How does Eddie’s use of NZT-48 compare to an extension of the body such as the Surrogates or a prosthetic arm? What would Hayles say about the use of such a drug that modifies consciousness to a superhuman capacity?
ENGL 360 | Future Perfect Human
Prof. Myra Seaman | Fall 2016
I think what is so interesting about Eddie’s use of a drug in the film is that unlike other instances of physical modification, the drug essentially allows Eddie to modify his innermost internal qualities. What is most important about the drug’s effects is their invisibility. When Eddie displays knowledge or cognitive ability, those around him who are not already aware of the drug are prevented from knowing that Eddie has effectively modified himself. Whereas the “modification” that happens in “Surrogates” is inherently physical and therefore visually detectable, the modifications, or rather the process of modification, allowed by NZT-48 is easily concealable.
In some ways, I think the secretiveness of the drug makes it a least little bit more troubling than outright physical modification. This of course relates to a theme we have returned often too in across several texts: legitimacy / “realness.” Are, we, the audience supposed to be troubled by Eddie’s rise to prominence because it is rooted in a kind of deception? I think Hayles would argue that Eddie’s taking of the drug and enjoyment of its effects has much to do with both the transmission of information and notions of going beyond the embodied self. Both of these ideas connote a level of unnaturalness that I think the film hopes we find at least little disturbing.
Eddie’s use of NZT-48 compares to other extensions we’ve encountered, like prosthetics, in several ways. As Matthew suggests, what is so unique about the drug is that it allows Eddie’s personal internal qualities to be heightened, and it does so in an invisible way. I think what is most distinctive about Eddie’s experience is the fact that it is his own personal capabilities and past knowledge that become accessible when taking NZT-48. As Vernon suggests, the drug is most useful when the person who takes it is already smart. Depending on who you are as an individual, the knowledge and experiences you have already obtained, the drug would alter your performance or success in different ways.
In her conclusion, Hayles reminds us of embodiment, “human being is first of all embodied being, and the complexities of this embodiment mean that human awareness unfolds in ways very different from those of intelligence embodied in cybernetic machines” (283-4). With that in mind, I think that Hayles would find Eddie’s experience taking the drug to be an embodied one because, as previously mentioned, the outcome of taking the drug largely depends upon already-present knowledge, that knowledge just becomes heightened and more accessible. In this way I think that Hayles would argue that Eddie’s experience is an experience that demonstrates embodied information.
Like you guys have said I think NZT represents an embodied experience, but I’d like to throw a wrench into it just being a heightened Eddie when on the drug. The real life analogues to NZT are drugs lIke Adderall that allow people amazing periods of focus and clarity. If this type of drug becomes as prominent on the general population or even just in student populations, we will have enhanced performances formulated around a drug. Being on the drug will become the norm and the expectation in order to get that presentaton perfect, that proposal as good as possible, and to secure outstanding evaluations. We start reaching a point where normal human brain performances is disregarded in favor of the stimulant, and the displacement is one we should not take lightly (Eddies crash on NZT). We stand to lose something with these drugs, and I start to think limitation is an inherent characteristic of human existence.