Computers? Merely simulators and modelers for life. The cell is king. -- Ribofunk 1990Well, despite my expressed intention in CNS #5 to produce another issue of INTERFERENCE ON THE BRAIN SCREEN, that worthy project is late. In the meantime, I was able to get Paul Di Filippo's seminal essay, Ribofunk 1997. Rather than delay presenting it to the world, I am cranking out a new CNS. INTERFERENCE will appear directly, but why wait until then when you can "strobe your lobes" right now? Take only as directed, do not exceed recommended dosage.
Fascinating and fruitful as physics, cosmology and the other hard' sciences are, they are meaningless without the context of Life. Trying to erase the self, to escape into a rarefied realm of particles and forces, is a deadly delusion, a ruse, a trap. To pretend that gravity is more important than love or sex is to deny the very forces that motivate the pursuit of such dry knowledge.
Any art which elevates unliving forces and data above Life is a lie. Just as a body can be reduced to inert chemicals with the consequent loss of all that gives the living entity value, so does such bad art hold its reductionist "truth" up as a deceitful mask.
The desire to abandon the wet body for silicon simulation comes perilously close to such a way of thinking. Granted, the field of Artificial Life might someday achieve true sentience, and has already indeed produced many insights into behaviors and evolutionary strategies of wet Life. But any jump to an artificial platform for mind abandons a system field-tested for millions of years, whose mysteries are hardly yet plumbed, and to which many improvements may easily be made.
Virtual Reality in its current state, throwing away as it does over half of the body's sensory inputs, should be seen merely as another tool to aid Life's questing, never as an end in itself or alternative to unmediated living. The same applies, of course, to the Net.
This is where Ribofunk comes in. As the portmanteau word implies, this type of art will be concerned with the primacy of non-reductionist biology conveyed in a hot, entrancing, tongue-in-the-ear style which speaks to both mind an body. Not merely cerebral, but cellular.
The love of Life has been named and scientific study of it begun. Biophilia, a term coined by Edward O. Wilson, nominates the trait as an inherent part of the human genome.
Architects are beginning to model their structures and philosophies on rhizomes and slime molds.
Piercing and tattoos are once again culturally mainstream, as they were in other times and societies, indicating a desire to enhance and even worship the body. Modern Primitives instinctively seek ancient connections.
As do the shroom-heads following Terence McKenna and his Archaic Revival. Eschewing drugs which dominate and brutalize rather than tease and coerce receptors, they search for oneness with and insight into the whole co-evolved biosphere.
The incredible success of Prozac is the merest foreshadowing of the development of a whole armamentarium of mood-enhancers, neurosis-killers and talent sharpeners.
The burgeoning mass of ravers and zippies cultivate highs by methods and rituals which do not deny the body, but rely on its inherent capacities, just as shamans and Sufis once did.
Antidrug sentiment, seemingly implacable, is actually exhibiting a last-gasp burst of energy before dying. Proven to be incredibly inefficient and wasteful, generalized drug prohibition will soon die (much as Communism so quickly and unexpectedly collapsed), to be replaced by legalization, regulation and implementation of more refined and less damaging substances. Witness recent decriminalization rulings in Germany and Holland.
Our seas and forest and animal partners are dying with alarming rapidity. Human populations are expanding beyond the planet's carrying capacity. (A Ribofunk corollary to current human birth patterns is a world where adulthood moves chronologically downward: in the Third World, because children are numerically preponderant; in the First World, because lesser number of children must support a large cohort of elderly.) Bio-problems demand bio-solutions.
Feminism and goddess worship have become less shrill and more pervasive, in society, art and religion, infiltrating even conservative Protestantism, for instance. As incubators of Life, women instinctively privilege Life over Death. "That leaves me dry" is the archetypical Ribofunk putdown.
Human intelligence, while important, should not be overly privileged. All life is equally sacred and important. "God must have loved beetles...."
Ribofunk is inclusionary, not exclusionary, open to males and females of any race or nationality.
Ribofunk art doesn't prohibit, but allows. Doesn't tease, but delivers. Doesn't bore, but excites. Isn't cool and distanced, but hot and intimate. Always comes down on the side of change and chaos (the essence of Life), not stasis and predictability (the definition of death).
Our role must be one of nurturing, not crushing. Creating, not destroying. Enjoying, not bewailing. Stiffen up your fishbone and bite he big red hot chili pepper of Life.
What is the history of the Ribofunk essays? I saw the early version in bOING bOING #2 in 1990, then it began to show up in various other zines.
The original Ribofunk essay was originally done on a whim as something of a spoof, and circulated thru the mails as a one-page broadside. (In the mists of memory, I seem to recall that I had just ended the 12-issue run of my zine ASTRAL AVENUE and was suffering from mail-deprivation.) Anyhow, it was picked up by bOING-bOING and others, and I began to be seduced by my own propaganda: what the CIA refers to as "blowback."The original essay was rather light-hearted, poking fun at cyberpunk and punk rock, listing slogans ("Put a Crick in your dick!"). Ribofunk 1997, while still light-hearted, is much more serious. It seems intended not simply to amuse but to argue and convince. What accounts for the change in tone?
Upon consideration, I decided that one could actually write some semi-serious SF stories of merit according to the precepts outlined in my manifesto. After a few years of doing so, I was thoroughly self-brainwashed to the point of considering my own ideas (which had originated half in jest) as worthy of some more earnest outpourings, hence RIBOFUNK 1997 and its more cajoling tone.Reading the new version, I'm reminded strongly of your old essays against horror fiction ("Brief Contra Horror") in SF Guide. Modern horror fiction is grounded in a revulsion of the body; Ribofunk celebrates the body. Is this, then, the continuation of an old argument?
Indeed, my feelings for the worst of horror literature have not changed a whit since those essays in Charles Platt's zine (though "moral" horror such as Graham Joyce writes seems to me a valid proposition), and insofar as I can only write what I personally endorse, then Ribofunk is some kind of antithesis to horror.Turning from Ribofunk the essay to RIBOFUNK the book -- how is the collection doing? Certainly it received very favorable reviews.
No hard sales figures yet on Ribofunk, but Avon has just picked up the paperback rights, so I'm happy!Do you plan more ribofunk stories?
I would like to do a Ribofunk novel to be entitled STRANGE OASES, set around the end time of the current story-cycle.