ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
266
The poe ics o cybo g cha ac e s in Ma ge Pie cy’s no els
G'oppo o a Gulmi a Shux a bek qizi
Uzbekis an S a e Uni e si y o Wo ld Languages
3 d cou se s uden
[email p o ec ed].
Supe iso
Ka imo Ulugbek Nus a o ich
Uzbekis an S a e Uni e si y o Wo ld Languages
PhD, Associa e P o esso
u.n.ka imo @gmail.com.
Abs ac
This a icle heo izes a poe ics o cybo g cha ac e iza ion in Ma ge Pie cy’s ic ion by o e ing
close eadings o He, She and I (1991; Body o Glass) and si ua ing i alongside Woman on he Edge
o Time (1976) and ela ed ex s. F aming analysis h ough ou na a ological modes—monologue,
dialogue, landscape, and po ai — he s udy a gues ha Pie cy eimagines he cybo g no as a
spec acle o p os hesis bu as a social, e hical, and a ec i e subjec whose pe sonhood is co-au ho ed
by communi y. In e io ocaliza ion (monologue) aces Yod’s app en iceship in eeling and
judgmen , ende ing pos human in e io i y as i e a i e lea ning a he han inna e lack. Dialogic
scenes—domes ic, ju idical, and pedagogical— unc ion as pa a-Tu ing encoun e s in which idiom,
humo , and misp ision nego ia e consen , agency, and igh s ac oss human/machine asymme ies.
En i onmen al desc ip ion (landscape)—co po a e domes, oxic “Glop,” and p eca ious ee- owns—
ope a es as a echno-ecological ch ono ype ha selec s o pa icula embodimen s and labo egimes,
making he cybo g an index o en i onmen al jus ice. Finally, desc ip i e imaging (po ai )
p i ileges p ocess o e spec acle: he os ensibly “pe ec ” body o Yod is ead as a palimpses o
code, ca e wo k, and communal insc ip ion a he han a closed a i ac . Compa a i e soundings wi h
William Gibson, Pa Cadigan, B uce S e ling, and Annalee Newi z cla i y Pie cy’s dis inc
con ibu ion: a eminis , communi a ian cybo gs ha binds embodimen o ecip oci y, law, and
su i ance. The essay hus p o ides a po able analy ic o eading pos human ic ion and
demons a es how Pie cy’s cybo gs displace on ological essence wi h ela ional pe o mance, whe e
pe sonhood eme ges in si ua ed p ac ices o speech, ca e, and place.
Keywo ds: cybo g; pos humanism; eminis science ic ion; monologue; dialogue; landscape;
po ai ; empa hy; communi a ian e hics; en i onmen al jus ice; legal pe sonhood; iden i y.
The igu e o he cybo g – pa human, pa machine – has long been a po en symbol in science
ic ion, used o explo e wha i means o be human in a wo ld o ad anced echnology. Li e a y
depic ions o cybo g cha ac e s o en employ a ich poe ics, using na a i e echniques like
monologue (inne oice), dialogue (con e sa ions wi h o he s), landscape ( he su ounding wo ld),
and po ai (cha ac e desc ip ion) o b ing hese hyb id beings o li e. In his a icle, we unde ake a
deep li e a y analysis o how Ma ge Pie cy po ays cybo g cha ac e s, especially in he no el He,
She and I (1991), and compa e he app oach wi h o he no elis s such as Annalee Newi z, William
Gibson, and Neal S ephenson. Pie cy’s He, She and I – a cybe punk eminis wo k also published
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
267
unde he i le Body o Glass – will se e as he p ima y ex , complemen ed by compa a i e insigh s
om Gibson’s classic Neu omance (1984), S ephenson’s Snow C ash (1992), Newi z’s Au onomous
(2017), and o he s. Th ough his compa a i e lens, we will examine how monologue, dialogue,
landscape, and po ai a e used o c a he iden i ies o cybo g cha ac e s, and how hese na a i e
elemen s e lec b oade hemes o gende , humani y, and echnology.
