Reproductive technology's animal unconscious: multispecies motherhood and humanimal horror.

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Georgia Walton, Dominic O'Key
{"title":"Reproductive technology's animal unconscious: multispecies motherhood and humanimal horror.","authors":"Georgia Walton, Dominic O'Key","doi":"10.1136/medhum-2025-013322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Preclinical animal testing has played a critical role within medical history. Yet it remains an underdiscussed topic within the medical humanities. What might happen, then, if we analyse the animal studies of the lab via the method of cultural critique that is animal studies? This essay responds to this question by exploring the roles that animals play, and are made to play, within the technologies for, debates about and narratives of human reproduction. The essay is comparative. First, it focuses on how the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) represents their experiments with lambs as part of their development of an artificial placenta. Then, it juxtaposes these narratives with two recent horror films that dramatise and hyperbolise the very human-animal relations on which CHOP's research relies. Both Laura Moss's <i>Birth/Rebirth</i> (2023) and Valdimar Jóhannsson's <i>Lamb</i> (2021) can be read, we suggest, as narratives of multispecies family-making that, in their representation of human reproduction as dependent on the exploitation of animal reproduction, signify and subvert the species hierarchies that attend animal testing. Yet we also wish to track how each of these films, just like CHOP, ultimately figures animals as sacrificial objects. We argue that reading these texts together illuminates the politics of species that undergirds CHOP's research, its medical humanities critique and the horror genre. More than simply adding an animal studies perspective to the debate about the future of human reproduction, this essay models forms of reading that, by combining the interpretive practices of animal studies and medical humanities, unsettle the ways that animals are positioned as literal and symbolic surrogates for the human.</p>","PeriodicalId":46435,"journal":{"name":"Medical Humanities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2025-013322","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Preclinical animal testing has played a critical role within medical history. Yet it remains an underdiscussed topic within the medical humanities. What might happen, then, if we analyse the animal studies of the lab via the method of cultural critique that is animal studies? This essay responds to this question by exploring the roles that animals play, and are made to play, within the technologies for, debates about and narratives of human reproduction. The essay is comparative. First, it focuses on how the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) represents their experiments with lambs as part of their development of an artificial placenta. Then, it juxtaposes these narratives with two recent horror films that dramatise and hyperbolise the very human-animal relations on which CHOP's research relies. Both Laura Moss's Birth/Rebirth (2023) and Valdimar Jóhannsson's Lamb (2021) can be read, we suggest, as narratives of multispecies family-making that, in their representation of human reproduction as dependent on the exploitation of animal reproduction, signify and subvert the species hierarchies that attend animal testing. Yet we also wish to track how each of these films, just like CHOP, ultimately figures animals as sacrificial objects. We argue that reading these texts together illuminates the politics of species that undergirds CHOP's research, its medical humanities critique and the horror genre. More than simply adding an animal studies perspective to the debate about the future of human reproduction, this essay models forms of reading that, by combining the interpretive practices of animal studies and medical humanities, unsettle the ways that animals are positioned as literal and symbolic surrogates for the human.

生殖技术的动物无意识:多物种母性和人类的恐惧。
临床前动物试验在医学史上发挥了关键作用。然而,在医学人文学科中,这仍然是一个未被充分讨论的话题。那么,如果我们通过动物研究的文化批判方法来分析实验室的动物研究,会发生什么呢?这篇文章通过探索动物在人类生殖的辩论和叙述中所扮演的角色来回答这个问题。这篇文章是比较的。首先,它关注的是费城儿童医院(CHOP)如何将他们的羔羊实验作为人工胎盘开发的一部分。然后,它将这些叙述与最近的两部恐怖电影并置,这两部电影戏剧化和夸张了人类与动物的关系,而这正是CHOP的研究所依赖的。我们认为,劳拉·莫斯的《诞生/重生》(2023年)和瓦尔迪玛Jóhannsson的《羔羊》(2021年)都可以被解读为多物种家庭形成的叙事,它们将人类繁殖表现为依赖于对动物繁殖的利用,表明并颠覆了参与动物试验的物种等级制度。然而,我们也希望追踪每一部电影,就像CHOP一样,最终是如何将动物塑造成祭祀对象的。我们认为,将这些文本放在一起阅读,可以阐明支撑CHOP研究、医学人文批判和恐怖类型的物种政治。这篇文章不仅仅是简单地将动物研究的视角加入到关于人类生殖未来的辩论中,而是通过结合动物研究和医学人文学科的解释实践,模拟了一种阅读形式,这种阅读形式颠覆了动物被定位为人类的字面和象征性替代品的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Humanities
Medical Humanities HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Occupational and Environmental Medicine (OEM) is an international peer reviewed journal concerned with areas of current importance in occupational medicine and environmental health issues throughout the world. Original contributions include epidemiological, physiological and psychological studies of occupational and environmental health hazards as well as toxicological studies of materials posing human health risks. A CPD/CME series aims to help visitors in continuing their professional development. A World at Work series describes workplace hazards and protetctive measures in different workplaces worldwide. A correspondence section provides a forum for debate and notification of preliminary findings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信