With this text I seek to re-calibrate the relations of the self-other on the screen. To enable this re-calibration, I retrace my memory strands that include my first interactions with technological set ups. These first interactions are the platforms on which the self-other was constituted according to consumerist narratives or military purpose via the screen.
By de-scribing these first memories with screens that occur in my memory architecture, I try to intervene in the persistent myths of technological determinism, progress and objectivity.

The instrument I use for intervention is radical subjectivity in form of an autotheory. Autotheory is a process of writing “that integrate autobiography and other explicitly subjective and embodied modes with discourses of philosophy and theory in ways that transgress genre conventions and disciplinary boundaries“ (Fournier 2021). 

By writing this autotheory I can re-calibrate the relations of the self-other on the screen – through re-calibrating I locate myself in relation to current technological (research) practices with the aim to generate a respons(e)-ability for new technologies, that evolve from scanning the “body“ to scanning the “mind“.

---

ACCELERATION / CCALIBRATION  are central pillars in technological transformations and both contain measurement that positions itself in relation to a constructed norm. I am reaching out for a processual and speculative way of taking measures, in which imagination practice, the artistic use of digital media and technologies reflect on my experience with the self-other on the screen.


These mediated images of the self act as proxies and stand-ins extending and reactivating the self in a variety of different environments and situations. Scrying onto the tech mirror to emancipate myself from the powerful effect of self-othering on the screen that constructs my identity, I refuse a binary body regime - beyond national, cultural and gendered parametric concepts. In refusal I recreate the imposed rigid avatars, make them morphable and glitchy, recode them and speculate on expression in a virtual space, blending materials, plants and bodies, animals and architecture all as influential parts of becoming and world building in a real-digital continuous loop in which I find myself.


The memory strands I am tracing back have made me realize that there is no memory that is not already mediated, they are mediated versions of myself – actors created to navigate in a certain technocultural milieu. What does that mean to the way identity is created in a technoculture?

A society in which technology and culture are one body of different extremities, that can only maintain their robust posture if these two bodycomponents cling to each other right at the most sensitive places on their individual corporealities to maintain the firmest, normalized stereo posture.

This pose of a technocultural corporeal perpetuates progress and power and a dynamic of exponential accelerating development of new technology and new promises coming along with them. What’s the counterpose to this dominant, linear accelerating progress thinking?

The concept of progress cannot be separated from the idea of progress that legitimized an imperial and colonial power regime that is the cause of global inequity and still active in social mechanics, evolving head to head with technologies that deeply intervene in our daily lives as we saw the rise of the screen in the public space. But the screen has become also a prosthetic to the body, precisely a prosthetic to the vision - in an optical as well as in an imaginary sense re-structuring, precursoring the gaze off/on screen.


What interacts with new media is something sensual, and demands a sensual approach. I develop this approach in describing screen occurrences - memories that were glued to my own body through experiencing the self-other on the screen, glued onto bodies like commercials glued to public space to find into one’s mind through repetition and territorial acceptance. But acceptance could be a gesture, or a simple move in a complex game, keeping the scepters in the hands of dominance, remaining its power position, reproducing gendered ways of looking into the digital space via the screen.

In my autotheory I am in dialogue with different embodied memories as well as books like Glitchfeminism (Russell 2020), Race after Technology (Benjamin 2019), Die Neuerfindung der Natur (Haraway 1995), Critical Discourse Studies and Technology (Roderick 2016) and more. They all come together in a messy, nonlinear way. “Messiness“ functions as a kind of methodology that disorganizes what is supposed to be pure, clear knowledge (Ruberg/Boyd/Howe 2018).

Into the supposedly transcendental entity of data, messiness reintroduces materiality, embodiment and orders of power. It aims to focus on the complexity of the power entanglement between technologies, people, resources and networks, and at the same time “messing up“ is also an activity to bring disorder into existing orders of power. In the following pages I’m messing around with a number of methods, concepts and discourses of technology that are central to my memory architecture. Tamam.