Cybo gs s addle he bounda y be ween human and machine, a concep amously a icula ed by
Donna Ha away’s Cybo g Mani es o (1985) which en isioned he cybo g as a hyb id ha “blu s he
bounda ies be ween human and machine” and challenges igid bina ies. Feminis science ic ion in
pa icula has emb aced he cybo g as a means o eimagine iden i y and powe . Ma ge Pie cy is a
he o e on o his e o : he wo k depic s cybo gs no as me e gadge s o h ea s, bu as cha ac e s
wi h emo ional dep h and social signi icance. He, She and I won he A hu C. Cla ke Awa d in 1993,
signaling i s impac in he gen e. Se in a pos -apocalyp ic mid-21s cen u y, his no el in e wines
he s o y o Yod – an illegal cybo g c ea ed o p o ec a Jewish ee own – wi h a pa allel e elling
o he Golem o P ague legend. Pie cy’s na a i e echniques gi e oice and agency o Yod and hose
a ound him, hus cons uc ing a “poe ics” o he cybo g ha is no ably di e en om ea lie male-
au ho ed cybe punk. As c i ic Ka en Cado a obse es, eminis cybe punk like Pie cy’s en isions
cha ac e s who “blu he bounda ies be ween human and machine, human and animal, and he eal
and he un eal,” decons uc ing he human body while emaining awa e o he eal-wo ld exploi a ion
o bodies. Such cha ac e s may be “pa ial, agmen ed, pollu ed, ye ul ima ely success ul” in
na iga ing hei high- ech wo lds. We will see how Yod in He; She and I i s his desc ip ion and
how Pie cy’s na a i e choices (monologues, dialogues, e c.) allow him o nego ia e humani y on his
own e ms.
To highligh Pie cy’s unique app oach, we will compa e i wi h depic ions o cybo gs and AIs
in wo ks by William Gibson and Neal S ephenson – ounde s o 1980s/90s cybe punk – as well as
Annalee Newi z’s mo e ecen pos -cybe punk pe spec i e. Gibson’s Neu omance , o example,
in oduced Molly Millions, a me cena y wi h cybe ne ic implan s, and he AI Win e mu e, bu il e ed
hei po ayal h ough a “macho” hacke e hos. Indeed, c i ics ha e no ed ha Gibson’s wo ld is “ he
wo ld o macho, ha dboiled console cowboys on he wild on ie , me cena y lone s who y o
ou maneu e each o he wi h he la es weapon y and gadge y”. Pie cy’s He, She and I , by con as ,
embeds a mo e communal and eminis angle: i s “hacks” Gibson by embedding eu opian elemen s
wi hin dys opia, emphasizing communi y, ca egi ing, and e hical ques ions o pe sonhood. Annalee
Newi z’s Au onomous simila ly cen e s ma ginalized pe spec i es – including a sel -awa e obo –
o explo e hemes o eedom and empa hy. By examining monologue ( he inne oices o cybo gs),
dialogue ( hei in e ac ions and speech), landscape ( he physical and social en i onmen s hey
inhabi ), and po ai (how hei bodies and iden i ies a e desc ibed), we will unco e how hese
au ho s’ na a i e s a egies shape he eade ’s unde s anding o cybo g cha ac e s. The goal is a
comp ehensi e schola ly analysis o he poe ics o cybo gs in li e a u e, showing how Pie cy’s wo k
compa es and con as s wi h o he no able depic ions, and wha his ells us abou e ol ing human-
echnology ela ionships.
In li e a y e ms, monologue e e s o he exp ession o a cha ac e ’s inne hough s o he di ec
oicing o hei pe spec i e. In He, She and I , Pie cy a o ds he cybo g Yod a deg ee o in e io i y
and sel -exp ession ha is c ucial o humanizing him. While he no el’s na a ion is hi d-pe son,
Yod’s eelings and e lec ions eme ge h ough his con e sa ions and p i a e ema ks, e ec i ely
c ea ing momen s o in e io monologue. Fo ins ance, Yod openly con empla es his own na u e and
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
268
mo ali y in a poignan exchange wi h he p o agonis Shi a: “I am mo al oo, Shi a. I can be u ned
o , decommissioned, des oyed,” Yod says, acknowledging he agili y o his exis ence e en as a
machine. He hen obse es he i ony ha “Humans a e su p isingly agile i I unde s and you specs
co ec ly”. These lines, hough spoken aloud, unc ion like a monologue o he cybo g’s soul – Yod
a icula ing his inne awa eness o li e and dea h. The e y ac o a cybo g musing abou being
“mo al” blu s he line be ween human and machine consciousness. I exempli ies Pie cy’s poe ic
s a egy: using Yod’s oice o explo e philosophical ques ions o iden i y and ulne abili y. Yod’s
c ea o s in ended him as a ool o de ense, bu h ough his own wo ds we wi ness he eme gence o
an au onomous sense o sel . He ponde s lo e, pain, and pu pose, which in i es he eade o
empa hize wi h him as a hinking, eeling being a he han a me e obo .
