4.27.2007

Please be advised. This paper deals with mature subject matter.


This is hardly the most popular (nor for the sake of this paper, applicable) picture of Britney Spears latest shaving headlines.

Why do we shave? We shave our faces, our armpits, our legs, our heads, our chests and our pubic hair. Perhaps we do so to keep ourselves cleansed. A way of keeping out germs and viruses, a shield from "others." Maybe we shave our armpits to be more comfortable, our legs to be less itchy and our faces to be more aerodynamic. Aliens never have any hair and they are highly evolved. It's as if our evolutionary process has not yet eradicated hair. Surely with the global climate rising, the need for facial hair to insulate must be declining. Our hair grows naturally and we deny its existence daily. Not all of us shave. Dissidents and rockers have goatees, bad boys have 5 o'clock shadows and hippies have dread locks, armpit and leg hair as a sign of their rejection of sameness. A way of reifying a non-conformist ideology.

Those who do shave do so for similar reasons. I cannot look like a rogue for my meeting. I want to look presentable, "clean shaven," and respectable. Generally speaking we shave because everyone else does. We must appear like everyone else, and at the most basic level, a level almost too basic to be of note; shaving is a way of doing so.

My focus here is neither to dissect the reasons we shave nor to shed light on the exceptions to the broad sweeping statements I've made. Rather I aim to set the stage for an even less focused circumlocution which features the Gilletter Venus and the Gillette Fusion razors.


The Gillette Venus and Fusion Razors are one of the most telling commodities Millennial Culture has to offer. I'd like to be clear. By Millennial Culture I am referring to the culture in which I have and continue to participate. I fully understand that any attempt to analyze segments of that culture do not exclude me from it. Rather, analysis or partial understanding of Millennial Culture makes my participation in such even more deplorable. Getting on with...

The Proctor and Gamble Company is responsible for a major advertising campaign for both the Gillette Venus and the Fusion razors. The razor itself is "dressed" differently but at its core, it is identical for both men and women. I believe that the advertising campaigns of each, assumptions that are made concerning gender differences, tactics utilized in the campaign and the reasoning behind the tactics run parallel with the fears and promulgation of Millennial Culture.



King Camp Gillette founded the Gillette razor company in 1902. At that time, his disposable razor sold for an astounding $5 ($134 by today’s standards). They were wildly popular and by 1915 he had sold over 70 million units. Although the "safety razor" was not his invention, he was the inventor of the throw away razor, an invention with large implications that are perhaps better saved for another paper [Wikipedia]. He is also responsible for a number of books. He felt that all business should be run by one single entity owned by the public and that the entire United States should live in a giant Metropolis centered around Buffalo due to its access to an "inexhaustible supply of pure water" [Gillette 90]. The significant natural horsepower Niagara Falls provides would sustain the Metropolis. The large buildings that would be built (ten in all), would be capable of housing one hundred million people. Every unit would be exactly the same and the world’s best artists would provide artwork to make the units idiosyncratic.
"It also seems clear that Gillette’s monolithic world corporation would complement the unifying forces of his urban technology by replacing the bewildering separateness of the competing inventors, scientists, businessmen, companies, states and nations with one coherent and unified human organization, [Roemer 567]”

He talks of the beautiful harmony we would live in were we to all live together. Furthermore, "World Corporation" would eradicate the difference not only of race, but also of gender. To repeat, "World Corporation" would eradicate the gender difference.
"World Corporation" means the absolute emancipation and freedom of woman. All that woman [sic] has attempted to do for centuries to throw off the yoke of man's dominion will be accomplished at a single stroke; for it must be self-evident that under "World Corporation," where intelligence is the only factor that determines position in the corporate body, sex cannot be considered without arbitrary laws and the destruction of the equitable basis of adjustment. Woman, under "World Corporation," and under its Labor System, will have the same right as man to enter any department of industry which she is capable of filling...Under "World Corporation" man and woman will be free and equal for the first time in the history of the world. [97]

He most likely meant for the second time in the history of the world. You see, "World Corporation" promises a return to the Garden of Eden. A return to the time of unnecessary self-awareness. A return to a time where shaving is perhaps superfluous. Men and women live in harmony and equality.

