Professional Documents
Culture Documents
By :
Yassir Ammisse
Table Of Components
II. Introduction
VI. Conclusion
Overview
Since the boundaries of cyber culture are difficult to define, the term is
used flexibly, and its application to specific circumstances can be
controversial. It generally refers at least to the cultures of virtual
communities, but extends to a wide range of cultural issues relating to
"cyber-topics", e.g. cybernetics, and the perceived or predicted
cyborgization of the human body and human society itself. It can also
embrace associated intellectual and cultural movements, such as cyborg
theory and cyberpunk. The term often incorporates an implicit
anticipation of the future.
The Oxford English Dictionary lists the earliest usage of the term "cyber
culture" in 1963, when A.M. Hilton wrote, "In the era of cyber culture, all
the plows pull themselves and the fried chickens fly right onto our plates.
» This example, and all others, up through 1995 are used to support the
definition of cyber culture as "the social conditions brought about by
automation and computerization. » The American Heritage Dictionary
broadens the sense in which "cyber culture" is used by defining it as,
"The culture arising from the use of computer networks, as for
communication, entertainment, work, and business". However, what both
the OED and the American Heritage Dictionary miss is that cyber culture
is the culture within and among users of computer networks. This cyber
culture may be purely an online culture or it may span both virtual and
physical worlds. This is to say, that cyber culture is a culture endemic to
online communities; it is not just the culture that results from computer
use, but culture that is directly mediated by the computer. Another way to
envision cyber culture is as the electronically-enabled linkage of like-
minded, but potentially geographically disparate (or physically disabled
and hence less mobile) persons.
Introduction
The goal of this essay is to develop the concept of what I call early cyber
culture, a concept to be employed in a critical rendering of the cultural
and ideological aspects of ICTs. I understand early cyber culture as a past
socio-cultural formation,ii[4] which was at the birth of current computer
technologies (e.g. of the currently dominant segment of ICTs) and of the
discourses and narratives which framed them. For early cyber culture
ICTs were a futuristic myth of a “new hope” and a “new menace” and
stood behind one of the most significant narratives of the 1980s and
1990s, the story of the power of a new technology, which dramatically
and fundamentally changes the world of humans and humans themselves,
a story that was grasped and adopted by the cultural mainstream, by
western societies and their political representations.
Probably the oldest and narrowest concept of cyber culture refers to the
initial discussions on new media and denotes the cyberpunk movement,
hackers’ subculture and (more generally) the first computer and network
users and, for example, members of the early virtual communities
developing via computer networks in the 1980s and early 1990s.
Douglas Rushkoff, author of Cyberia (1994, in Czech 2000) and Mark
Dery, who in his Escape Velocity: Cyber culture at the End of the
Century (1996) identifies cyber culture with “computer-age subcultures,”
are two representatives of this understanding of cyber culture. Members
of these “computer-age subcultures” perceived cyber culture as an
initiation of some kind of a futuristic regeneration of society, as Andy
Hawk (one of The Cyberpunk Project creators)iii[5] demonstrates in his
article Future Culture Manifesto.iv[6] For him, the cyber culture of the
“here and now” is in its infancy; nevertheless it is an already existing
foundation of a “new future”. Actually, in the case of Hawk’s manifesto
the hackers’ cyber culture, which developed from cyberpunk and a rich
variety of older subcultures, was to be the culture of the information
society. This orientation toward the future and the focus on
technologically catalyzed social change is typical of discourses
appropriating cyberpunk (see below) and it ushers in futurological and
utopian visions emerging from the academic world, but inspired by sub
cultural narratives.
In her book Virtualities: Television, Media Art and Cyber culture (1998)
the American theoretician of media Margaret Morse defines cyber culture
in a way that partly corresponds with Lévy’s and Hawk understands. She
approaches cyber culture as an emerging, juvenile and thus a predicated
rather than a retrospectively reflected phenomenon. Similarly to Lévy,
she defines cyber culture as a set of cultural practices enabling us to deal
with new forms of information. Her understanding is, however, far from
Lévy’s technotopist teleology. The vision of cyber culture as a cultural
level of the information society links her to Hawk’s approach but in
contrast to Hawk’s manifesto, her text does not share any characteristics
with the language of cyberpunk.
