Ode to Cisyphus PDF

Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 Ode to Cisyphus Prolegomenon This is not an academic essay, this is not an essay that attempts to be universally understood, it is an essay that eludes clear understanding. I am engaging with my discourse co...

Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 Ode to Cisyphus Prolegomenon This is not an academic essay, this is not an essay that attempts to be universally understood, it is an essay that eludes clear understanding. I am engaging with my discourse community, ‘…discourse communities are about “how people with shared interests communicate”: how specialist knowledge, even coded languages are used in these communities.’ (G. Hipkins 2022) This essay is written in code, different people will extract different meanings from it, I have not tried to prevent this, I have ensured it. I have disdained from needlessly trying to prove things that are known to be true, I have used a range of sources to support myself, but most of this is common knowledge, and most of this is undeniable. I have also not wasted words trying to weave or paraphrase quotes from my sources, I have credited them, and I will not discredit their writing by altering it, their words become a part of me, this work is polyphonic. I am bringing our voices together to speak in unison not to disguise their words as my own. Because of these factors, this essay could be better described as a manifesto, confrontational rhetoric, and auto theory. This body of work will not be comprehended without an understanding of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s ‘Capitalism and Schizophrenia.’ The rhizome, schizoanalysis, and becoming are fundamental to this work but I cannot adequately explain these ideas in such a brief essay, therefore the source texts must be consulted. Adding ‘’ to every I and me and my and you and them and us. As I become you and you become me and language slides into itself and essence becomes nothing. No boundaries and no divides, no us and no them, no other and undoubtedly an other. other to and to itself, ‘we’ are other, all other and all not other, so how other are we if we are alike in our otherness? Eye think and eye will and eye see and eye take, becoming eyes, seeing our own eyes, they are our eyes now. Eye have chosen to do this because it is queer to do so, queer in so far that queer is a question. For it is automatically so, stepping out of line is to question the validity, power of, and need for such a line. Eye am so many questions to so many eyes, and theye ask meye and eye ask them but no one will answer, so eye am answering now. Eye ask because eye have never understood, so then, in turn, meye answer is a question and maybe you will answer my questionawnser with your questionawnser and weye can stare at each other with our eyes and stare until one of us dieyes. Will there ever be an answer? Not just an overarching one, even a tiny wee one in the scheme of things that we tend to ignore, maybe not an answer to Why? But maybe, why a line? Why are things like this? This is what weye want to know but won’t ask and won’t tell. So here is some asking and some telling-longing, loathing and becoming-maybe some eyes will hate it and scoff, but maybe those eyes should try looking meye in the eyes while theye do so. These eyes are so very desperate. These eyes are so queer. These eyes are questions. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 We have seen god fall, but his monuments still stand, his power remains. ‘The ideas of the past, although half destroyed, being still very powerful, and the ideas which are to replace them, being still in process of formation, the modern age represents a period of transition and anarchy.’ 1A belief in god humbled us and inflated us simultaneously, we were the holy children, lords over nature and the centre of the universe, but we were also below god and at his mercy. Discovering that we are animals, we are part of nature, and we are an insignificant speck inside the universe, was catastrophic. We had meaning before, but now we were alone and helpless in an empty space. 2 Religion was a countermeasure to nihilism; atheism opened that door once again. 3 It is not surprising that we have not tried to confront this, the unbearable truth of our existence is called unbearable for good reason. ‘The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions.’ 4 These two factors of religion faltering and a complete upheaval in how we live taking place in the modern era opened the unknown and left us with no truth to stand on. Nietzsche describes this god killing as the opening of a vast and unexplored sea, it is not our destruction, it is new territory where new meaning can be created. However, the vast majority would much rather remain on land, for just as creatures moving from sea to land was an upheaval, we must now become sea animals and face a total upheaval of all that we have known. 5 ‘The abandonment of the belief in universal truth entails the loss of any final criterion by which to evaluate the various interpretations of reality that compete in the contemporary intellectual realm. In this situation, all human interpretations---including the Christian world view ---are equally valid because all are equally invalid.’ 