But let us not lose our place. Gillette is the guy that made razors. He came up with plans to recreate "heaven on earth" in his spare time. Fast-forward nearly one hundred years to the announcement of the new Gillette Fusion, a razor that blends the inanimate with the animate, and non-technology with technology. Let me remind you that this is a campaign for a razor...


The beginning and the end of the segment have a short clip of two people in the woods that appear to be non-related to the commercial however, because they are a part of the visual information I can't help but think of Nietzsche's idea that man is only a bridge. The first clip is of two people about to cross a bridge. In the second clip at the end of the commercial, they have or are in the process of crossing the bridge. Although it might not be on purpose it does seem to suggest that we have entered a new era, an era that is the posthuman. An era in which man has served its purpose.

In any case, we have a team of men that are at once science, at once technology and at once the government, flying in a yellow helicopter overhead. The beeping and the sound of men communicating on walkie talkies is an indication of such. We get a glimpse of a man in an orange suit with something pulsing and flashing between his legs. It appears that the cylinder between his legs is a container for something very important. He descends onto the large ball that can be taken for a globe or quite possibly an egg or perhaps both. He penetrates the globe in a move apropos to artificial insemination. After the insemination, which is void of any type of ejaculation or emotion, he floats back to the helicopter. The globe gestates and then begins to rise. The music changes and I am reminded of Space Odyssey 2001. The music is a clear indication that something has changed. At the apex of this globe/egg's journey upward, it shoots a laser beam out at one of the other planets that we can only take to be Earth. There are 9 globes in all each connected to the other. After sucking out the secrets or life or power or whatever it is it does to the globes (it's just a razor commercial for the heavens sake) it explodes. Shit, it's dead. Wait... the music! It is alive again and now reemerges from its own smoke, like a phoenix from the ash, an autonomous entity. A global One. A united One capable of including and replacing all the rest. It descends (did Matthew Barney ever model for Gillette?).

It might here be profitable to show a drawing from Gillette's book World Corporation, titled "Man Corporate." He holds the world in one hand, dressed in a skirt. Somewhat ironically, Gillette repeats in his book over and over how World Corporation will reassert the power of the individual while at the same time equating everyone. Part of the inscription underneath him reads...
HE WILL DO MORE: HE WILL PENETRATE THE CONFINES OF SPACE, AND MAKE IT DELIVER UP ITS SECRETS AND POWER




His pursuit continues today. On the Fusion website there is a cyber game you can play. The object is to "match wits with a seductive secret agent" to make her deliver up her secrets. "Warning: she's hot and you could get burned." You have the option to act "aggressive, flirtatious or shy." Are you Armed to Charm?

Here there are three references to revelation. The globe sucks secrets after being penetrated, Man will penetrate for secrets and we can try to get secrets from a secret agent. Whether it is power, or secrets, or information, something that was not revealed is being revealed or if not revealed at least transferred. In the Vital Illusion, Baudrillard writes, "Today, the object wakes up and reacts, determined to keep its secret. [76]" This brings up two issues. Firstly the object waking up.

The ability of an object to wake up suggests some sort of, "It's alive" moment. Pinocchio dancing with Archipeligo or whatever his name is. Can in not be said that when the wireless cell phone, when the wireless toothbrush (another commodity who's rising technology always seems to be at the forefront of science) when the wireless razor, and when the wireless vibrator begin to vibrate, they come to life? Toothbrush commercials use the word "pulse" as part of the advertising campaign! The inanimate object becomes an animate object. It shuffles off its immortal coil and becomes mortal. Its batteries die. The Baudrillard quote above comes from page 78 of The Vital Illusion. Page 77 says "Irony is the last sign that comes from the secret core of the object, the modern allegory of the reversibility of all things." It is this ironic reversibility of both of these shaving campaigns that interests me. I will come back to this quote later. For now, like the Toyota motto, Moving "Forward" we should go to the Gillette Fusion website. Baudrillard would say "EERRRRRTTT." Moving forward? "Things have become so accelerated that processes are no longer inscribed in a linear temporality." This was on page 79.

Click Image



Before we enter the site we have an option to select a country. Consider MCKibbens description of Gillette’s global strategy: "One product, one ad campaign for nineteen countries, with the same visuals and music, and only the language altered for local understanding." [Roemer 251] With only the smallest variation, the entry pages and navigation for each website is identical for Nederland, Canada, Spain, Croatia, Australia and Denmark, with a variation in only the language.

