Reflections On Anthropocentrism In Posthuman Cinema

At present,there is no clear definition of "posthuman cinema" in academic circles.The author defines posthuman cinema as a genre of cinema that constructs the "posthuman condition",portrays the posthuman image,engages in posthuman discursive practices and expresses posthuman ideas.The problematic area of posthuman cinema research is defined as the posthuman subject,which extends to the posthuman condition,the ethical relationship of the posthuman other and the construction of the posthuman body.Through the study of anthropocentrism,it is pointed out that the current concept of "human" has become a thing of the past.The film form,which is supposed to reflect the practice of posthuman discourse,has not yet been able to break out of its anthropocentric confines.The spectre of anthropocentrism lurks in the literary practices of posthuman discourse."In Derrida’s words,it is a problem".Through an image-text analysis of the more classic posthuman films.The anthropocentric symbols in current posthuman cinema are shown in four dimensions:the anthropocentric worldview in the posthuman condition,the anthropocentric position in the ethical relations of the posthuman other,the anthropocentric dimension in the construction of the posthuman body,and the anthropocentric narrative themes in the posthuman context,exposing the "sinister intentions" of the anthropocentric paradigm ".That is,the anthropocentric elements of the posthuman ’world’,constructed as a superimposition of the anthropocentric symbols of the linguistic construct and the anthropocentric symbols of the material dimension of the body,strongly disrupt the discursive intentions of posthuman cinema to transcend anthropocentrism.The reason why posthuman cinema cannot break out of the cage of anthropocentrism is that,from the perspective of production,the ideology of the posthuman cinema production subject,the aesthetic paradigm of the consuming subject,the functional properties of the cultural product and the paradigm of the media form still leave a "gap" for anthropocentrism to survive in a "misaligned"manner."The absence of the textual dimension is,respectively,the result of the latter.The lack of a textual dimension is reflected in the "high technology,low life" thematic configuration of posthuman cinema,the nostalgic "anthropomorphic" body,the"egoistic" subject that is difficult to break through,and the "human-machine game"scenario.The anthropocentric paradigm is confused with the dimension of the human being,and the coupling of technology with late capitalism strips technology of its critique from the structure of the formally constructed interactive subject,trapped in the ’little box’ of anthropocentrism.".The root cause of this is the non-benign process of paradigm change,namely the entanglement of the anthropocentric paradigm with the ’post’ anthropic paradigm within posthuman theoretical discourse and the nonbenign nature of the ’social construction’ paradigm with the ’scientific’ paradigm."The non-benign ’interaction’ of the ’social construction’ paradigm with the ’scientific’paradigm.If posthuman cinema is to break away from anthropocentrism,it must be based on a paradigm shift to explore the aesthetic form of cinema that is appropriate to the times.From the current trend of posthuman theory,posthuman cinema should be dedicated to constructing a "possible world" of "networks" of actors,i.e.a"heterogeneous" field of transhumanism."Inter-subjective" networks of actors.The post-human ’other’ of cyborgs and non-human intelligent beings is shaped in order to practise the generative subjective function of inter-subjective ’negative experience’.It also expresses the "interaction" towards an "existential" dimension with a posthuman subject form of "flow" and "life" that breaks with the atomic thinking of the individual."The "generative" posthuman thought is a breakthrough from anthropocentrism.