!

Z
|C5\56! | \. V6 P!6 \h6
LC|O 8|^6|5
" Do we really need another ana|ysis ot how a cu|tura| repre-
sentation does symbo|ic vio|ence to a margina| group " This
is how one co||eague recently put it, suggesting that the cu|-
tural studies and identity po|ihcs movements ot the i gBos and
iggos had at last exausted their uti|ity.
But how cou|d an ostensib|y libera|, broad-minded person
say such a thing How did we get here How did the wor|d
slip away trom the igGos mold, in which the l iberation ot
desire [and thus attective identities ot various kinds| was con-
sidered a po|itica|ly progressive proj ect to undertake At the
turn ot the new miI|ennium a ditterent deshny l ies ahead.
Today, under the new posttordist economies, desire and iden-
tity are part ot the core economic base and thus woven into
the va|ue chain more than ever betore. ' What cme|ty ot tate.
l t marginal groups are now "norma|ized" within the mode ot
production, what would it mean to otter criticism ot the present
situation ls there any outside anymore, when networks encir-
c|e the g|obe Any subaltern, when a|| are tethered to the com-
munications apparatus
This book has tried to address some ot these questions by
showing how digital aesthetics both prohibit and tacilitate
po|itica| encounters . At the outset l suggested that we think ot
media not so much as ob| ects but as princip|es ot mediation.
l n this sense, the computer shou|d be understood as an ethic
or a practice, in that it introduces a structure ot action, a recipe
tor moving procedura||y toward a cenain state ot attairs. The
primary site tor such investigations has been the intertace,
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 Z1
since it is the point ot transition trom one entity to another.
Yet, countering the received assumptions that intertaces are
doors or windows, connecting things to other things, l tried
to argue in Chapters i and z that the digital intertace in tact
produces an autonomous zone ot interaction, orthogonal to
the human sensorium, concerned as much with unworkability
and obtuscation as with connectiviq and transparency. Faced
with the breakdown ot the intertace, it was necessary, in Chap-
ters and q, to interrogate representabiliq as such. Can media
artitacts depict control society, and it so, how To end l will
consider one hnal intertace, the human intertace itselt, and
then otter some concluding meditations on the virtues ot
generic personhood in the age ot the control society.
A specter haunts the world ot digital games, the specter ot the
" Chinese gold tarmer. " But who is this shadowy hgure The
Chinese gold tarmer is a gamer who plays online video games
day and night in order to earn virtual gold and sell it tor real
money. | ournalists and researchers have stalked this elusive
pirate around the world, uncovering computer rooms in China
stocked with young gamers toiling in meager conditions tor
interior pay
But is it as simple as all that Such narratives are ohen
accepted at tace value, without probing more deeply into the
powerml repercussions ot the stereotypes they contain. l want
to suggest that the specter ot the Chinese gold tarmer is in tact
pertorming powertul ideological work within contemporary
culture. The gold tarmer is an allegorical portrait tor how
identity exists online, a portrait not so much ot the orientalized
other, but ot ourselves.
To triangulate this state ot attairs, the chapter will untold
around tour queries. The hrst is an inquiry into the contem-
porary status ot race, in parallel with a tew observations about
the state ot cultural theory. The second and third questions
deal directly with representations ot race in video games and
elsewhere. And the hnal guestion ohers something ot a sug-
gestion, a possible reassessment ot the situation itselt, not so
much a "way out" ot the problems presented here, but an
alternate beginning that shows, it it is successml, how some
! ZZ W A| !O LO| O |a | m|s
ot the problems might not actually be problems in the hrst
place, provided one i s willing to leave them be.
First Qucstion. Loncm Ccn|um Sumus: Or, Vhcrc
in mc Vord Arc Vc`
How did we get here Step back and recall two larger points
ot socio-historical contexI intorming the present debate . The
hrst concerns the question ot how race is represented today in
culture, and the second concerns the so-called tailure ol theory
and the turn, in recent years, away trom identity politics and
cultural criticism.
For the hrst point ot context, recall the inauguration ot the
American President Barack Obama in } anuary zoog - not the
ceremony itsell, but the rehearsal that took place | ust prior to
the event [ Fig. j . Three hgures appear on the plattorm, the
Fi gurc . i . Stand-ins for Prcsidcnt-ccct Barack Obama, his wifc
Michcc Obama, and Chicf |ushcc | ohn Robcrts rchcarsc thc
swcaring-in ccrcmony for thc inauguration on thc Wcst Front of thc
US Capito, Monday, |anuary i g , zoog in Washington, DC [APj
World Widc Photos, uscd with pcrmission. |
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 ZJ
same three who would be present during the swearing in.
Barack Obama' s stand-in is a black man, Michelle Obama' s a
black woman, and |ustice | ohn Roberts' a white man.
Who are these people ` Who orchestrated this event` One
may assume that the stand-ins tor this rehearsal are drawn
trom the White House aide corps or perhaps trom the Secret
Service, their roles in the rehearsal being merely to stand in
certain places and tollow the choreography ot simple sequences
ot events. Yet the specihcity ot the roles is particularly interest-
ing. this black man tor that black man, this black woman tor
that black woman, this white man tor that white man. Why go
to such lengths to entorce such racial specihcity body by body`
The casting ot these particular three stand-ins might not mean
much at all . l ndeed a number ot practical concerns most likely
inhuenced the decision, practical concerns such as lighting
and camera placement.
Even then, is there not evidence here, in Obama' s inaugura-
tion rehearsal, ot the most idealized torm ot racial typing`
Aher Obama' s election many began to speak ot a post-racial
society. But tocus on the inauguration rehearsal . Even during
this rehearsal, even during a moment in which race no longer
matters, it appears to matter more than anything else. ln the
most prosaic dress rehearsal ot who steps when and where, ot
moving television cameras around, ot determining the tempo-
ral sequences ot events - at this very moment ot absolute
banality, the logic ot race nevertheless holds sway, all the more
aggressive by virtue ot its very innocuousness.
Consider tor a moment the logic ot superstition. "Ot course
I 'm not superstitious, " the level-headed person says. "l know
that it doesn' t :clly matter it l step on a crack, or walk
under a ladder, or place a hat on a bed. " Occult ritual - doing
one thing to ward ott another - has oc|||og to do with how
the world really works. Common knowledge, claims the
level-headed person. Yet it is precisely in such moments ot
"common knowledge" that the logic ot superstition intervenes.
Precisely because it doesn' t matter where one places a hat,
all the more reason to adhere militantly to the rules ot
correct behavior. The tact that the decision is tree makes i t
all the more necessary to choose correctly. l t is absolutely
! Z4 W Ar lO LOl O |a |mrs
meaningless, so why risk it. Why walk under a ladder rather
than not, when the two paths are eguivalent and one may | ust
as easily avoid it
Such is the logic ot race in the Obama inauguration
rehearsal . c] ccc|s: |cc: Jc:so'| mc||:|, a||c| |s a|y || mcs| o:
p|:s:||:J c| cll ccs|. The open societies ot global neoliberalism
have reached a state in which race matters absolutely, but only
because it does not matter at all any more. The very lack ot
necessity drills torard like an irresistible torce. Thus racial
coding has not so much disappeared in recent years, but rather
simply migrated into the realm ot dress rehearsal , the realm
ot the ideal, the realm ot pure simulation, and as simulation
it remains absolutely necessary. The Obama body doubles, as
pure simulation, mcs| o: olcc|.
