Joy Garnett on Mon, 8 May 2000 05:12:07 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> It's not me it's my genes, or is it my memes?

Ana Viseu wrote:

> It's not me it's my genes, or is it my memes?

Actually, it could be just our jeans...

The main problem with the current genetic model is it's failure to
acknowledge the other, far more elusive half of the Equation of Life : 


The cellular, electronic pulse.

We're all walking batteries, and the gene material in a dead dog is
EXACTLY the same as it was when the dog was still alive. Dead or alive:
same DNA. Ha! So, something else which is terribly important must be
missing in the dead dog. 

What is the nature of energy as it pertains to our bodies? our cells? our
genes? What makes the gene become "living" genetic material? You can order
DNA and RNA from any biology supply house. It comes as a powder that gets
cloudy when you add water. Just add water. But it's still not alive. No
amount of Frankensteinian bubble and squeak will make it jump up out of
that jar either. Oh well. And your computer won't be worth shit to you if
you don't plug it in....Information is only half the story. 

Dylan Thomas got it right: the force that through the green fuze drives
the flower, etc. etc. It seems to be something the poets can get, and the
rationalists hasten to forget. The electrical genius Nicola Tesla got it,
and he was sabotaged, done-in. Sad story. The Energy model has yet to be

So, the problem with basing the meme model on the gene model is that the
gene model is faulty, incomplete. Perhaps someday someone will come up
with better models. 

joy garnett


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: contact: