http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Trh249&feedformat=atom
Dead Media Archive - User contributions [en]
2024-03-29T07:56:40Z
User contributions
MediaWiki 1.25.2
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Homing_Pigeons&diff=4884
Homing Pigeons
2008-04-30T19:59:54Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Homing Pigeons''' are a type of ''domesticated pigeon'' whose "role as a messenger has a long history" (''Encyclopaedia Britannica''). They look very much like the common street pigeon, though they are more narrow-bodied, and have larger eyes and beaks. <br />
<br />
[[Image:flying_pigeon.jpg|thumb|right|From "Crisis Communication" by Marjorie Van de Water, 1942.]] <br />
<br />
==Origins: 4,000 Years of Release and Return==<br />
<br />
[[Image:pigeon_woodcut.jpg|thumb|left|"Pigeon Post," Woodcut from A.D. 1481 (Holzmann and Pehrson 7).]]<br />
<br />
Homing pigeons belong to a larger group of domesticated pigeons, which have been in existence for over four thousand years. There are mixed claims regarding exactly when and where homing pigeons were first domesticated and subsequently utilized as a medium. Peter James and Nick Thorpe in ''Ancient Inventions'' state that pigeons were first domesticated in Sumer (southern Iraq) around 2000 B.C.: “Most likely it was the Sumerians who discovered that a pigeon or dove will unerringly return to its nest, however far and for however long it is separated from its home” (James and Thorpe 526). But the “first actual records of their use as carrier birds come from Egypt,” although the authors here do not specify when this occurred (James and Thorpe 526). Another account in ''The Early History of Data Networks'' holds that “in the days of the Pharaohs the Egyptians announced the arrival of important visitors by releasing pigeons from incoming ships,” which may have been prevalent as early as 2900 B.C. (Holzmann and Pehrson 6). Elsewhere, centuries later, it is said that “the outcomes of the Olympic Games in ancient Greece, around 776 B.C., were sent to Athens by pigeons” (Holzmann and Pehrson 6). Thus, one can infer that in ancient times, people quickly realized the potential that existed in a homing pigeon’s ability to be released at one spot and return to another – their ability as a medium. Beneath their wings was the only option of fast, easy communication that would present itself for millennia, and the state and the public alike took advantage of this intriguing form of airmail. <br />
<br />
==Training and Carrying==<br />
<br />
When it comes to animal navigation, it is plain that “birds…have the ability to return to precise, previously occupied locations,” and for this reason homing pigeons can be trained to carry messages from one known place to another (Able 592). Exactly how pigeons are capable of this is still unclear, though it could be attributed to various sensory capabilities and the Earth’s magnetic field (Able 601). <br />
<br />
[[Image:delivering_message.jpg|thumb|right|1942: Major John K. Shawvan, a "Pigeoneer" employed by the U.S. Army, with homing pigeons (Van de Water 156).]]<br />
<br />
In 1942, an article entitled “Crisis Communication” was published in the ''Science News Letter'', which outlined requirements for raising pigeons and described how pigeons are trained to deliver messages, chiefly in the United States Army (Van de Water 155). “The birds carry messages written on tissue paper and placed in a tiny container on one leg. They can carry slightly heavier weights on their backs” (Van de Water 155). The article also proclaims that “the raising and training of homing pigeons is an activity requiring much…skill,” for which “it is necessary to know how to give expert care to the birds, to prevent or cure illnesses, repair feathers, and to treat them properly” (Van de Water 155). Homing pigeons would first be taught to recognize the rattle of dry peas in a can as signifying a meal (which would later lure them home), and would gradually learn, over a several-week-long period, how and where to fly (Van de Water 155-156). From this information, it is clear that “maintaining” homing pigeons as media required a great deal of patience, kindness, and expertise, much more than it took to just stick a letter in a mailbox or make a phone call. However, it could be argued that the speed and efficiency of homing pigeons warranted the use of extra skill from these adept trainers called “Pigeoneers,” since such quick communication was necessary in times of crisis.<br />
<br />
==Speed and Efficiency==<br />
<br />
For the most part, records indicate that homing pigeons were rather fast flyers when they needed to be: a good homing “racing” pigeon “can achieve speeds of over ninety miles per hour” (James and Thorpe 529). When the ancient Roman light telegraph system collapsed, “pigeon post was left as the fastest means of communication in the world. And so it remained until the perfection of the electric telegraph…and radio” (James and Thorpe 527). Even later during the late nineteenth century, there was a surge in homing pigeon usage in Europe and U.S., which appears to be primarily due to their utilization during the Franco-Prussian War beginning in 1870. Many articles published at the time reported the distances and speeds at which homing pigeons traveled on a regular basis, marveling at how these little birds could handle so much distance and responsibility, and comparing their abilities to modern technologies of their day. <br />
<br />
[[Image:gustav_kramer.jpg|thumb|left|Homing pigeons being released from a cage (Able 595).]]<br />
<br />
In 1877, one such comparison happened in an experimental race between a homing pigeon and a continental mail express train in England. The ''London Times'' reported in an article entitled “Wings Against Steam” that the “odds at starting seemed against the bird, and the railway officials predicted the little messenger would be beaten in the race…When the Continental mail express came into Cannon-street station, the bird had been home for twenty minutes, having beaten her Majesty’s royal mail by a time allowance representing eighteen miles” (''London Times''). In 1881, the ''New York Times'' published an article called "A Homing Pigeon's Instinct," which reported on a homing pigeon who "had returned over an unknown road, 185 miles air line, to a place it had left when 4 months old and had not seen in the meantime" (''New York Times''). These accounts attest to just how useful homing pigeons were at the time, and in many ways these birds represented a traditional form of communication that literally trumped more modern technological advances. Pigeon “fanciers” in the late 1800s and early 1900s could be compared to modern college students who refuse to use Facebook and stick strictly to their cell phones; the newer technology is useful but slightly scary, with the potential for many drawbacks. While pigeoneers who weren’t working for the government could have easily used a telegraph or ultimately, a telephone, they saw many positive qualities in their soon-to-be-“dead” medium.<br />
<br />
==Government Employees and War-Time Missions==<br />
<br />
==="The Ears and Eyes of the Government"===<br />
<br />
[[Image:spy_pigeon.jpg|thumb|right|Camera attached to a homing pigeon. From the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C.]]<br />
<br />
Homing pigeons provided the option of quick communication through the air that primarily occurred without interruption. It is no wonder, then, that they came to be of “great practical value in ‘important affairs’” (James and Thorpe 525). These affairs were of course governmental, and by 632 A.D. the Moslem Empire had already incorporated pigeon post into an airmail system servicing the state, allowing homing pigeons to aid “the ears and eyes of the government” (James and Thorpe 526). One extremely literal example of this homing pigeon function occurred during the two world wars, when they were utilized as spies: “A camera set to automatic shutter, which was hung around their necks, helped in the reconnoitering of enemy positions…of the hundreds of thousands of spy carrier pigeons deployed, ‘95% completed their missions’” (Dee 1). These pigeon spies continued their service through the 1950s, “earning more medals of honor than any other animal” (Dee 1). Here, we see a homing pigeon not only acting as a medium for humans by carrying messages, but also performing the seemingly exclusive human task of photography, and for a specific purpose - to aid ''the eyes of the government''.<br />
<br />
===War and Warning===<br />
<br />
With governmental espionage comes the obvious use of homing pigeons during times of war, either to aid one party in spying (as abovementioned), to gain clues about various locations, or to warn others of impending danger. Such usage makes sense: pigeons blend into the background, fly above the battleground, and can swiftly get messages to and from various locations. This dates back to 2350 B.C. in Mesopotamia, when King Sargon of Akkad had each of his messengers carry a homing pigeon: the pigeon was released if the messenger was attacked en route, which signified that the original message had been “lost” and that a new messenger should be sent down another route (Holzmann and Pehrson 7). With time, the number of homing pigeons employed by various militaries was outstanding: in 1918, the British Air Force alone kept over 20,000 homing pigeons, handled by 380 pigeoneers (Holzmann and Pehrson 8). In the U.S., homing pigeons were "pampered pets" and treated with the utmost care, no doubt to make sure the birds would be anxious to hurry back to their base once their duties were completed (Van de Water 155). [[Image:pigeon_quarters.jpg|thumb|left|From "Crisis Communication" by Marjorie Van de Water, 1942.]] In addition, homing pigeons were “subject to draft” as were young men (Van de Water 156). The fact that pigeons were drafted in impressive numbers could speak to a variety of possibilities. One could infer that the military “employed” tens of thousands of pigeons because they were incredibly efficient and useful in times of an overflow of messages. A more realistic inference is that these birds were caught in the crossfire during times of battle, and often many would not return back to their military bases. With thousands of pigeons and hundreds of pigeoneers on call, one can easily get a sense of how immense this endeavor was.<br />
<br />
A particularly intriguing account of pigeon use during World War II comes from a first-hand narrative entitled ''Most Secret War'', written by a veteran named R.V. Jones. He writes, “In areas where we had no direct contact with the Resistance movement, we used to get out bombers to drop homing pigeons in containers which would open after a few hours and release the birds if they had not been found by someone on the ground” (Jones 279). These containers contained questionnaires that asked a series of simple questions that anyone on the ground could (and did) answer, with information that could be helpful to the British. Jones comments later in his book that “the ability of pigeons which had spent their entire lives in England to home back to their bases after we had dropped them on the Continent” made him “wonder” (Jones 507). He also sheds some light onto the use of photography in times of war, writing that “the first use of microphotography in war was in Paris in 1870, when microphotographed messages were sent by carrier pigeon” (Jones 509).<br />
<br />
==Limitations==<br />
<br />
The fact that homing pigeons are truly living media presents a whole slew of problems and limitations that one would not likely encounter in other media. As small birds, they are an easy target to be “caught by hawks,” or “fall into the sea during the night” while flying over the ocean (''New York Times''). There were many reports of pigeons returning severely injured, with “half a tail” for instance, leaving the messenger to wonder “what animal could have chewed up the other half” (''New York Times''). It was dangerous for pigeons, especially during wartime, to travel long distances. One article reported, “If birds don’t return in two days, it is almost certain that they won’t be seen inside of a week” (''New York Times''). Hawks, hunters, pigeon fanciers (who would steal the pigeons), and distance itself posed dangers to homing pigeons at flight. In addition, messengers and pigeoneers had to be careful in preparing a homing pigeon for flight, since they could physically injure the animal; one ''U.S. War Department Technical Manual'' posed this sentence of caution: "NEVER WIND a string or rubber band around a pigeon's leg because it will stop the circulation and may cause the pigeon to lose its leg."<br />