Perhaps this indicates the next phase in racial representa-
tion. Aher | im Crow, aher civil rights, race today has been
liberated, but only so it may persist in a purely simulated
torm [and in its being simulated it hnds a natural home in
the digital| . With the media ot simulation we have entered the
phase ot purely idealized racial coding, no longer merely the
dirty racism ot actual struggle. Now aher the "tormal" sub-
sumption ot racial logic comes the "real" subsumption. With
Obama racial typing is hnally liberated so that it may exist in
a purely ideological torm. ln essence, me most pertect racial
typing is that which lives inside a mediated simulation.
The reason tor this i s that the virtual can coly exist within
the absolute, the virtual o::Js the absolute. Yet conventional
wisdom ohen suggests the reverse, that the virtual is the thing
that stands "above" or apart trom the real, that all anxieties
about the real ultimately hnd their escape in the virtual . But
here the conventional wisdom is wrong, tor the exact opposite
is true. The virtual can only be possible, not in relation to the
real , but in relation to the absolute .
l n tormalizing this slightly, the tollowing two points emerge.
[ i| the absolute realm ot media tic simulation is responsible tor
the "pertection" [ i. e. "completion" or "accompl ishment"| ot
racial typing, and that [ z| the virtual is responsible tor pro| ect-
ing race torward into mediatic simulation, or in other words,
tor pushing race into the enterprise ot value creation.
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 Zb
l will advance to the guestion othow race enters the sphere ot
value creation in a moment. First l et me examine more closely
the present social and historical context, particularly the so-
called tailure ot theory, and the turn, in recent years, away
trom identity politics and cultural criticism. '
Consider again the lament cited at the top ot the chapter.
" Do we really need another analysis ot how a cultural repre-
sentation does symbolic violence to a marginal group " l nstead
ot passing this ott as merely the insensitivity ot a white liberal
academic turning a blind eye to matters ot racial and cultural
inj ustice, it is important to point out a tar more tundamental
trend that is at work here. For in certain philosophical circles
there exists today a newtound desire to divorce politics trom
ontology. There exists a desire to neuter the torce ot critigue
by removing dialectical reason trom the structure ot being. As
this particular individual put it, the terms ot the new philoso-
phy will be. "a rej ection ot textual analysis or linguistic struc-
tures, a positive ontology and desire to attain the Absolute, and
an attempt to shed all anthropocentrism. " But what does this
mean The hrst term, a re|ection ot textual analysis, reters to
literary criticism and the perception that textual approaches
gained too much ground particularly in the decades tollowing
the t gGos, so much so that they must be curtailed in tavor ot
realist or non-interpretive approaches. Te second term, a
positive ontolog, reters [as best one can surmise| to the "athr-
mative" ontology ot someone like Deleuze, who removes the
dialectical negative entirely trom his theory ot being. While
the third term, the shedding ot all anthropocentrism, reters to
a demotion ot the human, such that mankind is on an egual
tooting with all other obj ects in the world, no more privileged
and no less privileged than other kinds ot entities.
l s it a surprise that the identity politics and cultural theory
movements have experienced such a crisis ot taith Even the
most hardline detenders ot lettist theory admit the same
thing, that no one really believes in postmodernism any more.
Even | ameson, i n his A S|ogclc| McJ:|o||,, put torward a new
take on the postmodern as something ot an echo ot the
modern, something to be tolded back, something to be reversed
and reincorporated into a singular periodization. lt was easy
! Zb W Ar lO Co| d |a |mrs
to sneer at those who slowed the march ot civil rights, or cluck
at a politically incorrect remark. But perhaps a total reversal
has taken place without anyone knowing. Perhaps the bottom
has tallen out. Perhaps we are all Alan Sokal now.
But is it any surprise that, |ust at the moment when identity
and attect become incorporated into the digital markets ot
posttordism, the utility ot identity and attect as critical catego-
ries comes into question Shall we not discard our discussions
ot attective "taciality" in tavor ot a new detacement Recall
Tiqqun' s diagnosis ot the present political landscape ot empire,
that "Empire does not contront us l ike a subj ect, tacing us, but
like an :o||com:o| that is hostile to us. " ls the sixties-era
liberation ot attect really a new kind ot obscenity, a new porn-
ography in which all must be exposed tor speculation and
investment
Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri hred one ot the hrst
volleys in this new skirmish over the utility ot certain critical
tactics, specihcally the elevation ot multiple attects and sub| ec-
tivities by those working within lehist cultural theory.
Wc suspcct that postmodcrni st and postcooniaist thcorics may
cnd up in a dcad cnd bccausc thcy fai to rccognizc adcguatcy
thc contcmporary ob|cct of critiguc, that i s, thcy mistakc today' s
rca cncmy. What if thc modcrn form of powcr thcsc critics [and
wc ourscvcs| havc takcn such pains to dcscribc and contcst no
ongcr hods sway in our socicty What if thcsc thcorists arc so
intcnt on combating thc rcmnants of a past form of domination
that thcy fai to rccognizc thc ncw form that is ooming ovcr thcm
in thc prcscnt What if thc dominating powcrs that arc thc
intcndcd ob|cct of cri tiguc havc mutatcd in such a way as to
dcpotcntiaizc any such postmodcrnist chacngc ln short, what
if a ncw paradigm of powcr, a postmodcrn sovcrcignty, has comc
to rcpacc thc modcrn paradigm and rc|e||rccg| dg erea||c|||er
crc||esc] ||e|yor|dcad]cgea|cr,scoec||i|||esthat thcsc thco-
rists cccbratc ln this casc, modcm forms of sovcrcignty woud
no ongcr bc at issuc, and thc postmodcrnist and postcooniai st
suatcgics that appcar to bc ibcratory woud not chacngc but in
fact coincidc with and cvcn unwittingy rcinforcc thc ncw strat-
cgics of ruc! . . . This ncw cncmy not ony is rcsistant to thc od
wcapons but actuay thrivcs on thcm, and thus | oins its woud-bc
W A| the Co| d |ar mrs 1 Z
antagonists in appying thcm to thc fucst. Long ivc diffcrcncc!
Down with csscntiai st binaricsl
As might be expected Hardt and Negri were met by a consid-
erable amount ot resistance tor taking this position, particu-
larly trom those scandalized by the notion that postmodernist
theories about cultural identity might not be as ettective as
once thought, and may even add tuel to systems ot power and
domination. But Hardt and Negri were not speaking alone,
other voices soon added themselves to the chorus. Both Alain
Badiou and Slavo|

izek, tor example, have made it clear that

they oppose so-called postmodern theory and the tragmentary
sub|ectivities and liberated attects that supposedly go along
with it. With his book Io 0:]os: c] Lcs| Cccs:s

izek advocates
a return to universal truth, lettist theory' s erstwhile enemy,
and thus an end to postmodernism' s skepticism toward "grand
narratives, " a skepticism which he rightly associates with the
corrosive properties ot capitalism.
:
Badiou goes even turther,
staking much ot his work on a theory ot the sub|ect bound not
by "tragmentary sub| ectivities" but grounded in the universal-
ity ot truth. This newtound interest in a singular, universal
truth is also shared by Susan Buck- Morss in her recent H:g:l,
Hc|||, coJ 0o|i:|scl H|s|c|,.
Can wc rcst satishcd with thc ca for acknowcdging "munpc
modcrnitics, " with a poitics of "divcrsaity, " or "muuvcrsaity, "
whcn in fact thc inhumanitics of thcsc mutipicitics arc ohcn
strikingy thc samc Criuca thcorcuca practicc today is caught
within thc prisonhousc of its own acadcmic dcbatcs . . . Wc cxi st
bchind cumra bordcrs, thc dcfcnsc of which is a boon to poiu-
cians. Thc hght to frcc thc facts from thc cocctivc historics in
which thcy arc cmbcddcd is onc with cxposing and cxpanding thc
porosity of a goba socia hcd, whcrc individua cxpcricncc is not
so much hybrid as human . . . lt is not that truth is muupc or
that thc truth is a whoc cnscmbc of cocctivc idcnutics with
parua pcrspcctivcs. Truth is singuar, but it is a connnuous
proccss of inguiry bccausc it buids on a prcscnt that is moving
ground. Hi story kccps running away from us, going paccs wc,
mcrc humans, cannot prcdict. Thc poitics of schoarship that l
am suggcsting is ncutraity, but not of thc nonpartisan, "truth ics
! Z W Ar lO LOl O |a |mrs
in thc middc" sort, rathcr, it is a rcd|cc|ncutraity that insists on
thc porosity of thc spacc bctwccn cncmy sidcs, a spacc contcstcd
and prccarious, to bc surc, but lrcc cnough lor thc idca olhuman-
ity to rcmain in vicw.'
Truth is thus singu|ar, Buck- Morss suggests, and achieved
through a "radica| neutrality" ot the human. [A point l wi||
return to at the end. |
But perhaps the most torcetu| push away trom sub| ect-
oriented, relativistic, and correlationist thinking has come
trom Quentin Meil|assoux, in his A]:| F|o||cJ:. Through a
highly technical intervention, Meillassoux re| ects the hege-
mony ot hnitude and urges us to awake trom our s|umber and
reconcile ourse|ves with the absolute.

Citing these ditterent authors exposes a trend, and accentu-
ates the contrast between a dawning set ot concerns and those
ot the immediate past. Consider tor examp|e Cayatri Chakra-
vorty Spivak' s much cited essay "Can the Suba|tern Speak , " "
an artic|e that helped set the stakes tor a who|e he|d ot
critical race theop, particuIar|y in the area ot postco|onialism.
Spivak' s "subaltern" reters not simp|y to the historica|ly dis-
entranchised. Suba|tern is not simply the subordinate position
within any given structura| re|ationship, such as that ot
Woman, Proletarian, or Cay. There is another |evel ot remove.
The subaltern is that quasi-sub| ect structured as Other through
a re|ationship ot ditterence vis-a-vis imperia| power. The sub-
altern is precise|y the one who does not have a seat at the tab|e.
lt is the one who can not petition the powers-that-be, the one
who is not - or is not yet - a wage slave tor capita| .
l t Spivak' s "can the suba|tern speak " is emblematic ot the
i gBos and t ggos period ot cu|tura| po|itics, today the very
terms ot the question have changed dramatical|y. The question
today is not so much cco the subaltern speak, tor the new
globa| networks ot technicity have so|ved this problem with
ruth|ess precision, but a|:|: and |ca the suba|tern speaks, or
indeed | s ]c|c:J t o speak. l t is not so much a question ot cco
but Jc:s, not so much a politics ot exc|usion as a po|itics ot
subsumption. [And to be clear. "speech" means something
entire|y diherent under this new regi me. | The crucial po|itica|
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 ZJ
question is now theretore not so much that ot the liberation
ot attect, as it was tor our torebears in the civil rights move-
ment, the gay l iberation movement, or the women' s move-
ment, in which the elevation ot new sub| ect positions, trom
out ot the shadows ot oppression, was paramount. The crucial
question now is - somehow - the reverse. Not exactly the
repression ot attect, but perhaps something close. Perhaps
something like a politics ot subtraction or a politics ot disap-
pearance. Perhaps the true digital politics ot race, men, would
require us not to "let it be, " but l:ci: || o:. Something else is
necessary, a scm:|||og ot the political. l n short, Obama' s body
double should not necessarily have to be black. l t should be
whatever it is.
So where in the world are we ' To summarize the socio-
historical context. [i| there comes an increased cultivation ot
racial typing and a triumph ot the decades-long guest to liber-
ate attect, concurrent with [ z| the recession ot "theory, " par-
ticularly identiq politics and cultural theory. At hrst glance
these two phenomena might appear unconnected. They might
appear as merely contradictory ehects, pushing each other
apart, tied together only by historical coincidence. lt is thus
necessary to pose the question explicitly. Are these two torces
connected And the answer is most certainly yes.
bCCODd QuCSUOD. |y O L8DCS m8VC K8CCS
8Dd L8SSCSr
The Obama inauguration rehearsal is not intormatic per se,
beyond the admittedly vague reterences given already to simu-
lation and the virtual. To pull back the curtain a bit, consider
now cultural production and the digital intrastruchre, particu-
larly video games and the kinds ot worlds they create. A curious
logic holds sway in these digital realms . A curious logic ot race
and class, constructed via complex sottware algorithms, still
grips the psyche ot game makers and game players. But why
| n a game, a race designates a set ot representational pro-
clivities - across both diegetic and nondiegetic representation
- that are closely tollowed in matters ot narrative, character
! J W A| lO LO| O |a | m|s
modeling and animation, gamic elements such as weapons
and resources, m|s: :o scio:, algorithmic personalities, styles
ot gameplay, Al behaviors, and so on. These types ot sottware
artitacts are then "metaphorically patched" " into games as
coherent, contained "races. "
Camic races are ohen essentialist i n nature, paralleling
certain omine retrograde notions ot naturally or physiologi-
cally determined and unchangeable human races. For example
in a game like wc|lJ c] wc|c|c] race is conditioned largely by
the demands ot aesthetic representation ot cenain "ethnic"
intangibles like voice, visage, and so on, and only secondarily
intersects with intormatic modeling ot behavior in so-called
racial traits. For example the troll race in wc|lJ c] wc|c|c]
[ Fig. . z| speaks with a | amaican accent. Yet in a game like
S|c|C|c] race is much more algorithmically toundational. l n
Figurc j . z . Jro racc. Bi zzard Entcrtainmcnt. wcr|d c] wcrcrc],
zOOq. Camc sn.
W A| lh LOl O |a| m|s
S|crCrc], d IdCC dS uDIQuC COUDdI S!IdIC_ICS, d CCIIdID Wdy
O OOID_ IID_S. O DC SuIC, IdCC CIC QCIIdIDS IO dD CDUIC!y
_dHC CODICXI, d CODICXI WDIC IS d!!O_CICI OuCICDI IOU Du!
ID SOUC SCDSCS OCICIUIDCO Dy OIDC IdCC. 1CI ID IIS SCDSC
S|crCrc] IS UOIC SIDISICI ID !dI II QIO7IOCS d OIICCI UdQQID_
O IdCC OD!O UdCIDIC 7dIIdD!CS, WCICdS wcr|J c] wcrcrc]
OOdOS d!UOSI d!! O IIS uDCIIODd!I| IO !C SISICI CODCCQI,
C!dSS, ICIdIDIH_ IdCC !dI_C!y OI IC WIDOOW dICSSID_ O dIC_CIIC
ICQICSCHIdUOD.
