Journal of Socio-Informatics Vol. 7, No. 1 Nov. 2014

A Study of Change of the Body View in Cyberculture
Keywords:
early cyberculture, contemporary cyberculture, view of the body, Deleuze’s perspective

Naomi NEMURA, Nihon UNIVERSITY

Abstract
According to the French philosopher Gilles Deleuze, “art” actualizes the “virtual (possible)”which is latent once the world is organized by a fixed method and that “philosophy” conceptualizes
the “virtual (possible).” In other words, art and philosophy are regarded as suitable for grasping
new experiences that are different from the ones under the existing socially constructed order.
From this perspective, first of all, this paper shows that although early cyberculture describes
a utopia of the near future where escape from the body is realized by technologies (as seen in
William Gibson’s Neuromancer), expressions of new experiences of bodies in our everyday life
have become an important part of cyberculture nowadays. Contemporary cyberculture like somekinds of gameplay or cyborg performances contains the actualization of new experiences ofbodies in our society with the spread of the electronic environment.
Secondly, this paper examines new experiences of bodies in our society after the spread ofelectronic technologies based on some game studies and art commentaries. Recently, some gamestudies and art commentaries have analyzed new experiences of bodies in contemporary
cyberculture. According to those studies and commentaries, new experiences of bodies are not
only mental and emotional but also physical as well. Selves that appear in the electronic media are
not based on the release from the biological body but the reconstruction of the biological body.
The new experiences are crucial in making a re-examination of the framework of the biologicalbody and opening up infinite possibilities for interpretation of bodies. Those possibilities invite
rethinking and reconstructing the existing order related to the biological body.

37&:B$;'LQGG



A Study of Change of the Body View in Cyberculture

NEMURA

1. Introduction

into visionary technology, fringe science, avantgarde art, and pop culture (Dery, 1992). These

According to the French philosopher Gilles

four areas are in the realm of subculture.

Deleuze (Deleuze and Guattari, 1994), “art”

Therefore, it seems that early cyberculture

actualizes the “virtual (possible)” which is latentdeveloped outside of the mainstream culture. On

once the world is organized by a fixed method

the other hand, Nayar states that “cyberculture

and that “philosophy” conceptualizes the “virtualis the electronic environment where various(possible).” In other words, art and philosophy aretechnologies and media forms converge andregarded as suitable for grasping new experiences

cross over: video games, the internet and email,that are different from the ones under the existing

personal homepages, online chats, personalorder; the socially constructed relations orcommunications technologies (PCTs, such as

structures which include various exclusions or

the cell phone), mobile entertainment andrepressions.

information technologies, bioinformatics, andAt least a part of cyberculture can be consideredbiomedical technologies” (Nayar, 2010: 1). Nayar

as art from the viewpoint of Deleuze since it

defines cyberculture as the mainstream in ouractualizes new experiences of bodies in oursociety. Currently, cyberculture constitutes asociety with the spread of electronic technologies.

major part of our everyday life. This section divides

First of all, this paper explores which kind ofcyberculture into two periods (early cyberculture

cyberculture actualizes such new experiences ofand contemporary cyberculture) to explore thebodies by studying its early expressions such as

development of the body view.

William Gibson’s novels and its contemporary

2-1. William Gibson: The Desire for a Near-

expressions like some kinds of gameplay or

Future Worldcyborg performances.
Secondly, this paper illustrates a new trend of

Dery focuses his attention on the cyberpunk

the body view in cyberculture by analyzing new

movement, especially Neuromancer, a novel

experiences of bodies in our society. This paper

written by William Gibson in 1984 (Dery, 1992).

also suggests what such trend of the body view

The novel describes a near-future world in which

would bring to us.

information technologies and biotechnologies
have become highly developed. This world

2. Early Cyberculture and Contemporary

includes cyberspace as its core image.

Cyberculture

The term ‘cyberspace’ was coined by Gibson tocharacterize “disembodied space”(Brians, 2011:

It is difficult to define the range of cyberculture121) that provided “bodiless exultation” (Gibson,

because it is ambiguous and complex. However,

1984: 6). This characterization had a decisive

we can assume that a change has occurred in

influence on the image of cyberspace, especiallycyberculture after the late 1990s. We can see

before the widespread use of computers and thesuch change in the arguments of Mark Dery andinternet. In Gibson’s Neuromancer, the protagonist,

Pramod Nayar.

Henry Dorsett Case had been a hottest computer

Dery divides the main domain of cyberculture“cowboy” who had invested in cyberspace’s
38&:B$;'LQGG



Journal of Socio-Informatics Vol. 7, No. 1 Nov. 2014

“disembodied consciousness” and the sharpest

Don Ihde refers to such thought of early

data-thief in the Matrix (Gibson, 1984: 5).

cyberculture as a “technofantasy” (Ihde, 2002).

However, he stole data from his employers. As a

The fantasy is characterized by “the desire topunishment for the theft, Case lost the capability

escape the body” and “the belief that cyberof a “cowboy.” For Case, it was “FALL” (Gibson,

technologies (however these are conceived) will

1984: 6) because it prevented him from accessing

make this escape” possible (Brians, 2011: 122).

the “bodiless exultation” of cyberspace. For thisThis idea of transcendence of the body and its

console “cowboy,” his body was “meat” and Casematerial limits is frequently found in the image of

became a prisoner of “his own flesh” (Gibson,

cyberspace of early cyberculture.

1984: 6). In cyberspace of Gibson’s Neuromancer,

Ingrid Richardson and Carly Harper call suchintelligence is separated from the body, and thetranscendent thinking a “fleshless ontology ofimmaterial intelligence can manipulate data.

cyberspace” (Richardson and Harper, 2001:
online). According to Richardson and Harper,

2-2. The Desire to Escape the Body: Early

Gibson’s cyberspace is a “representation of theThoughts of Cyberspacepossibilities of disembodiment facilitated by

In Gibson’s Neuromancer, cyberspace of avirtual systems” (Richardson and Harper, 2001:

near-future world is realized by utilizing a special

online). “Within this hierarchical framework theelectrode to connect a computer with a brain. The

body exists as a lower-order mechanism,” and it

novel can be interpreted as an attempt to describe

is distinguished from the “ontologically superior

a wishful near-future in which technologies realize

and potentially autonomous mind” (Richardson

the desire for escaping from the body. However,and Harper, 2001: online). “ The teleology ofthis attempt is not the actualization of different

cyberspace” is exactly the “final non-necessity ofunderstanding of the body from the one underthe body,” or “achieving a mode of existence thatthe existing order. In other words, it is not art

can do without the body” (Richardson andas defined by Deleuze. The reason is that we

Harper, 2001: online). In other words, they point

can see the body-mind dualism, or the conceptout the underlying implication that the corporealof ultimate transcendence of the body inform is unnecessary.

Gibson’s

cyberspace,

which

is

tracedWhether it is called a “technofantasy” or

to “Christianity, Platonic Idealism, or the mechanic“fleshless ontology,” the imagery of cyberspace

Cartesian universe” (Brians, 2011: 123). In earlyin early cyberculture is founded on the belief thatcyberculture, the vision of cyberspace is deeply

technologies can enable transcendence of therooted in Western thought.

body. However, such dualistic thinking which is

Gibson recognizes such body-mind dualism indeep-rooted in Western thought is far from thehis works. According to him, the dualism isactualization of new experiences which are

influenced by the British writer, D. H. Lawrence

covered by the existing order.

(Tatsumi, 1997). Lawrence states that the mind-

When the Japanese translation of the novel

body split in Western thought has created“Idol” by Gibson was published in 1996, Hiroki

countless problems in Western culture (Tatsumi,

Azuma argued that there was a certain “oldness”

1997).

in the future images and the view of information
39&:B$;'LQGG



A Study of Change of the Body View in Cyberculture

NEMURAtechnology of Gibson’s works (Azuma, 2000). We

the media environment is created by bringing

can suppose that such “oldness” was not only

human’s body consciousness and the electronic

due to the fact that Gibson’s concept of a near-

media together” (Daijirin, Daisanhan, 2006). The

future information society had already become ause of this word has become widespread inpart of our everyday life because of theJapanese society and it is an example of how

widespread use of computers and the internet,

computer technology has become a part of ourbut also due to the fact that Gibson’s imaginative

everyday life. Such definition and explanation of

power was based on the dualistic thought which

the word correspond to the situation in which

had permeated the tradition of Western culture

computer networks have entered into our real

deeply. In othe words, we can assume thatlife.