<br />
==The Notion of a Network==<br />
<br />
What’s interesting to note is how, when employed by various governments for centuries, homing pigeons became part of the state’s communication network. Because communication “is the vital blood stream which makes all-out war possible” (Van de Water 154), and which keeps a government running and intact, it is no wonder that in times of war, many conquerors went straight for the homing pigeons. One such instance occurred in 1400 A.D., when Timur the Mongol conquered Iraq and tried to “eradicate the pigeon post along with the rest of the Islamic communications network” (James and Thorpe 527). People literally tried to shut down the network by killing homing pigeons, which in turn would cause the conquered state to crumble from the inside. This notion of a network, and a network’s destruction in times of war, is reminiscent of the worries that persist hundreds of years later regarding communication networks, safety, and terrorism. The reason why there’s no single central “line” for any widely used network (the Internet, telecommunications) is borne of the fear that all communication could be destructed in nuclear warfare should one part of the “network” be destroyed. The systems in place now are meant to prevent the tragedies that occurred centuries ago, when governments’ central “line” of homing pigeons could be killed off, and their communications networks destroyed along with their state.<br />
<br />
==The Extinction of a Medium==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Martha.JPG|thumb|left|Martha, the last homing pigeon.]]<br />
<br />
It can be argued that the homing pigeon network is in fact the only truly dead medium posted on this page, as the technology used is in a very literal sense extinct (see: [[Where do media go to die?]]). Unless there are truly monumental leaps in scientific knowledge regarding the revival of a long dead species (like in Jurassic Park), there is no recreating the homing pigeon. Animals, sadly, do not have easily read and reproducible patents.<br />
<br />
The radical materialism called for in the methodology of this project, echoing Derrida's concern for the "subjectile", is painfully clear in the destruction of an entire species of birds in order to send messages- primarily, as can be seen in this dossier, military messages of destruction themselves. One aspect of media- dead or alive- that may bear more intense scrutiny is the externalities of its use, and whether or not these externalities lead to the media's ultimate (self) destruction. What are the material necessities of a media that degrade the long term utility of the media itself, or of the social conditions that cause its use?<br />
<br />
In the case of homing pigeons, the answer is quite tragic. Due to the necessity to interrupt communications of enemy forces, as well as hazards such as hawks, weather, and illness (pop and hiss? noise? bad weather?), the population of homing pigeons rapidly decreased until only one pair- a male and a female- remained, held in the Cincinnati Zoo. With the death of the male in 1912, the species -and the medium- were doomed. <br />
<br />
==Works Cited==<br />
<br />
*Able, Kenneth P. "Orientation and Navigation: A Perspective on Fifty Years of Research." ''The Condor'', Vol. 97, No. 2. (May, 1995), pp. 592-604.<br />
<br />
*"A Homing Pigeon's Instinct." ''New York Times'' (1857-Current file); Aug 24, 1881; ProQuest Hostorical Newspapers The New York Times (1851-2004) pg. 2<br />
<br />
*"Back But With Half a Tail." ''New York Times'' (1857-Current file); Sep 23, 1883; ProQuest Hostorical Newspapers The New York Times (1851-2004) pg. 3<br />
<br />
*Dee, Jim. "Museum of Spies." ''Foreign Policy in Focus''. Albuquerque: Jan 25, 2007. <br />
<br />
*Holzmann, Gerard J. and Björn Pehrson. ''The Early History of Data Networks.'' California: IEEE Computer Society Press, 1995.<br />
<br />
*"Homing Pigeons on the Wing: The Birds Released From New Orleans Not Yet Heard From." ''New York Times'' (1857-Current file); Jul 12, 1885; ProQuest Hostorical Newspapers The New York Times (1851-2004) pg. 12<br />
<br />
*"Homing Pigeon Sea Service." ''New York Times'' (1857-Current file); Sep 2, 1883; ProQuest Hostorical Newspapers The New York Times (1851-2004) pg. 7<br />
<br />
*James, Peter and Nick Thorpe. ''Ancient Inventions.'' New York: Ballantine Books, 1994.<br />
<br />
*Jones, R.V. ''Most Secret War.'' London: Hamish Hamilton, 1978.<br />
<br />
*Van de Water, Marjorie. "Crisis Communication." ''The Science News-Letter'', Vol. 41, No. 10. (Mar. 7, 1942), pp. 154-157.<br />
<br />
*War Department Technical Manual TM-11-410, "The Homing Pigeon." War Department, U. S. Government Printing Office, January 1945.<br />
<br />
*"Wings Against Steam." ''London Times.'' Messenger (1876-1878); Sep 5, 1877; 46, 36, APS Online pg. 6</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Martha.JPG&diff=4882
File:Martha.JPG
2008-04-30T19:43:06Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div></div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Black_box&diff=4833
Black box
2008-04-24T02:06:56Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Blackbox.jpg|left]]<br />
<br />
Black Boxes- the "hiding" of aspects of an artefact- should be understood as both literal (in the case of most computers, including the [[NeXT Step]]), as well as metaphorical in regards to the artefact's history, possible uses, and technical considerations decided during its development. Media artefacts typically present themselves as black boxes- regardless of how much of their "guts" are visible, they are taken as cohesive, finished wholes to be used for a set purpose. Using the technology in a way not intended or against its design, [[the Hack]], requires to a certain extent the opening of the black box surrounding the technology.<br />
<br />
A prime example of this is the "[[obvious]]," i.e. those aspects of the technology that are used due to the particular historical context of the development of the artefact. These aspects, however, were not always obvious, and in most cases of dead media, no longer seem all that obvious anymore. <br />
<br />
Following Bruno Latour, scientific and technological progress includes both the opening and closing of "black boxes". The opening of black boxes involves the questioning or destabilizing of settled knowledge- even if this knowledge is of the lack of knowledge- and proposing alternative solutions/explanations to the problematic at hand. For example, the [[Hollerith Punch Card]] opened the black box of knowledge regarding the tabulating of census data. The closing of black boxes entails the settling of knowledge into fact- the inclusion of [[the arbitrary]] into a technology was a conscious, debatable (and in most instances, probably debated) decision during development, but once settled these choices are taken for granted. QWERTY is an example of a black boxed aspect of computers, although multiple attempts from its inception have tried to pry open this box.<br />
<br />
At its core, inquiries into dead media involves the opening of black boxes- it is the questioning not only of the material object, but also the socio-historical circumstances of its development and use. "Black box" is also the term used for the instrument that records flight information that can be collected and analyzed after a plane crash. In many ways, this may be a particularly striking metaphor for the inquiries pursued in the Dead Media Archive project.<br />
<br />
Methodological Questions:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Where_do_media_go_to_die%3F&diff=4830
Where do media go to die?
2008-04-23T21:08:47Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div>The bodily metaphor of death cannot account for the curious trajectory of media decline. Most dossiers are premised on the belief that media don't necessarily die when they just happen to break, and, conversely, that most 'dead' media may still work perfectly [http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php/The_Victrola fine]. Are we to understand the persistent availability of dead media for purchase on eBay, or for rediscovery in our basements and attics, as an opportunity for grave-robbing? Or, to push the metaphor to its limit, are our closets full of fully functional, intact bodies? There is no clear boundary between the living and dead with media: the failure of component parts (the brain, heart, etc…) does not a media death make. Instead, media either slowly recede into disuse—rendered obsolete, inoperable, or outmoded by subsequent media or shifting social, political, or cultural imaginaries—or finally go extinct. Is the problem once again one of [http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php/Data_Visualization_and_Defunct_Visual_Metaphors metaphor]? Does [http://www.brown.edu/Departments/MCM/amm/frame_about.html archaeology], to adopt an alternative language, always entail a resurrection of the dead, or might it be a return of the irrepressibly alive?<br />
<br />
Media never say die. And yet history is littered with media that no longer figure in contemporary practice. Perhaps this is where we should look for a new definition: practice. Rather than a binary distinction between the living and dead, based on a concept of bodily or systemic integrity (a pulse), might we instead develop a process-oriented definition? An archaeology of media is an account of slow decline, a history without a clear change-of-state. Obsolescence is our watchword. [http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php/Main_Page#Dead_Media_Dossiers Dead Media Dossiers] are stories of the ''becoming'' outmoded and, occasionally, inoperable. They are not obituaries. And beyond obsolescence, can we imagine a world where media actually cease to exist? Will there some day be a world free of America On-Line sign-up CDs? And if so, might this really constitute an extinction, an irrecoverable loss?<br />
<br />
==Obsolescence==<br />
Media and representational practices can fall into disuse for two reasons: subsequent media or practices perform a similar function more efficiently (with efficiency broadly conceived, to include such ineffable qualities such as style and fashion), or the ecological system subsequent media or practices introduce renders earlier media or practices inoperable. <br />
===Outmoded===<br />
<br />
===Inoperable===<br />
This is the question of technical standards. How do you make use of a device whose interface no longer works with any existing technology?<br />
<br />
http://obsoleteskills.com/Skills/Skills<br />
<br />
===Planned Obsolescence===<br />
<br />
Some media were born to die. In some cases technologies are designed with the knowledge that they will be either obsolete or useless within a relatively short time frame. This may be due to the business strategy of the designers, an explicit understanding that technological advancements will quickly obsolesce the current artifact, or a mixture of both.<br />
<br />
==Extinction==<br />
Can media go the way of the Dodo? Do lapsed patents, legal prohibitions, the termination of manufacturing cycles, or any such events fall into such a category? Or must a media technology be both unusable and unreproducible for it to be extinct? Indeed, the reproducible of a specific technology is what makes patents so important: the schematic itself must be protected.<br />
<br />
http://flickr.com/photos/adubber/sets/72157600179591602/</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Where_do_media_go_to_die%3F&diff=4827
Where do media go to die?