P!CI ICSC SOIWdIC C!uSICIS dIC UCIdQOIICd!!y QdICCO
IDIO IC _dUC dS OISUHCI IdCCS, IC _dUC dCSI_DCIS SCCK
Dd!dDCC ID _dUCQ!dy Dy HDC !uDID_ OIUCICDI 7dIIdD!CS WIIID
CdC SOIWdIC C!uSICI, ICOuCIH_ d 7d!uC ID OHC dCIIOD dDO
du_UCD!ID_ II ID dD OQQOSIIODd! dCIIOD. lD IDS Wdy, d!! !C
IdCCS dIC DIOu_I ID!O Dd!dDCC. OI CXdUQ!C, I ODC S|crCrc]
IdCC IS IDOIOIDdIC!y QOWCIH! CCIIdID IdCId! 7dIIdD!CS Udy DC
QudDII!dH7C!y IDCICdSCO OI OCCICdSCO. C _Od! IS IO CICd!C d
DCI!CI SCHSC O CQuI!IDIIuU ID Q!dy. bIDCC CdC SOHWdIC C!uS!CI
IS dQ! IO DC QuIIC COUQ!CX, IDC ICCDIquCS O IdCId! Dd!dDCID_
_CDCId!!y OQCIdIC ID d IdICI IOuDddDOuI Wdy, CSCCWID_ dDy
DCd! dDO IIdy IIddCO DCIWCCD IIS OI IdI IIdII UIIIOICO
dCIOSS !WO OI UOIC IdCCS. lDS!CdO, Dd!dDCC IS dCC7CO IIOu_D
IC dC!ICdIC dII O CXCdD_ID_ Qud!I!dU7C!y dICICDI 7d!uCS, OI
CXdUQ!C Dy Sd7ID_ ||mc O ODC IdCId! dDI!I!y dDO !IdDSUuUD_
II IDIO d Jcmcgc DOOSI IH dDO!CI IdCC S dDI!IIy. l IC SIUudICO
SySICU ID7O!7CS IICC IdCCS dS ID S|crCrc], OI dD C7CD !dI_CI
DuUDCI O C!dSSCS dS ID wcr|J c] wcrcrc], uC dI! O Dd!dDCC
CdD DC CXCCCOID_!y OIHCu!I, u!IIUdIC!y UCdSuIdD!C ID CCIIdID
_!ODd! SIdUSIICS SuCD dS WID!OSS QCICCD!d_CS OI CdC IdCC, OI
IdI IDIdD_ID!C SIdIIS!IC KDOWD C!uSI7C!y dS uD.
LCIIdID!y UuC UOIC COu!O DC SdIO DCIC dDOuI IdCCS dDO
C!dSSCS ID _dUCS, dDO IC OISHDCIOD DC!WCCD ICU, DuI OHC
QdI!ICudI ODSCDdUOD IS DCCCSSdIy DCOIC UO7ID_ OD, IdI
uCSC _dUCS SuDSCIIDC IO d SQCCIHC DOUOD O IdCC dDO C!dSS
[dDd ODC DOI dISSIUI!dI IO IC OIDC) . rccc |s s|c||c caJ ua||cr
sc|, u|||c c|css |s |c|:ce|c caJ |ccmJ. bO D wcr|J c] wcrcrc]
IdCId! !IdIIS IDOCCO CXISI dDO d7C d DCdIID_ OD _dUCQ!dy, DuI
ICy dIC uDUOOIHdD!C [ddS, uC UO!!jdUdICdD dIdDCC IS
IDCOIIuQ!D!C) , WI!C CdSS IIdI!S dIC COH_uIdD!C ID d DuUDCI
! JZ W Ar lO LOl O |a |mrs
ot signihcant ways including the talent tree and the boosting
ot class abilities via consumables or wearables. What this
means is that race is "unplayable" in any conventional sense,
tor all the tangible detail s ot gamic race [voice, visage, charac-
ter animation, racial abilities, etc. | are quarantined into certain
hardcoded machinic behaviors, what l have el sewhere called
the "diegetic machine act. " '' One cannot "play" race in wc|lJ
c] wc|c|c]. One must accept it as such. Certainly the enter-
prising gamer can " pl ay with" race via the chat channel , tan
comics, and so on. But to lcy with race and to play a||| race
are two entirely diherent things.
The worrisome conclusion is that this view on digital race
is typically what one would call, in the omine context, racism,
in that the apparatus assigns trom without certain identihable
traits to distinct classes ot entities and then builds complex
machineries tor explaining and maintaining the natural imper-
viousness ot it all. That the game pleads innocence by placing
the narrative in a tantasy world ot tantasy races [troll s, gnomes,
elves| does not absolve it trom toregrounding a systemic,
"cybertype"'' logic ot naturalized group dehnition and division,
as in a dream when the most important or traumatic details
are paraded betore the mind' s eye in such hagrant obviousness
that one is blind to them in their very immediacy. The "inno-
cence" ot the sublimation is in tact apropos because it illus-
trates the neoliberal, digirati notion that race must be liberated
via an uncoupling trom materia detail, but also that the logic
ot race can never be more alive, can never be more c|:ly
actualized, than in a computer simulation. Apparently one
must leave this world in order to actualize more tully its mech-
anisms ot management and discipline.
Let it be underscored though that the most interesting thing
to observe here is ac| that wc|lJ c] wc|c|c] is racist. The
interesting thing to observe is precisely the way in which racial
coding must always pass into tantasy betore it can ever return
to the real . The true is only created by way ot an extended
detour through talsity.
But is gaming' s race problem merely a nominal one l s
" race" simply a n untortunate word choice tor what i s ulti-
mately a pragmatic design requirement, that many games
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 J J
reguire clusters ot algorithmic representational proclivities to
designate distinct players and player qpes. l t game designers
had used a ditterent word like "archetype, " "species, " or
"tamily" would the problem go away The answer l ies certainly
in the deployment ot what Lisa Nakamura calls "menu-driven
identities" - with or without reterence to race - but also in the
disheartening discovery that ethnic and racial coding seem
always to be synonymous with mediation itself" The one
implies the other. By way ot an allusion to the S|c| wc|s
movies, this is what might be called the " | ar | ar Binks" problem
ot tantasy representation [ Fig. . j | . the more one seems to
extricate oneselt trom the mire ot terrestrial stereotyping, the
more tree and hexible the bigotry machine becomes, able to
repopulate the racialized imagination with "aliens, " but aliens
that conveniently still stick to the gangly comic reliet ot the
blacktace minstrel complete with exaggerated tacial teatures
and a | amaican accent. [ | ar | ar Binks borrows the voice, but
not the body, ot black actor Ahmed Best. | Si milar scenarios
occur in any number ot other digita animations, as in the
zooi animated teature S||:| where black actor Eddie Murphy
guite literally plays the ass. Apparently computers are much
better at this than we could ever have imagined| Because ot
this, the contemporary tormat ot digital animation, both cin-
ematic and gamic, is one ot the most important sites today
where racial coding is worked out in mass culture . Until this
issue is addressed, the "race" problematic in gaming will be
alive and well, no matter what name it goes by. ' '
|IId QuCSlIOD |O lS l|C L|IDCSC LOd 8IDCIr
But what ot the market system in general , where does it
appear Markets are places where the standardized exchange
ot gualitatively diherent entities takes place in a naturalized,
untettered tashion tollowing certain ground rules. Most all
games are markets ot some torm or another. RTS games in
particular - races and all - simulate markets guite vividly with
their economics ot resource collection and exchange. To be
sure this is entirely ditterent trom the claim, issuing trom
! J4 W Ar lO LO| O |armrs
Fi gurc j . j . |ar |ar Bi nks pubIici imagc for S|crwcrs, Ep|scJesI-III
[d. Ccorgc Lucas, i ggg-zooj | .
certain economists, that games like Ei:c:s| or wclJ c] wc
cc] are markets due to the circulation ot virtual gold within
them. '
:
Rather, this is the claim that RTS games [a genre
shared not by wclJ c]wccc] but by its predecessor wccc]
III as well as S|cCc]j are markets because the algorithms ot
gameplay themselves are structured around an economy ot
resources and productive capabilities. Resources circulate,
ob| ects and agents are produced, destroyed and replenished,
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 Jb
all without the exchange of "gold" or the existence of virtual
" marketplaces" in any proper sense. The market analogy is
signihcant because it highlights the problem of how to
"control" that which is uncontrollable, or how to shih from
top-down control to organic, bottom-up control.
