Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite
Year 2024, Issue: 39, 956 - 971, 21.04.2024
https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1469464

Abstract

References

  • Ağın, B. (2012). The agency question: Animal as the subject/object/abject in Hollywood [Paper presentation]. V Biennial Conference of EASLCE, Tenerife, Spain.
  • Ağın, B. (2020). Posthümanizm: Kavram, kuram, bilim-kurgu (1st ed.). Siyasal Kitabevi.
  • Bolter, J. D. (2016). Posthumanism. In K. B. Jensen, E. W. Rothenbuhler, J. D. Pooley, & R. T. Craig (Eds.), The International encyclopedia of communication theory and philosophy (pp. 1-8). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect220
  • Bostrom, N. (2005a). Transhumanist values. Journal of Philosophical Research, 30(Supplement), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.5840/jpr_2005_26
  • Bostrom, N. (2005b). In defense of posthuman dignity. Bioethics, 19(3), 202-214.
  • Braidotti, R. (2005). Affirming the affirmative: On Nomadic affectivity. Rhizomes, 11/12. http://www.rhizomes.net/issue11/braidotti.html
  • Braidotti, R. (2006). Posthuman, all too human: Towards a new process ontology. Theory, Culture & Society, 23(7-8), 197-208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276406069232
  • Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Polity Press.
  • Ceiridwen, T. (2001). Romancing the bomb: Marine animals in naval strategic defense. Organization & Environment, 14(1), 105-113. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26161717
  • Doede, B. (2009). Transhumanism, technology, and the future: Posthumanity emerging or sub-humanity descending?. Appraisal, 7(3), 39-54.
  • Ferrando, F. (2014). The body. In Ranisch, R. and Sorgner, S. L. (Eds.), Post- and transhumanism: An introduction (1st ed., pp. 213-226). Peter Lang. https://doi:10.3726/978-3-653-05076-9
  • Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. Routledge.
  • https://doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2005.00437.x
  • Islam, M. (2016). Posthumanism: Through the postcolonial lens. In D. Banerji, & M. Paranjape (Eds.), Critical posthumanism and planetary futures (1st ed., pp. 115-129). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-3637-5_7
  • Krishnan, A. (2016). Military neuroscience and the coming age of neurowarfare. Taylor & Francis.
  • Latour, B. (2011). Love your monsters. Breakthrough Journal, 2(11), 19-26.
  • Murnaghan, I. (2017, November 14). Animal tests in military defence. About Animal Testing. https://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/animal-tests-military-defence.html
  • Nayar, P. K. (2018). Posthumanism. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Ranisch, R., & Sorgner, S. L. (Eds.). (2014). Post- and transhumanism: An introduction (1st ed, pp. 7-27). Peter Lang. https://doi:10.3726/978-3-653-05076-9
  • Tchaikovsky, A. (2017). Dogs of war. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • Wolfe, C. (2003). Animal rites: American culture, the discourse of species, and posthumanist theory (1st ed.). University of Chicago Press.
  • Wolfe, C. (2010). What is posthumanism?. University of Minnesota Press.

Re-evaluating the agency of non-human subjects in Adrian Tchaikovsky's Dogs of War

Year 2024, Issue: 39, 956 - 971, 21.04.2024
https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1469464

Abstract

Adrian Tchaikovsky is renowned for exploring animal consciousness and non-human perspectives in his works. His 2017 novel Dogs of War exemplifies the dominance of anthropocentrism within the novel’s transhumanist context, wherein genetically engineered non-human bioforms are exploited by humans. This study argues the way humans perceive and treat non-human subjects in the novel, which are reduced to “disposable bodies” (Braidotti, 2013, p.15), extends the reach of human-centred ideology into transhumanism. Therefore, the termination of the bioforms once they are deemed obsolete demonstrates a utilitarian view of life within transhumanist thought. Building upon these arguments, this study examines whether genetically engineered non-human entities in the novel are entitled to the same rights as their human creators, who design and command them in the pursuit of technological and military advancements. By extension, this study proposes Tchaikovsky's portrayal of bioform animals resonating with Donna Haraway’s concept of the “cyborg,” which challenges the traditional concept of humans by attributing agency and sentience to these beings. The study seeks to illuminate the complex interplay between human and non-human agency, thereby questioning the established hierarchy of beings in the context of transhumanist thought.