because the imagery of a near-future information

With the spread of the electronic environmentsociety became a part of our everyday life andin our society, contemporary cyberculture

gave no great excitement, some of the readers incontains the attempts to express new experiences

the late 1990’s like Azuma found the mind-bodyof bodies. For example, according to an interview

dualism of Western cultural tradition, and felt thewith Sterc by Joanna Zylinska and Gary Hall, his“oldness” in the Gibson’s works.

cyborg performances reveal that the body “hasnow been invaded by technology” and it is “what2-3. Contemporary Cyberculture

we’ve always been and what we have alreadyGibson’s works are still popular and influential

become” (Zylinska, 2002: 115). Based on thisfor contemporary cyberculture. It cannot becomment, we can conclude that cyberculture has

validly concluded that we can no longer see thedeveloped to show how we grasp bodies throughdesire for escaping from the body or the praise ofliving in a society with electronic technologies.

the escape from the body in cyberculture.

The studies of such cyberculture are referred

However, the argument of Azuma suggests thatto as new media studies, which are distinguished

we can also find a new trend in cyberculture after

from the earlier version of media studies thatthe late 1990’s.

analyzes culture with other types of media priordefinesto creations of our electronic society. In such new

cyberculture as “the electronic environment

As

we

have

discussed,

Nayar

media studies, we understand our relation to thewhere various technologies and media forms

media with terms such as “interactive users,”

converge and cross over” and cites video games,“experience,”

the internet and email, personal homepages, online“ubiquitous media” (Dovey and Kennedy, 2006:

chats, personal communications technologies

1-21).

“immersion,”“simulation,”or(PCTs, such as the cell phone), mobile

2-4. Preceding Cyberculture Studies

entertainment and information technologies,
bioinformatics, and biomedical technologies as

Previous cyberculture studies in the 1980s andexamples. According to “Daijirin,” a Japanesethe early 1990s, for example works of David Tomas

dictionary, “cyberspace” is described as “virtualor Dery, analyze early cyberculture focusing on

space which comes into existence in electronic

the desire for “disembodied consciousness” inmedia such as computer networks. In particular,

cyberspace (Tomas, 1989; Dery 1992). However,40&:B$;'LQGG



Journal of Socio-Informatics Vol. 7, No. 1 Nov. 2014

cyberculture studies after the late 1990s analyze

agent

a new trend in cyberculture drawing attention tobearing the agent’s seal, and the agency the texts

new experiences of bodies. For example, John

implied could be enforced through human

Dovey and Helen Kennedy examine bodydelegates” (Stone, 1995: 96). However, in the time

experiences of game players (Dovey andof electronic speech, that is, when the telephone

Kennedy, 2006). Some art commentaries explore

appeared, proximity started to be “maintained

understandings of body experiences in digital

through technology,” and the agency became

performances (Zylinska, 2002).

“invisible” (Stone, 1995: 96). When users of themaintained

proximity

throughtexts

It is important to consider such new trend in

telephone took for granted that they talked with

contemporary cyberculture because it actualizes

others on telephone, they had the sense of

new experiences of bodies in our society with theassurance in the presence of “a specific bounded

spread of electronic technologies. Our next step

unitary agency” (Stone, 1995: 97) based on a voice,is to conceptualize the experiences of bodies

and the meaning of proximity has gradually been

based on new insights of cyberculture studies.

reconstituted.
Regarding the “specific unitary agency,” Stone

3. The New Trend of Cyberculture

discusses that it is “a political, epistemological,
and biological unit that is not only measurable

Cyberculture has a new trend in expressing

and quantifiable but also understood in an

body experiences after the late 1990s and new

essential way as being in place” (Stone, 1995: 90).

media studies have developed in correspondence

In addition, she states that an “individual societal

with the trend of cyberculture. This section

actor becomes fixed in respect to geographicalexplores how new media studies describe newcoordinates that determine physical locus” (Stone,

body experiences to conceptualize the experiences.

1995: 90). The geographically fixed body has beenprivileged as a place of political certification or a

3-1. Allucquère Rosanne Stone’s Argument

political action because the individual societal actor

In her book, Allucquère Rosanne Stoneis connected to the agency, that is, the self which isanalyzes the integration and dissociation of selvessocially constituted as a “politically authorized”

and bodies in cyberspace, and treats the history of

persona in the sense of Stone (Stone, 1995: 96).

communication technologies from the viewpoint ofFurthermore, according to Stone, whereas“the tensions between selves and bodies and theproximity of the agency was achieved throughplay of their interactions, separations, and fusions”

appearing of the justified body by technologies at(Stone, 1995: 88).

the time of an electronic speech on a voice, electronic

In the historical analysis, Stone argues about

technologies

based

on

iconicrepresentations

the integration and dissociation of selves andappeared and the agency became to be on the “iconic

bodies from the viewpoint of technologies

representation of a voice” (Stone, 1995: 97). Stone“mediating between bodies and selves that may

discusses this reconfiguration of the meaning ofor may not be within physical proximity; i.e.,

proximity of the agency as follows: “ This processinterfaces” (Stone, 1995: 89). Stone asserts thatof changing the relationship between agency andbefore electronic communication emerged, “anthe authorizing body into a discursive one
41&:B$;'LQGG



A Study of Change of the Body View in Cyberculture

NEMURAeventually produced the subjectivity that could

constellation of activities much like reading,fairly unproblematically inhabit the virtual spaces

but an active and interactive reading, aof the nets” (Stone, 1995: 97).

participatory social practice in which theStone states further that if “we consider theactions of the reader have consequences inphysical map of the body and our experience of

the world of the dream or of the book. The

inhabiting it as socially mediated, then it shouldolder metaphor of reading undergoes a

not be difficult to imagine the next step in atransformation in a textual space that isprogression toward the social—that is, to imagine

consensual, interactive, and haptic, and thatthe location of the self that inhabits the body as

is constituted through inscription practices—

also socially mediated” (Stone, 1995: 92). This

the production of microprocessor code. The

means that we can think of the self “in terms ofboundaries between the social and theposition within a social field or of capacity to“natural” and between biology and technology

experience, but of the physical location of thetake on the generous permeability that

subject, independent of the body within whichcharacterizes communal space in the mosttheories of the body are accustomed to ground it”

recent virtual systems.

(Stone, 1995: 92). In other words, we come to(Stone, 1995: 121)

think of subject construction within “a system ofIn the aforementioned paragraph, Stone

symbolic exchange, that is, information technology”

suggests that selves in cyberspace, that are given(Stone, 1995: 92).

body

representatives,

have

consensual,interactive, and haptic experiences. These

3-2. Bodies of Selves in Cyberspaceexperiences are the ones in which the boundaries

As mentioned above, according to Stone, by

between the social and the “natural” as well as

focusing on the “tensions between selves andthe biological and the technological permeate.

bodies and the play of their interactions,That is, Stone does not conceive selves inseparations, and fusions,” we can understand thecyberspace to be free from physical bodies. On

self that moves by a different order of vectors in athe other hand, she believes that selves in

network of information exchange, or the self thatcyberspace are based not on the biologicalmoves in a space in which the privileged body isbodies, but on the reconstructed bodies by

excluded.

interacting with technologies.

Apparently, in Stone’s interpretation, selves in

However, according to Stone, “much of thecyberspace do not have physical bodies. However,work of cyberspace researchers, reinforced andStone describes a virtual community as follows:

perhaps created by the soaring imaginary ofWilliam Gibson’s novels, assumes that the human

The participants learn to delegate theirbody is ‘meat’—obsolete, as soon as consciousness

agencies to body representatives that exist

itself can be uploaded into the network” (Stone,

in

with

1991: 452). Certainly Tomas states in his paper

representatives of other individuals. They

imaginal

spacescontiguously

on cyberpunk that “ ‘jacking in’ to cyberspace” isbecome accustomed to what might be called

the “instantaneous rite of passage that separates

lucid dreaming in an awake state— to a

body

from

consciousness,”

and

that

the

42

&:B$;'LQGG



Journal of Socio-Informatics Vol. 7, No. 1 Nov. 2014

“disembodied human consciousness is then ablethat experiences of gameplay are not disembodied

to simultaneously traverse the vast cyberpsychic

but physical. Such experiences, which arespaces of this global information matrix” (Tomas,

understood to be immersive, differ from those

1989: 137). Furthermore, Donna Haraway, in herthat Gibson portrays in Neuromancer. Recently,

dialogue with Takayuki Tatsumi, argues that ingame studies have shown that the virtual world

the circulation of Gibson’s works, we can see theof cyberspace cannot be characterized by the“praise of the escape from limits and abstractionbody-mind dualism.