---

DE-SCRIPTION is a process which implies a detaching from the written words/text into other dimensions. De-scribing is not describing, it is a writing out of the idea that descriptive and normative observations can be neatly separated It is a writing out of descriptions that try to categorize me one-dimensional.

When DE-SCRIPTION takes place, text is provoking action through an intervention. De-scribing is a form of an artistic practice in regard of my subjectivity, my story, my body and the possible actions as an individual in consideration of my position as a gendered and culture-queer person, from which it is questioned to find hold in a cultural binary encoded society, avoiding inconsistencies and glitches that are substantial parts of how I build identity from a hybrid cultural background, allowing ruptures and vulnerability, contradictions and insecurities.

I understand De-scribing as a tool to counterpose a social and political calibration like digital transformation. Y’m trying to create a system to document the reflections of the self as a multitude, transformulating from within the in-between on- and offline, but also as a strategy to navigate from in between gendered and ethnic encoded selves embracing the transformation including the infinite buffering to render this virtual self into reality.
I tap into an artistic research practice with creating a material form of language emphasizing moments, in which new digital technologies are social calibrations, that sometimes remain unnoticed due to its assumed neutrality paired with the fascination that comes with new perspectives and with visualizations of my body that propose an accurate perception of my physicality.

---

HACKOSEXUAL - hackosexuality is the erotic attraction by being hacked by others or hack value of another person.

---

TRANSFORMULATION, diminutive of transformation. Performs its own unconformity, underlined with a red wave by the computer, unrecognizable to the software and therefore identified as an error, incapable of bringing to effect the call to intervene and modify; recode and re-define.

---

OVERLINING. As you type, Word displays a wavy line under suspect text as follows: A red line indicates a possible misspelling. A green line indicates a possible grammatical error. An overline signalizes a linguistic in(ter)vention to interpret and use words in a personalized way, choose the color of an overline and use it to comment on the process of deconstructing a word, sentence or a whole chapter - overlines will indicate that there is no misspelling or error but a critical, speculative linguistic approach that makes space for inter lingual and cultural expression. See: underline, overline. Tamam.

If I could use overlines, I would start to switch certain letters in my vocabulary, that give a different perspective on the connections, to display the polarities of a society and its language. Power would turn into pover and poverty into powerty.

The combination of the two letters O and V are a symbol of an ovary system, it is a sound and description of a container for meaning and gives the expression a certain direction or stratospheric, topographic tension, shows a dialectic dependance that needs to be unfolded yet. “Ov“ replaces “of“. The fouls of a language system become visible, as the software detects suspicious words, giving others its legitimacy and taking it from others simultaneously shows that pover is relational. „The red line tells us that only one of these phenomena, underserved and overserved, is legitimate while the other is a mistake, a myth.“ (Benjamin 2019)

---

CALIBRATION may have derived from the Arabic expression قَالِب qalib, a shoemakers term for the (shoe) last, a mold, model that is used in the manufacture or repairof shoes, which also must have been my grandfather’s tool who arrived in Switzerland in the 60s as a migrant worker for a Swiss industrial shoe manufacturer.

---

I already accepted the memory as a false memory or fantasy, in which I was 3D scanned in the military recruitment process. No other men around my age I was talking to had been scanned. I decided to contact the military office to find out if there were anybody scan data collected:

“In my artistic-research practice I am concerned with human/machine interaction. Using trans disciplinary methods, I document my first experiences with technologies to learn more about how digital images and visualizations affect our memory. I am now tracing back memory strands, trying to reconstruct and reconcile situations in which I first came into contact with technology, which is the reason I am reaching out to you.
I can remember a situation where a bodyscan has been done during the recruitment process, in this examination I could observe a 3D model of myself on the screen for the first time .Is there a possibility to have accessto the data collected or the visualizationof it? The information is a prerequisite for analysis and would significantly advance my research in thisarea.”