References

  • Ağın, B. (2012). The agency question: Animal as the subject/object/abject in Hollywood [Paper presentation]. V Biennial Conference of EASLCE, Tenerife, Spain.
  • Ağın, B. (2020). Posthümanizm: Kavram, kuram, bilim-kurgu (1st ed.). Siyasal Kitabevi.
  • Bolter, J. D. (2016). Posthumanism. In K. B. Jensen, E. W. Rothenbuhler, J. D. Pooley, & R. T. Craig (Eds.), The International encyclopedia of communication theory and philosophy (pp. 1-8). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect220
  • Bostrom, N. (2005a). Transhumanist values. Journal of Philosophical Research, 30(Supplement), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.5840/jpr_2005_26
  • Bostrom, N. (2005b). In defense of posthuman dignity. Bioethics, 19(3), 202-214.
  • Braidotti, R. (2005). Affirming the affirmative: On Nomadic affectivity. Rhizomes, 11/12. http://www.rhizomes.net/issue11/braidotti.html
  • Braidotti, R. (2006). Posthuman, all too human: Towards a new process ontology. Theory, Culture & Society, 23(7-8), 197-208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276406069232
  • Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Polity Press.
  • Ceiridwen, T. (2001). Romancing the bomb: Marine animals in naval strategic defense. Organization & Environment, 14(1), 105-113. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26161717
  • Doede, B. (2009). Transhumanism, technology, and the future: Posthumanity emerging or sub-humanity descending?. Appraisal, 7(3), 39-54.
  • Ferrando, F. (2014). The body. In Ranisch, R. and Sorgner, S. L. (Eds.), Post- and transhumanism: An introduction (1st ed., pp. 213-226). Peter Lang. https://doi:10.3726/978-3-653-05076-9
  • Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. Routledge.
  • https://doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2005.00437.x
  • Islam, M. (2016). Posthumanism: Through the postcolonial lens. In D. Banerji, & M. Paranjape (Eds.), Critical posthumanism and planetary futures (1st ed., pp. 115-129). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-3637-5_7
  • Krishnan, A. (2016). Military neuroscience and the coming age of neurowarfare. Taylor & Francis.
  • Latour, B. (2011). Love your monsters. Breakthrough Journal, 2(11), 19-26.
  • Murnaghan, I. (2017, November 14). Animal tests in military defence. About Animal Testing. https://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/animal-tests-military-defence.html
  • Nayar, P. K. (2018). Posthumanism. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Ranisch, R., & Sorgner, S. L. (Eds.). (2014). Post- and transhumanism: An introduction (1st ed, pp. 7-27). Peter Lang. https://doi:10.3726/978-3-653-05076-9
  • Tchaikovsky, A. (2017). Dogs of war. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • Wolfe, C. (2003). Animal rites: American culture, the discourse of species, and posthumanist theory (1st ed.). University of Chicago Press.
  • Wolfe, C. (2010). What is posthumanism?. University of Minnesota Press.
There are 22 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects British and Irish Language, Literature and Culture
Journal Section World languages, cultures and litertures
Authors

Gülşah Çınar Yastıbaş 0000-0001-6907-0574

Kuğu Tekin 0000-0003-0123-8523

Publication Date April 21, 2024
Submission Date January 30, 2024
Acceptance Date April 20, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Issue: 39

Cite

APA Çınar Yastıbaş, G., & Tekin, K. (2024). Re-evaluating the agency of non-human subjects in Adrian Tchaikovsky’s Dogs of War. RumeliDE Dil Ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi(39), 956-971. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1469464