Love in the Time of Tamagotchi

Theory, Culture and Society 26 (2-3):189-208 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a popular conception among many Zeitgeist watchers, especially in places like the US, Western Europe and Australia, of the urbanized East as existing somehow further into the future. As William Gibson once stated: `The future is here; it just isn't equally distributed yet.' This kind of cultural fetishism extends to not only technolust, but the practices that new gadgets and electronics encourage. The specific phenomenon explored in this article is that of virtual girlfriends and boyfriends: whether in the form of avatars or automated SMS text messages. This particularly Japanese `craze', if we can call it that, fascinates and appals people who still hold P2P romance IRL in high-esteem. It seems like an insult to the intrinsically human and humanist discourse of courtship; and indeed it is. How does this perspective change, however, if we consider `love' as a technology? That is, as both a code with its own algorithmic parameters, and a discourse that also challenges the hyper-rational assumptions of the `merely machinic'. Extending the argument articulated in my book, Love and Other Technologies, this article asks how the emergence of virtual dating and other techno-inflected treatments of romance are working to undo our jealously held notions of intimacy and identity. It concludes that all sex can be considered cybersex, given the communication flows that occur both before, during and after the act. For, as we continue to enframe the discourse of intimacy via new and mobile media, we find it increasingly difficult to deny that intensified inter-subjectivity is always already a matter of technics. Indeed, what Heidegger says of modern technology can effectively be applied to modern love: that it embodies an `unreasonable demand' of nature (and thus has the capacity to reveal something essential about the posthuman condition).

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Is it Better to Love Better Things?Aaron Smuts - 2015 - In Tony Milligan, Christian Maurer & Kamila Pacovská (eds.), Love and Its Objects.
Love’s Vision.Troy Jollimore - 2011 - Princeton University Press.
Love: a history.Simon May - 2011 - New Haven: Yale University Press.
Love is all forgiving: reflections on love and spirituality.Petŭr Dŭnov - 2004 - Deerfield Beach, Fla.: Health Communications.
The Dance of Love.Peter Murphy - 2002 - Thesis Eleven 72 (1):65-90.
Love: gloriously amoral and arational.Nick Zangwill - 2013 - Philosophical Explorations 16 (3):298 - 314.
Self Love.Stephen David Ross - 2010 - International Studies in Philosophy Monograph Series:129-152.
Love.Bennett W. Helm - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Hating the one you love.Aaron Ben-Ze’ev - 2008 - Philosophia 36 (3):277-283.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-02-02

Downloads
13 (#1,010,467)

6 months
2 (#1,232,442)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Towards Behavioral Aesthetics.Adrian Mróz - 2019 - Polish Journal of Aesthetics 52 (1):95-111.
Artificial Economics.Paul Smart - 2020 - In Timothy Shanahan & Paul R. Smart (eds.), Blade Runner 2049: A Philosophical Exploration. Abingdon, UK: Routledge. pp. 185–205.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Technics and time.Bernard Stiegler - 1998 - Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Being singular plural.Jean-Luc Nancy - 2000 - Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Relations with Concrete Others.D. Pettman - 2004 - Theory, Culture and Society 21 (6):137-144.

Add more references