6Religion remains despite science because religion offers meaning, science offers the truth of no truth, and people would much rather live in bad faith than in despair. We are our jailors, we are controlled by the will of the masses, and we are the masses, only we have the power to make change and new meaning for ourselves. 1 Bon, Gustave Le. The Crowd a Study of the Popular Mind. (Ernest Benn Limited, 1896), 14. 2 Keiji Nishitani, The Self-Overcoming of Nihilism (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1990), 70. 3 Keiji Nishitani, The Self-Overcoming of Nihilism (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1990), 76. 4 Marx, Karl, and Karl Marx. Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 1. 5 Keiji Nishitani, The Self-Overcoming of Nihilism (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1990), 78-79. 6 Grenz, Stanley J. A Primer on Postmodernism. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996.), 163. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 ‘While all our ancient beliefs are tottering and disappearing, while the old pillars of society are giving way one by one, the power of the crowd is the only force that nothing menaces, and of which the prestige is continually on the increase. The age we are about to enter will in truth be the ERA OF CROWDS’ 7 These thinkers referenced here brought these ideas forward decades ago, and yet we find ourselves in much the same situation that they were in. We have not faced the ocean before us, in biding our time we have done everything to create new distractions from the truth. God is not our constant companion steering us from the void, we have replaced him with consumption. We fret over the brand of shoes we wear or the latest celebrity gossip, we pay attention to new advertisements and lose ourselves in increasingly realistic fantasy entertainment. We have no perspective on our existence, some feel defeated when they burn their steak that has flown halfway around the world, while others are forced to survive on three cups of tea a day. Reality in the mind, Reality in the flesh, the myth of the self. We pacify ourselves within our daily lives through bad faith, distracting ourselves from the unbearable loneliness and futility of our existence, this is reality in the mind, what we choose to be aware of instead of reality. Reality in the flesh can be understood as the real, seeing things through eyes unclouded, seeing both yourself and the world as they are. Being identified causes you to no longer be defined by flesh but by language, by mythology, by the minds of others. One could argue that our actual self to ourselves bears no weight, we are defined by how we are seen rather than what we are. Each word that we use to identify ourselves with does not only describe some physical, social, or economic trait of our being, each word carries with it a whole array of connotations. In most cases labels do not convey any part of our self as we see it, they only serve to communicate the associations made with that word. Language is not the truth, it simply tries to order the truth, but we believe it as truth. ‘To borrow Heidegger's definition, the world is "that in terms of which human reality makes known to itself what it is.''’ 8To have any chance of making progress we must consider everything in our lives and question it. A becoming of my experience could use examples of language like trans or woman, identifying as trans singles you out as a freak or monster, an affront to nature, and an abomination in the eyes of society. 7 Bon, The Crowd a Study of the Popular Mind, 14. 8 Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. Translated by Hazel E. Barnes. (London: Methuen & Co Ltd., 1972), 104. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 ‘I consider transsexualism to be a fraud, and the participants in it … perverted. The transsexual [claims] he/she needs to change his/ her body in order to be his/her “true self.” Because this “true self’ requires another physical form in which to manifest itself, it must therefore war with nature. One cannot change one’s gender. What occurs is a cleverly manipulated exterior: what has been done is mutation. What exists beneath the deformed surface is the same person who was there prior to the deformity. People who break or deform their bodies [act] out the sick farce of a deluded, patriarchal approach to nature, alienated from true being.’ 9 When I first came out as trans I was constantly afraid of judgment, I knew the things people said about my kind, I knew this wasn’t me. In my art I couldn’t show my face, I obscured myself to reflect how people’s bigotry prevented them from perceiving me as I am. Gender was technology and a tool used to oppress people and I was a glitch in that technology, as many people are. As more and more glitches come to be, the machine starts to fail. So, in a way nothing has changed, I am using different words now and see more than just gender but my goals remain unchanged, my methods remain much the same. This has always been about othering; this has always been a revolution and my art has always been me. Identifying as a woman also fixes individuals with another range of stereotypes and prescribes them a predetermined purpose. If the concept of what a woman must be ‘…is contradicted by the behaviour of flesh-and-blood women, it is the latter that is wrong: we are told not that Femininity is a false entity, but that the women concerned are not feminine.’ 