-

“After consultation with the person responsible for recruitment, we unfortunately have to give you a negative answer, as we do not have any 3D scanning data. The reason for this is that we never got beyond the test stage with the body scanners. To my knowledge the body scanner should be used for logistics (fitting of clothes / shoes). It has obviously not been suitable for the needs of recruitment. I can unfortunately not give you any contact persons who could help youthere.„

Surprised about the fact that I was a test object for a military 3D body scan system with the goal to improve fitting of military clothes and shoes, made me revive the memory once again to transform it in a performative way.

Two men in the corner of the small room observe the visualization on a bigger screen next to the scanning booth - four poles carrying lasers that measure my body accurately, creating a live rendering model of myself on the screen mounted in front of my face. Fascinated by this technology,this picture of myself that was created by the military male gaze, demonstrating masculinity in a patriarchal system has been imprinted in my mind but never been re-validated.

To emancipate from this virtual version of my body, which was militarized, objectified, analyzed and gendered, I overwrite, de-scribe and transformulate these imageselfs when I on my own use similar technology to scan my body, try to capture me in space and - unlike the military measurement tool - allowing glitches and ruptures, vulnerability and expression. I use this template as an artistic statement to transform this image of a ‘man’ that was imprinted through technologies of war.

Just as in this virtual military version of myself, the characters I watched on TV are glued to my body through visual technology. 

In a very early screen induced memory: I climb my father’s back up the fibre landscape of his jacket to reach the top of the mountain where I get a view over the living room onto the TV screen where I see Minney the mouse’s eyelashes jingle to realize that I have eyes, and that humans must blink too.

These two memories show how I identify with the images of the self that technology proposes to me: be it the military male body in straight pose or animated cartoon characters, the person on my passport photo, my ‘real’ political identity or any pseudo for an app; the psychology of the media, the effect on our social understanding and acting is interdependent of technological developments. These (shadow) characters are part of public space, they are as ephemeral as they are monumental and are part of a capitalist and consumerist narrative, that needs to be deconstructed - since the energy that comes from the possibility to transform into the other on the screen can be a way to reflect on ourselves - the sensitivity for the creation of the avatars glitches into the life off screen and questions rigid cultural and gender identity metric thinking.

A century ago Minney found its way on the screen as a female cartoon character to be inspired by a movement of independent young apolitical individuals, liberating the possibilities of individuality for women in the early 20s, adapting the lifestyle, fashion and behavior of men, irritating and provoking gender issues the flappers made it to free themselves somehow from male influence in a world that was booming with access to mobility and mass media production that until that time only were in behalf of the male: chain smoking, drinking, driving cars, sports - freeing themselves from the corsets (Roesch 2013). Highly consumerist individuals that queered the gender roles, as teenage flappers, as models for the mouse and its movement,carried with for close to a century in Minnie, the description of this early memory involving screens, the gaze as well as the glance, which in the cartoon version is a performed, corporeal glance, involving the body and eyes itself of the observer to act while simultaneously looking at others also is a technical expansion of the eyes - the artificial eyelashes are prosthetics that define a gender and their immanent gestures. While the eyes of Mickey remain “natural“ Minnie mouses eyes are not only there to make the character see, she performs, jingles, flappers with her artificial eyelashes, prosthetics to perform her gendered self.

The capture of my body by a military gaze, brutally mastering the object of representation on one hand, while the glance is considered a wa of seeing that touches softly and slowly the material surface of the representation on the othe hand  (vgl. Baetens 2006), these two ways of looking reproduce a binary body regime and with that its specific ways of looking, indistinguishable from the appearance of screen technologies, where these accurate versions of the self on the screen are part of understanding identity as a key concept to liberate and emancipate from a binary and closed perception of a body to a very transformative one in relatio to a more cosmic view of the body - one that morphs and shapeshifts, one that embraces its
contradictions, which become the core of the work as I formulate these ambivalences to create opportunities to become active in the creation / deconstruction of the parametric grids, that are constantly pulled over complex and fluid understanding on Identity produced in technoculture.