Once a country has been selected, our Flash loading bar says "Initiating Sequence," as if we have just entered a code to a very important vault of some sort. It feels as if we are having a private viewing and the entry pages to the Alien and Matrix DVD's seem close at hand. You can move to different floors and sections of the Holosphere guided knowledgably by our host Cassandra, a computer generated hologram that holds a "PhD in physics, including a published thesis on the distribution of force and its relativity to pressure exerted on smooth surfaces." Oh to get a hold of such a document. She has a clipboard and a lab coat quantifying her as a certified doctor/scientist/physicist. At one point she duplicates herself and says, "I hate it when I do that." Perhaps she hates it when she does that because, like Call in Alien resurrection, it is a reminder of her inhumanness. Rather than being self-aware she is aware of her 'other' self and her 'other' self is presumably aware of her. Neither holds the trump card. They are equal.

Our apparent ability to reproduce Cassandra reaffirms the superfluous nature of the opposite sex. Why do we need females at all if we can reproduce females without females? This is a part of the irony early suggested. The website uses the idea of a woman and the possibility of sex with a woman to sell its product. However, working from within the ideology of the website, if Cassandra is a hologram, than the possibility of sex with her does not exist, save for virtually.

This website uses role-playing video games as its guide. You take on the character of a person and act and react to circumstances based on pre-conditioned abilities/powers. It allows one to escape the body, if only momentarily, and replace it with a computer body. It is the disappearance of the human body as a whole. We are communicating with Cassandra not with our minds and our voices existentially as Heidegger would say, rather we are noncommunicating (as Bienko would say) with Cassandra using our devices. Our computer is telling Cassandra to go here and do this. We are not communicating. Our devices are doing it for us. I encourage you to navigate the entire website which is thorough. However, as difficult as it may be to remember while looking at this computer screen, we are mortal and for the sake of our mortality, we best move on.

Click Image



The Gillette Venus razor is a whole other can of shaving cream. Even calling the razor "Venus" (a truly paper ready word) has stark implications.
1. Venus
-An "inferior" planet (along with Mercury) because it is closer to the sun than Earth.
-It is known as the Earth's sister planet due to its similar size and gravity.
-It is the only planet in the Solar system named after a female figure.
-It is covered with an opaque layer of highly reflective clouds. [Wikipedia]
-It is Earth's inferior female double.
2. The goddess of love.
3. And on an art historical note, let us not forget the contentious Titian painting of the same name. Touching herself or covering herself? Mark Twain writes, "There are pictures of nude women which suggest no impure thought -- I am well aware of that. I am not railing at such. What I am trying to emphasize is the fact that Titian's Venus is very far from being one of that sort."[Wikipedia]




Upon entering the Venus website a remake of the Bananarama song "Venus" is playing. It was remade for this commercial and consequently re-remade by Hitomi, a famous Japanese pop star. Hitomi is the spokesperson for Gillette Japan. She is also featured in the adult volleyball video game Dead or Alive known for its adult subject matter and its M (for Mature) rating. Video examples are readily available.



The first time I saw the Venus Vibrance commercial on television I honestly thought that the song said, I'm your Penis, I'm your fire. If you are unfamiliar with the song, then I'll let you be the judge of exactly what the lyrics to the remake are. On the website it is literally virtually indecipherable. Replacing the word "Venus" with the word "Penis" takes no stretch of the imagination. The Venus Vibrance vibrates to give you a closer shave... but that is a bit misleading. The razor itself does not vibrate, rather its hot pink bulbous tip vibrates to help soothe you and reveal your inner goddess. Again, we have this theme of revealing. Revealing the very thing the object is determined to keep secret. I hope that it does not appear that I am being perverse or ironically sexual. There is a long history of vibrating home appliances geared specifically toward women. Historian Rachel Maines describes how in 1869 a physician named George Taylor patented a steam-powered massage and vibratory apparatus for treatment of female disorders, such as "hysteria." Medical and midwifery massage of the genital area had been a common practice since the seventeenth century for various female disorders, often categorized as "hysteria," a condition believed to result from the womb's revolt against sexual deprivation [Juffer]. In the 1970's, there were a large amount of vibrating appliances that were marketed discreetly to woman. For instance Norelco's personal beautifying kit, which resembles a pack of birth control pills. [Goodvibrations.com]


The shaving of hair, specifically pubic hair can be seen as a return to prepubescence. A return to a time when our sexual differences did not matter. A time when we were incapable of reproducing. This can also been taken as a glimpse of the future where we no longer have hair. All of our renderings of aliens from the future are lacking hair. The only need for any type of sexual act would simply be for physical satisfaction and for that, we need not rely on the opposite sex. A machine is perfectly capable and in actuality, superior. Written on the front of King Camp Gillette's book World Corporation is...
"A MACHINE WHICH HAS THE ECONOMIC POWER TO DISPLACE ANOTHER MACHINE IS BETTER THAN THE MACHINE DISPLACED."
This book was written in 1910. The technology involved in making something vibrate is very simple. The technology to produce the Venus Vibrance has been around for a very long time. But...
As history repeatedly demonstrates, the mere availability of a technology is no guarantee that it will be taken up. [Wertheim 29]

It would appear that the time for this technology to be incorporated into a women’s razor is now. This is not a phenomena that is exclusively for women though. Although the website for the Venus Razor and its potential applications is hardly coded, the commercials for a vibrating razor for men do not even make an attempt at being coded (at least in terms of there sexual implications. Their posthuman implications, well...).


OR...



In an attempt to avoid letting something obvious 'slip under my nose', I would like to reiterate that the tool being marketed to opposite sexes is identical. It is a razor that cuts hair. It is sort of like grabbing the left-handed spatula from the drawer. The tool works and for all intents and purposes, is interchangeable. The Gillette Venus website and the Gillette Fusion website are not. A thorough comparison of the two sites is fodder for a paper more involved than five pages. The ways each website goes about seducing its targeted consumer is nothing, if not telling.

The Venus website urges us to release our inner goddess. We sort of float along the beachy landscape while swirls and butterflies loop around us. Goddess tips float from bottles while we make our decision of whether we want a razor that ejaculates creamy shaving cream or one that vibrates. The Fusion website offers a two tiered architecture in which we can move back and forth from the laboratory to the holosphere. Holograms that seem infinitely reproducible are at our fingertips. We are encouraged to investigate different floors the way video games have conditioned us to do. In there own way each website eradicates the need for the other. The Venus Vibrance vibrates, ideal for masturbation, and the Gillette Fusion is the hybrid of technology and tool. It replaces a real female with a technological representation of a female and offers a cybersphere for us to exist in. We can win the war of wits with a combination of aggressive, shy and flirtatious behavior in the virtual sex game.

In his No Sex Please, We're Post-Human essay on lacan.com, Slavoj Zizek references Alan Turing's famous "imitation game." To paraphrase, the game goes like this. We communicate with two interfaces. One is human and one is computer. If we cannot decipher which is which then it proves that machines can think. What is less known about this experiment, Zizek points out, is that it was first performed without a computer. The two interfaces were originally a male and a female. Why is this of note? Well which of the two examples is more applicable to Millennial Culture as a whole? One would assume the interface between computers and human would be more telling. But for the sake of this paper, could it not be the interface between the male and the female? As soon as we cannot tell the difference between a male and female, a human being effectively becomes indistinguishable from a machine. As soon as we are indistinguishable, then we are equal or as soon as we are equal we are indistinguishable. If you know what I know, I have no reason to communicate with you. We are together a specific series of data and that data is shared. "Your are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. " There is no need to communicate. You know what I know, and I know what you know. "Your voice in my head." "Your voice in mine," Tyler Durden retorts in the final scene of Fight Club.

Each of these campaigns, Gillette promises the end of sexual difference. Here again, Baudrillard...
"Irony is the last sign that comes from the secret core of the object, the modern allegory of the reversibility of all things [77]."

If indeed, it is the unrevealed secret of the object to promote sexual, and in effect, universal sameness leading to the eradication of sex and communication, is it not ironic that it is the very instruments that promote sex and communication that keep hidden these very secrets. I'm thinking specifically of shaving razors but no google search for razor would be complete without turning up results for the number one selling cell phone in the world. The Razr! And it should be no surprise to you that it vibrates! It is not an inanimate object, "It's Alive!" I don't want to suggest immoral thoughts as Twain says, so I'll let this device do it for me.



This commercial follows a wave of vibrator related commercials. Ikea (the same Ikea featured in Fight Club) has a similar commercial that can be found here.

Why are all of these videos available at our fingertips? Pornography. Pornography on the Internet is responsible for a significant amount of the advancements of the Internet, from streaming video, to secure online payment systems.
Cyberspace is hardcore pornography, i.e. hardcore pornography is perceived as the predominant use of cyberspace. The literal "enlightenment," the "lightness of being" the relief/alleviation we feel when we freely float in cyberspace (or even more in Virtual Reality) is not the experience of being bodiless, but the experience of possessing another aesthetic, virtual weightless-body, a body which does not continue us to the inert materiality and finitude, an angelic spectral body, a body which can be artificially recreated and manipulated [Zizek].

This is Millennial Culture. It is a culture that relies on devices that free us from our bodies. The closer we come to eradicating our physical bodies, the closer we come to being "same." Once we are "same," our material, physical bodies will cease to exist. Tyler Durden says, "It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything." A floating “virtual weightless body” that is no longer tethered to this mortal shell will replace our body. It is this freeness that signifies the true birth of Man. As soon as the cord that holds us to this human body has been cut, life will begin. Grab the left-handed scissors from the drawer.

Works Cited


Baudrillard, Jean. The Vital Illusion. Columbia University Press, 2001.

Gillette, King Camp. World Corporation. The New England News Company, 1910.

Goodvibes.com. Museum of Antique Vibrators.
http://www.goodvibes.com/Content--Antique-Vibrator-Museum--id-367

Juffer, Jane. At Home With Pornography: Women, Sexuality, and Everday Life. New York University Press, 1998. eBook available through UGA GALILEO

Lacan.com. "No Sex Please, We're Posthuman" Slavoj Zizek
http://lacan.com/nosex.htm

Roemer, Kenneth M. Technology, Corporation, and Utopia: Gillette's Unity Regained
Technology and Culture, Vol. 26, No. 3. (Jul., 1985), pp. 560-570.

Wikipedia.org

3.13.2007

I do not want to begin by quoting.



It is inevitable.

Any subversive act, ("Our attitudes toward our superiors should always include an element of dread") [Davenport-Hines 7] must contain some knowledge of its relationship with mimesis rather than subversion. In other words, I am fully aware that my response to the readings and the Alien series will have less to do with my ability to respond authentically and more to do with my ability to mimic Post/In human pundits. In any case...
"The hyper visibility of the similar leads only to the hollow aesthetic of "the look" in a kind of postmodern pornography where the undifferentiated other is objectified by the universal global gaze, as we check out the other's factitious image in a parody of desire [Flieger 94]."

This quote was referring to a narcissistic double, but I believe it can be interpreted here to illustrate Call’s “desire” to be human. Call assesses and makes apparent in her discussion with Ripley, that both she and Ripley are other.



Talk about a global gaze. Look at where that clip freezes. Ripley is part post-human clone and part Alien. Call is an inhuman robot. This scene is the great conversation between the posthuman, the inhuman, and the human. Call would like to be human and her suggestion to Ripley to "look at her" is one of self-loathing, but it is also one of longing. A longing to be seen, to be an image and to be self-aware. In this sense she may perceive herself pre-human, as if the possibility for technology to allow her to be self-aware might someday exist (It seems she'd have to be self-aware to recognize her inability to be self-aware, but that seems to lead us down the yellow brick road of "you had a heart this whole time," a truly unproductive path). She is jealous of Ripley's humanness, (even if it is only partial) and her ability to be seen, and at the same time she is repulsed by Ripley’s post-humanness. This notion of needing to be seen harkens back to the Garden of Eden and is consistent with Baudrillard’s concept of not existing, rather being visible. "I am an image-Look! Look [25]!" Call does not actually have the ability to be jealous. Her jealousy is as factitious as her intelligence.
"Artificial intelligence is devoid of intelligence because it is devoid of artifice. True artifice is the artifice of the body in the throes of passion; but since all machines are celibate, they do not suffer that ironical surplus [Flieger 94]."