Morse, like Lev Manovich, a visual culture theorist, emphasizes the role
of visual representations in the television and “post-television” society.
Due to the similarity of their approaches it is not surprising that Morse’s
concept of cyber culture partly matches Manovich’s concept of
information culture (but importantly not his concept of cyber culture, see
below).
“we are now getting a first taste of ‘Cyberia’ – the new civilization
emerging through our human–computer interface and mediation” (Sardar
and Ravetz 1996: 1).
Hakken (1999) does not use the term cyber culture, rather he talks about
cyberspace. However, his concept of cyberspace is defined by features
that connect it to Escobar’s and Morse’s concepts of cyber culture;
moreover, Hakken’s criticism perfectly complements Escobar’s and
Morse’s approaches.
“Life ways based on AIT are not only real and distinctly different; they
are transformative. The transformative potential of AITs lies in the new
ways they manipulate information. The new computer-based ways of
processing information seem to come with a new social formation; or, in
traditional anthropological parlance, cyberspace is a distinct type of
culture” (Hakken 1999: 1-2).
Hakken is fully aware of the speculative nature of this claim, it is thus not
surprising that he labels himself “a cyberspace agnostic” and emphasizes
the need to empirically verify the proclaimed “distinctiveness” of the
cultural formation emerging around cyberspace and ICTs. Indeed he
presents his formulations in the form of hypotheses and at the same time
pays due attention to the unpredictability of the continuous and yet
unfinished development of ICTs. Hakken coins the term proto-
cyberspace in order to distinguish the current level of the development of
ICTs and their current cultural context from a hypothetical “resultant”
situation.
Last but not least, the term cyber culture is in the above mentioned senses
used metonymically to label the theorizing on cyber culture or on ICTs.vii
[9] The term is in this respect used, for example, by Lev Manovich
(Language of a New Media, 2001) and Lister et al. (New Media Reader,
2003). Manovich distinguishes between cyber culture and new media as
two distinct areas of research. Manovich understands new media theory
as an exploration of the information culture (see above), while for him
cyber culture involves:
Lister et al. use the term cyber culture “in two related, but distinct, ways”
(Lister et al. 2003: 385) – the first, in contradiction to Manovich’s
differentiation between new media and cyber culture, broadly
corresponds to Escobar’s and Morse’s approach to cyber culture as a set
of cultural and social practices, codes and narratives. However, the first
way smoothly flows into the second one. Lister et al. conceive cyber
culture as a cultural context of ICTs, a context characterized by its themes
(communication networks, programming, software, artificial intelligence
and artificial life, virtual reality, etc.). Works of fiction and film such as
Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984), Cadigan’s Synners (1991) or Scott’s
movie Blade Runner that map the rise of the technological world and
provide it with a language, meanings, stories and values, played (or still
play) a key role in this respect.
Cyber culture can thus be seen as a meeting point of works of fiction with
discourses, concepts and theories of the social and natural sciences as
well as engineering – which permeate, shape and transform each other.
Cyber culture is deeply self-reflexive because the theories are part of its
(cybercultural) narratives and these narratives then inspire emerging
theories. Therefore, the categorization of cyber culture into a socio-
cultural formation and an assemblage of theories is a seeming and
probably misguided one.
It is obvious that there is a significant difference between the first and the
second part of the story, we talk about two different phenomena separated
by a vague historical dividing line. The first one contributed to the rise of
the second yet the two cannot be conflated and they require distinct
methods of exploration. Early cyber culture, which played the role of a
cultural lab, is a closed chapter, a past cultural text. Contemporary cyber
culture, the living and changing cultural matrix, is (and Morse, for
example, is right in this respect) in its infancy. Although the exploration
of contemporary cyber culture is one the greatest challenges facing the
socio-cultural exploration of ICTs, it is impossible to embark upon this
task without an adequate exploration of early cyber culture and an
understanding of its “message”.