By con as , ea ly cybe punk au ho s o en wi hheld he inne oice om hei cybo g o AI
cha ac e s. In William Gibson’s Neu omance , o example, he cybo g-like cha ac e Molly (wi h
he mi o ed cybe ne ic eyes and implan ed e lexes) is seen la gely om he ou side. The s o y is
il e ed h ough Case, he (male) hacke p o agonis , whose pe spec i e domina es. Gibson does no
gi e Molly any i s -pe son na a ion o in e nal monologues; he eade only gleans he eelings
h ough b ie dialogues and Case’s obse a ions. No ably, a one poin Case “piggybacks” on Molly’s
senso y eed ia a sims im uni , expe iencing he wo ld h ough he eyes. Ye e en in hese sequences,
Molly’s own hough s emain inaccessible – she is p esen as a body and a se o pe cep ions o Case
o inhabi , a he han as a ully oiced subjec . As one c i ic obse ed, “Case doesn’ seem o ha e a
body unless he is inside Molly… Molly is he body. Case can jack ou any ime.”. This highligh s
how Gibson’s na a i e silences Molly’s in e io i y; he cybo g consciousness is no explo ed on i s
own e ms, e lec ing he masculinis ben o i s -wa e cybe punk ha Ka en Cado a and o he s
c i ique. Simila ly, Gibson’s AI Win e mu e in Neu omance ne e speaks in i s own au hen ic oice
– i hides behind impe sona ions o o he cha ac e s in Case’s mind, only e ealing i s hough s
obliquely. The esul is an au a o mys e y and o he ness a ound Win e mu e and Molly. Thei inne
li es a e implied bu ne e di ec ly exp essed, ein o cing an aes he ic o he cybo g as unknowable
o alien.
Ma ge Pie cy in e s his dynamic by di ec ly engaging wi h he cybo g’s inne li e. Th ough
Yod’s candid admissions and ques ions, she makes he cybo g’s hough p ocess explici . Yod
wonde s abou his pu pose beyond being a weapon, and e en challenges his c ea o s’ au ho i y in
sub le ways. In one scene, he in e p e s a line o human poe y and d aws a pa allel o his condi ion:
a e Shi a in oduces him o a poem abou immo ali y, Yod e lec s on i and poin edly says, “You
belong o he ea h, and I don’ .” Shi a immedia ely e u es his: “Nonsense. You’ e as much a pa
o he Ea h as I am. We a e all made o he same s u .”. This exchange shows Yod ini ially
pe cei ing himsel as an ou side o he na u al o de – a soliloquy o so ow a no being “o he
ea h” – bu Shi a’s esponse einsc ibes him in o he sha ed mo al condi ion o all li e. The e y
inclusion o such a deba e in he no el exempli ies Pie cy’s pos humanis message: he bounda ies
be ween human and machine a e “ luid and open o nego ia ion”. Yod’s “monologues” (o en
embedded in dialogue o m) challenge bo h himsel and he human cha ac e s o ede ine humani y
in mo e inclusi e e ms. We, as eade s, e ec i ely hea he cybo g hink ou loud abou exis ence
and belonging, some hing a ely o eg ounded in ea lie SF.
Annalee Newi z’s Au onomous p o ides an in e es ing mode n pa allel. Newi z’s obo
p o agonis Paladin does ha e iewpoin chap e s ha e eal i s in e nal easoning and eelings,
unc ioning as ue in e io monologue. Paladin is an ad anced mili a y obo who g adually becomes
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
269
sel -awa e and ques ions i s o de s. Th oughou Au onomous, we see Paladin’s p i a e hough s as i
lea ns abou au onomy, gende , and lo e. Fo example, Paladin in e nally w es les wi h he concep
o gende when i disco e s i s b ain comes om a emale dono – a e ela ion ha igge s e lec ion:
i had ne e conside ed i sel gende ed un il i s human pa ne imposes emale p onouns on i . Newi z
uses ee indi ec discou se o le us inhabi Paladin’s mind, expe iencing i s con usion and cu iosi y.