2008-04-23T20:02:53Z
<p>Trh249: /* Obsolescence */</p>
<hr />
<div>The bodily metaphor of death cannot account for the curious trajectory of media decline. Most dossiers are premised on the belief that media don't necessarily die when they just happen to break, and, conversely, that most 'dead' media may still work perfectly [http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php/The_Victrola fine]. Are we to understand the persistent availability of dead media for purchase on eBay, or for rediscovery in our basements and attics, as an opportunity for grave-robbing? Or, to push the metaphor to its limit, are our closets full of fully functional, intact bodies? There is no clear boundary between the living and dead with media: the failure of component parts (the brain, heart, etc…) does not a media death make. Instead, media either slowly recede into disuse—rendered obsolete, inoperable, or outmoded by subsequent media or shifting social, political, or cultural imaginaries—or finally go extinct. Is the problem once again one of [http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php/Data_Visualization_and_Defunct_Visual_Metaphors metaphor]? Does [http://www.brown.edu/Departments/MCM/amm/frame_about.html archaeology], to adopt an alternative language, always entail a resurrection of the dead, or might it be a return of the irrepressibly alive?<br />
<br />
Media never say die. And yet history is littered with media that no longer figure in contemporary practice. Perhaps this is where we should look for a new definition: practice. Rather than a binary distinction between the living and dead, based on a concept of bodily or systemic integrity (a pulse), might we instead develop a process-oriented definition? An archaeology of media is an account of slow decline, a history without a clear change-of-state. Obsolescence is our watchword. [http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php/Main_Page#Dead_Media_Dossiers Dead Media Dossiers] are stories of the ''becoming'' outmoded and, occasionally, inoperable. They are not obituaries. And beyond obsolescence, can we imagine a world where media actually cease to exist? Will there some day be a world free of America On-Line sign-up CDs? And if so, might this really constitute an extinction, an irrecoverable loss?<br />
<br />
==Obsolescence==<br />
Media and representational practices can fall into disuse for two reasons: subsequent media or practices perform a similar function more efficiently (with efficiency broadly conceived, to include such ineffable qualities such as style and fashion), or the ecological system subsequent media or practices introduce renders earlier media or practices inoperable. <br />
===Outmoded===<br />
<br />
===Inoperable===<br />
This is the question of technical standards. How do you make use of a device whose interface no longer works with any existing technology?<br />
<br />
http://obsoleteskills.com/Skills/Skills<br />
<br />
===Planned Obsolescence===<br />
<br />
==Extinction==<br />
Can media go the way of the Dodo? Do lapsed patents, legal prohibitions, the termination of manufacturing cycles, or any such events fall into such a category? Or must a media technology be both unusable and unreproducible for it to be extinct? Indeed, the reproducible of a specific technology is what makes patents so important: the schematic itself must be protected.<br />
<br />
http://flickr.com/photos/adubber/sets/72157600179591602/</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Black_box&diff=4826
Black box
2008-04-23T20:01:43Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Blackbox.jpg|left]]<br />
<br />
Black Boxes- the "hiding" of aspects of an artefact- should be understood as both literal (in the case of most computers, including the [[NeXT Step]]), as well as metaphorical in regards to the artefact's history, possible uses, and technical considerations decided during its development. Media artifacts typically present themselves as black boxes- regardless of how much of their "guts" are visible, they are taken as cohesive, finished wholes to be used for a set purpose. Using the technology in a way not intended or against its design, [[the Hack]], requires to a certain extent the opening of the black box surrounding the technology.<br />
<br />
A prime example of this is the [["obvious"]], i.e. those aspects of the technology that are used due to the particular historical context of the development of the artefact. These aspects, however, were not always obvious, and in most cases of dead media, no longer seem all that obvious anymore. <br />
<br />
Following Bruno Latour, scientific and technological progress includes both the opening and closing of "black boxes". The opening of black boxes involves the questioning or destabilizing of settled knowledge- even if this knowledge is of the lack of knowledge- and proposing alternative solutions/explanations to the problematic at hand. For example, the [[Hollerith Cards]] opened the black box of knowledge regarding the tabulating of census data. The closing of black boxes entails the settling of knowledge into fact- the inclusion of [[the arbitrary]] into a technology was a conscious, debatable (and in most instances, probably debated) decision during development, but once settled these choices are taken for granted. QWERTY is an example of a black boxed aspect of computers, although multiple attempts from its inception have tried to pry open this box.<br />
<br />
At its core, inquiries into dead media involves the opening of black boxes- it is the questioning not only of the material object, but also the socio-historical circumstances of its development and use. "Black box" is also the term used for the instrument that records flight information that can be collected and analyzed after a plane crash. In many ways, this may be a particularly striking metaphor for the inquiries pursued in the Dead Media Archive project.<br />
<br />
Methodological Questions:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Blackbox.jpg&diff=4813
File:Blackbox.jpg
2008-04-23T18:55:15Z
<p>Trh249: http://www.fortunespawn.com/</p>
<hr />
<div>http://www.fortunespawn.com/</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=4806
Main Page
2008-04-23T18:47:30Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Media Archaeology'''<br />
<br />
[http://cultureandcommunication.org/galloway/2008spr-MediaArchaeology.html Media Archaeology course syllabus] (Spring 2008)<br />
<br />
Over the last decade or so, scholars in several disciplines have embarked on a series of media-archaeological excavations, sifting through the layers of early and obsolete practices and technologies of communication. The archaeological metaphor evokes both the desire to recover material traces of the past and the imperative to situate those traces in their social, cultural, and political contexts--while always watching our steps. This graduate seminar will examine some of the most important contributions to the field of media archaeology.<br />
<br />
The course follows a research studio format in which students undertake archaeological projects of their own in the area of forgotten, obsolete, or otherwise "dead" media technologies. This might include papyrus, Athanasius Kircher's seventeenth-century magic lantern, or the common slide projector, discontinued by Kodak in 2004. Our goal is to introduce students to the skills and resources necessary for producing rigorous research on such obsolete and obscure media. It will include an exposure to scholarship in media archaeology; an intensive introduction to research methods; instruction on the localization and utilization of word, image, and sound archives; and an emphasis on restoring media artifacts to their proper social and cultural context. The course stems from the premise that media archaeology is best undertaken, like any archaeological project, collaboratively. Hence the course follows a research studio model commonly used in disciplines such as architecture or design.<br />
<br />
= Dead Media Dossiers = <br />
<br />
{| cellpadding="0" cellspacing="20"<br />
<br />
<br />
||<br />
<br />
[[3D Television]]<br />
<br />
[[8-track Tape]]<br />
<br />
[[Autopen]]<br />
<br />
[[Camera Lucida]]<br />
<br />
[[Camera Obscura]]<br />
<br />
[[Chirograph (Cyrograph)]]<br />
<br />
[[Civil Defense Siren]]<br />
<br />
[[Credit Card Imprinter]]<br />
<br />
[[Daguerreotype]]<br />
<br />
[[Discipline]]<br />
<br />
[[Data Visualization and Defunct Visual Metaphors]]<br />
<br />
[[Ear Trumpet]]<br />
<br />
[[Electric Pen]]<br />
<br />
[[Experiential Typewriter]]<br />
<br />
[[Glass Harmonica]]<br />
<br />
[[Hierarchy]]<br />
<br />
[[Hollerith Punch Card]]<br />
<br />
[[Homing Pigeons]]<br />
<br />
[[Hotel Annunciator]]<br />
<br />
<br />
||<br />
<br />
[[Kinora]]<br />
<br />
[[Magic Lantern]]<br />
<br />
[[Marine Chronometer]]<br />
<br />
[[The Market]]<br />
<br />
[[Medieval Mariner's Compass]]<br />
<br />
[[Mechanical Television]]<br />
<br />
[[Megalethoscope]]<br />
<br />
[[MiniDisc]]<br />
<br />
[[Minitel]]<br />
<br />
[[Movable Type]]<br />
<br />
[[Mystical Writing Pad]]<br />
<br />
[[Nansen Passport]]<br />
<br />
[[Newspaper via Radio Facsimile]]<br />
<br />
[[NeXT Step]]<br />
<br />
[[Notificator]]<br />
<br />
[[Panorama]]<br />
<br />
[[Peruvian Quipu]]<br />
<br />
[[Phonograph Doll]]<br />
<br />
||<br />
<br />
[[Photographic Gun]]<br />
<br />
[[Player Piano]]<br />
<br />
[[Pneumatic Tubes]]<br />
<br />
[[Political Effigies]]<br />
<br />
[[Roentgen Ray Tube]]<br />
<br />
[[Semaphore Telegraph]]<br />
<br />
[[Shorthand]]<br />
<br />
[[Smell Organ]]<br />
<br />
[[Spirit Duplicator]]<br />
<br />
[[Standardization]]<br />
<br />
[[Steenbeck]]<br />
<br />
[[Stereoscope]]<br />
<br />
[[Talking Book]]<br />
<br />
[[Telautograph]]<br />
<br />
[[Telharmonium]]<br />
<br />
[[Typewriter]]<br />
<br />
[[The Victrola]]<br />
<br />
[[Wax Cylinder]]<br />
<br />
[[Zuse palimpsest]]<br />
<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= Research Methods =<br />
<br />
[[Media:Research_methods.pdf|Guidelines on Research Methods]] (PDF)<br />
<br />
= Critical Techniques =<br />
<br />
As a group we are developing a series of techniques that help facilitate the analysis of dead media artifacts. These questions are provisional and may not be appropriate for all artifacts. They are meant as tools for critical exploration. <br />
<br />
* "[[Pops and hisses]]" -- Pops and hisses refers to the background noise often heard on phonograph recordings resulting from inconsistencies in the underlying material. Research Question: What are the unavoidable, obtrusive material qualities of the substrate itself that enter into the medium's overall system of representation? <br />
<br />
* [[Skeuomorph, or the "click"]] -- Single-lens reflex (SLR) cameras make a clicking sound when taking a picture. The click results from a mechanical operation: an internal mirror moves aside and the shutter opens, exposing the film to light. Many of today's digital cameras have no shutter and no internal mirror, yet they still simulate the click using a digital audio sample. Why? Research Question: What qualities of the artifact are unnecessary at the material level but are still nevertheless necessary at the semiotic level? Where is the "click"? <br />
<br />
* Remediation -- Like the "click," remediation refers to the process through which older media formats are simulated, extended, coopted, modified, tamed, or rendered obsolete by new media formats. Research Questions: What came before this artifact? What newer medium came after? What traits are lost or preserved in the historical transformation from one system to another? <br />
<br />
* "Functional nonsense" -- Functional nonsense refers to actual material qualities of the medium that are necessary for the medium to function correctly but which have no semantic or semiotic purpose. A good illustration is the [[Chirograph (Cyrograph)|chirograph]] which requires that some word -- by custom it was often the word "chirograph" -- be inscribed across the midsection of a document. The word is then cut in half, certifying and authenticating the two pieces. The word "chirograph" is therefore highly functional, but semantically irrelevant. Research Question: What qualities of the artifact are unnecessary at the semiotic or semantic level but are nevertheless crucial to its functioning correctly?<br />
<br />
* Encoding -- Research Question: What symbolic system is used in the medium to encode and decode messages? <br />
<br />
* Digital versus analog -- Research Questions: What parts of the artifact conform to a model of representation using discrete sample points, and what parts use a continuously variable input? Are the two hybridized and if so how? <br />
<br />
