Thing-Power and Agency in Different Dystopian Environments

In this final blog post of my series on delving into many dystopian environments, I am using a peer’s blog post focusing on “thing-power” to expand my previous argument.

I will be reviewing Hope Wason’s blog post titled “An Egg-citing Hunt.”  (Please check out her blog post by clicking this link.)  In her post, Hope begins by explaining the new materialist idea of “thing-power,” where she notes that the “more direct connections an object has, the more power and influence it carries over others.”  To illustrate her argument that objects shape environments, Hope analyzes the dystopian novel Ready Player One by Ernest Cline, specifically the three keys and an Easter egg.  She also mentions how these objects obtain their power though the Oasis, a virtual reality that harnesses control over people who are looking to escape the real world.  And, as a result of the death of the Oasis creator, James Halliday, a “hunt” was developed and marketed for all people within the virtual reality, the prize being all of Halliday’s fortune and ownership of the Oasis.  She suggests that these objects develop agency as the “hunt” got more competitive and, therefore, “thing-power.”  In fact, Hope remarks that “the hunt became people’s lives” in her blog to demonstrate the significance of this objects in the novel.  She concludes her blog by suggesting that the “hunt” allowed players in the game to interact and create relationships with one another, thereby increasing the “thing-power” of those objects.
Movie banner that shows real world versus virtual world.  Image from the buzzmag.ca.
To comment on dystopian ecology and new materialism, I used the “thing-power” of both inanimate things and humans in my blog post, focusing specifically on “The Mockingjay” in The Hunger Games series by Suzanne Collins.  (Please check out my third blog post by clicking this link.)

Even though we use different dystopian environments, Hope’s ideas regarding “thing-power” are similar to mine.  And, it is Hope’s discussion about these relationships that I want to expand on. 

“The Mockingjay,” signifying both Katniss Everdeen and the mobilization of the districts against the Capitol, representing both human and non-human features of “thing-power” and agency.  And, it is the “thing-power” of “The Mockingjay” that actually connects humans at the same time that an assemblage (i.e. where multiple agents come together) slowly uses its power to chip away at the Capitol’s power.  Perhaps the most all-encompassing scene of “The Mockingjay” establishing direct relationships is when the rebellious tributes work together to save Katniss (and Peeta) from death during the 75th Hunger Games.  (To see the scene, click this link and this link.)

These connections can be seen in other dystopian environments as well. 
·      In The Man in the High Castle by Phillip Dick, we see relationships form based on the I-Ching, which are objects used discover fate.  

Picture of an I-Ching.  It is important to note that an I-Ching can take on many forms and objects, so there are many different versions of this symbol.  Image from ancient-origins.net.
·      In The Road by Cormac McCarthy, we see food have the power allow the man and his son to interact with an older man (“Eli”) (161-167).

In the dystopian environments I mention, two things are constant:  the use of language and expression for the creation of an assemblage.  Manuel DeLanda (2006) studied new materialist Giles Deleuze’s theory of assemblages, suggesting that, “Every participant in a conversation is […] expressing his or her public identity through every facial gesture, dress, choice of subject matter, deployment of (or failure to deploy) poise and tact and so on” (255).   
This image illustrates the many different ways that humans can interact with environment and technology, both of which contain objects.  Image from mpdi.com.

Without language and expression as forms of interaction, “thing-power” of humans and object could not be created.  Thus, like Hope suggests in her blog post and Deleuzean theory, we find that “thing-power” allows objects to play a part in the language and expression between humans.  

Word count:  597 words

Works cited
Bennett, Jane.  Vibrant Matter:  A Political Ecology of Things.  Duke University Press, Durham and London:  2010.
DeLanda, Manuel.  “Chapter 13:  Deleuzian Social Ontology and Assemblage Theory.”  Ed. by Martin Fuglsang.  Deleuze and the Social.  Edinburgh University Press, 2006.  pp. 250-266.
McCarthy, Cormac.  The Road.  Vintage Books, 2006.  pp. 1-287. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

WHAT IS A "DYSTOPIA"?

Image
I begin this new blog series with the central aim, to analyze the characteristics of dystopian environments in literature and use that knowledge to determine how those characteristics are present in today's society.  Before delving into this topic, I must start with a definition of "dystopia" to use throughout this blog series: "A dystopia [...] is a radically dysfunctional society in which the lives of the inhabitants are significantly impaired, damaged, or otherwise  undesirable" (Seeger, 2018). From this definition, we understand that a dystopian environment is dramatically unpleasant.  "Dystopia" was derived from another term, "utopia."  Seeger (2018) basis the difference between utopia and dystopia within a society on the "imagined social order" of its inhabitants.  Opposite from a dystopian environment, a utopian environment is one that is predicated on characteristics like human success and a perfect order of society. 
Read more

New Materialism and Dystopian Environments

Image
What is New Materialism? Thinking about our reality through the lens of a new materialist allows us (as readers) to see humans as equal to everything else in nature.  Hence, the new materialist sees humans as not superior animals.  This concept is important to understand because it assumes that both organic (living) and inorganic (nonliving) beings or objects hold some sort of power within our society (Bennett, 2010).  And, this idea of giving all objects power is called thing-power.  According to Deleuzean theory, thing-power is when objects have the power to change outcomes as a result of their being and place in society (DeLanda, 2006).  And, all of these objects that have thing-power combine into an assemblage together that hold enough power to modify reality (DeLanda, 2006; Bennett, 2010).  These aspects of new materialism allow for dystopian environments to form.  New Materialism in Dystopian Environments Many dystopian environments present the new materialist idea o
Read more

Why I Find Dystopias Interesting?

Image
The two concepts that interest me the most about dystopias are the idea of thing-power and assemblages in these environments.  I also enjoy looking at dystopian environments where the host, or dominant, group controls all of life.  The human response, or reaction, to these dystopian environments intrigues me so much!  As I read and watch about dystopian environments, I constantly find myself wondering how I, personally, would react if I were the main character in the same situations.  Here’s a quick recap on what thing-power and assemblages are: Thing-power is when objects hold some sort of power and, therefore, have the ability to change society.  It is important to understand that anything can have power, including both organic (living) and inorganic (non-living) beings or objects. An assemblage is when beings or objects with thing-power come together and hold enough power to change reality.  The implication of an assemblage is, therefore, that our own human reality can be
Read more