The specter of the Chinese gold farmer returns again now
as a way of addressing the guestion of markets in games.
Recall the narrative again, that somewhere off in another land
beyond the sea there are legions of Chinese gamers, working
in near sweatshop conditions, playing games to earn real cash
for virtual ob| ects . l have no interest in disputing this on
purely empirical grounds. Of course such rooms exist, here,
there, and elsewhere. But of much greater importance, it
seems, is the ideological work being performed by the tableau
itself. "the problem of the Chinese gold farmer. " A certain
amount of ideological demystihcation is in order, if not to
shrug off the xenophobia latent in such a formulation, then to
invert the terms entirely.
What if something else is happening What if the "problem
of the Chinese gold farmer" is really a decoy for what is actu-
ally going on ln order to tackle the problem directly, consider
the hrst of two afhrmations. [i| w: c|: t|: gclJ ]c|m:|s. [And
by "we" l mean the gamers and users of the developed and
developing worlds alike, the unihed mass of whites and non-
whites alike. |
What does this mean, that a: c|: ||: gclJ ]c|m:|s? l t means
that in the age of postfordist capitalism it is impossible to dif-
ferentiate cleanly between play and work. lt is impossible to
differentiate cleanly bebeen nonproductive leisure activity
existing within the sphere of play and productive activity exist-
ing within the sphere of the workplace. Such a claim should
be understood both in a general and specihc sense. ln general,
postfordist workspaces are those that have ballooned outward
into daily life to such a high degree that labor is performed
via phone in the car, on email walking down the street, or at
home aher putting the children to bed. Crosscutting this
outward expansion is an internal collapse of the workspace
itself, as the "bored at work" classes invent new ways to slack
off on the | ob, surhng the web, and otherwise circumventing
! J b W Ar lO LOl O |a |mrs
the necessities ot workplace always-on pertormance. But also
in a more specihc sense, posttordism is a mode ot production
that makes lite itselt the site ot valorization, that is to say, it
turns seemingly normal human behavior into monetizable
labor. The new consumer titans Coogle or Amazon are the
masters in this domain. No longer simply a blogger, someone
pertorms the necessary labor ot knitting networks together.
No longer simply a consumer, browsing through links on an
e-commerce site, someone is omoading his or her tastes and
proclivities into a data-mining database with each click and
scroll. No longer simply keeping up with email correspon-
dence, someone is presiding over the creation and mainten-
ance ot codihed social relationships. Each and every day,
anyone plugged into a network is pertorming hour aher hour
ot unpaid micro labor. |n this sense are we not gold tarmers
too Why are our dreary hours spent in tront ot the screen any
ditterent We troll and scroll, tagging and clicking, uploading
and contributing, posting and commenting. They spider us
and mine us, extracting value trom pure intormation. Our
drudgery is rewarded trom time to time ot course, with bribes
ot tree this and tree that, a tree email account or a tree ring-
tone. | do not dispute the existence ot a business plan. Rather
| dispute the ideological mystihcation that says that we are the
tree while the Chinese children are in chains, that our com-
puters are a liteline and their computers are a curse. This kind
ot obscenity must be thrown out. We are all gold tarmers, and
all the more paradoxical since most ot us do it willingly and
tor no money at all.
Now a second athrmation. zj I| 's oc| ||: gclJ, | | 's ||: C||o:s:.
|n order to understand turther the kind ot ideological torce
behind the so-called problem ot me Chinese gold tarmer, one
must acknowledge that it is not the gold that is being tarmed,
it is the "Chinese" that is being tarmed. Te purely economic
claim trom the hrst athrmation must now be supplemented.
As has been hinted thus tar, there is a new kind ot speech
online, the speech ot the body, the codihed value it produces
when it is captured, massihed, and scanned by systems ot
monetization. The purely economic claim, then, that all users
pertorm scads ot unpaid micro labor, merely through the act
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 J
ot living inside the digital cocoon, must be supplemented via
an examination ot the very quality ot that act. So the hunter
becomes the hunted, migrating trom a situation in which
users tarm tor gold, to a situation in which users are being
tarmed. For, under posttordism, the act otlite is always already
an act ot attective identity. A body is always "cybertyped, " that
is to say, it is always tagged with a certain set ot attective iden-
tity markers. Whenever a body speaks, it always already speaks
as a body codihed with an attective identity [gendered, ethnic-
ally typed, and so on| , determined as such by various intra-
structures both ot and tor identity tormation. The dithculty is
not simply that bodies must always speak. The dithculty is that
they must always speak
Let there be no misunderstanding, my goal is not the elimin-
ation ot ditterence, racial or otherwise. Rather what must be
interrogated is, on the one hand, when ditterence becomes
todder tor in|ustice, and on the other hand, when ditterence
is mobilized as tuel tor vaIue creation in the marketplace. The
goal , then, would be to uncouple ditterence trom both in|ust-
ice and valorization.
With the posttordist colonization ot attect and the concomi-
tant valorization ot attective ditterence, a body has no choice
but to speak. A body speaks whether it wants to or not. This
is the genius ot the "page rank" algorithm used by search
engines. use graph theory to valorize pure heterogenity, show
how quality is an emergent property ot quantity, as Barbara
Cassin has wrihen in her book on Coogl e. '' Data mining is
otten considered in terms otlocation and extraction ot nuggets
ot intormation trom a sea ot background noise. But this meta-
phor is entirely wrong. Data mining is essentially a plastic art,
tor it responds to the sculpture ot the medium itselt, to the
background noise itself l t valorizes the pure shape ot relahon-
ships. Not "can" but "does" the body speak Yes, it has no
choice.
Making a phone call trom the slums ot Cairo or Mumbai
or Paris, the subaltern "speaks" into a database - j ust as much
as l do when l pick up the phone. The ditterence tor ditterence
is no longer actual, it is technical . The subaltern speaks, and
somewhere an algorithm listens.
! J W Ar lO LOl O |a |mrs
ID8 Qu8UOD. O8 l| |8lVI bQ8Kr
At the very moment ot the digital, at the very moment ot the
prohibition ot the negative, trom out ot the trenches ot torced
speech, ot entorced behavior, ot networks reintorced with
apparatuses ot capture and protocols tor ebb and how, here
rises a new politics ot disappearance. lt is no longer the Hegel
othistory, where everything is "post-" this and "post- " that, but
the Hegel ot the negative, where everything is "un-" or "non- "
What was once a logic ot supercession is now a logic ot cancel-
lation. Seek not the posthuman, but the nonhuman. Be not
post identity, but rather subtractive ot it. The operative political
guestion today, thus, in the shadow ot digital markets, is not
that ot controntation on egual tooting, not "what are they
going to do to us " or even "what are we going to do to them , "
but rather the exodus guestion. hrst posed as "what are we
going to do a|||cc| them " and later posed in a more sophis-
ticated sense as "what are we going to do without cc|s:l |:s?
Cease trying to buttress presence with new predicates, i t is
time now to abandon it, to leave it be. lt is time now tor
leaving-being.
The virtual [ or the new, the o:x|j is no longer the site ot
emancipation. Rather, it is the primary mechanism ot oppres-
sion. And so, even in the tace ot those who seek alternatives
to this world ot debasement and exploitation, we must stress
that it is not the | ob ot pol itics to invent a new world. On the
contrary it is the |ob ot politics to make all these new worlds
irrelevant. No politics can be derived today trom a theory ot
the new. '

The reason is simpl e. we have never known any
torm ot modernity except that torm ot modernity subservient
to the new. We have never known any torm ot modernity
except that ot market accumulation, increased proht margins,
development ot the productive torces, rises in productivity,
new | ingles, the latest tads, and on and on. These are the cur-
rency ot the realm. lt is time now to subtract trom this world,
not add to it. The challenge today is not one ot political or
moral imagination, tor this problem was solved ages ago - kill
the despots, surpass capitalism, inclusion ot the excluded,
equality tor all ot humanity, end exploitation. The world does
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 JJ
not need new ideas. The challenge is simply to realize what
we al ready know to be true.