ANOTHER POVER MECHANISM of designing new technologies is to generate profit from the lack of knowledge about one’s own identity. Cut off from their ancestors, my Turkish grandparents both knew little about where they came from. My Turkish relatives therefore wanted to know more about their unknown origins and did a DNA test. Under these circumstances the access to the DNA data base seems to target a particular group of people who have migrant history and experienced some sort of displacement, lost their homes and therefore are disconnected from their ancestral culture.

Memories based on computer generated Images of the self illustrate how technology affects the body directly in a very individual manner. De-scribing and transformulating are a way to generate responsibility for the power that fictional characters and digital constructed identities exert on their beholder. These strategies are parts of recreating my memory architecture and re-approrpriating the constituted self-other.


The recalled experiences with technology are embedded in the discourse about digital technologies and technoculture. Persistent myths and sociotechnical imaginaries are found in these discourses that continue to be updated despite artistic and scientific interventions. One such example of the perpetuation of such myths is the recently launched research project Evolving Language (2020) which is a NFS project. My first encounter with “Brain Reading Technology“ - with its introduction into popular discourse for once - was via an SRF Broadcast (2020). It was an Interview with Balthazar Bickel, a linguist and the co-head of the project Evolving Language, who states there is a real risk of eavesdropping in regards of surveillance of brainwaves from a distance. In the interview it is considered whether you can build in security mechanisms - a password in the brain, for example. The fundamental change expected from brain-machine interfaces is compared to the invention of nuclear weapons. The research focus of the project is the Brain-Machine-Interface Technology (BMI) and whether and how neurotechnologies could or should be used to influence language capabilities (vgl. Factsheet Evolving Language - with an added element of the escape button). 

The language, metaphors and symbols that arise with the discourse of the concept of mind reading (Gedankenlesen) as well as its dangers are framed by ideas/ pre_enacted, rooted in science fiction cinema and the impossible, that may be real in the future. To examine a political and social order and its imaginary, a continually rearticulated awareness of order in social life and a resulting commitment to that order’s coherence and continuity (Jasanoff 2012) we have to find these regularities when we try to make sense of the nature of collective life. Imaginaries by definition are group achievements - for example of nations (Hecht 1998).

Looking at the summary of the National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) linguistic research, it is clear that these studies of the evolution of language are wider than any undertaken before. I will de-scribe this Illustration and its function as a visual representation of technological progress. Technological progress can be understood as one of many myths and narratives of technoculture(Roderick 2016).

Progress is a synonym to technology, depicted as a “kind of linear, natural, inevitable development towards a perfect state“ (Roderick 2016) and understood as a “god term“ - where every progress also needs a sacrifice to go a step further to be materialized, leaving its primitive preceding state. This biological conception of evolution is grounded in social darwinism, which is an umbrella term used to refer to a grouping of theories about society that justified the gross inequities of the late victorian period and the early 20s century (Roderick 2016).

Behind the working title of the project “The Origins and Future of Language“ the silhouetted bodies evolve into upward walking position. Far left an ape walking on all fours is the beginning of a 12 step sequence that ends with the representation of the perfect state on the far right side: two individuals, represented as a female with her hands in their pockets, her body levitating off the ground level, with her brain glowing blue and light blue strings interconnected to the brain of her opposite, a representative male silhouette, with his hands to the chin, a posture indicating a person thinking. Having left their preceding tech evolution in this state, screens seem to have disappeared. As we see in their preceding stage, in which people seem to connect via a screen wall - the environment itself becomes a device before screens have become obsolete as communication happens immediately between the connected brains of the individuals. In this final stage of the development, they do not carry or look at any devices or tools as their brains have become technologically advanced devices. The computational wetware inside their heads is linked directly with a computing device. The research project Evolving Language wants to achieve just this - as discussed in the before mentioned podcast, Computer-Brain Interfaces or “brain-reading technology“ will revolutionize human-machine interaction and according to the scientists speaking in the interview “will have an impact on humanity as nuclear weapons did, with the technologies advancement it will be possible within twenty years to read ones thought from distance, detecting sentences one thinks for themselves in silence.“

Traveling backwards on the sequence of human progress dependent on technological advancement, taking its users to the next step on the evolution ladder as it is demonstrated as an image on a factsheet. We reac the current evolutional state in which we find ourselves in - after leaving three evolutional stages in sitting position, hypnotized by the static display of screens, they have become a part of the body which animates a male figure to carry on stepping up the evolutional ladder while simultaneously interact with the mobile screen of the smartphone. It would be the current stage of using the screen in a contemporary mode, which is an interactive one, as the tool is in his hands, connecting the body:face:hand:skin to the device itself. Continuing with alternating binary gender representations a female figure is the last stage of the three that are developed in a sitting posture. The hands on the keyboard of the person indicate an interaction with the personal computer, (desperately hitting the escape button repeatedly). Behind her a male figure in front of the TV with no physical interaction with technology other than the chairs they were sitting in, both in front of their devices (the male figure with the same thinking posture as seen in the final stage of the sequence) – a TV replaces the radio and marks the entry into the modern world and the point of acceleration and manifestation of a sequence of tech developments.
Their sole purpose was economic growth and capital benefit. Without any moral and ethical code these technologies are situated in militaristic use or surveillance, never designed to protect the user but to maintain a power structure, based on competition and economic beliefs built on gender and racial inequalities. The programs of mass media technologies depend on these inequalities to survive as they did according to a colonial and imperial history that rearticulates itself because of its novelty in a supposedly reference-free technological future space.

This visualizing, materializing of the not yet seen into the assemblages of imagination is a social, collective practice. Overlapping with economic interest and gentrification, the question of what tech is desirable is discussed and manifests itself in relation to the corporate other, the big companies, more precisely the individuals that navigate

these global market players, incontrollable private investigators over-performing the national engagements in new technologies, like brain-computer-Interfaces, are legitimizers be realized in such an extent. With the aim to be an ethically regulating factor, again a neutral image of Switzerland is working effectively - fading out the consequences on, unaffected by de-colonizing engagements, leaving things unquestioned as a nation hyperactive in its inactivity in the global national enmeshment of colonization, operating as a so called “colony without colonies“ which the actively colonizing power nations are dependent of as a market and financial place. The Swiss neutrality is part of the narrative, a military tool that has been serving a bigger narrative realizing its own economic interest, a gage from bigger profit making organizations, seen in the Crypto AG scandal in February 2020, when US and German intelligence used this Swiss company‘s encoding devices to spy on other countries. From the Cold War into the 2000s, Crypto AG sold the devices to more than 120 governments worldwide. The machines were encrypted but it emerged that the CIA and Germany‘s BND had rigged the devices so they could crack the codes and intercept thousands of messages.

In my de-scriptions the screen as an interface is a crucial part of the evolution chain according to the modified version of the “march of progress“ or “evolution of man“ depicted on the factsheet of the research project. But the screen is more than an interface it is a way of thinking and seeing:

“Screen-thinking - a way of looking becomes a way of ‘visual thinking‘, more ‘screen-thinking‘ has the ambition to explain how we make sense of images without being guided by already given words or verbal comments, also extend this kind of visual reasoning and understanding to the field of writing.”(Beatens 2006) 


The Evolving Language project is of interest because it reveals not only persistent myths and ideas about technologies, but also ideas about Switzerland‘s imagined neutrality within research and how future interfaces like the screen are imagined as incorporated. What are the compass points of Switzerland’s technopolitical identity and its sociotechnical imaginary? Benedict Anderson (1991, 163) understood the nation as an “imagined community whose coherence is created through specific economic, cultural and political practices“. The technological choice plays in the formation of national identities, entangled with national technopolitical cultures. The development of specific kind of “Swissness“ is tied to engineering and technological progress as well its still active neutrality as an ethically regulating instance. Imagination „operates at an intersubjective level, uniting members of a social community in shared perceptions of futures that should or should not be realized“ (Jasanoff 2015) which fits into the concept of nationalism of Anderson (1991) as a “construct of minds that may never encounter each other in reality but nevertheless are tied together through shared practices of narrating, recollecting and forgetting“. Imagination becomes organized work, a collective practice that shapes the scape of an imagined community, which is bound together by media. The reinforcement of nationhood during a global pandemic which showed a high contrast regarding the decision making on how to measure the dangers as a community in regard of the current situation is emphasized more than ever.