Perhaps in the movies they can appear to suffer that ironical surplus. Within the context of the movie, it is suggested that you can have sex with a robot. Call might be capable of mimicking the act of lovemaking and perhaps "performing" the feelings involved with sex, but these too would be factitious. One calls to mind the sex scene between Deckard and Rachael in Blade Runner. Their performance is absurd because it is potentially mimetic. It is a hodge-podge of scenes and lines recited from movies in a type of asemsexblage.

The scene preceding Call and Ripley's "heart to heart" should not be overlooked. It parallels the crucifixion, which incontrovertibly precedes the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christ's last words, "Father why hast thou forsaken me," are nearly spelled out on the screen. Wren yells a command to Father and then questions Father and his new found disobedience toward man. Call answers on the loud speakers that, "Father, (i.e. the Creator) is dead...asshole," and with his death, the need for a creator also dies. Clearly, she invests her longing for self-awareness entirely in the hope of technology. Clearly? Hardly. If her hope were truly in technology then perhaps she would be supportive of Wren's goals, which are for the good of all humanity, through the guise of science.. This illustrates perfectly the paradoxical nature of the film and could provide a reason, other than the obvious, for the Alien's inhuman behavior.

Slavoj Zizek writes...
"This is also what makes it so unbearable to witness the last moments of people who know they are shortly going to die and are in this sense already living-dead - again, imagine that we would have discovered, among the ruins of the Twin Towers, a video camera which magically survived the crash intact and is full of shots of what went on among the passengers of the plane in the minutes before it crashed into one of the Towers. In all these cases, it is that, effectively, we would have seen things as they are "in themselves", outside human coordinates, outside our human reality - we would have seen the world with inhuman eyes. (Maybe the US authorities do possess such shots and, for understandable reasons, are keeping them secret.)" [lacan.com]

The alien is arguably in a no win situation. If the company has its way, the alien will become a paid soldier, waging war on others for the benefit of certain humans (and by certain humans I think it is safe to assume Western culture, in fact whenever the words, "for the good of humanity" are uttered, it is most likely referring to the United States). If Call and the Real Slim Ripley or the non-cloned Ripley were to have their way, then the Alien would be destroyed. If we apply Zizeks’s idea of the inhuman to the Alien as if it were a human, we would have an explanation for the Aliens desperate "inhuman" violence. The Aliens undeniable destruction (similar to the people's recognition of their own fate in Zizek’s hidden Twin Towers camera) would allow it to see with inhuman eyes. It would see things as they are "in themselves" seemingly outside of its human coordinates and outside its human reality (Again, this is applying the idea to the Alien as if it were a human in an attempt to gain perspective. This could also be said to be looking at Zizek's idea through through the "She" perspective presented in Lyotard's "Can a Thought Go on Without a Body?," in the sense that our vision is limited to our human sphere). This might be an explanation for the Alien's erratic and 'eradicat' behavior toward humans and dogs. Cats seem to be OK. If the Alien acts strictly by instinct, than it can be said that from the very first introduction of the human to the Alien field, (Alien 1) the Alien's behavior is predicated upon its acknowledgment of its own impending doom. It knows immediately that its introduction to humans will not prove positive. Later we see that the addition of a female reproductive system does enhance its power, but this is short lived. Its improvements only increase its necessary destruction.

Soon after the crew is told that there are no less than 12 Aliens aboard the ship with the ability to reproduce quickly, Johner suggests they "get rid of the cripple." It is possible that this type of inhuman behavior does not develop further in the movie for the very same reasons that Zizek suggests. It would be seeing too much and that viewing could set us all into a type of inhuman mayhem, like a pie eating contest in Stand By Me. AHHHHH!

These distinctions between the inhuman, the post-human, the pre-human, and the human seem already to lose their relevance. But what will relevance have to do with it in the near future? Donna Haraway's utopia of an undifferentiated society would lead one to assume that the need to make or discuss distinctions would be superfluous. That is not completely the case as we see in Blade Runner, and Alien Resurrection. There is much attention given to the difference between what is human and what is inhuman. Interestingly, there is little to no attention given to whether or not one is a clone. The clone, the genetically modified human is, after all, human. Making this distinction in the movies as well as in real life seems nearly futile and with the increasing futility of such a distinction comes the increasing discussion.