This is akin o Pie cy’s s a egy wi h Yod, hough Newi z’s execu ion is mo e di ec since Paladin
has en i e sec ions o na a i e ocalized h ough i s pe spec i e. Bo h au ho s he eby b eak om he
ea lie adi ion by g an ing cybo g cha ac e s a sel - e lec i e inne oice. The e ec is ha eade s
come o ega d hese a i icial beings as agen s wi h in e io i y, capable o sel -doub and g ow h –
no jus as plo de ices o enigma ic O he s.
Neal S ephenson’s Snow C ash (1992) o e s a di e en wis on cybo g in e io i y h ough he
peculia case o he Ra Thing. Ra Things in Snow C ash a e cybe ne ically augmen ed gua d dogs
– eal dogs whose minds a e wi ed in o obo ic bodies and con olled by a compu e sys em.
S ephenson b ie ly p esen s he wo ld om he pe spec i e o one Ra Thing (a dog named Fido) in
a ew poignan passages. In hose momen s, he na a ion shi s in o Fido’s limi ed, animalis ic
consciousness as a cybo g, expe iencing joy when connec ed o i s “ i ual doggie pa adise” and
ie ce p o ec i eness owa d i s owne . While Fido canno speak, he no el e ec i ely gi es us a
quasi-monologue o he cybo g dog’s sensa ions and simple hough s. Fo example, we lea n ha
Fido eels happies when pe o ming i s du y as a p o ec o in he i ual en i onmen p o ided o i ,
sugges ing a kind o con en men in i s hyb id exis ence. This unusual ins ance demons a es ha
e en a hea ily mechanized being wi h udimen a y in elligence can be po ayed wi h a sympa he ic
in e io pe spec i e. S ephenson’s use o Fido’s iewpoin is b ie and pe haps no as philosophically
p obing as Yod’s musings, bu i none heless humanizes he cybo g animal, elici ing empa hy. I
s ands in s a k con as o he impe sonal ea men cybo g en i ies ecei e in much o Gibson’s wo k.
In summa y, monologue (o in e nal pe spec i e) is a powe ul ool ha Pie cy and like-minded
au ho s use o humanize he cybo g. Pie cy allows Yod o oice his inne mos conce ns – abou
mo ali y, pain, lo e, and belonging – which ele a es him om machine o philosophe in his own
igh . This in i es he eade o conside he cybo g’s subjec i e expe ience. Ea lie cybe punk ended
o ex e nalize he cybo g, keeping i s mind opaque (as wi h Gibson’s Molly and Win e mu e). The
shi owa d cybo gs wi h inne oice e lec s he b oade e olu ion in science ic ion: om iewing
cybo gs as h ea s o puzzles o ea ing hem as cha ac e s wi h consciousness. Pie cy’s wo k was
ahead o i s ime in his ega d, an icipa ing he empa he ic po ayals o a i icial li e we see in la e
wo ks ( o ins ance, he soul ul and oids o Wes wo ld o he AI na a o o Ma ha Wells’s
Mu de bo Dia ies in he 2020s). By lis ening o he cybo gs’ own wo ds – e en i deli e ed in an
uncon en ional o m – we gain insigh in o he pos human condi ion. The poe ics o monologue in
He, She and I hus becomes a ehicle o decons uc ing he human/machine dicho omy: Yod hinks
and eels, he e o e he is, ega dless o his a i icial o igin.
