Visualizations of “self” and “other”: immune systems in the schematic illustration and microphotographies

Publication Type:

Language:

Transliteration of original Title: 
Vizualizatsii «svoego» i «chuzhogo»: immunnye sistemy na skhematicheskikh izobrazheniyakh i mikrofotografiyakh
Author(s): 
Denis Sivkov
Institute of Management – Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Issue number: 
No.2 (Vol.52)
Pages: 
153-167
Abstract: 

Since the 1980-s the number of immune system's depictions has increased dramatically. Often in classroom or in hospital immunologists or doctors could show you how our immune system works. Most popular hand-drawn schema is a model of self-other distinction with clear and rigid border between body and environment. But there is a tension between different models of immune system and their visualizations. For example, it’s difficult to explain autoimmune diseases in terms and pictures of classical model self-other distinction because immunity means a war of self against self. Niels Jerne’s network model of immune system does not react on other or non-self. It deals only with its own components and prepares immune response before any possible invasion. In another model that’s called “symbiotic model” we cant tell about self and non-self, because some non-self entities are friends of organism. Besides some of bacteria in our body are responsible for our immune response. So there is no unity and consensus in immunity system’s visualization. But how do we know that immune systems exist? What if schemata are just a product of immunological imagination? Microphotographs made by electronic microscope are evidence of truth. They stabilize all arguments and controversies in visualization of immune systems. First Donna Haraway and later Emily Martin demonstrated microphotographs and asked people about their feeling and impression. Lay people couldn't associate biological of microphotographs and their limited body. Microphotographs are out of context of human bodily experience and in this sense there is no stabilization of arguments. Immune system’s microphotographs depend on hand-drawn pictures. Micrographs as fragments of immune system are not linked with immunological patterns. In this sense schematic images are “golden standard” for electron micrographs. There is no self and other in this picture but we define self and other in microphotographs by schemata.

Keywords: 
representation, visualization, science & technology studies, immunology, immune system, self, other, microphotography, de-contextualization, mechanical objectivity
References: 

Anderson, W., Mackay, I. Intolerant Bodies: А Short History of Autoimmunity. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2014, 250 pp.

Cohen, E. A Body Worth Defending: Immunity, Biopolitics, and the Apotheosis of the Modern Body. Durham; London: Duke University Press, 2009, 372 pp.

Cohen, Е. “Moe svoe kak chuzhoe: autoimmunitet i inye paradoksy” [My Self as an Other: Autoimmunity and ‘other’ paradoxes], Sociologiya vlasti, 2014, No. 4, pp. 182–197. (In Russian)

Buiani, R. “Innovation and Compliance in Making and Perceiving the Scientific Visualization of Viruses”, Canadian Journal of Communication, 2014, No. 49, pp. 539–556.

Cambrosio, A., Jacobi, D., Keating, P. “Ehrlich's ‘Beautiful Pictures’ and the Controversial Beginnings of Immunological Imagery”, Isis, 1993, No. 4, pp. 662–699.

Cambrosio, A., Jacobi, D., Keating, P. “Antibodies and ‘De-monstration’”, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 2008, No. 2, pp. 131–157.

Daston, L., Galison, P. Objectivity. New York: Zero Books, 2007. 501 pp.

Dumit, J. Picturing Personhood: Brain Scans and Biomedical Identity. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2004. 272 pp.

Frolov, V.A. Operedivshii vremya [Ahead of the Time]. Moscow: Sovetskaya Rossiya, 1980. 272 pp. (In Russian)

Haraway, D. “The Biopolitics of Postmodern Bodies: Constitution of Self in Immune Systems Discourse”, in: Haraway D. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: the Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge, 1991, pp. 203–230.

Haraway, D. “Manifest kiborgov: nauka, tehnologiya i sotsialisticheskiy feminizm 1980-kh godov” [Cyborg Manifesto: science, Technology and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century], in: Gendernaya teorija i iskusstvo. Antologiya: 1970-2000 [Gender Theory and Art. Antology: 1970-2000]. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2005, pp. 322–377. (In Russian)

Latour, B., Woolgar, S. Laboratory life: the Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986. 294 pp.

Latour, B. “Visualization and Cognition: Thinking with Eyes and Hands”, in: Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Past and Present, 1986, Vol. 6, pp. 1–40.

Martin, E. Flexible Bodies: the role of Immunity in American Culture from the Days of Polio to the Age of AIDS. Boston: Beacon Press, 1994. 320 pp.

Moulin, A.-M. “Immune System: a Key Concept for the History of Immunology”, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 1989, No. 11, pp. 221–236.

Pradeu, T. The Limits of the Self: Immunology and Biological Identity. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. 302 pp.

Roitt, I., Brostoff, G., Male, D. Immunologiya [Immunology]. Moscow: Mir, 2000. 592 pp. (In Russian)

Silverstein, A. A History of Immunology: Second edition. London; New York: Academic Press, 2009. 552 pp.

Sivkov, D. Y. “Paradoksy autoimmuniteta. Predislovie k perevodu Jeda Koyena” [Paradoxes of Autoimmunity. Preview to translation of Ed Cohen], Sotsiologiya vlasti, 2014, No. 4, pp. 174–181.

Tauber, A. The Immune Self: Theory or Metaphor? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. 354 pp.

DOI: 
10.5840/eps201752236
Full Text: