💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › alex-gorrion-golem-in-the-catacombs.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:03:54. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Golem in the Catacombs
Author: Alex Gorrion
Date: January 12, 2014
Language: en
Topics: technology, alienation, social-isolation, apparatus, class, power, review, The Anvil Review
Source: The Anvil Review

Alex Gorrion

Golem in the Catacombs

“The harmony of the seasons mocks me. I spend hours watching the sky,

the lake, the enormous sea. This world. I feel that if I could

understand it I might then begin to understand the creatures who inhabit

it. But I do not understand it. I find the world always odd, but odder

still, I suppose, is the fact that I find it so, for what are the

eternal verities by which I measure these temporal aberrations?”

John Banville, Birchwood

It's getting colder here. People shuffle by in hats and scarves.

Fur-lined hoods appear in improbable quantities. Licensed vendors,

unpacked in pleasant arrays, marshalled forth by the city in its brave

quest to claim a new pedestrian shopping zone, are the first and only

line of battle against the cold. They rub mittens and hunch puffy

jackets against it, smile as only ascendant shopkeepers can, and roast

chestnuts, slice baked goods, fetch glittery necklaces from crowded

displays, and conquer what would have been a winterbarren street.

I used to be a partisan of winter, back when the seasons still promised

an untamed difference. Now I too huddle against it, my fire gone,

protected by an old leather jacket I found, waiting in just the right

size, in a freestore near here. My friends made jokes about it, a

throwback to the '80s, evidently. When their jokes continued from time

to time, I gathered they were actually made uncomfortable by my wearing

of the jacket and its extinguished aesthetic.

The commodity demands its homage, even from those who must steal it. And

my friends, anticapitalists to a one, go about in those sporty jackets

made from materials far more polysyllabic than leather. Again the old

question. Is it better to blend in, or to signal our defiance of the

national religion? For myself, I just can't turn down a jacket that

still works, and my brain won't accept that the dull brown thing

actually draws attention from the citizens sunk in layers of equally

mundane garb, hiding away from temperatures that still have not passed

freezing.

They are a frigid people, with few defenses against even a lackluster

winter. Nonetheless, this year there are fewer gloves in evidence. More

people are keeping their fingers free to tap on little screens, their

faces awash in blue glow, as they scuttle blindly down the streets.

The new device is finally triumphing in this economically holdout

nation. Could anyone ever have doubted it? What sorts of homogenization

is something so flimsy as “culture” able to hold back? This is the

difference between a hula hoop and an iPhone. One is a product that may

catch on or not. The other is an army that must be quartered.

The entire citizenry has revealed their vapidity. They are mere bodies

stripped of all their limbs and plugged into a vast matrix of

domination, perpetually vacated to serve as conduit for the flux of

power. Lost creatures who fumble around in smug devices looking for love

or distraction. They are children who have never learned to read maps or

ask for directions, children whose intimate haunts that were never

trusted to paper have now been thoroughly mapped by the devices they

carry with them. The impoverished oral culture that remains has been

forced through this new apparatus. There is no more face-to-face

communication; all of it is legible now to the authorities.

The cellphone that shares my room sometimes like an evil stranger

heralds the arrival of a new message with a cheerful arrangement of

beeps. After a time I pick it up, already imagining the number of the

one person I wish most to hear from. But there are only five digits on

the screen. An automatic message from the phone company, wishing me a

happy birthday—did I put down this day, of all days, as my birthday?—and

offering me a present, a free gift, which I only have to claim by

logging on to their website. I unplug the broken thing and, batteryless,

it dies. Every device should be equally crippled. I turn back to the

article I am writing.

In a parallel universe where justice reigns, all those cretins who

claimed the internet would bring us closer together and Twitter would

make the revolution are being lined up against the wall in an old park

and shot. Not out of vindictiveness or vengeance. The purpose of the

executions is educational.

“Don't worry,” each of the condemned is told as blindfolds are affixed.

“It's all okay: we'll update your Facebook.”

But parallel lines never intersect, and as ours progresses, the parks

and squares empty out. Only wraiths pass by, absent to themselves,

linked in a psychic death pact to another wraith staring somewhere at

the same glowing screen. Only a few are still resentfully here,

temporarily anchored by domesticated dogs for whom no application yet

exists to take on walks. But even the housepets appear more neurotic as

they pull against a leash that connects only to dead weight. They stare

frantically at nothing, like inmates too long interned.

I think of a resolution to make on New Years. From now on, whenever I

encounter a cyborg, I will speak only to the device, the brain, and

ignore the flesh-head that still pretends to be in charge. Someone

should start killing cyborgs, smashing the devices and liberating the

golem they hold in thrall.

A year ago a wave of graffiti appeared in a park near my house. It was

the first sign of life to have appeared there in some time. The

occasion, I gathered, was the premature death of a member of a circle of

young people who sometimes gathered on the stairs. “Alex,” the inked

etchings inscribed, “We will remember you.” “Alex, brother, we won't

forget.” “Alex, you were my first love.” The wall stood almost always

alone. The kids I associated with it appeared less and less often. Had I

only dreamt them? The graffiti, as such, seemed like its own tribe. When

the wall was washed clean, the writing appeared again, as if by magic.

Now there is nothing there. I wonder if I am the only one who remembers

that unknown boy. What has become of his friends?

And what superb instinct leads us to scratch away at the indelible

façade of our world right at that moment when one of us snuffs out their

meaningless life? As if the excess of agony standing like stale water

that no apparatus yet designed can wash away pushes us Borf-like to

attempt the impermissible, the inscription of our experiences in the

metallic flanks of our prison. In moments like these it seems that

everyone is aware that amnesia is included in the bylaws of Order; and

therefore, to not forget, we must break the law. The only walls we are

allowed to transform are on Facebook, mapping for the enemy.

Today, true grieving demands we resort to graffiti. In a time not far

off—already arrived in some parts—it will demand terrorism.

Such a tragedy that suicide loses its enchantment with age. Precisely as

we have nothing left to lose, we lose the resolve to go out with dignity

in that ultimate, irrecuperable subversion. As though we were

genetically programmed to weaken just in those years when we can claim

empirical proof that, no, things will not get better, it seems the onset

of a hormonal listlessness, the liquification of a certain moral fiber

running through our core, enlists us to plod along with the whole of our

society, look away or grimace as we might, but ever onwards, in

furtherance of whatever harebrained course the species has set.

The political consequences of this resulting lack of elderly suicide

bombers are immense. Social stability may lay thanks for its prosperity

on the doorstep of that biological cowardice with which failures cling

to failure and rebels, at their very best, cling to those same gestures

that have long since let them down.

Even the engineers of each new apparatus are feeling lonely. How many

start-up geeks marketing the latest Twitter spin-off or networking app

sincerely believe that their invention might bring people closer?

Convince a prisoner that freedom is made of walls, and they will build

new cells all on their own. The guards have put down their guns but they

can't hand out bricks fast enough. The general population scouts out the

new galleries and wings. Is this what we've been looking for?

We often tell of Baron Hausmann of Paris, the rightwing architect who

redesigned the city in time for the Commune, widening avenues and

intersections, enclosing common spaces, to take the defensive advantage

away from a population in revolt and allow an invading army easy access,

changing the very terrain to favor a new kind of war.

We should speak more of Ildefons CerdĂ , the utopian socialist architect

who redesigned Barcelona in the 1860s. He sought to use architecture to

bring about social justice and defuse class conflict by bringing rich

and poor together in harmony. The modifications he left behind were

nearly the same as those that had been imposed on Paris.

This is not new, but it is getting more common. Nowadays, hip CEOs

debate whether technology will overcome alienation and powerlessness or

whether it is increasingly totalitarian. One pole in this debate labors

all the faster to develop new technologies, hoping to find the one that

will really save us, and the other promotes conscious capitalism and

donates profits to NGOs.

Those who do not take sides in the social war and commit themselves to a

path of negation maintain an affective allegiance to power, and the only

way for them to reconcile this allegiance with whatever residual

feelings of being human still trouble them in their new cyborg

physiology is to decorate these allegiances, to pour even more affective

attention into the “improvement” of the rites of power. The fact that

what we are seeing is not an initiative of the traditional ruling class

is evident in the selection of rites for decoration. Elections, military

parades, leader cults, and similar processes are not the objects of

adoration. In fact, the enthusiastic campaigns of civic improvement have

tended to destabilize, delegitimize, or eclipse the rites that have

traditionally been predominant in the sanctification of power. Neither

have the initiatives come from the upper strata of the owning class; on

the contrary, the most influential production to result in the

decoration and intensification of the affective allegiances that tie

people to power has been initiated by individuals from the

computer-literate section of what would be defined as the working class,

who in their astronomic ascent have founded companies that upset the

preexisting capitalist hierarchy and now rank among the largest.

A large part of what economists might see as growth in the last few

decades is an exponential explosion in the frenetically doomed activity

of alienated people constructing new apparatuses to mediate alienation,

with the unintended but inevitable consequence of spreading it to new

heights and moments of life.