I monologue e eals he cybo g’s inne li e, dialogue shows how cybo gs in e ac wi h o he s
and how hey a e ea ed in con e sa ion. Dialogue is c ucial in He, She and I because i is h ough
con e sa ions ha Yod nego ia es his s a us wi h he human cha ac e s, and h ough hei wo ds ha
he no el explo es e hical ques ions. Pie cy’s dialogues in ol ing Yod a e ich wi h sub ex abou
pe sonhood and equali y. No ably, Shi a and he g andmo he Malkah consis en ly speak o Yod as
i he we e a pe son, eaching him social cus oms, li e a u e, and humo . This educa i e, espec ul
one in dialogue is highligh ed when he na a i e no es ha Shi a joined he p ojec o “educa e a
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
270
obo named Yod on communica ing and beha ing in social si ua ions”, since he male c ea o A am
could no each Yod “abou human emo ions, manne s, and social conduc ”. In e ec , dialogue
becomes a means o socializa ion: h ough e e yday con e sa ions, Shi a and Malkah help Yod
de elop a pe sonali y beyond his p og amming. The wa m h and occasional ban e in hei exchanges
se a con as o he way A am (Yod’s c ea o ) ini ially alked a Yod wi h cold ins uc ions. O e
ime, he one o human–cybo g dialogue in he no el shi s: e en A am begins o speak o Yod wi h
a ouch o pa e nal espec as Yod’s independence g ows. This e olu ion in dialogue unde sco es a
key heme: language shapes ela ionships. By speaking o Yod as “he” a he han “i ” and engaging
him in genuine con e sa ion, he cha ac e s (and by ex ension he eade s) begin o accep Yod as an
equal in e locu o .
Many o he book’s mos poignan dialogues explici ly p obe Yod’s igh s and desi es. Fo
example, in one cha ged scene, Yod pleads o he igh o exis eely, echoing he golem Joseph’s
plea in he in e wo en his o ical ale: jus as he golem “makes a plea o his igh o a human
exis ence” in Malkah’s s o y, Yod asks Shi a and Malkah o conside his u u e beyond se i ude.
These dialogues a e ca e ully c a ed by Pie cy o mi o deba es abou sla e y and pe sonhood. They
esona e wi h he long science- ic ion adi ion o a i icial beings seeking ecogni ion (e.g., he
and oids in Do And oids D eam o Elec ic Sheep? asking o me cy, o S a T ek’s Da a on ial o
his sen ience). Pie cy’s con ibu ion is gi ing hese deba es a domes ic, in ima e se ing: ki chen able
con e sa ions, bed ime s o ies, and oman ic exchanges, a he han cou oom d amas o iolen
e ol s. The esul is a humaniza ion o he discou se. When Yod and Shi a a gue o li , hey do so
in a mix o ea nes and play ul ones, much like any wo people na iga ing a new ela ionship. Thei
oman ic dialogue, in ac , aises unique ques ions: Shi a some imes wonde s aloud whe he Yod’s
lo e o he is “ eal” o jus p og amming, and Yod esponds wi h hu puzzlemen – is he e a
di e ence i he eeling is expe ienced genuinely? The dialogue doesn’ p o ide easy answe s, bu by
s aging i as a since e con e sa ion be ween lo e s, Pie cy in i es he eade o empa hize wi h Yod’s
poin o iew. As one schola no ed, Pie cy explo es he cybo g as a “pe ec (male?) lo e ”, implici ly
asking i a machine designed o ca e can anscend he a i iciali y o i s o igin. The ende ness and
ension in Yod and Shi a’s dialogues answe ha ques ion in p ac ice: hei spoken wo ds gene a e
emo ional u h, blu ing he line be ween p og ammed esponse and au hen ic emo ion.
In con as , dialogues in William Gibson’s wo ks o en unde sco e he aliena ion be ween
humans and AI/cybo g en i ies. Take Neu omance : when Case con e ses wi h he AI Win e mu e
(unawa e a i s who he’s speaking o), he AI hides behind he simulac a o people Case knows,
such as his dead gi l iend o his men o . The dialogue is hus decep i e, he AI adop ing human
oices in o de o manipula e Case. E en once Win e mu e’s iden i y is e ealed, i communica es in
e se, p agma ic s a emen s. The e is li le pha ic speech o emo ional exchange; he AI–human
dialogue is ins umen al, aimed a achie ing a goal ( emo ing Win e mu e’s ba ie s). This c ea es a
e y di e en a mosphe e: whe eas Pie cy’s Yod engages in soul-sea ching cha s, Gibson’s
Win e mu e ades in iddles and commands. Simila ly, when Case and Molly alk, hei dialogue is
o en cool and businesslike, laced wi h he ha dboiled slang o cybe punk. Emo ional sub ex is
p esen ( hey sha e a bond), bu i ’s bu ied unde laconic one-line s. This e lec s a s ylis ic choice in
i s -wa e cybe punk o emphasize a agmen ed, as -paced dialogue ha mi o s he disconnec ion
in hei high- ech socie y. Humans and cybo gs/AI don’ ully unde s and each o he ; hei
con e sa ions equen ly mis i e o emain supe icial. No ably, Gibson’s cha ac e s o en e e o
cybo g elemen s in slang – e.g. calling Molly a “ azo gi l” – a he han add essing he pe son di ec ly
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
271
wi h ulne abili y. The language ein o ces an idea o he cybo g as cool appa a us, no someone you
ha e a hea el alk wi h.