That silly slogan ot the lett, "another world is possible, "
should be scrapped. Another world i s not possible. The pol iti-
cal is that thing that can not happen. lt can not be produced
and it can not take place. But why Because "production" and
"taking place" are the domain ot anti-political torces. The polit-
ical does not arise trom the domain ot production, nor does it
exist in any place or situation. Another vocabulary is required.
So like Badiou we might speak ot the political in terms ot the
event. Or like Laruelle we might speak in terms ot generic
immanence.
The "me" today is the a|c|:|:|. Recall Buck- Morss' concept
ot a "singular" truth reached via "radical neutrality. " Or recall
what Rey Chow once described as the "inditterence" ot the
native. ' These are hints into the meaning ot this elusive
concept. But what exactly is the whatever Now the question
may be answered more tully.
The concept ot the whatever comes trom the writing ot a
number ot ditterent authors, all working roughly in the terrain
ot continental philosophy and political theory. While the
concept has roots in the scholastics and can be tound in think-
ers as divergent as Pierce, Levinas, and Lyotard, the whatever
gained traction in the current discourse largely because ot
Deleuze and then later via more sustained considerations by
Agam ben. De leuze uses the concept ot the "whatever" and the
"any-space-whatever" in his C|o:mc books, and deploys related
terminology in other texts, such as the "something" cl|c|Jj
and the "neutral" in Lcg|c c] S:os:, and "haecceity" [the Lati-
nate term borrowed trom Duns Scoms meaning "thisness"|
in A DccscoJ Plc|:ccs. l n 7|: Ccm|og Ccmmco||y Agamben
explains his use ot the term in greater detail . "The Whatever
in question here relates to singularity not in its inditterence
with respect to a common propeny [to a concept, tor example.
being red, being French, being Muslim| , but only in its being
scc| cs || |s. ' And l ater. "Whatever is the hgure ot pure sin-
gularity. Whatever singularity has no identity, it is not deter-
minate with respect to a concept, but neither is it simply
indeterminate, rather it is determined only through its relation
! 4 W Ar lO LOl O |a |mrs
to an |J:c, that is, to the totality ot its possibil ities. " " The what-
ever tollows a logic ot belonging [x such that it belongs to yj ,
not a logic ot predication [x is dehned through y, or more
simply, x is yj . '
The trick ot the whatever i s thus to abstain trom the assig-
nation ot traits, to abstain trom the system ot biopolitical
predication, to abstain trom the bagging and tagging ot
bodies. '' This does not mean that all bodies are now blank.
Quite the opposite. All bodies are tull . But their mllness is a
generic tullness, a tullness ot whatsoever they are. ' Likewise
it does not mean that ditterence has "gone away. " The opposite
is the case, as ditterence may now hnally come into its own as
generic ditterence.
The whatever is ohen contused with two omer kinds ot
subj ects that, whe similar, are ultimately incompatible. The
hrst is the posttordist economic subj ect. lt would be a mistake
to think that the whatever is merely the tully unigue, custom-
ized, gualitatively special posttordist consumer - what Tiggun
calls " Bloom, " the subj ect tor whom everything is tailored and
targeted. '' For each attective predilection ot the posttordist
economic sub| ect there is a corresponding marketplace that
will satisty it. Here lies the Pyrrhic victories ot identity politics.
each woman a woman consumer, each black a black con-
sumer, each gay a gay consumer, each chicano a chicano
consumer. For in our delivery trom oppression, were we not
also delivered to a new site ot consumption This was precisely
the point made previously about the Chinese gold tarmer.
every economic transaction today is also an attective transac-
tion [which is to say a transaction that will likely deal with
aspects such as, but not limited to, racial identity| .
Second is the liberal political sub|ect. lt would also be a
mistake to think that the whatever is akin to something like
the "original position" and "veil ot ignorance" described by
| ohn Rawls in his theory ot j ustice, but evident as well in other
torms across a number ot ditterent liberal social theories. The
ve-ot-ignorance subj ect must hold in suspension its gender,
its ethnicity, its religious athliation, its class position, etc . l n
the digital context it i s ohen summed up by the slogan "on the
l nternet nobody knows your identity. " [A position that was
W A| lh LO| O |ar m|s 1 41
once tamously parodied as "on the l nternet nobody knows
you' re a dog. "| The Rawlsian l ibera| tantasy is thus that ot the
transcendental sub| ect par excel|ence, the sub|ect who is able
to step out ot his skin, suspending social relations in order to
observe them trom a position ot supposed neutrality. [The
di|emma with Rawls is that some models ot social relations
are oc| suspended, specihcally those borrowed trom liberal
political economy and game theory. respect tor individual
liberty, the maximization ot advantage, rational choice, and so
on. Again the demon ot simulation rears its head, as things
appear neutral precisely at the point ot l:cs| neutrality. | Civen
this characterization ot the l ibera| political sub| ect it would be
a mistake to think that it has much at all in common with the
whatever.
Remember that, atter the o|d enemy ot transcendental
essentialism, racia| | ustice has a new enemy, transient anti-
essentialism. Reca|l the conceit ot white privilege. to cast ott
the tetters ot race and retreat to the original position behind a
veil ot ignorance [as in Rawls| . Such a theory reveals not only
the ignorance ot the veil , but a|so the ignorance ot the position,
tor it is only certain select bodies, certain select sub| ects, who
are tree to cast ott their earthly tetters and go blank, like a
white sheet ot paper.
What ot those bodies ot color tor whom this is not an
option Or what about those who simply have no desire to
abandon themselves, to abandon their culture, to abandon
their history For whom would this be called | ustice What
even ot those bona hde whatever bodies who nevertheless are
constructed and viewed as such trom the perspective ot the
dominant Did they bring it upon themselves Do they wish
it to be so C|early such suba|tern positions exist entirely
within normative discursive structures.
The rebuttal trom the whatever is. yes, the ol d system ot
transcendental essentialism is sti|| our enemy, we do not
want to return to a politics ot essential purity in which only
certain sub|ects are dominant and al| others are consigned to
a|terity, but at the same time, the new system ot transient anti-
essentialism is our enemy too, tor we also re| ect the new
customized micropo|itics ot identity management, in which
! 4Z W Ar lO LOl O |a |mrs
each human sou| is captured and reproduced as an autono-
mous individual bearing attects and identities. '
-
The whatever
re|ects the symbo|ic vio|ence ot Facebook | ust as much as it
re|ects the rea| vio|ence ot | im Crow. The whatever re| ects the
tarming ot "Chinese" |ust as much as the tarming ot go|d.
l n short, there exists today co||:|scl||y a|||cc| ccll:c|||||y.
The whatever is an attempt to work through this dilemma, not
by eliminating universa|ity, but by showing how co||ectivity is
the natura| outcome ot the generic, how the common is only
achieved by those who have nothing in common.
Fina||y now the unso|ved enigma ot Chapter i receives
some attention. That "dirty regime" ca||ed ||c||, consisting ot
the intersection ot both aesthetic and po|itica| incoherence,
returns with tu|l torce. The whatever is aesthetically incoher-
ent because it does not coa|esce around any given tormal
essence or dehnitiona| predicate. The whatever hnds its
power in incontinence and transtormation, not unihcation or
repetition. Likewise the whatever is po|itica||y incoherent
because it tends to erode existing territories and institutional
routines. Te whatever is not a coa|ition or a po|itical party.