The futility of making distinctions is fully exploited throughout Alien Resurrection. As soon as you believe you’ve made a distinction, the tides turn. As soon as you’ve brought the story to closure, and Ripley has killed herself as well as the queen Alien, the Alien series resurrects itself. It is a situation that is in flux, not unlike our supposed transformation from the human to the post human. Visually, the Alien seems to be made of metallic parts, yet it drools profusely all over itself, suggesting that its life consists of growing machine parts. Technology is highly advanced, but the guns that are used throughout the movie are gigantic and phallic, like the noses of a Chapman Brothers sculpture.
"An erect penis is animated, it implies a certain vibrancy or stimulation - ready to be consumed by the viewer but also pleased to see the viewer" [Rosenblum 148].

The phallic gun’s indispensability is dispensed with by Johner's suggestion (in the special release version anyway) that the guns are disposable. The Aliens have phalluses that are deadly, yet they reproduce and seem to have both male and female parts, (which by the way, make great souvenirs). Vriess, the dwarf-like wheelchair bound character whistles the theme song to Popeye, "I am what I am," a lyric that begs the question, "and exactly what is that?" Men give birth to Aliens, (if I remember correctly, Ripley is the only female to give birth to an Alien) and the female robot Call, oozes some sort of milky sperm like substance from her side (an allusion to Christ's punctured side, or a vagina?). The biblical allusions abound. Ripley's pose when the queen Alien encapsulates her could be an allusion to Grunewald's altarpiece. Grunewald, the first painter to show Christ in his true, bloody pained, skin diseased self. A painter that provokes the type of inhuman eye that Zizek refers to. Chloe Piene's performance, based on Grunewald's altarpiece looks almost identical to the movie scene.





The Alien form itself is in constant flux, always changing in a type of metamorphic growth cycle. The distinctions that we are used to making easily are confused and crossed throughout the movie leaving us undecided as to who is other and who is not, who is male and who is female, who is human and who is inhuman. Are those relevant questions? Does it matter? AHHHH!
"This is how we became transsexuals...in other words, indifferent and undifferentiated beings, androgynous and hermaphroditic - for by this time we had embraced, digested and rejected the most contradictory ideologies, and were left wearing only their masks [Baudrillard 25]."

Snap back to reality, oh, there goes gravity...


"Feminist women love Eminem [10]." It could almost be a line from a Gertrude Stein poem. The video for Eminem's song is telling and not simply for its obvious allusion to cloning. With the introduction of the cloned and admittedly "white" rapper, (a contradiction in terms with very few exceptions) we have a modified version of rap. On the conveyer belt, a long line of Eminem’s (or are they Slim Shady’s, or are they Marshall Mathers?) are produced. The lyric directs the chorus to sing along with him, yet compliance with such a demand is an admission of mimesis, or the admission of imitating the real thing.
"So will the real Shady, please stand up
and put one of those fingers on each hand up
and to be proud to be outta your mind and outta control
and one more time, loud as you can, how does it go?"

In the video, Eminem is both male and female, attracted and repulsed by himself. Whether he is more attracted to the female version of himself or the male version of him is unclear. This theme of undifferentiating between male and female is a consistent theme in Eminem's, work.
"Now I'm gonna make you dance
It's your chance
Yeah boy shake that ass
Oops I mean girl,
Girl, girl, girl
Girl you know you're my world
Alright now lose it"

This is from the rap "Just Lose It," the video where prepubescent children gyrate to the music seconds before Michael Jackson's nose falls off and Eminem begins doing the "robot" dance. (Worth watching in the context of this discussion as well as for a good laugh)

Lose the distinction, lose the ability to make a distinction, lose your own distinction or just lose yourself in the music? A relationship of attraction and repulsion is at the center of the video and helps illustrate the similar way Ripley feels, and in kind the viewer feels in the final scene of Alien Resurrection.
"To name a sensibility, to draw its contours and to recount its history, requires a deep sympathy modified by revulsion." -Susan Sontag.