* The "obvious" -- In every medium there are techniques and design conventions that result from the prevalent tendencies of the historical situation. For example, the problem of writing and reproduction in the modern period was "solved" using mechanical levers, metal type, presses and inks, while the problem of writing and reproduction in the late twentieth century was solved using an entirely different set of techniques: digital code, microchips, and LCDs. Research Question: What aspects of the medium result from large scale paradigms appropriate to the historical context? <br />
<br />
* The "arbitrary" -- Every medium also contains entirely unmotivated and unexplainable traits. Western writing runs left to right, top to bottom. But this convention is arbitrary. Research Question: What specific aspects of the medium have no material or semiotic reason for being? <br />
<br />
* Formal prohibitions/affordances -- Communications media often put clear limitations on where and how messages can originate and be received. Radio began as a two-way medium, but evolved into a broadcast medium. Research Questions: Who can read in this medium? Who can write in this medium? Is there an asymmetrical relationship between those who can send and those who can receive? What types of values are embedded in the affordances of the technology?<br />
<br />
* The "Hack" -- Given a set of formal prohibitions, do there exist alternate practices of use that change the intended outcome of the medium? For example, DJs "hack" record players when they "spin" records, using their hands to overcome the formal prohibitions of the record player, resulting in the advent of a new style of music. [[Hacking this assignment]]. [TODO: add to this -- mention improvisation, play.]<br />
<br />
* The "Cake Mix" effect -- Research Questions: What part of the process is streamlined, mechanized, or determined in advance, and what part of the process must be performed by the user? For example, Karaoke machines mechanize the instrumental part of a song, and the user performs the vocals. [TODO: add to this] Prior to the use of tape as a means of recording, the composer had to work with a finite set of possibilities and sounds. With the advent of tape, the sonic substance became malleable, and cuttable. What effect does the mechanized portion of the process have on the emergence of the new? What effect does the streamlined portion of the process have on the overall mode of representation?<br />
<br />
* [[The "Reversal"]] -- Is there a point where maximum efficiency within a medium forces it into obsolescence? Mapmaking was ridden with errors due to difficulties in measuring longitude, but once the Marine Chronometer made it possible to plot the exact coordinates of a given position in space, and the grid mapped upon geographic representations was perfected, it was no longer necessary to use a map for navigation since a course could be plotted without any geographic references. (Additional question/theory: Is a "sampling" medium capable of reversal, or is it only threatened by upgraded mediums that are more efficient? Is the Reversal only possible in a "programming" scenario?)<br />
<br />
* [[The "Break Boundary"]] -- Research Questions: Is there a point beyond which "the system generated by the artifact suddenly changes into another or passes some point of no return in its dynamic processes?" Or what specific reconfigurations in the spatio-temporal framework surrounding the media environment of the artifact might "break" the dynamics which it was attended to address? [DO OTHERS AGREE THIS IS WORTH ADDRESSING? a suggestion via McLuhan that might be worth talking about - perhaps an attribute that doesn't apply to the material framework of the object, but maybe one that is crucial in establishing the artifact's relevance and obsolescence?]<br />
<br />
* "Bad Weather" (non-diegetic influences?) -- The [[Semaphore Telegraph]] was unable to operate in fog. External inputs often influence the proper functioning of media. Research Questions: What external events exist that might cause the medium to operate in flawed or unexpected ways? Does the medium try to shield itself from the outside world? If so, how does this change the format in question?<br />
<br />
* "Guts" -- Some dead media, like the [[NeXT Step]], hide their internal guts inside a [[black box]]. Others like the [[Kinora]] expose their inner workings for all to see. The way in which a media object alternately reveals or hides its insides greatly influences how it is understood, used, and analyzed. Research Questions: Does the medium in question hide or reveal its own internal functioning? If the guts are displayed, does this "technologize" the medium or change it in other ways? If the guts are hidden, does this reify or fetishize the object in question?<br />
<br />
* "Iris vs. Hermes" -- Most media can be charted on a continuum between Iris and Hermes. Both Iris and Hermes were Greek gods of communication; Iris was a messenger for Hera, and Hermes for Zeus. Yet while Hermes facilitated communication by accompanying messages, guiding trade, appearing alongside travelers and otherwise chaperoning interconnections between people, Iris relayed messages by immanently internalizing them in the physically of her own body. For Iris, the medium is the message. Hermes however was more of a letter carrier, keeping the outer envelop distinct from the inner content of the message. Research Questions: Does the medium maintain a separation between the symbolic layer of the medium and the material substrate? Or does the physicality of the medium itself mean something without recourse to surface inscriptions?<br />
<br />
* [["The Sample vs. the Program"]] (Witnessing vs Interpreting / Feeling vs Perceiving) -- Some media can be inscribed by simply being turned on and allowed to feel, or sample the content they remediate - yet other media generate complete nonsense unless a highly specialized and refined language code or aesthetic has been mastered and applied in the process of inscription. Research Questions: Does the medium demand a great deal of analysis before the act of inscription, or does it appropriate material that can be processed and interpreted later? Does the noise of the medium illustrate a condition external to the user's actions (ie background noise) or does the noise illustrate imperfect execution of a symbolic system (misspellings, syntactical errors, grammatical nonsense, freudian slips etc.)? Does the medium demand a complex understanding of the given content (embodying an informational cultural bias) or does it appear to witness with an inhuman objectivity?<br />
<br />
* [[Mediatic Etymology]] - Proposes a methodology for theorizing the existence of dead media by inverting the process of remediation.<br />
<br />
* [[Where do media go to die?]] -- Some artifacts or representational practices may no longer perform a useful function or satisfy a popular demand in the current media ecology, but they don't necessarily disappear. Research question: What constitutes the moment of death? Is the artifact or representational practice obsolete (outmoded or inoperable) or outright extinct?<br />
<br />
= Background =<br />
<br />
Some entries in the archive are drawn from the [http://www.deadmedia.org Dead Media Project], an email list devoted to the topic started by [http://www.well.com/conf/mirrorshades Bruce Sterling] and more recently moderated by Tom Jennings. The email list is now dead.<br />
<br />
= Special Pages =<br />
<br />
[[:Special:Upload|Upload a File]]<br />
<br />
[[:Special:Allpages|All Pages]]<br />
<br />
[[:Special:Imagelist|All Uploaded Files]]</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4706
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T20:47:10Z
<p>Trh249: /* More Alive Than the Living */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|thumb|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, the peasant Mitrofan Nikitin, who was viewing Lenin's body, took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's corpse and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true''<br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
Lenin was just the first of many Communist heads of state to be embalmed. Party leaders who were embalmed include:<br />
<br />
[[Image:Check HoS.JPG|thumb|right|Klement Gottwald]]<br />
[[Image:Anoglan HOS.JPG|thumb|right|Agostinho Neto]]<br />
<br />
*Georgi Dimitrov, head of the Bulgarian Communist Party<br />
*Horloogiyn Choybalsan, leader of Mongolia<br />
*Klement Gottwald, leader of the Czech CP<br />
*Agostinho Neto, leader of the People’s Republic of Angola<br />
*Lindon Forbers Burnham, President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana<br />
*Kim Il Sung, leader of North Korea<br />
*Ho Chi Minh, President of North Vietnam<br />
*Mao Zedong, leader of the People’s Republic of China<br />
*Joseph Stalin, leader of Soviet Russia<br />
<br />
Most of these corpses have been at this time cremated or buried, albeit for differing reasons. Horllogiyn Choybalsan was in fact murdered by Stalin’s regime, and was only afforded short-term embalming in order to send his corpse back to Mongolia. Georgi Dimitrov and Klement Gottwald were both interred after the fall of Stalinism. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Together Again.JPG|thumb|left|A short-live reunion]]<br />
<br />
Even Joseph Stalin, who was placed on display next to Lenin and had his name added to the face of the Mausoleum, was quietly removed and buried following Khrushchev’s speech decrying his crimes.<br />
<br />
Ho Chi Minh was embalmed under the worst of circumstances, deep in the jungle and under constant fear of American attack or discovery. One North Vietnamese official is quoted as saying that had Minh’s body been captured, they would have exchanged all of the American POWs in exchange for his safe return. He was not discovered, and his body still lies in its Mausoleum.<br />
<br />
Mao Zedong was the only leader on this list not to have been embalmed by Russian specialists. By the time Mao died, Sino-Soviet relations had soured and it was out of the question to share such prized technology. The Chinese had to turn instead to the Vietnamese for assistance, and created a crystal sarcophagus to house his bodily remains. There is speculation, however, that the Vietnamese were not able to correctly impart the expertise of the Russians, and that Mao’s waxy hue is due not to his chemical bath but rather to his artificial composition.<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Dancing on the Grave.jpg|thumb|left|Party members (Including Stalin, second from left) stand atop the Mausoleum. One member of this group had already fallen from grace, as can be seen by his unceremonious removal from the photograph]]<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4705
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T20:46:30Z
<p>Trh249: /* Death Becomes Them */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|thumb|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, the peasant Mitrofan Nikitin, who was viewing Lenin's body, took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's corpse and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true''<br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
Lenin was just the first of many Communist heads of state to be embalmed. Party leaders who were embalmed include:<br />
<br />
[[Image:Check HoS.JPG|thumb|right|Klement Gottwald]]<br />
[[Image:Anoglan HOS.JPG|thumb|right|Agostinho Neto]]<br />
<br />
*Georgi Dimitrov, head of the Bulgarian Communist Party<br />
*Horloogiyn Choybalsan, leader of Mongolia<br />
*Klement Gottwald, leader of the Czech CP<br />
*Agostinho Neto, leader of the People’s Republic of Angola<br />
*Lindon Forbers Burnham, President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana<br />
*Kim Il Sung, leader of North Korea<br />
*Ho Chi Minh, President of North Vietnam<br />
*Mao Zedong, leader of the People’s Republic of China<br />
*Joseph Stalin, leader of Soviet Russia<br />
<br />
Most of these corpses have been at this time cremated or buried, albeit for differing reasons. Horllogiyn Choybalsan was in fact murdered by Stalin’s regime, and was only afforded short-term embalming in order to send his corpse back to Mongolia. Georgi Dimitrov and Klement Gottwald were both interred after the fall of Stalinism. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Together Again.JPG|thumb|left|A short-live reunion]]<br />
<br />
Even Joseph Stalin, who was placed on display next to Lenin and had his name added to the face of the Mausoleum, was quietly removed and buried following Khrushchev’s speech decrying his crimes.<br />
<br />
Ho Chi Minh was embalmed under the worst of circumstances, deep in the jungle and under constant fear of American attack or discovery. One North Vietnamese official is quoted as saying that had Minh’s body been captured, they would have exchanged all of the American POWs in exchange for his safe return. He was not discovered, and his body still lies in its Mausoleum.<br />