10 Even though one cannot define in any true way what a woman is, anyone who identifies with the word is told what they are and what they must be simply because they use that word. We will never be seen as meeting any of the ideals set by society, we will also never be seen as ourselves, only as these ill-fitting labels. What happens when there is nothing a woman shouldn’t be? ‘Identities seem contradictory, partial, and strategic. With the hard-won recognition of their social and historical constitution, gender, race, and class cannot provide the basis for belief in "essential" unity. There is nothing about being "female" that naturally binds women. There is not even such a state as "being" female, itself a highly complex category constructed in 9 Susan Stryker, “My Words to Victor Frankenstein above the Village of Chamounix: Performing Transgender Rage,” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1, no. 3 (1994): pp. 237-254, 239. 10 Beauvoir, Simone de, and H. M. Parshley. The Second Sex. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972), 283. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 contested sexual scientific discourses and other social practices. Gender, race, or class consciousness is an achievement forced on us by the terrible historical experience of the contradictory social realities of patriarchy, colonialism, and capitalism.’ 11 Gender as a category is only one of the many chains that bind us and that we must undo, discussed here in detail because it should be easily understood. The patriarchy rules over society and wishes to keep it that way, those in power spread and empower ideas of innate traits of individuals based on their identifiers in a way that transcends the individual. ‘To identify Woman with Altruism is to guarantee to man absolute rights to her devotion, it is to impose on women a categorical imperative.’12 Just as “History is Written by Victors.”, one could also say that our identity is determined for us by those in power, and then we as a crowd enforce their determination. ‘Evidently it is not reality that dictates to society or to individuals their choice between the two opposed basic categories; in every period, in each case, society and the individual decide in accordance with their needs.’ The power of the crowd is unreproachable, but each of us as individuals can thin the crowd by othering ourselves. The narrative spun regarding gender is that it is biological and unchangeable, cleanly divided in two. We are also made to believe that equality can be achieved within this system and that the only people who should cross the boundaries of man and woman are transgender individuals. None of these things are true, currently, it is largely correct that the only people who step out of line are those with gender dysphoria, but anyone can question this line, and anyone can refuse it. Becoming nonconforming is an act of rebellion that anyone can do, and with each person that does this, the line will begin to fade. By allowing things to hold unquestionable authority over us we condemn ourselves to unnecessary suffering. Systems like Gender which impose morals and control society’s consciousness use this power to give authority to the patriarchy and oppress people across the globe. These moralities and hierarchies become so entrenched in us that many people can’t imagine it being any other way and think that things are as nature intended. 13 (2nd sex?) But this system begins to unravel when it is defined, I can see firsthand the inadequacies of such labels when they bare no relation to me even when I am made to use them. I can only conclude that the only way to not be misidentified is to be unidentifiable, we must become tricksters and cyborgs, bodies without organs, we cannot be, we must become. What happens when there is nothing? 11 Haraway, Donna Jeanne. The Haraway Reader. (New York: Routledge, 2004.), 13. 12 Beauvoir The Second Sex, 284. 13 Beauvoir The Second Sex, 285. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 In bringing so many voices into my work I hoped to form a multiplicity that could provide more fruitful inspiration than any of these ideas singularly. I could not only become a cyborg or monster or glitch or salamander or body without organs or ubermensch or butterfly or becoming-woman or schizo I could only attempt to become everything and nothing simultaneously. A rhizome cannot be examined at only one point it must be considered within and with everything else, never a duality of options, always an infinite number of boundaries intersecting. To facilitate this becoming and coalesce these mythologies into a liveable identity we look to the trickster for our answers. ‘The best way to describe the trickster is to say simply that the boundary is where he will be found – sometimes drawing the line, sometimes crossing it, sometimes erasing or moving it, but always there, the god of the threshold in all its forms.’ 