No center exists toward which it might gravitate. The whatever
does not make politica| demands, and has no po|itica| p|at-
torm. A harbinger ot the truth regime, the whatever disso|ves
into the common, ettacing representationa| aesthetics and
representationa| po|itics a|ike, in tavor ot direct immanence
in matter.
So the whatever shou|d not be read as simp|y a new spin
on the same o| d white libera| hobbyhorse. l t is not a call tor
all the wor| d' s people to appear in our image, tor us a|| to | oin
in a chorus ot "we are the wor|d. " No, as Ceorge Ydice wrote,
we are oc| the world. The world does not appear in our image.
By contrast, the whatever is an attempt to avoid the trap ot
attect, that is t o say, the trap ot the "image" ot the identity-
bound individua| . lt is an atIempt to avoid the trap otracia|ized
universa|ism. The sooner we realize these things, the sooner
we can return to what we are, a|c|:|:| that may be. ''
Again, to be absolute|y c|ear. the whatever does not elimi-
nate ditterence. The whatever is neither a synonym tor the
universa|, nor tor the transcendenta|, the white, the b|ank, the
W A| lh LO| O |ar mrs 1 4J
empty, or the whole. The whatever begins when the system of
predication ends.
To be sure, the whatever is not a panacea. l t is not a heroic
sub|ect position. The whatever is not a gateway to a utopia.
This is not a new kind of Maoism, a call to go forth and dis-
entangle oneself from ideology and privilege, to live among
the peasant classes, those who have no gual ities except their
own authentic history. The whatever is merely a practical sug-
gestion, an ethos. Demilitarize being. Stand down. Cease par-
ticipating in the system of sub| ective predication. Stop trying
to l iberate your desire. Forget igGB. Don' t "let it be, " l:c|: be. '
s
Again the guestion, was the subaltern able to speak No,
not exactly.
What ot today' s digital class lt has no choice but to speak,
continuously and involuntarily.
And the whatever The whatever helds no guestions and
leaves very little to say. Let' s try to keep it that way.
Notes to pages J-1 Z 1 b J
word. Scc Nicoas Bourriaud, Re|c||cac| Aes||e||cs [ Dij on. Lcs
Prcsscs du rc, zooz| .
t g Frcdric ]amcson, "Cass and Acgory i n Contcmporary Mass
Cuturc. cg cy A]emcca As a Poitica Fim, " S|gnc|ces c]
||e \|s|o|e [ Ncw York. Routcdgc, i ggz| , q.
zo Frcdric |amcson, Pcs|mcdem|sm, c, 7|e Cc||cc| Lcg|c c] Lc|e
Ccp||c||sm [ Durham. Dukc Univcrsity Prcss, i ggt | , i .
D|s| ngcnuous | n!ormat| cs

scason j , cpi sodc q [ Fox, zooj | , minutc zj.

z Scvcra tcchnica tcrms such as "protoco" and "sockct" arc
uscd by charactcrs in thc show in ordcr to givc thc diaoguc an
aura of tcchnoogica sophistication. ln

a protoco mcans a
dircctivc for action invoving information hows and human
agcnts.
j l thank David Parisi for this word choicc, as wc as his thoughts
throughout. Savoj Zizck discusscs thc dctachcd subjcct posi-
tion of thc

tormrcr in his piccc "Jhc dcpravcd hcrocs of zq
arc thc Himmcrs of Hoywood, " De Cccd|ca, http. ] ] .
guardi an. co. uk]commcntj storyj o, j 6oq, i 65zy6o, oo. htm
[acccsscd ]anuary t o, zoo6| . For Zizck howcvcr, this dctach-
mcnt indicatcs a ccrtain typc of coping stratcgy, not cvidcncc
of thc purc machinic cxpcdicncc of torturc as a tactic [or rathcr
a ]ca|csy tactic| .
q Scc in parncuar Lcv Manovich, 7|e Lcagccge c] Nea Med|c
[ Cambridgc. MlT Prcss, zooi| , iqz-iqj .
; l discuss this furthcr in Ccm|ag: Esscys ca A|gci||m|c Cc||ce
[ Minncapois. Univcrsity of Mi nncsota Prcss, zoo6| , 6q-6 .
6 Annc Fricdbcrg attcnds thcsc gucstions with much grcatcr
dctai than l . Scc in particuar thc hna chaptcr of hcr book De
\||cc| w|adca: lcm A|oe|| |c M|ccsc] [ Cambridgc. M|J
Prcss, zoo6| .
Postscr| pt. Wc Arc thc Co| d |armcrs
Nancy Frascr charts this historica shih with grcat faciity and
insight in hcr articc " Fcmini sm, Capitaism and thc Cunning
of History, " Nea Le] Rei|ea 6 [ March-Apri zoog| . gy-iiy.
! b4 Notes to pages 1 Z1 -1 J
z l ntcrcsting work has bccn donc on thc gucstion of racc and
abor in gaming. Scc in particuar Lisa Nakamura, " Don' t Hatc
thc Paycr, Hatc thc Camc. Jhc Raciaization of Labor in Word
of Warcraft, " C|||cc| S|cd|es |a Med|c Ccmmca|cc||ca zG, no. z
[ ] unc zoogj . rz8rqq.
j For two contrasting articuations of this trcnd scc Bruno Latour,
"Why Has Critiguc Run out of Stcam From Mattcrs of Fact to
Mattcrs of Conccrn, " C|||cc| Iac|y jo, no. z [Wintcr zooqj .
zz;zq8, and D. N. Rodowick, "An Ecgy for Jhcory, " Oc|coe
rzz [ FaI zoo)j . grrog.
q Tiggun, Ia|cdcc||ca |c C|i|| wc, trans. Acxandcr R. Caoway
and ]ason E. Smith [ Los Angccs. Scmiotcxt[c| , zoroj , r)r .
; Michac Hardt and Antonio Ncgri , Emp|e [Cambridgc. Harvard
Univcrsity Prcss, zoooj , rj)r j8, cmphasis addcd.
G Savoj Zizck, Ia e]ease c]Lcs| Cccses [ Ncw York. Vcrso, zoo8j .
) Susan Buck-Morss, Hege|, Hc|||, cad 0a|iesc| H|s|cy [ Pi tts-
burgh. Univcrsity of Pittsburgh Prcss, zoogj , rj8rj g, rqg, r ;o.
8 Qucntin Mciassoux, e F|a||cde: Aa Esscy ca ||e Necess||y c]
Cca||ageacy, trans. Ray Brassicr [ London. Connnuum, zoo8j ,
rz8.
g Cayatri Chakavorty Spivak "Can thc Subatcrn Spcak" in
Mcx|sm cad ||e Ia|epe|c||ca c] Cc||ce, Cary Ncson and Law-
rcncc Crossbcrg, cds . [ Urbana, l L. Univcrsity of l inois Prcss,
rg88j . z)rjrj .
ro With thc chaptcr wc undcrway onc may now rcfcrcncc thc
sourcc of this guotation, Ciccro' s famous amcnt from thc
Cc||||ae Oc||cas whcrc with much pomp and hourish hc
dccrics thc abominations bcsctting thc city. d| |mmc|c|es,
co|acm gea||cm scmcs Qccm em pco||ccm |coemcs Ia cc
coe i|i|mcs [ "Oh immorta gods, whcrc in thc word arc wc
What kind of commonwcath do wc havc ln what sort of city
do wc ivc"| Or pcrhaps for our purposcs today a sighty morc
itcra transation of gea||cm is appropriatc. "Whcrc arc wc
among a thc raccs" Arc wc ococ|cas? Do you think this is
C||ac? '
" Mctaphoricay patchcd artifacts arc| tcchnoogica narrativc
ccmcnts that arc brought to ht into thc dicgcsis by thc dcpoy-
mcnt of a mctaphor. " Scc Eddo Stcm, "A Jouch of Mcdicva.
