Simulacrum
Root: Latin simulāre- imitate, from similis- like, likeness. In her exposition of the ‘Cyborg’ world known as modern human life, Donna Haraway defines “simulacra” as Plato did; as “copies without an original”1. This poetic but enigmatic description raises a host of connected questions reaching deep into ontology and semantics; if there exists no corresponding “original”, how can an object claim to be a “copy”? The word “simulacrum” is of Latin origin, meaning likeness or similarity. The term was used first to describe effigies of deities; crafted representations of intangible, and almost by definition indescribable beings. The term then took on its more modern meaning of a re-presentation; a copy. It was perhaps in the age of mechanical reproduction2 that the term took on a negative tint, denoting a product that lacked the (presumably desirable) qualities of the original that it takes as its referent point. The definition of “simulacrum” presupposes and requires, in lieu of a true referent “original”, a shared understanding of its character. However, the hybrid nature of the Cyborg being’s existence is one that necessarily subverts and eludes attempts at the construction of a universal experience. Moreover, the Cyborg’s disassociation with the organic reproductive systems means it has a different understanding of mortality; the Cyborg dreams of being constantly regenerated, not of being reborn as its human ancestors did. 3 Haraway’s use of the word “simulacra” to describe the character of the cyborg being is important as it emphasizes the Cyborg’s lack of a focused “origin-point”, the intensive creation-and-apocalypse myth that has enthralled humans for so long. Instead, the cyborg has come into being insidiously; through assimilation, re-appropriation, upgrading and the use of simulacra. The connections between human, nature, and machine have become intricately interwoven through the continuous extension of will and consciousness, and it is already too late to deny that “we are, in short, cyborgs.” 4 Anthony Vidler’s essay on “Cyborg homes” reminds us modern cyborgs of the half human, half machine inventions of the past, and the importance of learning to copy in order to advance; to simulate in order to create. It is precisely the rejection, opposition of the ‘original’ that is key to the Cyborg’s great flexible strength in its lived battle against oppression, conformity and stagnation, what Haraway calls the Cyborg’s state of “permanent construction”.