<br />
Mao Zedong was the only leader on this list not to have been embalmed by Russian specialists. By the time Mao died, Sino-Soviet relations had soured and it was out of the question to share such prized technology. The Chinese had to turn instead to the Vietnamese for assistance, and created a crystal sarcophagus to house his bodily remains. There is speculation, however, that the Vietnamese were not able to correctly impart the expertise of the Russians, and that Mao’s waxy hue is due not to his chemical bath but rather to his artificial composition.<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Dancing on the Grave.jpg|thumb|left|Party members (Including Stalin, second from left) stand atop the Mausoleum. One member of this group had already fallen from grace, as can be seen by his unceremonious removal from the photograph]]<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4704
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T20:46:07Z
<p>Trh249: /* Death Becomes Them */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|thumb|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, the peasant Mitrofan Nikitin, who was viewing Lenin's body, took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's corpse and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true''<br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
Lenin was just the first of many Communist heads of state to be embalmed. Party leaders who were embalmed include:<br />
<br />
[[Image:Check HoS.JPG|thumb|right|Klement Gottwald]]<br />
[[Image:Anoglan HOS.JPG|thumb|right|Agostinho Neto]]<br />
<br />
*Georgi Dimitrov, head of the Bulgarian Communist Party<br />
*Horloogiyn Choybalsan, leader of Mongolia<br />
*Klement Gottwald, leader of the Czech CP<br />
*Agostinho Neto, leader of the People’s Republic of Angola<br />
*Lindon Forbers Burnham, President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana<br />
*Kim Il Sung, leader of North Korea<br />
*Ho Chi Minh, President of North Vietnam<br />
*Mao Zedong, leader of the People’s Republic of China<br />
*Joseph Stalin, leader of Soviet Russia<br />
<br />
Most of these corpses have been at this time cremated or buried, albeit for differing reasons. Horllogiyn Choybalsan was in fact murdered by Stalin’s regime, and was only afforded short-term embalming in order to send his corpse back to Mongolia. Georgi Dimitrov and Klement Gottwald were both interred after the fall of Stalinism. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Together Again.JPG|Thumb|left|A short-live reunion]]<br />
<br />
Even Joseph Stalin, who was placed on display next to Lenin and had his name added to the face of the Mausoleum, was quietly removed and buried following Khrushchev’s speech decrying his crimes.<br />
<br />
Ho Chi Minh was embalmed under the worst of circumstances, deep in the jungle and under constant fear of American attack or discovery. One North Vietnamese official is quoted as saying that had Minh’s body been captured, they would have exchanged all of the American POWs in exchange for his safe return. He was not discovered, and his body still lies in its Mausoleum.<br />
<br />
Mao Zedong was the only leader on this list not to have been embalmed by Russian specialists. By the time Mao died, Sino-Soviet relations had soured and it was out of the question to share such prized technology. The Chinese had to turn instead to the Vietnamese for assistance, and created a crystal sarcophagus to house his bodily remains. There is speculation, however, that the Vietnamese were not able to correctly impart the expertise of the Russians, and that Mao’s waxy hue is due not to his chemical bath but rather to his artificial composition.<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Dancing on the Grave.jpg|thumb|left|Party members (Including Stalin, second from left) stand atop the Mausoleum. One member of this group had already fallen from grace, as can be seen by his unceremonious removal from the photograph]]<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Anoglan_HOS.JPG&diff=4703
File:Anoglan HOS.JPG
2008-04-16T20:45:58Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Together_Again.JPG&diff=4702
File:Together Again.JPG
2008-04-16T20:45:39Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4701
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T20:38:52Z
<p>Trh249: /* Death Becomes Them */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|thumb|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, the peasant Mitrofan Nikitin, who was viewing Lenin's body, took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's corpse and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true''<br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
Lenin was just the first of many Communist heads of state to be embalmed. Party leaders who were embalmed include:<br />
<br />
*Georgi Dimitrov, head of the Bulgarian Communist Party<br />
*Horloogiyn Choybalsan, leader of Mongolia<br />
*Klement Gottwald, leader of the Czech CP<br />
*Agostinho Neto, leader of the People’s Republic of Angola<br />
*Lindon Forbers Burnham, President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana<br />
*Kim Il Sung, leader of North Korea<br />
*Ho Chi Minh, President of North Vietnam<br />
*Mao Zedong, leader of the People’s Republic of China<br />
*Joseph Stalin, leader of Soviet Russia<br />
<br />
Most of these corpses have been at this time cremated or buried, albeit for differing reasons. Horllogiyn Choybalsan was in fact murdered by Stalin’s regime, and was only afforded short-term embalming in order to send his corpse back to Mongolia. Georgi Dimitrov and Klement Gottwald were both interred after the fall of Stalinism. Even Joseph Stalin, who was placed on display next to Lenin and had his name added to the face of the Mausoleum, was quietly removed and buried following Khrushchev’s speech decrying his crimes.<br />
<br />
Ho Chi Minh was embalmed under the worst of circumstances, deep in the jungle and under constant fear of American attack or discovery. One North Vietnamese official is quoted as saying that had Minh’s body been captured, they would have exchanged all of the American POWs in exchange for his safe return. He was not discovered, and his body still lies in its Mausoleum.<br />
<br />
Mao Zedong was the only leader on this list not to have been embalmed by Russian specialists. By the time Mao died, Sino-Soviet relations had soured and it was out of the question to share such prized technology. The Chinese had to turn instead to the Vietnamese for assistance, and created a crystal sarcophagus to house his bodily remains. There is speculation, however, that the Vietnamese were not able to correctly impart the expertise of the Russians, and that Mao’s waxy hue is due not to his chemical bath but rather to his artificial composition.<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Dancing on the Grave.jpg|thumb|left|Party members (Including Stalin, second from left) stand atop the Mausoleum. One member of this group had already fallen from grace, as can be seen by his unceremonious removal from the photograph]]<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Dancing_on_the_Grave.jpg&diff=4700
File:Dancing on the Grave.jpg
2008-04-16T20:13:03Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4699
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T20:12:32Z
<p>Trh249: /* Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|thumb|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, the peasant Mitrofan Nikitin, who was viewing Lenin's body, took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's corpse and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true''<br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Dancing on the Grave.jpg|thumb|left|Party members (Including Stalin, second from left) stand atop the Mausoleum. One member of this group had already fallen from grace, as can be seen by his unceremonious removal from the photograph]]<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4698
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T20:10:10Z
<p>Trh249: /* More Alive Than the Living */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|thumb|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, the peasant Mitrofan Nikitin, who was viewing Lenin's body, took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's corpse and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true''<br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4697
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:58:57Z
<p>Trh249: /* Goodbye Lenin? */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|thumb|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4696
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:57:01Z
<p>Trh249: /* Goodbye Lenin? */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4695
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:56:40Z
<p>Trh249: /* Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Being Green ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4694
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:50:17Z
<p>Trh249: /* Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Virtual M.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Virtual_M.JPG&diff=4693
File:Virtual M.JPG
2008-04-16T19:49:44Z
<p>Trh249: http://www.lenin.ru/index_e.htm</p>
<hr />
<div>http://www.lenin.ru/index_e.htm</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4692
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:48:18Z
<p>Trh249: /* Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
[[Image:VM.JPG|thumb|right|The Virtual Mausoleum]]<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4691
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:44:23Z
<p>Trh249: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Villetard, Xavier, Simon Chilvers, and First Run/Icarus Films. 2006. Forever Lenin. Brooklyn, NY: First Run/Icarus Films,. videorecording.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4690
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:43:34Z
<p>Trh249: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2000. Dreamworld and catastrophe : the passing of mass utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4689
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:42:46Z
<p>Trh249: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Crazy_Lenin.jpg&diff=4688
File:Crazy Lenin.jpg
2008-04-16T19:41:38Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Lenin_and_Stalin.jpg&diff=4687
File:Lenin and Stalin.jpg
2008-04-16T19:41:06Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Siberia.jpg&diff=4686
File:Siberia.jpg
2008-04-16T19:40:48Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Building.jpg&diff=4685
File:Building.jpg
2008-04-16T19:40:25Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Bring_out_your_dead!.jpg&diff=4684
File:Bring out your dead!.jpg
2008-04-16T19:39:55Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4683
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T19:39:15Z
<p>Trh249: /* Better Dead: Communist Embalming */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward I (otherwise knowb as Edward the Confessor), who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. As Chamberlain and Pearson argue, these funerals had been "low-key and even shambolic affairs. Far from venerating the royal corpse, the court appeared to treat it as an unpleasant problem: William I's corpse was left unattended for rather too long and then disintegrated when it was being stuffed into its coffin. The burial service for this great king was conducted as quickly as possible because he smelt so bad" (26). The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry II. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy. The funeral procession, from this point on, no longer showcased the unconcealed or concealed body, but instead the effigy. The effigy became the central object of the procession, with scant attention paid the body proper. Indeed, most procession increasingly lead with a highly adorned effigy and concluded with the unembellished coffin that housed the bare body. The unusual use of an effigy in the funeral procession of Edward II, which seemed more a matter of happenstance and a function of necessity, nonetheless established a new and long-lasting tradition. As Woodward again points out, “Edward III was buried within two weeks of his death and thus public display of his corpse was possible but nevertheless an effigy was made” (66). This practice would persist until the time of James I. <br />
<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
<br />
Although Kantorowicz believes this practice would only make sense in the context of a pre-existing juridial concept of the so-called 'King's Two Bodies,' it may well be that this discourse on sovereignty was thrust upon the effigy. Kantorowicz's genealogy of embodied sovereignty, wherein the king is the unification of the sovereign royal body and sovereign body politic...<br />
<br />
“No matter how we may wish to explain the introduction of the effigy in 1327, with the funeral of Edward II there begins, to our knowledge, the custom of placing on top of the coffin the ‘roiall representation’ or ‘personage,’ a figure or image ad similitudinem regis, which—made of wood or of leather padded with bombast and covered with plaster—was dressed in the coronation garments or, later on, in the parliamentary robe. The effigy displayed the insignia of sovereignty: on the head of the image (worked apparently since Henry VII after the death mask) there was the crown, while the artificial hand held orb and scepter. Wherever the circumstances were not to the contrary, the effigies were henceforth used at the burials of royalty: enclosed in the coffin of lead, which itself was encased in a casket of wood, there rested the corpse of the king, his mortal and normally visible—though now invisible—body natural; whereas his normally invisible body politic was on this occasion visibly displayed by the effigy in its pompous regalia: a persona ficta—the effigy—impersonating a persona ficta—the Dignitas” (Kantorowicz, 420-421)<br />
<br />
The King is dead! Long live the King!<br />
<br />
“We should not forget that the uncanny juxtapostion of a decaying corpse and an immortal Dignity as diplayed by the sepulchral monuments, or the sharp dichotomy of the lugubrious funeral train surrouding the corpse and the triumphant float of an effigy-dummy wrapped in regalia, was fostered, after all, in the same ground, came from the same world of thought and sentiment, evolved in the same intellectual climate, in which the juridical tenets concerning the ‘King’s two Bodies’ achieved their final formulation. In both instances, there was a body mortal, God-made and therefore ‘subject to all Infirmities that come by Nature or Accident,’ set against another body, man-made and therefore immortal, which is ‘utterly void of Infancy and old Age and other Defects and Imbecilities’” (436).<br />
<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
<br />
"[I]n the Middle Ages the king was buried with his crown and regalia, or copies thereof; now, however, he was naked or in his winding sheet, and he came to heaven as a poor wretch, whereas the regalia were reserved for the effigy, the true beater of royal glory and the symbol of a Dignity 'which never dies'" (424).<br />
<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
1625—Constitutional Monarchy: The decoupling of the head of state and the head of government<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Bring out your dead!.jpg|thumb|left|People wait in line in the cold for the chance to see Lenin's corpse.]]<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|right|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Crazy Lenin.jpg|left|Enjoying Every Sunset]]<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin and Stalin.jpg|thumb|right|If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...]]<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
[[Image:building.jpg|thumb|left|Making room for all that soveriegnty]]<br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Siberia.jpg|thumb|right|Lenin's temporary home in Siberia.]]<br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Second Life Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's. The reason for these complex simulations was the need to test new methods of preservation and to troubleshoot possible developing problems- both procedures too risky to attempt on Lenin’s actual body.<br />
<br />
These “body doubles”, often with beards trimmed to match Lenin’s trademark goatee, serve as a standing reserve of corporeal ephemerality upon which the skirmishes against the real are fought before traversing the battlefield of the symbolic that infuses Lenin’s body. Yet these copies of the copy (for Lenin’s body, it must be admitted, is a simulacrum of its former self- one that has significantly improved upon the original) use as their subjectile actual bodies- in life they may have been Ivan Ivanovich, Dmitri Gregorovich or Bob Jones- in death they are Vladimir Illich Lenin, complete with Mausoleum and private chemical bath.<br />
<br />
The fight against Lenin’s material decomposition requires his replication, but the power of his legitimacy requires that he remain unique. This paradox haunted not only the bodies of those doomed to be test-Lenins, but also his political successors. Unlike the wax effigies that were mere “way-stations” between sovereigns, Lenin’s body was intended to be an eternal vessel of Soviet power. It was not possible to share this power without diminishing it- a lesson Stalin learned too late. Soviet heads of state could stand on Lenin’s Mausoleum, but they could never truly enter it. This held true in other Communist countries- Mausoleums were solitary affairs.<br />
<br />
At the website www.lenin.ru, it is possible (after downloading the requisite add-ons) a virtual tour of Lenin’s Mausoleum. Unlike the actual Mausoleum, there is no long line to wait in, no restrictions on cameras, and no heavily armed soldiers ensuring that you linger too long. In fact, you can linger for as long as you wish, rotating the camera to most conceivable angles (from the perspective of a spectator), and zoom in and out. Lenin’s body is also there digitally reproduced in his eternal slumber.<br />
<br />
His cuticles, however, are flesh-colored.<br />
<br />
This virtual Lenin has shifted from the symbolic to the imaginary- fully detached from the material subjectile that decays, that holds and holds onto the real, the digital body of Lenin is nothing but simulacrum. The digital Mausoleum is a mirror image of the Mausoleum on Red Square, albeit in a manner diametrically opposed to the test Mausoleum with its fake Lenins. The digital Mausoleum is a replica of the idealized form, devoid of material substance and the decay that accompanies it. The test Mausoleum is present only in and for its dirty, infecting materiality- it takes on the decay and rot of the Red Square Mausoleum without laying claim to any of its symbolic power.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
=== Dead Presidents ===<br />
When important political figures die, there is usually a public ceremony, followed by a private burial of the bodies in the hometown of the family. Examples of this are shown in the cases of Nixon, Reagan, Princess Diana, and Saddam Hussein. Photos of the dead bodies of the presidents were not in the news, nor were they dispersed throughout the internet with exception of Saddam. The photos of princess Diana only show the car crash, but not the actual body. However the case of Saddam Hussein, is quite different. Although both Nixon and Diana’s funerals, did not reveal the dead bodies to the media, Saddam Hussein’s dead and mangled body was seen on TV, newspapers, and on the internet. The images of Saddam’s body showed the “real” deterioration and decay of the corpse. The reason why his body was shown, and not other political figures, is that the political climate was such that if he no longer existed, then his regime was gone as well. The difference between Saddam’s case, and that of other world leaders, is that Saddam’s death was seen as having severe political significance. The image of Saddam’s dead body, is similar to the image of the head on a stake. At the time of his death, there was a proliferation of images that circulated the media of his dead body. This was to prove how dead he was, and that his presence, aura, and mystique were gone. This is similar to the image of the head on a stake, where the body is shown in its rawest form in order to prove how dead a person is. The dead body of Saddam Hussein was turned into a political symbol. <br />
<br />
The importance of Saddam’s body can be seen in the events surrounding his death. At first, officials did not want to bury him for fear of the violence towards the body, and surrounding the burial sight. It was only under American pressure that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Iraq's new ruler, agreed to surrender the body for burial after his aides insisted for much of Saturday that it would be held in a secret location until the risks of violence or turmoil at the burial site receded. But a political adviser to Prime Minister Maliki, Bassam al-Saddami, said there were no plans to hand over the body until the risk of violence over Saddam's hanging subsided, a period that he said could run for weeks or months. In the meantime, he said, the body would be kept in "a secret place," where it would be secure against desecration by his enemies. "If we bury him in Tikrit, people will dig him up and tear the body apart," he said. (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) Saddam’s death was highly publicized, and circulated throughout the media. “This nation of 27 million people spent the 36 hours after the hanging crowding around television sets to watch mesmerizing replays of a government-made videotape…” (Saddam buried; videos grip, Iraq, By John F. Burns, Published: December 31, 2006) One reason why the bodies of both Saddam and Lenin were seen as significant, was that both had a single-party autocratic dictatorship. Their symbols were used in order to centralize power in an autocratic form. There was a faith in the immortality of the leaders and what they were to represent.<br />
<br />
=== Long Live the (youtube video of the ) King! ===<br />
As we are constantly saturated with virtual images of our leaders, it can be argued that the motivation to see them in person has been lost. The images, recordings, and videos of political leaders are present, even while their body is absent. When the material body of the leader dies, it can be said that as long as their virtual image survives, their legitimacy is still present. In our media environment, death is not an end, as everything is recorded and dispersed throughout the media, and nothing disappears. “Our bodies know fatigue and finitude, but our effigies once recorded, can circulate through media systems indefinitely, across the wastes of space and time.” (Speaking Into Thin Air, Peters, 140) As opposed to royal effigies, one could say that presently we have media effigies. If one were to look at the invention of the Phonograph, it is possible to see that the original intention of this technology was to preserve the voices and the messages of the political leaders, and to transmit them to posterity. This has resulted in the presence of media effigies, and technologies that preserve traces of subjectivity. “But death (knowledge of mortality) is the ultimate condition of cultural creativity as such. It makes permanence into a task, into an urgent task, into a paramount task – and so it makes culture, that huge and never stopping factory of permanence.” (Mortality, Immortality, and Other Life Strategies, Bauman, p. 4) As Lenin’s body was embalmed for propaganda purposes in order to gain populist support for communism, images and videos of Reagan that circulated throughout the media can be seen serving a similar purpose.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|left|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
<br />
=== Live and Let Live ===<br />
Chryonics is strategy of literally avoiding the deterioration of the individual. It is a strategy of avoiding death by preserving organs in a non frozen vitrious state. (patent, 4559298) A Baumen says that the first activity of culture is survival, and expansion of the boundaries of space and time in order to push back the moment of death, Chryonics is a method that brings this notion from the realm of the virtual to the actual. The purpose of chryonics is to suspend the moment of death to a point in the future, where the solution for whatever caused the body to die would be known. As a method for preserving organs, chryonics differs from embalming because its purpose is not to preserve the exterior body for the purpose of representation. "Cryonics leaves a person at least some chance. The only alternative is decay and decomposition, just a corpse and no hope," says a person who opted to be chryonically preserved. (The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)While the embalmed body exists as a representation, what has died is subjectivity. “For a few centuries now, death stopped being the entry into another phase of being which it once was; death has been reduced to an exit pure and simple, a moment of cessation, an end to all purpose and planning. Death is now the thoroughly private ending of that thoroughly private affair we call life.” (Bauman, 130) People who opt to use chryonics are concerned with suspending the death of their subjectivity and identity. Chryonics is an attempt to preserve the vital organs, and in many cases, people opt to only preserve the brain. “For this money a client's head will be separated from the body, bled, filled with antifreeze, and placed into a thermos where it will wait until it can be revived and reconnected with a cloned body, a cyborg or a donor. No one knows the resurrection date, and this is why cryonics has been banned in Japan and the EU. Russians have more freedom in choosing an interment option.” (New York Times 2006: Russians Search for Eternal Life) Moscow News (Russia), June 30, 2006, SOCIETY; No. 24, 1822 words, By Yelena Komarova The Moscow News) “Many cryonicists opt to preserve only their heads, hoping for revival technology good enough to give them new, younger bodies. However, there are not even animal experiments to bolster the idea. Nobody has yet frozen and revived any mammal.” (Guardian: The Guardian (London) - Final Edition, February 14, 2008 Thursday, Guardian Technology Pages; Pg. 1)<br />