The second period of cyber culture can be broadly set to the 1970s and
the beginning of the 1980s, when cyber culture moved beyond the realm
of institutes and universities. The most crucial features of this era were
the increasing accessibility of technology, the invention of
microcomputers and their massive development, which spawned an entire
new industry. In addition to “classic” academic hackers, cyber culture
also comprised the so called phone phreaks (hacking the phone systems),
computer clubs hackers (interested in developing and programming the
first homemade as well as mass-produced computers) and later the first
de facto regular computer users.
Naturally, the Homebrew Computer Club was not the only cybercultural
group of the period. At the beginning of the 1970s technology hobbyists
found a new interest, the detection of “bugs” in the phone system and in
the security system of long distance calls, an involvement which extended
the meaning of hacking. We find also many hackers interested in
computers among phone phreaks – as phone hobbyists called themselves,
a subculture that for the first time extended some cybercultural practices
to the limits of the law. It was constituted around a newsletter YIPL
(founded in 1972, later renamed TAP) and could be understood as the
computer clubs’ forerunner. Although the security level of the phone
system was constantly improving, the technology of phone systems
remained the focus of the interest of the hackers’ subcultures until the
1980s.
“For the very first computer hobbyists suddenly a vacuum is filled. The
“legion” of amateur programmers just jumps “en masse” on the micro.
With the first micro computer coming to the market it seemed that
everything just, as a kind of puzzle, clicked together. Lack of knowledge
was suppleted in a hurricane kind of speed by computer clubs that grew
like mushrooms. These clubs published newsletters that spread the word.
No software was in sight for these machines by far. But the micro will
conquer the world by storm and change the way we live and deal with our
work totally within two decades. A new world has opened up and without
them life is unthinkable as it is.”
This storm conquering the world was initiated by Apple II, the “spread of
the word” and the success of the microcomputer widened the rank of non-
expert users of the new technology. By the end of this period the personal
computer represented not only a technological challenge, it suddenly
changed into a tool of entertainment (the first computer games,
programmed originally for consoles and mainframes, spread probably
faster than any other type of software), of work (at the end of the 1970s
the first commercial office software appeared) and of education. It was
exactly these users, who viewed the computer as a tool rather than a goal
that took over the initiative in the next period.
At the end of the previous period, cyber culture started to evolve from a
narrow set of expert communities to a wide, diversified subculture of
computer users. Besides the next generation of gradually vilified and later
even criminalized hackers in the third period we find subcultures of
computer game players, the first virtual communities, and in connection
with cyberpunk the so called digital avant-garde that articulated the
aspirations and goals of cyber culture. All these groups were
metaphorically as well as literally connected by the computer. The
computer, as a technological novelty at first, penetrated universities,
where the cultural foundations of cyber culture were enriched by many
influences.
The most significant of these inspirations were literary and film science
fiction (cyber culture overlapped, as mentioned above, with American
fandom), some fragments of the past hippie counterculture and the
subsequent punk counterculture, and theoretical influences from the field
of social theory of the 1960s and the 1970s.xi[13] These inspirations and
influences were creatively melted into the language of cyberpunk, into its
view of the social reality and its powerful anticipatory vision. Cyberpunk,
a literary movement named after Bruce Bethke’s short story, invigorated
by William Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984) and brought to life by Bruce
Sterling, developed themes of the New Wave of SF and can be
characterized by a critical, dystopian futurism, on the one hand and by an
adoration of technology and its use for individual subversive purposes, on
the other. A discursive bricollage and a re-writing of symbolic inputs at
the literary level resulted in cyberpunk’s peculiar cybercultural ethics,
esthetics and political orientation. Thus, cyberpunk stressed the
independence of cybercultural discourses and narratives and implied that
their specific character is above all determined by the structure of
cybercultural themes. Cyberpunk writers and even their epigons can be
seen as cultural spokesmen of cyber culture, who, in their fiction,
formulated the foundations of an exploration of the rapidly
technologizing world.xii[14] The colorful language of cyberpunk fiction
formed the background for the social theory of the new media and of pop
cultural and media representations of cyber culture.
Hackers, who formed the core of cyber culture until the invention of the
microcomputer, gradually became separate from a “users’ cyber culture.”
Hackers’ subcultures became increasingly younger (hacking became
more attractive for teenagers due to cyberpunk and the influence of very
popular movies, War Games from 1983, for instance), also the focus of
their activities changed as a consequence of the industrialization of
computer production, enforcement of copyright regulations and creation
of public computer networks and also under the influence of cyberpunk.
The hacker, not only as inspired by Necromancers, became a “data
cowboy” and cyberspace (in a Barlow’s words embodied by
contemporaneous networks) became his field of self-realization. The
hackers’ challenge was, of course, also transformed, some new forms of
hacking appeared, including software cracking or unauthorized entry into
computer systems and networks. This change contributed significantly to
a shift in the “myth” of the hacker. The word gained its current,
negatively connoted meaning and the hacker’s identity became an
identity of resistance. Even in the eyes of the preceding generations of
hackers these new hackers were synonymous with “‘computer criminals,’
‘vandals,’ ‘crackers,’ ‘miscreants’ or in a purely generational swipe,
‘juvenile delinquents’,” as Steve Mizrach (href 1) claims. They explicitly
follow the same ethics as the ‘old hackers’, but they were labeled and the
time of ostracization and stigmatization arrived. The change of context
transformed the evaluation of similarly motivated action – what was an
act of a “programmer’s heroism” in the 1960s, seemed to be almost (or
definitely) a crime in the 1980s.
The Fourth Period
The final, and for a variety of reasons key, fourth period of early cyber
culture, is the period of definitive fading of cyber culture into the
majority society. It is the period when cyber culture is subjected to
normalization, is tamed by the language of social sciences and politicized
and its culturally provocative edges are taken off. This period begins at
the end of the 1980s and ends in about the middle of the 1990s. However,
there is no point in defining the exact “end” of this period, because it
could be defined by any of the key events or processes that signalized the
massive and final shift of cyber culture to the social and cultural
mainstream.
The first of them was the continuing spread of computer technology and networks. The growing
acceptability of the technology and the metamorphosis of the computer to a new and specific type
of a widely used medium were enabled by a unification of hardware and software standards, by (a
relative) reduction in prices and increase in the capacity of the technology, and by making the
language of new mediaxiii[15] more accessible. With transition to the Graphical User Interface
(GUI) – “windows,” the computer-user interfaces became easier to understand. The same happened
to networks when the World Wide Web, currently the most known Internet service based on
HTML, was introduced. The digital media overcame the image of an expensive toy and a specific
office tool and at last became commonly accepted and easy to use in everyday life. A stigma of
exclusivity and curiosity that surrounded the computer user disappeared without a trace.
The “Nietzsche an” claim of some cyberpunk writers and critics, that
“cyberpunk is dead,” was another indication of the transformation of
early cyber culture. This bon mot (currently still discussed)xiv[16]
appeared seemingly paradoxically at the beginning of the 1990s when
cyberpunk (cybercultural) topics conquered the mainstream, cyberpunk
writers became celebrities and computer technology “got to the streets”.
However, the fact that the raw literary matter of cyberpunk and the
originality of its style and visions were lost and translated into the
schematizing language of the cultural industry (see Shiner 2001, Maddox
1992) combined with the fact that cyberpunk prophecies regarding a
computerized world were getting fulfilled, questioned the viability of the
genre. Punk could define itself in contradiction to the mainstream and die
at the moment of melting into it, and it is exactly what happened.