To reveal topography of power is one aim of work on sociotechnical imaginaries, which are “collectively held and performed visions of desirable futures“ and they are also
“animated by shared understandings of forms of social life and social order attainable through, and supportive of, advances in science and technology: collective, durable,
capable of being performed; yet they are also temporally situated and culturally particular - at once products of and instruments of the coproduction of science, technology, and society in modernity“ (Jasanoff 2015: 19). Switzerlands’s master narrative, a monolithic neutrality which offers a rationale for a society’s long evolutionary course while also committing that society to keep performing the imagined lines of the story, a singular retelling of a national and cultural story as an unchangeable vision, this master narrative is a form of governance and cannot be articulated from below, where sociotechnical imaginaries are more temporally limited and refer to near-term futures with a designated goal and usually are products of formal institutional authority rather than a shared cultural property. The methods proposed by Sheila Jasanoff to analyze a sociotechnical imaginary cuts through the binary of structure and agency, combines subjective and psychological dimensions of agency with the structured hardness of technological systems, policy styles, organizational behaviors, and political cultures. In attending to the means by which imaginaries frame and represent alternative futures, link past and the future times,
enable to restrict actions in space, and naturalize ways of thinking about possible worlds, a sociotechnical imaginary can be elaborated from the method of comparison across social and political structures to identify the content and contours of sociotechnical imaginaries, and have proved useful revealing in the ingrained normative commitments that distinguish political communities, such as their ways of knowing and reasoning (Burri 2015). The concept of sociotechnical imaginary reveals how the Evolving Language project imagine itself as a national sociotechnical neutrality instance that legitimize to perpetuate the myths of technological progress and to be the protagonists in this myth. However, the project not only perpetuates the myth of progress, but also a technological determinism.

The constant of progress is technology and it is the driving factor. Technological determinism attributes to technology a degree of agency that makes it able to act independently upon society, remaking it in its own image. Putting technology on the center stage in the role of lead actor and all other elements are delegated to the chorus. Assumptions regarding the causal power of technology mean that it can be as cast in the role of villain as it can be cast as the hero in the drama of social change. Technological determinist discourse attributes to technology the ability to change society for the better or the worse. (Roderick 2016: 119). Langdon Winner (1986: 75) notes that the “concept ‚determine‘ in its mundane meaning suggests giving direction to, deciding the course of, establishing definitely, fixing the form of configuration of something. “Technological determinism attributes such causality to technology and depends upon tacit acceptance of two hypothesis: +(1) that the technical base of a society is the fundamental condition affecting all patterns of social existence and (2) that changes in technology are the single most important source of change in society“ (Winner 1986: 76).

A way to encrypt your thoughts is to layer your thinking activity with different materials, that produce specific stimuli in your brain to cover the initial thought or message, making it impossible to know what you are thinking about right now. The room I am sitting in to talk to you is covered with mayonnaise. The sensory information and associations this specific material provides as an architectural quality of the space I am virtually sitting in, it distorts the signals of out brain activity scan since it will activate a lot of different regions in the brain - the complexity of the mayonnaise with all its ingredients and the associations work as a shield for observation: fresh egg yolk, little salt, pepper, mustard, sunflower or rape oil, lemon juice or white vinegar are the usual ingredient - to give it a twist that makes it impossible for mind scan technology to read your mind, add some dried lavender on top of the mayonnaise. If you can maintain a solid mayonnaise space, that is also comfortable to sit in, we will begin with the transmission. Define the sauce as the surface material off the walls, covering the beton structure of the room you are located in- you can hear the reverb of your voice, traveling a high vault but you can also see how the frequency travels up the walls to the ceiling of the room, visualize the sound wave that creates a pattern with the vibrations on the lavender mayonnaise, frequencies climbing up the walls to the highest point - the center of the cupola of the building. Let every word you think evolve in this simulation space during transmission.