[[Image:krang.gif|thumb|right|Krang]]<br />
<br />
=== Science will Save Us! ===<br />
Embalming has Christian origins, where the spirit remains in the corpse. The new religion is a faith in technology and a “cult of the individual.” One obvious shift that has taken place is the notion of what it means to be dead. Although this varies from culture to culture, after the enlightenment, people began to see death in a secular light. For the first time, death was seen as an absolute absence. They did not fear the punishment of what would happen to them after death, rather the nothingness that constitutes death. In Christianity, death was looked at as a different state of being. Here a person would pass from the state of beingIn Sheskin’s book “Chryonics” there is a case study of one of the first people who opted to be chryonically frozen. The discussion of the Nelson case shows that the intention was for the body to be kept in s frozen state for centuries until medical science evolved techniques to repair the body and bring it back to life. The mother of Nelson saw no religious or moral problem as religion dealt with “issues of the soul and not with the flesh.” ( 10) “My son had a great vision of what science would do in the future, and he wanted to be a part of it. He had a great belief in the future of science, and if there is even the slightest chance that it might help him or someone else, hen we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.” (11) (Sheskin, Chryonics) As people used to look to religion for answers about what happens to the soul after death, people who opt to be preserved, have placed their faith in technology and science, as that which will save them. Chryonics is an example of Durkheim’s concept of the “cult of the individual.” “In modern society, as other beliefs and practices become less and less religions in character, the idea of the worth and dignity of the individual emerges as a religion object or ideal.” Durkheim's "Cult of the Individual" and the Moral Reconstitution of Society, by Charles E. MarskeSociological Theory © 1987 John Wiley & Sons. Chryonics can also be seen as a privatized view of the “immortality of the nation.” Instead of the nation living on, the individual can now be immortal.yeh<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Binski, Paul. ''Medieval Death: Ritual and Representation.'' Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.<br />
<br />
Chamberlain, Andrew T. and Michael Parker Pearson. ''Earthly Remains: The History and Science of Preserved Human Bodies.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.<br />
<br />
Daniell, Christopher. ''Death and Burial in Medieval England 1066-1550.'' London: Routledge, 1997.<br />
<br />
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. ''The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology.'' Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Together_again.JPG&diff=4674
File:Together again.JPG
2008-04-16T19:27:35Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Siberia.JPG&diff=4673
File:Siberia.JPG
2008-04-16T19:27:20Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Possible_plans.JPG&diff=4672
File:Possible plans.JPG
2008-04-16T19:27:07Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Lenin%27s_first_M.JPG&diff=4671
File:Lenin's first M.JPG
2008-04-16T19:26:53Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Lenin_and_Stalin.JPG&diff=4670
File:Lenin and Stalin.JPG
2008-04-16T19:26:38Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Dancing_on_the_Grave.JPG&diff=4669
File:Dancing on the Grave.JPG
2008-04-16T19:26:21Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Check_HoS.JPG&diff=4668
File:Check HoS.JPG
2008-04-16T19:26:05Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Building.JPG&diff=4667
File:Building.JPG
2008-04-16T19:25:54Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Bring_out_your_dead!.JPG&diff=4666
File:Bring out your dead!.JPG
2008-04-16T19:25:43Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Angolan_HoS.JPG&diff=4665
File:Angolan HoS.JPG
2008-04-16T19:25:31Z
<p>Trh249: Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</p>
<hr />
<div>Zbarski*i, I. B., and Samuel Hutchinson. 1998. Lenin's embalmers. London: The Harvill Press.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Political_Effigies&diff=4598
Political Effigies
2008-04-16T17:09:46Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Leviathan.png|thumb|right|1651 Edition Cover of ''The Leviathan'']]<br />
[[Image:Edward_II.png|thumb|right|The vandalized effigy of Edward II]]<br />
[[Image:Louis_XIV.png|thumb|right|A satiric comic of Louis XIV, noting the regalia that makes an otherwise feeble man a monarch]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I.png|thumb|right|The procession for Elizabeth I, featuring her effigy]]<br />
[[Image:Elizabeth_I_Effigy.png|thumb|right|The effigy of Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey]]<br />
[[Image:Disputacione_betwyx_the_Body_and_Wormes.png|thumb|right|A folio depicting the separation of the mortal body and enduring effigy]]<br />
== Simulacra and Interregna: Medieval Royal Effigies ==<br />
The emergence and assumed significance of the royal effigy is a matter of peculiar happenstance, particularly in England where the practice was first popularized. Early English medieval royal funerals obeyed the common religious traditions of the day: as Woodward dryly notes, “the corpse itself was exhibited” (65). This display was rather simple and held no obvious or uniquely political symbolic value. For instance, Edward the Confessor, who died in first days of 1066, and William I (otherwise know as William the Conqueror), who passed away in 1087, were both “carried to their graves unembalmed and covered on a bier” (65). The concealed bodies were subject to no special post-mortem preservative treatment; little attention was paid to attire. The unadorned body, though the object of a spectacular procession, remained hidden away. This was a limited form of publicity: the dead king was not showcased by way of direct exposure, bur rather through the physical circulation of the covered body. Evidentiary and commemorative circulation did not require line-of-sight verification. The ritualistic value of the procession was not yet tied to any spectacular display of the exposed body. This tradition persisted even in the event of embalming: “[t]he corpse of Henry I, who died in France in 1135, was rudely embalmed to facilitate its transport back to England but it was still borne covered upon a bier” (66).<br />
<br />
This changed with the 1189 death of Henry I. His was the first royal body to be openly displayed and arrayed in the coronation ornaments. The first use of a funeral effigy, however, dates to either the 1272 death of Henry III or 1327 death of Edward II. Woodward speculates that a wax effigy appeared in the funeral procession for Henry III, although no material record of the effigy exists. The wood effigy of Edward II, on the other hand, is still on display in Gloucester Cathedral, the original location of his burial. What accounts for this shift in royal funeral rituals? The open display of the body was consistent with the religious currents at the time of Henry II’s death; effigies, likewise, have a longer religious history. But what accounts for the adoption of effigy practices at this precise moment? As Woodward notes: “[t]he reasons for [the effigy’s] introduction are unclear but probably relate to the three-month delay in organsing [Edward II’s] funeral. Edward died at Berkeley Castle on 21 September but was not buried in Gloucester Cathedral until 20 December. Medieval embalming techniques were insufficiently skilled to keep the body fresh for that length of time” (66). To be clear, a funeral effigy and a tomb effigy could have been, but were not always, one and the same. Whereas the tombs of many royals and notable religious figures had long included an effigy, the use of an effigy in the funeral procession was indeed something new. Unlike the tomb effigy which, like the busts of antiquity, aspired to partial and commemorative verisimilitude, the funeral effigy served as a complete simulacrum. The funeral effigy was not a representation, but a copy.<br />
<br />
=== The Paradox of Monarchy and Popular Sovereignty ===<br />
=== The King's Two Bodies: ''The King is dead! Long live the King!'' ===<br />
=== The Politics and Performance of Ascension ===<br />
=== From Embodied Sovereignty to Constitutionalism ===<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Better Dead: Communist Embalming ==<br />
<br />
Although the creation of effigies to materially hold the "body politic" of the deceased monarch fell from active practice with the rise of Constitutionalism in Western Europe, this mode of representation found new life in the attempts of the young Bolshevik government to establish a firm basis for legitimate sovereignty. Although historical materialism would seem to be fundamentally at odds with the fetishization intrinsic to the creation of royal effigies- especially since the two institutions which necessitated and explained the practice, monarchy and the Christian concept of transubstantiation, were violently rejected by the Communists (quite literally, as the corpses of the Romanovs and countless Orthodox churches attest). Armed with cutting edge scientific techniques, however, the Bolsheviks did not create likenesses of their fallen leaders in order to preserve the continuity of the body politic- instead, they preserved the leader's body as an undying vessel for sovereign power. The embalming and display of particularly important party members in Mausoleums was a procedure unique to Communist countries in the 20th century, and even within these countries was typically not repeated following the preservation of the founding leader (the exception being Stalin, who was nonetheless rather unceremoniously removed from the Red Square Mausoleum in the aftermath of Nikita Khrushchev's speech denouncing his rule).<br />
<br />
=== Goodbye Lenin? ===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Lenin.png|thumb|left|Lenin's embalmed body]]<br />
<br />
''On January 20, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He was already dead but not yet alive.''<br />
<br />
Lenin's death is generally agreed to have been caused by calluses formed around the remnants of a would-be assassin's bullet (fired by Revolutionary Socialist Fanya Kaplan), which did not immediately kill him on August 30th, 1918 when the shot was fired (as Kaplan surely had hoped)but rather caused a slow demise from advanced atherosclerosis.<br />
<br />
''On August 30th, 1918 Vladimir Illich Lenin was shot to death. He just didn't know it yet.''<br />
<br />
By 1921, Lenin was suffering from debilitating migraines, and in 1922 he suffered his first stroke. Later that year, suffering daily attacks, Lenin removed himself from the political scene despite the festering power struggle between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. In 1923 he attempted to weigh in on the side of Trotsky, but had been outmaneuvered by Stalin who forbid Lenin outside visitors or communication. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, Lenin died politically. He took Trotsky and millions of Russians with him.''<br />
<br />
This political excommunication was quickly followed by another stroke, which robbed Lenin the facilities of speech as well as a great deal of his memory and bodily control. <br />
<br />
''In December of 1920, half of Lenin's brain died. His body survived, but did he?''<br />
<br />
On October 19th, 1923 members of the Politburo meet in the Kremlin to discuss possible funeral plans- it was at this meeting that Stalin is purported to have first raised the possibility of preserving Lenin's body, an idea to which Trotsky raised strong objections. <br />
<br />
