TYOTF vs. Harraway’s “Cyborg Manifesto”

Jonah: In the context of Year of the Flood, Donna Harraway’s  “Cyborg Manfesto” is quite relevant given the dystopic future that Atwood depicts. Harraway provides a direct critique of the God’s Gardeners through her critique of naturalism. This becomes clear when she states “The cyborg does not dream of community on the model of the organic family, this time without the oedipal project. The cyborg would not recognize the Garden of Eden; it is not made of mud and cannot dream of returning to dust.” The mantra of the God’s Gardeners is a naturalist doctrine. Under this naturalist doctrine, Harraway argues that gender norms and patriarchy continue to exist. When looking into the text, Harraway is spot on. There are multiple instances where patriarchal norms are apparent within the Gardener’s community, such as the multiple acts of sexual assault on Toby, and the normalizing of it.

Sophia: Right on, Jonah. Another troublesome aspect of what you call the “naturalist doctrine” that the God’s Gardeners uphold, is its extreme reliance on a set of principles, stemming, in particular, from problematic creationist origins, the teaching of which, Harraway claims, ought to be “fought as a form of child abuse.” They fail to recognize the irony of their faith in this form, rendering their hypocrisies offensive, rather than inspiring, strategic, or methodical, which Harraway proposes as just some of the valuable untapped capabilities inherent in such an attitude. Indeed, in coming into contact with the God’s Gardeners I imagine Harraway would be deeply disappointed in their lack of respect for the blasphemous, which she believes “has always seemed to require taking things very seriously.” That is, perhaps, with the exception of Zeb, who seems to relate his membership to the Gardeners through a constant desecration of their principles, with a wink-wink and an elbow in the side of whoever might be watching.