“...a cyberpunk upbeat underground paper from San Francisco. The full
color magazine was filled with techno fashion, drug fantasies, a parade of
the latest gadgets, DIY video tips, science fiction, with an occasional
theory essay. In retrospect we can say that _Mondo_ paved the way for
Wired (starting in 1993), which was more successful in packaging and
neutralizing the early, pre-WWW, cyber cultures of the US West Coast”
(Lovink 1999).
The release of Wired (the above quoted Geert Lovink does not think of it
highly) could be seen as the next of the neuralgic points of the upcoming
end of early cyber culture. Wired, with its high circulation rate,
transformed the lifestyle of hackers’ subculture into an object of pop
cultural adoration and market commoditization. At the same time Wired
became the most known narrator of cyber cultural “stories” and a
platform for justifying cyber cultural ideas and new technology.
Kroker and Weinstein react to the fact that at the beginning of the 1990s
in the U.S. new technologies became part of the public and political
agenda. Vice-president Al Gore introduced the project of the national
information infrastructure, known as the Information Highway project
(computer network technologies should become a powerful tool in the
global spread of democracy, see Gore 1994). The narrative of the positive
relation between new technology and democracy forms, since the 1980s,
one of the most significant streams of cyber cultural narratives (see the
next section) and made the cyber cultural vision politically attractive.xviii
[20] Gore explored older cyber cultural arguments and narrative figures
when proclaiming the support of technological literacy a national interest.
The issue of electronic democracy (or teledemocracy) still resonated in
the late 1990s in Clinton’s project of a “presidential town hall meeting”
(Dahlberg 2001: 159). Probably in relation to the growing power of the
computer industry and the increasing role of the economic-information
flows the novel theme of a “new economy” emerged. The concept of new
economy was stronger than that of new democracy, if only for the
presumption that the computer industry expanding over one or two
decades could ignite a new economic boom and a new economic order as
such.
Moreover, the fact that the narratives, due to their mythological nature,
tend to naturalize the mentioned attributes provides them with significant
ideological power. Their ideological potential made them attractive
enough as well as acceptable for the wider society and they became part
of the topography of power. Cyber cultural narratives are interesting not
only because with their help we can detect the image of the technology at
the time of its emergence and development, but also due to the obvious
assumption that they form a part of what we can call ICTs ideology – an
ideology that shaped the information policies of western states as well as
the marketing and persuasive strategies of the computer industry.
I begin with the first two themes – technology as agent of change and the
relation of technology and freedom, power and empowerment.
This ethos was born at the end of the 1950s and early 1960s in the
relatively authoritative environment of the technological institute within a
community of young programmers who were discovering the charm of
mainframes, the intellectual attraction of computer technology so far
basically hidden from the public’s view. At the time, access to computers
was significantly limited and subjected to educational and research
purposes, the majority of programmes were literally made on paper and
personal contact with a computer and personal experience of
programming were worth a fortune. This is where cyber cultural distrust
of authority, longing for emancipation and craving for unlimited contact
with technology is born.
Cyber culture further enriched the message of this code by the issues of
cultural colonization and the relativization of the authenticity of
experience and insights, these issues were reflected in two key themes
(technology and the formation of the new frontier and technology and
authenticity).
Other themes are connected with the discourses of the social sciences,
they include cybercultural narratives on the symbolic and physical
changes of the body, gender and personal identity as enhanced by
technology (the story of the cyborg, one of the most influential
cybercultural myths, resonates strongly in this respect), on the
invigoration of community (symbolized by the birth of the virtual
community, virtual agora), on cyberspace as a space of subversion, on the
possibility of creating a strong Habermasian public sphere and on
technology as a tool for the strengthening and spread of democracy, on
future or developing forms of community (which take the shape of dark
cyberpunk visions as well as considerably more optimistic ones on
information or network society and promises of entering the information
age), on the new global economic order and the new economy (promising
the lasting solution of the deepening economic recession that affects the
West already since the 1970s).
Conclusion