Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Voicing the Clone: Laurie Anderson and Technologies of Reproduction

View through CrossRef
In the 1980s, new reproductive technologies such as in vitro fertilisation and embryo transfer became commercially available in the United States, and somatic cell nuclear transfer—the cloning process by which Dolly the Sheep would be conceived in 1996—was in its experimental phase. While anxieties concerning these new technologies escalated in the popular sensorium, Laurie Anderson explored the phenomenon of cloning in a short musical film called What You Mean We? (1986) in which Anderson consults a design team to clone herself in order to manage her demanding workload. The videographic image of the clone is Anderson herself, performing in drag, and her clone’s body is partially created through the use of a pitch shifter which changes Anderson’s voice to that of the cloned—but ostensibly male—version of herself. In this article, I investigate Anderson’s technological consideration of the body, which extends beyond her own corporeality, to interrogate the biological and affective capacities of clones. I consider how Anderson addresses the convergence of reproductive technologies, the market and the creation of subjects within this market as participating in a shift in how voices are heard, governed and reproduced in the latter half of the twentieth century.
SAGE Publications
Title: Voicing the Clone: Laurie Anderson and Technologies of Reproduction
Description:
In the 1980s, new reproductive technologies such as in vitro fertilisation and embryo transfer became commercially available in the United States, and somatic cell nuclear transfer—the cloning process by which Dolly the Sheep would be conceived in 1996—was in its experimental phase.
While anxieties concerning these new technologies escalated in the popular sensorium, Laurie Anderson explored the phenomenon of cloning in a short musical film called What You Mean We? (1986) in which Anderson consults a design team to clone herself in order to manage her demanding workload.
The videographic image of the clone is Anderson herself, performing in drag, and her clone’s body is partially created through the use of a pitch shifter which changes Anderson’s voice to that of the cloned—but ostensibly male—version of herself.
In this article, I investigate Anderson’s technological consideration of the body, which extends beyond her own corporeality, to interrogate the biological and affective capacities of clones.
I consider how Anderson addresses the convergence of reproductive technologies, the market and the creation of subjects within this market as participating in a shift in how voices are heard, governed and reproduced in the latter half of the twentieth century.

Related Results

Study of genotypes for clone candidates of high-demand varieties
Study of genotypes for clone candidates of high-demand varieties
Abstract. The work is devoted to a highly topical area – domestic clone breeding, as well as the rehabilitation of isolated plants from harmful objects identified in them. Agrobiol...
Study on interactions between voicing production and perception using auditory feedback paradigm
Study on interactions between voicing production and perception using auditory feedback paradigm
A previous study reported that perturbed auditory feedback affected voicing production [Mitsuya, MacDonald, and Munhall (2014). J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 135, 2986–2994]. In this study,...
Genomic characterization of sporadic isolates of the dominant clone of Mycobacterium abscessus subspecies massiliense
Genomic characterization of sporadic isolates of the dominant clone of Mycobacterium abscessus subspecies massiliense
AbstractRecent studies have characterized a dominant clone (Clone 1) of Mycobacterium abscessus subspecies massiliense (M. massiliense) associated with high prevalence in cystic fi...
Laurie Halse Anderson
Laurie Halse Anderson
Laurie Halse Anderson's path to writing for young adult readers was indirect, unintentional, and difficult. Although Anderson may never have set out to write for teens, her commitm...

Back to Top