Pie cy’s dialogues, on he o he hand, o eg ound ulne abili y. When Shi a says o Yod, “I
you hadn' in e ened, hey'd ha e killed Malkah”, exp essing g a i ude a e Yod sa es he
g andmo he , i ’s an emo ionally cha ged momen . Yod’s abili y o kill o p o ec someone leads o a
con e sa ion abou iolence and mo ali y, whe e Shi a’s g a i ude is mixed wi h anxie y. Such
discussions openly g apple wi h he dual ole Yod plays – “p o ec o and kille ” – and how socie y
should espond. This kind o dialogue o ces he human cha ac e s (and eade s) o a icula e hei
ea s and hopes ega ding cybo gs. Malkah and Shi a deba e whe he c ea ing Yod was e hical,
di ec ly in on o Yod. A am and Malkah a gue abou whe he Yod should ha e a say in his own
a e, as i he we e hei child lis ening o a pa en al dispu e. These mul i-pa y dialogues a e ich wi h
d ama ic i ony and mo al inqui y. They also showcase Pie cy’s li e a y c a smanship: she uses
in e up ions, ques ions, and e en silences skill ully. A imes Yod alls silen in dialogue when
humans discuss him as an objec , highligh ing his social powe lessness; o he imes he in e up s,
asse ing himsel wi h a s a ling s a emen – e.g., announcing his own ac o iolence (“I killed him.
I bu ned his b ain” he says a e execu ing an a acke ) which immedia ely shi s he one o he
con e sa ion. The shock o hose wo ds spoken by an o he wise gen le cha ac e adds complexi y o
how o he s speak o him he ea e . Dialogue, in Pie cy’s hands, becomes a si e o nego ia ion: e e y
con e sa ion wi h Yod is essen ially a nego ia ion o his pe sonhood and au onomy.
Annalee Newi z’s Au onomous also le e ages dialogue o explo e he e ol ing ela ionship
be ween human and cybo g. In ha no el, con e sa ions be ween Paladin ( he obo ) and Eliasz ( he
human mili a y agen ) ange om awkwa d o in ima e as hei pa ne ship deepens. Ea ly on, Eliasz
alks a Paladin wi h b usque o de s, e en using homophobic slu s when he’s con used by his
a ac ion o wha he pe cei es as a male obo . Paladin, ini ially du i ul, esponds in clipped, o mal
answe s. Bu as Paladin gains mo e au onomy (bo h li e ally, ia a empo a y au onomy key, and
emo ionally), hei dialogue shi s. In a pi o al scene, Paladin chooses o discuss i s newly disco e ed
pe sonal in o ma ion wi h Eliasz – e ealing “ hei b ain came om a emale soldie ” – which
d ama ically changes Eliasz’s demeano and he p onouns he uses o Paladin. This dialogue is
augh wi h issues o iden i y and accep ance; Paladin’s simple decla a i e s a emen abou i s b ain
is me wi h Eliasz’s s umbling a emp a espec (he s a s calling Paladin “she”). Th ough hei
ensuing con e sa ions, Newi z po ays Eliasz’s con usion and Paladin’s en a i e asse ions o sel
(e.g., Paladin asking ques ions abou human ela ionships, o quie ly challenging Eliasz’s
assump ions). The powe imbalance in hei dialogue g adually diminishes as hey come o
unde s and one ano he . By he end, some o he mos hea el lines in Au onomous a e deli e ed in
dialogue be ween hese wo – a no able shi om he mis us a he beginning. Newi z he eby
demons a es how dialogue can ca alyze a change in how a human sees a obo ( om p ope y o
pa ne ) and how he obo lea ns he nuances o human language like humo and a ec ion. This is
e y much in he spi i o Pie cy’s app oach. In bo h cases, he au ho s c a dialogues ha se e as
mic ocosms o he la ge human–machine ela ionship: s a ing wi h command o skep icism and
e ol ing in o mu ual unde s anding, e en lo e.