Narrativc, Magic and Computcr Tcchnoogy in Massivcy Muti -
paycr Computcr Roc-Payi ng Camcs, " http. ] ] . c-cvc.
cc]~cddo]StcrnTOME.hm, rcprintcd in Frans Mayra [cd. | ,
Notes to pages 1 JZ-1 4 1 bb
Ccmp|er Ccmes cad |g||c| C||res Cca]ereace Prcceed|ags
[Jamprc Univcrsity Prcss, zoozj .
rz A dicgctic machinc act is an action pcrlormcd by thc gamc
within thc word of thc story. For morc on this conccpt scc thc
chaptcr "Camic Action, Four Momcnts" in my Ccm|ag: Esscys
ca A|gcri||m|c C||re [ Mi nncapoi s. Univcrsity of Mi nncsota
Prcss, zooGj .
rj Scc Lisa Nakamura, Cyoer|ypes: Rcce, E||a|c||y, Idea|||y ca ||e
Ia|eme| [Ncw York. Routcdgc, zoozj .
rq lbid. , rorrj; .
r ; l thank David Parisi lor raising thc probcm ol nominaism i n
this contcxt.
r G Scc in particuar Edward Castronova, Sya||e||c wcr|ds: 7|e Bs|
aess cad C||re c] Oa||ae Ccmes [Chicago. Univcrsity ol Chicago
Prcss, zoo; j . A prccursor to wcr|d c] wcrcrc], Eieres| i s a
massivcy mutipaycr oninc roc-paying gamc rccascd in
r ggg by Sony Oninc Entcrtainmcnt.
r) Scc Barbara Cassin, Cccg|e-mc|: Lc dex|ime m|ss|ca de | 'Am
rie [ Pari s. Abin Michc, zoo)j , roo, r oz.
r8 Hcrc l takc obiguc aim at McKcnzic Wark' s assumptions in A
Hcc|er Mcaqs|c [ Cambridgc. Harvard Univcrsity Prcss, zooqj ,
onc ol thc csscntia books on poitics and information
tcchnoogy.
r g "And shc starcs indiffcrcnty, mocking our imprisonmcnt . . . , "
Rcy Chow, wri||ag |cspcrc: 7cc||cs c]Ia|enea||ca | a Cca|em
pcrcry C||rc| S|d|es [ Boomington. l ndiana Univcrsity Prcss,
r ggjj , ;q.
zo Ciorgio Agambcn, 7|e Ccm|ag Ccmma||y, hans. Michac
Hardt [ Minncapois. Univcrsity ol Minncsota Prcss, r ggjj ,
r . Agambcn i s rcying hcrc on thc Latin word cd||oe|, thc
ltaian cognatc is c|ae, thc Frcnch e|ccae. Agambcn
suggcsts that thc root ||oe| indicatcs that thc whatcvcr bcing
has a rcationship to dcsirc, yct it carrics a sighty soltcr con-
notation than that, as ||oe| signihcs not so much fu-hcdgcd
dcsirc [a word so oadcd with mcaning thcsc days| as thc lact
ol bcing pcascd by somcthing or hnding somcthing agrccabc.
Jhus onc shoud not scc thc whatcvcr as a codc word lor dcsirc
in thc suongcst scnsc, particuary not in thc way that dcsirc
was pickcd up by poststructuraism. Qcd||oe| is |itcray. "what
you pcasc" , or morc ooscy, "whatcvcr you want. "
zr Agambcn, De Ccm|ag Ccmma||y, G).
! b b Notes to pages 1 41 4Z
zz Jo this Franois Larucc adds an important amcndmcnt. l n
contrast to both bconging and prcdication, Larucc favors thc
ogic of idcnbty in which somcthing is undcrstood shicty
through samcncss [x is x| .
zj Scc ]ason E. Smith, Op||m|sm c]||e w|||, Pess|m|sm c] ||e Ia|e|-
|ec| [forthcoming| .
zq Agambcn says that thc whatcvcr i s ncithcr particuar nor
gcncra, ncithcr i ndividua nor "gcncri c. " Yct it is important to
point out that Badiou uscs thc tcrm "gcncri c" too, and whcn hc
docs hc mcans somcthing vcry simiar to thc whatcvcr. So a
supcrhcia fasc-fricnd incompatibiity shoud not dctcr us from
making a connccbon bctwccn thc two tcrms. Scc Aain Badiou,
Be|ag cad Eiea|, trans. Oivcr Fctham [Ncw York. Continuum,
zooj | , and aso Nina Powcr' s cssay "What is Ccncric Human-
ity Badiou and Fcucrbach, " Scoec| Mc||es z, i [ zooj | . j j-q6,
i n which shc foows an intcrcsting path back to Marx and
Fcucrbach' s Cc||cagsaesea, man' s "gcncric naturc, " or as it i s
morc commony rcndcrcd in Engish, his "spccics-bcing. "
zj Scc i n parncuar Jiggun, Decie dc B|ccm [ Pari s. La Fabriguc,
zooq| . Jhc Jiggun group aso dcpoys thc conccpt o| thc what-
cvcr i n thcir witing.
z6 For a di scussion of thc whatcvcr in conncction with contcmpo-
rary mcdia tcchnoogy scc thc work of ]odi Dcan and Dominc
Pcman, in particuar Chaptcr j on "Whatcvcr Bogging" in
|odi Dcan, B|cg Decq: Feedocc| cad Ccp|ce |a ||e C|cc||s c]
iie [Cambridgc. Poity, zoio| , and Dominic Pcman, Lcie
cad O||e Iec|ac|cg|es [ Ncw York. Fordham Univcrsity Prcss,
zoo6| .
zy Hcrc l divcrgc - if pcrhaps not substantivcy thcn in a |cw
points of cmphasis - from thc criuguc o| Agambcn and Mark
Hanscn in thc cxcccnt papcr by ]cnnifcr Conzcz titcd
" Surfacc. Sippcry Ethics and thc Facc" givcn at thc "Visua
and Cutura Studics . Thc Ncxt zo Ycars" con|crcncc at
thc Univcrsity of Rochcstcr on Octobcr z, zoog, and pubishcd
in atcrnatc form as "Jhc Facc and thc Pubic. Racc, Sccrccy,
and Digita Art Pracbcc, " Ccmec Oosccc yo, vo. zq, no.
[ zoog| . jy-6j . ln Agambcn thc whatcvcr is not a univcrsay
samc subjcct, as Conzcz' s cri tiguc of Agambcn and Hanscn
woud i mpy. Thc whatcvcr i s thc subjcct of unassigncd diffcr-
cncc, not samcncss. Jhc whatcvcr is ncvcr thc samc, it ncvcr
transccnds what it i s, it aways disidcntihcs itscf i nto thc
gcncric. Again, this is a |ar cry from both thc bank, univcrsa
Notes to page 1 4J 1 b
samcncss of thc transccndcnta cgo on thc onc hand [thc
Cartcsian, Kantian, Rawsian variant| , and thc inhnitcy cus-
tomizabc granuar individuaity of thc postfordist "dividua" on
thc othcr [thc cybcrnctic, bchaviorist, gamc-thcorcnca, proto-
coogica variant| .
z8 For an inspiring cxampc of what this might ook ikc scc
Eugcnc Thackcr' s pro|cct "Caamity Cym, " forthcoming lrom
Punctum Books.