“Any TV, any LCD, any iPhone, any iPad — something like that — if you just stare at it, it looks like a ‚Black Mirror,‘ and there‘s something cold and horrifying about that, and it was such a fitting title for the show,“ (Brooker told The Guardian in 2011) - I recalled this statement instinctively while listening to the discussed Radio Broadcast about dangers of “mind reading“. Even if I falsely associated the title with obsidian mirrors and the method of scrying rather than with a screen turned off - the resemblance of the material characteristics of the obsidian scrying mirrors to blank
digital screens are as evident as the influence on society some kind of prophetic
divinatory effect. The divinatory practice of scrying that tried to see into the past and
revealed the future to the seers as a tool to communicate with the spirit world / the imaginary media and technology in Black Mirror may both impact what becomes reality sooner or later in a similar way. They are examples of imagination as a social practice, that becomes real as soon as it is ready to be performed by entering the daily assemblages. Is (screen)technology also prophecy? I re-watched the Season 4, titled “Crocodile“ in which a device comes to use that can recall a person’s memory and monitor their visual perception. The viewers are introduced to a world where the newest form of surveillance takes place inside people’s minds and where technology can grant access to any observer. In this near-future reality insurance worker carried around a non-invasive marble-sized device and placed them on a person’s temple to pick up shortterm memories which were then displayed on the screen of another device
that looks like a small television. “This accesses, engrams, your memories of what hppened, “the investigator says. “Now, they’re subjective. They may not be totally accurate, and they’re often emotional. But by collecting a range of recollections from yourself and any witnesses, we can help build a corroborative picture.“ The explanation was clear enough for the protagonist who was hit by an autonomous pizza manufacturing van (Toyota made a design of based to the scene from this episode), that was the cause of the investigation into the memories of the eye witnesses to clarify who was responsible for the accident - of course it came much worse than an automatic car hitting a pedestrian, when later in the story the recaller-device unintentionally reveals a murder crime. The tech fiction of Black Mirror pulls up questions related to the brain machine interface investigated in so many different areas today, since it is predicted to increase in size as a market. Key drivers of this market for brain computer interface (BCI) technology include increasing prevalence of neuroprosthetic conditions, growing geriatric population, and rising technological developments facilitating communication and movement in paralytic patients. Furthermore, the use of BCI technology in vir-tual gaming, home control systems, and military communication enhances the applicability of brain computer interface systems, thereby fueling its growth.

These narratives and innovations can be overwhelming - with de-scribing, transformulating and re-appropriate the self-other I tried to appropriate the narratives around digital technology through memory work. In my memory architecture screens were central in their multiple meanings.

They are incorporated through my memories and my experiences. When I’m scrying on a screen, I see the desires and socio-technological imaginaries which - as in the example of the Language Evolving project - want to dissolve the screen as an interface by incorporating the infrastructure. It is the desire that the human being is its own interface. But whose desires, whose sociotechnological imaginaries are these? As I have shown with for example the 3D scan and the mediatised gendered roles on TV, all these technological imaginaries are closely interwoven with existing power structures and perpetuate them. This is not, however, a reason for me to reject technology, because through digital technologies I can at the same time free myself from these glued-on mediatised gendered racialised images - or/and re-appropriate the self-other. Although these master narratives and myths are making me feel caught between two worlds. In between -female and +male, swiss or turkish, shy or girgin (turkish - outgoing), the space I was caught in between simultaneously, is the gap between the real world and the virtual - which felt comfortable being caught in, as digital native – the glitchiness of my digital body felt liberating, the process of writing has influeence on how I use language as an artist. In a multimedial environment I can express myself multimedial, which is close to multicultural, that is the hybrid glitchy identity construct I am not born into, but develop with everybody else in co-operation. The digital is a possibility to “make new worlds and dare to modify our own. Through the digital, the body “in glitch“ finds its genesis. Embracing the glitch is therefore a participatory action that challenges the status quo.“ (Russell 2020: 11)