In the final scene we see the Alien child grasping the throat of Call with one hand and fondling Calls open wound with the other. Ripley’s investigation of Call’s wet wound earlier in the film is not dissimilar. Unlike the robots from the past, Call's ooze does not spurt, spray or ejaculate. Just before the Alien retires Call, Ripley orders it to put Call down. Ripley then embraces the Alien child the way a Mother and child hold close directly after birth. I believe this embrace is genuine on the part of Ripley. It seems as if their moment is interrupted by the black hole of space, the screen of the window that negotiates the outside with the inside once and for all. Surely by now, we know better than to understand anything in this series as “once and for all." Had this window not been in Ripley’s view and this had not been a movie, perhaps Ripley’s embrace would be everlasting. But, the sighting of the window snaps Ripley "back to reality" and back to the very natural element that will destroy the Alien…Gravity or the lack thereof. She cuts herself on the Alien child’s tooth, where the scars of her last stigmata have healed. There are three scenes in the movie where Ripley faces death, and in each scene the blood of the center of her palm plays an integral role. One can assume that upon her return to earth, her scars will provide partial evidence of her supernatural resurrection. This alien/human blood cracks the screen between “in here” and “out there” and the sucking begins. I am here reminded of a quote from "In the Shadow of the Vampire," which refers to the place that Dracula will be staying during the shooting of the film.
"A dark hole that has been untouched and unexplored for a very long time."

The space of space in this context can be said to preexist, in which case its last exploration was its creation and its creation is the place that the Alien will meet its final destruction. Slowly the Alien is sucked out, piece be piece in a truly agonizing scene. It would seem that the Alien was still capable of harming Ripley had it wanted to. We saw its family members spit acid and we've seen constant evidence of their inhuman strength. The Alien's true death seems to be its recognition of its Mother’s rejection. The Alien child actually seems too hurt to try to harm it’s own Mother, as if the two seconds of loving embrace that Ripley afforded it, was enough to make its life worth living. Ripley whispers, "I'm sorry." Ripley wept. Her human reaction has to do with her inhuman loss. Previously, her inhuman response to Call's question, "How could you kill one of them, they're one of your own?" seems to have more to do with our inhuman tendency toward humanity. We kill and murder each other because we are “in the way,” specifically in this movie, in the way of progress or science. Ripley is partially human and partially other and these two responses to her murderous actions seem to be coming from opposite halves.

From its birth, the viewer has had a strange sort of relationship with the Alien child. It is simply looking for a Mother, but it is extremely violent. It seems to be the most dangerous Alien we've seen so far, capable of killing even the Queen with one blow. Yet with the Alien's final expulsion, we hardly exhale [14]. Rather, we feel remorse for both the Alien child and Ripley. We suffer at the apparent and potential humanity of such an inhuman creature. The somehow sad look in its eyes is the lasting image of the final scene. As the Alien is sucked out of the screen, it stares with a global gaze back at Ripley. Its eyes scream, "Mother, why hast thou forsaken me?" It is at this moment, this moment when the Alien acknowledges its imminent death, that it stops acting inhuman, and begins to act human. By applying Zizek’s idea of the inhuman here, to an inhuman subject rather than within a human context, we lose all differentiation between the Alien and ourselves. We become equal. The Alien begins to see with human eyes, outside of its inhuman coordinates and outside of its inhuman reality. It is the equivalent of the Twin Towers video in Zizek's example and allows the Alien to see things "in themselves." This scene mirrors the unbearable nature of witnessing a human being just before their certain death, and in the television screen's reflection, the final screen that now determines "in here" and "out there," we see reflected our rosy selves. The Alien child, for the split second before its death looks back at us with human eyes...and it is a truly horrific sight.




Works Cited

Baudrillard, Jean. The Transparency of Evil: Essays on
Extreme Phenomena
. New York: Verso, 1993: 20-25.

Davenport-Hines, Richard. Gothic: Four Hundred Years of Excess, Horror,
Evil and Ruin
. (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1998): 1- 11.
Introduction page of quotes. Susan Sontag.

Eminem. "The Real Slim Shady." The Marshall Mathers LP. Aftermath, 2000.

Flieger, Jerry. "Review: The Listening Eye: Postmodernism, Paranoia, and the Hypervisible." JSTOR
Diacritics- Vol. 26, No. 1 (Spring, 1996), pp. 90-107 [Baudrillard 53]

Lacan.com. "Badiou: Notes from an Ongoing Debate" Slavoj Zizek
http://www.lacan.com/zizou.htm

Merhige, E. Elias. In the Shadow of the Vampire. 2000

Rosenblum, Robert. “Interview with the Chapman Brothers” in Unholy Libel: Six Feet Under.
New York: Gagosian Gallery, 1997: 147-153.

joshuabienko.com