State planners and capitalists, while not the initiators of what has

become an October 12, a Columbus-moment, in the field of social control,

have responded in perfect form; the former by pursuing an aggressive

institutional advance into the network of new and momentarily

underregulated apparatuses that have been formed, and by integrating new

technics into a revamped Cold War security apparatus; the latter by

handing out bricks on low-interest loan, making sure that the supply

never runs low and that no good deed goes unexploited.

Yet one has the feeling that they are not merely profiting off a

plebeian circus, that even the most powerful engineers are now moved by

a quest to mediate alienation. As a historical rule, up until now it

seems clear that no matter how universal alienation has been, the

exercise of power acted as a drug to allow a certain class of people to

find fulfillment in the midst of misery. This affective marker of the

ruling class as distinct holders of power is what made Foucault's theory

of the immanence and diffusion of power an overstated argument and, if

our present musings have set their teeth to marrow and not air, an

argument that was ahead of its time.

Increasingly, a new measure of class (post-defeat class, as ladder and

not as warfare) is how fully one can organize their lives in the space

of the new virtual apparatuses.

Could it be that the charm of winning the class war has worn out? A

power-holder must hold it against someone. Once the class war is won is

the moment our prison guard realizes that he too is in a prison. He is

no longer a heroic protagonist wielding his power against the savage

masses, but a conduit through which power moves to maintain the good

order of the apparatus. The emergency is past. Power no longer needs his

creativity and dedication as protagonist to triumph. Put another way,

power has risen out of the class of protagonists who heroically

generated and organized it so as to organize itself at a higher level.

Today, affective dedication and creativity are required of all those

desolate souls who must inhabit a prison, regardless of their level of

relative privilege.

The forerunner of this dynamic, now repeated at a greater intensity, is

the patriarchal system of bribery that allowed any expendable

proletarian or peasant man to play at being tyrant, and taste a small

dose of the drug that made misery enjoyable.

Games of power-against played out at a continental scale color the early

history of the State. Power-as-drug constituted an affective wage that

roped people in to building State power. However, power-fiending

protagonists do not always make decisions in the interests of stability

or accumulation. The new apparatuses, organized on a logic of

power-as-flux, mark a tighter arrangement whereby people are conduits of

power and they pay to be played. They dedicate their affective energies

to the improvement of their prison, independent of any wages, because to

not do so would be spiritual suicide. While capitalism has always relied

on unwaged labor, until now that labor has been provided by patriarchy

or colonialism. In the Wikipedia age, the voluntary character of unwaged

production is largely different.

The new apparatuses of social networking also begin to quantify informal

power (the very informal power that has always held primary importance,

even and especially in the institutions of formal power, which could not

work without it) in “likes”, “friends”, and “followers”. But this

version of informal power is not the kind created by protagonists, it is

the kind produced by a mill wheel set spinning by a hundred chained

bodies each chasing after their own loneliness.

There are some who attempt to pirate power at the level of property,

using unregulated spaces in the new apparatuses to steal and share the

digital commodities that make up such a large part of the global

economy. But alienation extends so far beyond property, they can only

hope to be privateers. The free circulation of the product they have

liberated brings no benefit to the major concentrations of capital,

whose spokespersons tell of tremendous economic losses. Surely, such

crimes will not go unpunished, and in the future, prevented, as the

State cannot abide unregulated space. But at a level much more dear to

the world-machine than that of paltry capital accumulation, these

would-be pirates are doing important work, thus they are allowed a

certain license (though it is a license the most powerful nations will

not recognize, just as the privateers were legally commissioned

criminals in a polyarchic global system).

The service they render is to maintain and even expand the project of

social control. They are the next chapter in the dilemma of the workers

who occupy their factory and keep on producing. To name a common

example, they have liberated music—what could be more beautiful? But

this is not a pirate cassette, taped off the radio and shared among

friends on a boombox in the park. This is a digital file that will be

added to an inhumanly extensive library, linked in to the web for the

collection of metadata, and fed directly into the ears of the golem, who

will continue to slide like oil over the surface of the muted landscape,

blind and limbless, doing whatever it takes to avoid wondering how they

got there.

Such music is the pinnacle of our civilization. What beautiful sounds we

invent, to play while the ship sinks, the weight of its spite bringing

the whole sea down with it.

A gust of tepid wind blows past me. I have finished my circle and found

nothing to keep me. An alcoholic sits on a bench, howling at the empty

streets. Young people drift by, ears plugged to the world, bobbing their

heads to unheard tunes. A dog barks. A motorcycle idles. When someone

passes close enough, I hear a faint, electric rendition of song.