14 As embodiments of ambiguity and creators of culture, tricksters are exactly whom we need in our current conditions and so they are what we must become. ‘We constantly distinguish---right and wrong, sacred and profane, clean and dirty, male and female, young and old, living and dead---and in every case trickster will cross the line and confuse the distinction’ 15 ‘That is why cyborg politics insist on noise and advocate pollution, rejoicing in the illegitimate fusions of animal and machine. These are the couplings that make Man and Woman so problematic, subverting the structure of desire, the force imagined to generate language and gender, and so subverting the structure and modes of reproduction of “Western” identity, of nature and culture, of mirror and eye, slave and master, body and mind.’ 16 The figure of the trickster is often regarded as if his recognition in culture marks that the culture has progressed past a more primitive stage to become more conscious. But tricksters have always been the figures that create new meaning, question values, and produce ambiguity, they encourage or at least allow destratification, without them culture becomes stagnate and society becomes black and white. ‘We may hope that our actions carry no moral ambiguity, but pretending that is the case when it isn’t does not lead to greater clarity about right and wrong; it more likely leads to unconscious cruelty masked by inflated righteousness.’ 17 ‘Trickster is at one and the same time creator and destroyer, giver and negator, he who dupes others and who is always duped himself … He knows neither good nor evil yet he is responsible for both. He possesses no values, moral or social … yet through his actions all values come into being’ 18 14 Hyde, Lewis. Trickster Makes This World. (Edinburgh: Canongate Books, 2008), 7. 15 Hyde, Trickster Makes This World, 7. 16 Haraway, Donna Jeanne. Manifestly Haraway. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2016.) 57. 17 Hyde, Trickster Makes This World, 10. 18 Hyde, Trickster Makes This World, 10. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 Seeing things not in black and white but greyscale. Being grey in a black and white world makes you imperceptible. To be comprehensible means being available to be seized or appreciated, able to be contained. When we become imperceptible, become incomprehensible we cannot be misunderstood or misjudged, we are understood as not understood. To humans, things that are not understood, do not exist. We become impossible, undefinable, and unconquerable. This work is far more to me than the images I have created or the words I have written, those were never the art. This has been personal from the very beginning. It was never about aesthetics or materials or abstract ideas, it has always been me. How do I illustrate becoming? My own becoming. I could not make the work out of me. So, I become the work. How do I become an essay? A word? A piece of metal? Whether or not the work has faciality or is a signifier of my physical vessel, everything I have made, and everything I have done has been a remaking of myself. ‘Theory can do more the closer it gets to the skin.’19 (Sarah Ahmed) We cannot fight the crowd, we can only thin it by othering ourselves and thus weakening it, making our own unquestionable crowd of the other. Becoming-other becoming-multiple, becoming-pack. ‘to be other is to be multiple, without clear boundary, frayed, insubstantial.’ 20 We spread through contagion, these words are contagious, and contagion has no boundary only a limit of its effects, this limit is where the border of our pack is found. One become two and three become 4, becoming multiple and many, becoming named nameless and faced faceless. Keep razors by your bedside and your blood locked away. Deface the self as self-defence. Become aware, become critical, become radical, becoming changing. No longer being but becoming, no longer a being but a becoming. Maybe you should be afraid. Afraid of sudden disappearances. Afraid of looming shadows. Afraid of us. We are sea monsters and cyborgs, a flowering menace. We can see you and ourselves while you can see neither. We reflect as we reflect, we show you your Self, abhorrent, we see this too and know it is everywhere. You do not know yourself and you will not No yourself. We are here but also there; we will always be and were always there. We have no desires, no commands, and no demands, we need not affect but only experience. Our future will come and become and overcome itself. We are the future. You say to yourself you can’t wrap your head around it, you cannot name or define us, we do not fit into your 19 Sara Ahmed, Living a Feminist Life (Duke University Press, 2017), 10. 20 Haraway, Manifestly Haraway, 60. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 strata, we cannot be contained. We will not be seized or appreciated. Will we ever complain because we are misunderstood, misjudged, misidentified, slandered, misheard, and not heard? We become louder, become noise, become deafening. We dissolve into sound, into liquid, and into you, until you no longer remember which way you called up. What does a fish know of water? What do you know of what surrounds you? It would serve you best to know nothing, and question everything. And yet you do not even know to question. We are the question, every question at once that you refuse to ask of yourself and refuse to hear being asked. We are all Greek to you. Ακούς τώρα? Δεν έχει καν σημασία. έτσι έχουμε μιλήσει There has always been so much I have never understood about people. Growing up in a world filled with so much violence, although sheltered from much of it, as is my privilege, while also living under the shadow of the apocalypse has always left me feeling lost. Throughout my life, I have often felt there is no place for me in this world, no future in it where I want to be or where I could be happy. What future could I even look forward to? In my lifetime billions of people will die from climate change, born into a death cult we did not ask for and cannot escape. Our fate was never in our hands and has been decided for many years now. Mine is the generation that will watch the world burn. How could I not be a nihilist in times like these? That is the question Fearing only god. God and mandarins and lobsters. Feeling ephemeral, I want to be ephemeral, I want to burn very bright indeed. It’s only natural, all of nature is ephemeral, we simply try and mask and ignore this fact to cope with the abject truth of our impermanence. Everything to dust. We deny this because we want to be gods, we want to be immortal. Who wants to live forever? Who wants to watch me die? Who wants me to be immortal? Guess I’m not getting any grandchildren. Sorry I didn’t make you immortal dad, what a waste. Throw a lobster into the sun instead and disappear into gas. I could disappear into gas; would I be the same as the lobster then? When my body stops moving, would people love the lifeless corpse? Do I live on through love? Or do they hate me, Can hate sustain me? For how long? Which is worse? I just don’t see the point in running from your own shadow. It seems like the only answer is to forget you are running. Maybe I should ask a hamster, they seem ok. I want to be ok. But I am separate and inseparable, all alone with everything, part of it and it of me, how can I be ok if things are not? Nothing is ok. I can find a spiral in anything. Can contagion overcome parasite? Either one will do, but only one. Restless. Pump me full of drugs and Tv maybe I can be normal. Not my first choice, but it’s not like I exist anyway, I am unknown and unrecognised, maybe even to myself, and this will never Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 truly change. So, what am I? Anything? Something? Any whomever? What do I want to be? Maybe nothing is what I want to be. Can I achieve that? Can I become whatever I want or is it out of my control? What am I in a vacuum? What am I to others? What do people think they see? Does anyone ever see me? Maybe I don’t need to become imperceptible, incomprehensible, or impossible. Maybe I already am. Once we have seen the constructions that surround us, we can construct the seen. All previous ideas can be seen as equal and equally invalid and new meaning is free to be created. This is what my body of work represents, ‘a cleverly manipulated exterior: what has been done is mutation. What exists beneath the deformed surface is the same person who was there prior to the deformity.’ 21 Not merely in a photo shoot or for a moment, a true alteration of self, an apparition that is not fleeting, both undetectable and effectual. Becoming a new person every day, questioning not what I might be but what can be detected from me, perceiving my perception, and manipulating what I become in the eyes of others. My work is a confrontation with becoming, forcing the possibility of change into the minds of others, forcing them to question themselves. The work is driven both intrinsically and extrinsically, I wish to change others just as I wish to change my self, and through my changing, I pursue this change in others. People reproach confrontations with nihilism and with queerness because these ideas and embodiments put cracks in their illusory world, and the foundations of their Self become unstable. What are they without god? What are they if not a man? We cannot afford to allow people to remain ignorant of how they have been deceived because a new reality is possible, those of us who are already aware suffer because of this knowledge. Not because ignorance should be desired but because we are so painfully close to something better. This is my small part in trying to enact change. The biggest hurdle I encountered was stagnation, the completion of an image is the death of production, and the death of production causes stillness. To embody the trickster both in myself and in mywork necessitated becoming slippery, shifting, and sly. I thought the answer to this might lie in moving image or sound mediums as they are temporal and do not allow ideas to stand still, there was truth in this, but it did not satisfy me. I did not want to hold the reader’s hand, what I wanted was refusal. Me and mywork would refuse to be palatable, refuse to be clear and defined, refuse to be observed and analysed with ease. When I am examined, I am not understood as I would like, so I will not just disengage from becoming definite, I will engage in becoming transparent, becoming reflective, becoming obscure. 21 Susan Stryker, “My Words to Victor Frankenstein above the Village of Chamounix: Performing Transgender Rage,” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1, no. 3 (1994): pp. 237-254, 239. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 Disidentify Disguise Distort Dissolve Disfigure Displace Disorder Disappear Sounds and video work are not the mediums I have the most experience with and are not what I feel most connected to, since becoming is a molecular change, not molar, involution not evolution, it seemed more fitting to embody myself in the mediums that I am always drawn back too, Screen printing and text. Not becoming something discrete that cannot be understood, mutating what I already am to become incomprehensible. In this project text served an important role in making work that is alive, the nuances and quirks of the English language are often a hindrance to effective communication because of how wildly different interpretations of a word or a sentence may be. Here I use this to my advantage to make work that no two people will have the same experience viewing, and that a singular person can return to and find new meaning. This is what allows the work a life of its own and allows a rhizome of connections to form, and new meaning to be created. Homophones, homonyms, and homographs are examples of some of the tools which are afforded by the English language, giving sentences double meaning, doublespeak, doublethink, equivocate. The appropriation of pop culture or cliché into my work also aids the ambiguity and aligns with the methods of the trickster, I give these things new meaning in my context while also drawing in their connection to their origin for those who recognise it. People will extract meaning from the text based on what they already know as well as from what I am saying. As well as referencing others I also bring in my own experiences which will never contain the same meaning for others as they do for me, everything I have written is a part of me, whether it is my pain, my inspiration, or my love from and to others. I may have extrinsic motivation from how I want to affect people, but I will never know if I have succeeded, I am within others’ minds, but I will never know what it is like to be there. If I fail, at least I have succeeded leaving a record of myself, I have become something that will outlive me. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 What is the value of an incomprehensible image? Perhaps there is none, at least to most people. Perhaps it contradicts itself, an image is a representation of something, if that is incomprehensible maybe it is no longer a representation. Can I become incomprehensible to myself? Have I ever comprehended this self? Things that are not understood are an opportunity for meaning to be found, the value of an incomprehensible image is in its power to create new meaning through interpretation. When people analyse art, they reveal what they perceive within the image but also what is within themselves. When people analyse me, they do not reveal what I am but they do reveal themselves. I am drawn to printing on metal, because not only does the image move as things pass in front of it, but people must also see their reflection within the image. Who they are affects the interpretation of the image just as much as what I present, therefore they are part of the work. Obscuring the face and the body, defacing the face, erasing the image into nothing, allowing myself to only be seen from certain angles, in certain lights, becoming reflective, and dissolving the boundary of the image. This is the methodology of the trickster in practice, manipulating the boundaries, embodying ambiguity, forcing all things to be questioned, and creating new meaning. This is how we enact change. It becomes at a molecular level. It becomes through the individual. INVOCATION My soul is wrought to sing of forms transformed to bodies new and strange! Immortal Gods inspire my heart, for ye have changed yourselves and all things you have changed! Oh lead my song in smooth and measured strains, from olden days when earth began to this completed time! 22 22 Publius Ovidius Naso, “P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphoses,” P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphoses, Book 1, line 1. Zoey Young Montgomerie – 872122517 – FINEARTS 322 REFERENCES Ahmed, Sara. Living a Feminist Life. Duke University Press, 2017. Beauvoir, Simone de, and H. M. Parshley. The Second Sex. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972. Bon, Gustave Le. The Crowd a Study of the Popular Mind. Ernest Benn Limited, 1896. Grenz, Stanley J. A Primer on Postmodernism. Grand Rapids , MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Haraway, Donna Jeanne. Manifestly Haraway. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2016. Haraway, Donna Jeanne. The Haraway Reader. New York: Routledge, 2004. Hyde, Lewis. Trickster Makes This World: How Disruptive Imagination Creates Culture. Edinburgh: Canongate Books, 2008. Marx, Karl, and Karl Marx. Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970. Nishitani, Keiji. The Self-Overcoming of Nihilism. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1990. Ovidius Naso, P. “P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphoses Brookes More, Ed.” Metamorphoses, BOOK 1, line 1. Accessed October 24, 2022. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0028. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. Translated by Hazel E. Barnes. London: Methuen & Co Ltd., 1972. Stryker, Susan. “My Words to Victor Frankenstein above the Village of Chamounix: Performing Transgender Rage.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1, no. 3 (1994): 237–54. https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-1-3-237.