without the concrete” (Tatsumi, 2001: 255). At

3-4. Attempts of Art

least we can observe that a kind of cyberpunk

According to Ella Brians, the importantpraises cyberspace as a world of consciousness

pressurethat has seceded from the body.

forreconstructing

the

image

of

What kind of body experience do selves incyberspace came from the world of art (Brians,

cyberspace have? Is it seceded from the physical2011: 125-126). For example, Monica Fleischmann,body, or is it based on the reconstructed body?

an artist and theorist engaged in phenomenologicalAs mentioned earlier, Stone considers that selvesstudies, discusses how the body interacts within cyberspace are not seceded from physicaltechnologies or environments and uses digitalbodies and many researchers agree with her ideainterfaces as a “playful interaction of bodies, art(Haraway, 1991; Friedman, 1999; Ryan, 2001;

and technology” in “opposition to the theory of

Dovey and Kennedy, 2006).

the disappearing body” (UNESCO Digital Art
Portal, 2013: online). Furthermore, the concept

3-3. Experiences of Game Playersof “mixed-reality” is applied instead of virtual

Recently, Dovey and Kennedy have analyzed

reality to understand the relation to cyberexperiences of game players, using Haraway’s

technologies more properly (UNESCO Digital

image of the “cyborg” (Dovey and Kennedy,

Art Portal, 2013: online). According to Brians, this2006). According to their analysis, experiences ofconcept of “mixed-reality” expresses that “material

gameplay are not only mental and emotional but

bodies, their virtual representations, the humanalso physical. Their analysis, similar to the one byimagination, and computer hardware and software

Stone, argues that selves that appear in the

all interact to produce a reality that has bothelectronic media are not released from physical‘material’ and ‘virtual’ elements” (Brians, 2011:

bodies, but are still based on the reconstructed125).

body by interacting with technologies.

Sterc,

who

performs

usingelectronic

In addition, they state that the phenomenological

technologies and comments on his performances

method helps us understand that “we arein various ways, is known for his thesis “theembodied subjects whilst engaged in our

obsolete body” (Zylinska, 2002). Although it isexperiences of ‘virtual reality’” and that “we areoften

also re-embodied and gain a sense of presence

disembodied consciousness, he criticizes suchand agency in these virtual spaces through the

an interpretation. According to Sterc, the body isinterface and the avatar” (Dovey and Kennedy,“obsolete in form and function. But we cannot

2006: 106). Their analysis of gameplay suggests

operate disembodied. We cannot discard thebelieved

that

this

thesispresents

43&:B$;'LQGG



A Study of Change of the Body View in Cyberculture

NEMURAbody” (Zylinska, 2002: 121). He also states, “ This

gameplay includes a certain “freedom of movement,”

body is not in a kind of Cartesian theatre of ‘I’ as

that is, “a sense of agency and mastery not

opposed to ‘my physical body’ ” (Zylinska, 2002:

necessarily available in their everyday lives”

121), and that the question concerning the thesis(Dovey and Kennedy, 2006: 117) quoting Taylor’s

is “not so much whether we discard bodies but

study on the women players. Here, it is clearlyrather how to rethink the design of the body”

demonstrated that the pluralization of the self

(Zylinska, 2002: 122). The performances of Sterc

through cyberspace can be an importantsuggest that we begin to reconstruct the bodyopportunity for rethinking and reconstructing

view in our society based on the electronic

the existing order. The self in cyberspace can beenvironment. Thus, the body of his performances

free from the restrictions imposed by being

actualizes the “virtual (possible)” which isconnected to the biological body in real life. Suchcovered by the existing order (Deleuze anda self permeates into real life and makes re-Guattari, 1994).

examination and reconfiguration of the existingorder possible.

4. Social Reconstruction of the Framework of

The argument of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal

the Body

Mouffe explains this possibility. According to
Laclau and Mouffe, the category of “subject”

As stated earlier, the analysis of game players

means “ ‘subject positions’ within a discursive

by Dovey and Kennedy reveals new bodystructure” (Laclau and Mouffe, 2001: 115). The

experiences in our electronic environment.