''On October 19th, 1923 the Kremlin had declared Lenin dead. They also made plans for his life.''<br />
<br />
On the 20th of January in 1924, his condition having thoroughly deteriorated, Lenin suffered his third and final stroke- he appeared to complain of not being able to see, his temperature raised to a high of 42.3 degrees Celsius, he convulsed with violent seizures, his face turned red and for a minute he seemed like he was trying to sit up. He the suddenly stopped breathing, and his face became a deathly pale. <br />
<br />
''On January 20th, 1924 Vladimir Illich Lenin died. He quickly became livelier than he had been in years.''<br />
<br />
=== More Alive Than the Living ===<br />
<br />
Against Lenin's wishes (he had wanted to be buried next to his mother), and under the watchful eye of Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (who would found the Cheka, forerunner of the KGB) Lenin's body was preserved using standard embalming techniques (his veins were flushed with a chemical compound) and placed in a temporary Mausoleum. This was done, officially, at the request of the workers and peasants who did not want to part with Lenin. The rudimentary technology would not hold his body for long, and when freezing became unfeasible due to electricity shortages scientists Vladimir Voribiov and Boris Zbarsky successfully created a new method of embalming that involved soaking Lenin's body in a particular chemical bath on a regular basis. It was a baptism that literally gave Lenin's body new life. <br />
<br />
First, however, Lenin's brain was removed and taken to St. Petersburg, false eyes were inserted under the eyelids and sewn shut, his mouth was sewn shut, and dark spots on the skin were removed with abrasive chemicals. Lenin's body was made to look as if he were sleeping, not dead. Through science- science!- the Soviets achieved what the Europeans had only dreamed, for the material frailty of the beloved leader was replaced not with a wax simulacrum but with the leader's own body, perfected and immortalized. <br />
<br />
A giant hole was blasted into the frozen soil of the Red Square and a giant underground facility was put in place, topped by a pyramid-like granite Mausoleum that bore the simple epigraph: LENIN. The Red Square, like Lenin's head, was hollowed out and refilled with the preservative power of science and enduring power of the state. <br />
<br />
The tradition started with Stalin and continued through Gorbachev's rule that spectacles of patriotism (such as military processions) took place upon the Red Square, with the important political figures watching from atop the Mausoleum. <br />
<br />
''In the performance of Soviet sovereignty, Lenin's corpse became the ultimate prop.''<br />
<br />
Shortly after the Mausoleum opened to the public, a peasant who was viewing Lenin's body took out a pistol, shot at Lenin's body and then turned the gun on himself. A letter was found on his body decrying the path he saw Russia taking. Fortunately, Lenin was not hurt (although the same could not be said of the peasant, nor- in all probability- his family, friends and acquaintances).<br />
<br />
Following a similar instance in which a peasant spat upon and then threw a rock at the glass holding both Lenin and Stalin, measures were taken to protect the corpses from attacks from not only rocks, but guns and explosives as well (it is quite certain that inmates in the Gulags took comfort knowing that Lenin was safe). <br />
<br />
During the Second World War, in the face of the oncoming Panzer divisions, Lenin's body was taken by train along with his team of scientists to a facility in Siberia. There his body was maintained with the greatest of care, and those who attended his needs were treated quite well. Fortunately, the war ended and Lenin was able to return to the comfort of his Mausoleum (sadly, the same could not be said of those left behind to defend the city who died of cold, starvation, or German bullets).<br />
<br />
''There was a saying in Russia that Lenin was more alive than the living. The Politburo ensured that this was true'' <br />
<br />
=== Death Becomes Them ===<br />
<br />
=== Its Not Easy Having Green Cuticles ===<br />
<br />
There are no cameras allowed in the Mausoleum. Even cell phones must be checked. One is not allowed to stand still while viewing the body, one must continually move. The honor guard armed with automatic rifles ensures these rules are strictly followed. Lenin's body is to be seen, not inspected.<br />
<br />
Lenin's face is waxy, his eyes closed. You can only see his torso, in a simple suit, with his arms laid to his sides- the rest of the body is covered in a black sheet. But if you look closely, you can see the rims of his fingers are green. But you must keep moving, you cannot inspect, you cannot look closely at the mossy decay that defies the pinnacle of Soviet science.<br />
<br />
The decay that creeps up Lenin's cuticles is the subtle hiss of the natural process of death that has not stopped despite the years of chemical baths and tender care. It is the traces of Lenin's actual body that were never fully exorcised from the national symbol of strength and unity. In a very literal sense, the rot that remains the constant threat hovering on the edges of Lenin's corpse is the Real hiding in, under and behind the Symbolic. Lenin's body, literally transformed into a Bakhtinian sign, is rigorously contextualized in an attempt to retain control of its meaning, yet the noisy decomposition continually interrupts, evades and creeps into the semiotic process.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the green tinge of Lenin's cuticles gives his body an aura of authenticity reportedly lacking in Mao's sallow corpse. As in the funeral processions of the European Royalty that begrudgingly dragged the body of the deceased monarch along with the resplendent and regaled wax effigy, the grotesque materiality of the leader's body in the Soviet Union and its satellites was simultaneously necessary for legitimacy and necessarily fought/marginalized/denied. The pops of organs rupturing and hisses of gases escaping can be chemically paused, but to remove them entirely would be to remove the materiality of the corpse/sign, rendering it ephemeral and inauthentic. The wax effigy was quickly stripped of its regalia once the actual body was interned, and the Mausoleum would quickly disappear if it were discovered that Lenin's body was fake.<br />
<br />
=== Body Doubles and Cyber-Lenin ===<br />
<br />
In the complex that is used to dunk Lenin's body in its rejuvenating chemical bath was also an exact replica of the inside of the Mausoleum, along with a number of "biological doubles"- corpses that had similar features as Lenin's.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Image:Gore.png|thumb|right|Al Gore: Creator of the internet, First Emperor of the Moon]]<br />
== Live and Let Die ==<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
Woodward, Jennifer. ''The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England 1570-1625.'' Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=Nansen_Passport&diff=3773
Nansen Passport
2008-03-26T07:24:01Z
<p>Trh249: </p>
<hr />
<div>The "Nansen Passport" was the name for a series of documents used during the period between World Wars I and II as identification and travel papers for refugees, initially given only to Russians fleeing the civil war that ultimately solidified Bolshevik power, but was eventually distributed to many refugee communities. The passport was named after Dr. Fridtjof Nansen, a chemist and explorer who had been named High Commissioner for Refugees by the League of Nations, and is cited as both founding modern refugee regimes as well as helping to solidify the "monopoly of movement" by states.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Front_Page.jpg|thumb|right|Front Page of French Nansen Passport]]<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
==The Problem of Statelessness==<br />
<br />
===The Passport Prior to WWI===<br />
<br />
===The Refugee Crisis===<br />
<br />
===Fridtjof Nansen and the High Commission for Refugees===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Young Nansen.JPG|thumb|left|Young Fridtjof Nansen]]<br />
<br />
[[Image:League of Nations w Nansen.jpg|thumb|right|Opening of the League of Nations. Nansen is seated second from the left in the fourth row.]]<br />
<br />
===Successes and Failures===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Nansen Passport.JPG|thumb|right|Early Nansen Passport of farm laborer Niktin Constantin- note that the form directly refers to the bearer's Russian citizenship]]<br />
<br />
[[Image:First Three Pages.jpg|thumb|left|First three pages of a blank French Nansen Passport, which is now folded into a booklet and contains more categories to be used for identifying information.]]<br />
<br />
===Legacy===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Affidavit of Identity in Lieu of Passport Arendt.JPG|thumb|right|Affidavit of Identity in Lieu of Passport for Hannah Arendt. While not technically a Nansen Passport, these Affidavits allowed many refugees fleeing Nazi oppression to emigrate to the United States, including Arendt and her husband.]]<br />
<br />
==Death, Media and the Document==<br />
<br />
===The Trouble of Definition, or Lincoln's Ax===<br />
<br />
===Death of a Document, the Form of a Form===<br />
<br />
[[Image:Nansen's funeral.JPG|thumb|left|Nansen's Funeral Procession in Olso]]<br />
<br />
===Problematic Problematics===</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Nansen%27s_funeral.JPG&diff=3770
File:Nansen's funeral.JPG
2008-03-26T07:16:22Z
<p>Trh249: Nansen's funeral procession in Oslo.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20540</p>
<hr />
<div>Nansen's funeral procession in Oslo.<br />
<br />
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG<br />
Library of Congress<br />
101 Independence Ave., SE<br />
Washington, DC 20540</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Affidavit_of_Identity_in_Lieu_of_Passport_Arendt.JPG&diff=3768
File:Affidavit of Identity in Lieu of Passport Arendt.JPG
2008-03-26T07:10:51Z
<p>Trh249: Affidavit of Identity in Lieu of Passport for Hannah Arendt. While not technically a Nansen Passport, these Affidavits allowed many refugees fleeing Nazi oppression to emigrate to the United States, including Arendt and her husband.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS </p>
<hr />
<div>Affidavit of Identity in Lieu of Passport for Hannah Arendt. While not technically a Nansen Passport, these Affidavits allowed many refugees fleeing Nazi oppression to emigrate to the United States, including Arendt and her husband.<br />
<br />
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG<br />
Library of Congress<br />
101 Independence Ave., SE<br />
Washington, DC 20540</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:League_of_Nations_w_Nansen.jpg&diff=3766
File:League of Nations w Nansen.jpg
2008-03-26T07:01:55Z
<p>Trh249: Opening of the League of Nations. Nansen is second from left in the fourth row.
Sørensen, Øystein. 1993. Fridtjof Nansen : mannen og myten. [Oslo]: Universitetsforlaget. 101.</p>
<hr />
<div>Opening of the League of Nations. Nansen is second from left in the fourth row.<br />
<br />
Sørensen, Øystein. 1993. Fridtjof Nansen : mannen og myten. [Oslo]: Universitetsforlaget. 101.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Young_Nansen.JPG&diff=3764
File:Young Nansen.JPG
2008-03-26T06:58:13Z
<p>Trh249: Young Fridtjof Nansen.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20540</p>
<hr />
<div>Young Fridtjof Nansen.<br />
<br />
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG<br />
Library of Congress<br />
101 Independence Ave., SE<br />
Washington, DC 20540</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:First_Three_Pages.jpg&diff=3763
File:First Three Pages.jpg
2008-03-26T06:54:12Z
<p>Trh249: The first three pages of a French Nansen Passport. The passport is now folded in booklet form, and contains more entries for identifying information.
Sørensen, Øystein. 1993. Fridtjof Nansen : mannen og myten. [Oslo]: Universitetsforlaget. 117.</p>
<hr />
<div>The first three pages of a French Nansen Passport. The passport is now folded in booklet form, and contains more entries for identifying information.<br />
<br />
Sørensen, Øystein. 1993. Fridtjof Nansen : mannen og myten. [Oslo]: Universitetsforlaget. 117.</div>
Trh249
http://cultureandcommunication.org/deadmedia/index.php?title=File:Nansen_Passport.JPG&diff=3760
File:Nansen Passport.JPG
2008-03-26T06:46:23Z
<p>Trh249: Completed early Nansen Passport.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20540</p>
<hr />
<div>Completed early Nansen Passport.<br />
<br />
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG<br />
Library of Congress<br />
101 Independence Ave., SE<br />
Washington, DC 20540</div>
Trh249