“various positions cannot be totally fixed in a

Dovey and Kennedy argue that “these ‘otherclosed system of differences” (Laclau and Mouffe,cyborgian selves’ that we perform in our play have

2001: 115). “The non-fixation or openness of theansystem of discursive differences is what makes

importantpersonal,socialandculturalsignificance” (Dovey and Kennedy, 2006: 116).

possible

They state that the “performed selves madeinterpenetration”(Laclau and Mouffe, 2001: 117).

possible by the cybernetic process of gameplay

Thus, “the presence of the Other prevents me fromoffer us the opportunity to explore alternative

being total myself” and “it is because a peasantsubjectivities and to engage in different kinds ofcannot be a peasant that an antagonism exists

affective experience, where embodiment andwith the landowner expelling him from his land”

possibilities are defined by different rules to(Laclau and Mouffe, 2001: 125). In our context,

theseeffectsofanalogyandthose imposed in real lives” (Dovey and Kennedy,

we cannot be totally a woman. In this case, it is2006: 117). According to them, in “multiplayer

the presence of a man that prevents one fromrole playing we can imagine a world without ourbeing totally a woman and it allows her to rethink

existing

and reconstruct the existing gender order.

racialhierarchies

andexperience

inclusion and affiliation on the basis of technicity

The

selves

that

have

a

possibilityofalone—unsullied by ethnic, gender or classreconsidering and remaking the existing order ofprejudices, or disabilities” (Dovey and Kennedy,

real life are exactly the cyborgian selves whose

2006: 117).

bodies are reconstructed by permeating their

Furthermore, they mention that the access toboundaries with machines and therefore are not44&:B$;'LQGG



Journal of Socio-Informatics Vol. 7, No. 1 Nov. 2014

based on the biological understanding. This newpaper has argued that such new experiences

body experience creates the possibility of re-

make the re-examination of the framework of theexamining the framework of the biological bodybiological body possible as well as the restrictions

as well as the restrictions imposed by theimposed on the biological body. In other words,

framework.

such experiences provide infinite possibilities for

To put it another way, those selves ininterpreting bodies. Those possibilities forcyberspace have experiences in which theinterpretation of bodies open the doors forbiological body can no longer represent truth, or

rethinking and reconstructing the existing orderreality. Such experiences lead us to therelated to the biological body.

recognition that not only the concept of the self

In this paper, we have considered cyberculturethat is based on the biological body, but also thefrom the viewpoint of Deleuze regarding art andframework of the biological body is merely “onlyphilosophy. Hereafter, I wish to focus on art that

one form of our knowledge” (Scott, 1999: 10)

reveals experiences of bodies which are covered

through our interaction. Those experiences bringby the existing order, and additionally to attempt

us the recognition that the framework of theto conceptualize the experiences by philosophy.

biological body itself is only socially constructed.

Moreover, I would like to correlate such

Furthermore, because such recognition opens

philosophical analysis with actor-network theory

up infinite possibilities for interpreting bodies, itthat evolved from the works of Michel Callon andurges us to rethink and reconstruct the existing

Bruno Latour (Kawamura 2008).

order related to the biological body.
As stated in the introduction, this paper is

Bibliography

based on the idea that art and philosophy actualize

Azuma, Hiroki (2000): “Saibâpunk no Nihon ga

the possibilities in the world that are hidden

Usinawareta Jidai ni.” Reprinted (2002) in Yubin-under the existing order. With regard to this, it isTeki-Fuan-Tachi#. Tokyo: Asahisinbunsha, pp.

necessary to emphasize that art and philosophy

373-379. ISBN-13: 978-4022613783.

do not actualize the origin and the real existence

Brians, Ella (2011): “ The ‘Virtual’ Body and thebehind the existing world. They actualize theStrange Persistence of the Flesh: Deleuze,

ongoing process and the flow of the world itself

Cyberspace and the Posthuman.” In Laura(Deleuze and Guattari, 1994; Colebook, 2002).

Guillaume and Joe Hughes (eds.), Deleuze and the
Body. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

5. Conclusion

Colebrook, Claire (2002): Gilles Deleuze. London and
New York: Routledge.

First, this paper has illustrated that although

Daijirin, Daisanhan (2006): kotobank.jp. 18 Feb.
2013. 〈http://kotobank.jp/〉.

early cyberculture describes a utopia of the nearfuture where escape from the body is realized byDeleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari (1994): What Is

technologies, more recently the attempts toPhilosophy? Translated by Hugh Tomlinson andactualize new experiences of bodies in ourGraham Burchell. New York: Columbia University

electronic

Press.

environment

have

becomeanimportant part of cyberculture. Secondly, thisDery, Mark (1992): “Cyberculture.” South Atlantic

45&:B$;'LQGG



A Study of Change of the Body View in Cyberculture

NEMURA

Quarterly 91, pp. 501-523.

Reality: Immersion and Interactivity in Literature

Dovey, Jon, and Helen W. Kennedy (2006): Gameand Electronic Media. Baltimore and London: The
Johns Hopkins University Press.

Cultures: Computer Games as New Media.
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Friedman,Ted(1999):

Scott, J. W. (1999): “Jendâ Saikou.” Interpreted and“Civilization

and

Its

commented by Miho Ogino. Shisô, 898, Iwanami

Discontents, Simulation, Subjectivity, and Space.”

Shoten. pp. 5-34. ISSN 0386-2755.

In Greg M. Smith (ed.), On a Silver Platter: CD-

Stone, Allucquère Rosanne (1991): “Will the Real

ROMs and the Promises of a New Technology. New

Body Please Stand Up? Boundary Stories about

York and London: New York University Press, pp.

Virtual Cultures.” Reprinted (2007) in David Bell132-150.

and Barbara M. Kennedy (eds.), The Cybercultures

Gibson, William (1984): Neuromancer, New York:

Reader. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge,

Ace Books.

pp. 433-455.

Haraway, Donna J. (1991): Simians, Cyborgs, andStone, Allucquère Rosanne (1995): The War of Desire

Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York:and Technology at the Close of the Mechanical Age.

Routledge.

Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London: The

Ihde, Don (2002): Bodies in Technology. Minneapolis

MIT Press.

and London: University of Minnesota Press.
Kawamura,

Kumiko(2008):

Takayuki Tatsumi (ed.) (1997): Uiriamu Gibusun:“Fuhenshugi

gaTokyo: Sairyusha. ISBN-13: 978-4882024866.

Motarasu Kiki.” In Buruno Latour, Kyokou no
Kindai:

Kagakujinruigaku

Tranlated
Shinhyoron.

byKumikopp.

ha

Kawamura.

255-320.

Takayuki Tatsumi (ed.) (2001): Saibôgu Feminizumu(zouhoban). Tokyo: Suiseisha. ISBN-13: 978-

Keikokusuru.

ISBN-13:

Tokyo:

4891764463.

978-

Tomas, David (1989): “ The Technophilic Body: On

4794807595.

Technicity in William Gibson’s Cyborg Culture.”

Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal Mouffe (2001):

Reprinted (2007) in David Bell and Barbara M.

Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a

Kennedy (eds.), The Cybercultures Reader. 2nd ed.

Radical Democratic Politics. 2nd ed. London andLondon and New York: Routledge, pp. 130-143.

New York: Verso.

UNESCO

DigitalArt

Portal(2013):“Monika

Nayar, Pramod K. (2010): “Introduction.” In Pramod

Fleischmann & Wolfgang Strauss eMuse.” 18 Feb.

K. Nayer (ed.), The New Media and Cybercultures

2013. 〈http://digitalarts.lmc.gatech.edu/unesco/

Anthology. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 1-5.

vr/artists/ vr_a_mfleischmann. html〉.

Richardson, Ingrid, and Carly Harper (2001):

Zylinska, Joanna (ed.) (2002): The Cyborg Experiments.

“Corporeal Virtuality: The Impossibility of a

London and New York: Continuum.

Fleshless Ontology.” Body, Space, and Technology
2: 2. 12 Dec. 2012. 〈http:/ /people.brunel.ac.uk/

Acknowledgment
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant

bst/vol202/ingridrichardson.html〉.

Number 25511014.

Ryan, Marie-Laure (2001): Narrative as Virtual46&:B$;'LQGG