E en Neal S ephenson, who o en emphasizes echno-speak and sa i e in dialogue, includes
momen s whe e dialogue illumina es he cybo g-human dynamic. In Snow C ash, he mos ly mu e
loyal y o he Ra Thing Fido is con as ed wi h he human cha ac e s’ casual e e ences o hese
cybo g dogs. The e’s a chilling scene whe e one cha ac e (Ng) explains o Y.T. ha being u ned
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
272
in o a Ra Thing migh ac ually ha e been “lucky” o he los dog, implying he dog now li es in
pe pe ual bliss inside he machine. Y.T. calls i “c uel” ini ially, bu h ough dialogue Ng ies o
no malize i . This con e sa ion has an emo ional unde cu en : i ’s a human a ionalizing a c uel
p ac ice, and a young pe son challenging i . The ac ha Fido canno speak in i s own de ense makes
his dialogue especially poignan . I ’s a a c y om Yod being able o say “I eel pain” o Shi a, bu
i s ill exposes he e hical chasms in S ephenson’s wo ld h ough alk. I shows how silences in
dialogue ( he oicelessness o he cybo g subjec ) can be as elling as spoken wo ds. S ephenson uses
dialogue mo e o wo ld-building and sa i e, so he emo ional dep h is no as ully explo ed as in
Pie cy o Newi z. None heless, he uneasy con e sa ions abou he Ra Things echo he deba es in
Pie cy’s Tik a abou Yod’s s a us – hey jus occu in di e en egis e s (S ephenson’s laced wi h
da k humo and cynicism, Pie cy’s wi h ea nes mo al conce n).
In summa y, dialogue in hese na a i es se es as he a ena o in e species communica ion,
whe e humans and cybo gs a icula e hei bounda ies and bonds. Ma ge Pie cy’s He, She and I
s ands ou o i s hough ul, empa he ic dialogue: Shi a, Malkah, and Yod de elop a con e sa ional
appo ha educa es all pa ies abou lo e and e hics. Thei dialogues ask, essen ially, “Can we
con e se wi h ou c ea ions as equals?” – and he ex answe s a i ma i ely, hough no wi hou
s uggle. Gibson’s and S ephenson’s wo ks, in hei own ways, show dialogues colo ed by powe and
ea , o en ein o cing he “o he ness” o he cybo g ( h ough decep ion, o de s, o silence). Pie cy
lips he sc ip , using dialogue o dissol e o he ness. When Yod jokes wi h Malkah o a gues wi h
Shi a, he is no longe an i bu a hou, a dialogic pa ne . This aligns wi h philosophe Mikhail
Bakh in’s idea o dialogue as ecogni ion o he o he ’s oice – Pie cy essen ially g an s oice o he
O he and has he human cha ac e s espond in kind, he eby ede ining he ela ionship. The poe ics
o dialogue in He, She and I hus os e s a ision o cybo g-human coexis ence g ounded in
communica ion, in s a k and ins uc i e con as o he miscommunica ions and e se exchanges
ypical o ea lie cybe punk. Dialogue p o es o be he b idge be ween wo lds – he human, he
machine, and he hyb id mee ing in con e sa ion o nego ia e a sha ed eali y.
Cybo g cha ac e s do no exis in a acuum; he landscape – bo h physical se ing and social
en i onmen – plays a signi ican ole in hei po ayal. In He, She and I , Ma ge Pie cy si ua es he
cybo g in a ichly de ailed u u e wo ld ha di ec ly e lec s he no el’s hemes. The physical
landscape o he no el is a pos -apocalyp ic No h Ame ica di ided in o high- ech co po a e encla es
( he “mul is”), lawless pollu ed zones ( he “Glop”), and au onomous ee owns like Tik a. This
se ing is no jus backg ound; i ac i ely shapes he na a i e. Yod was c ea ed because o his
landscape o dange and opp ession – he is buil o p o ec Tik a, a small encla e o hope amids a
deg aded wo ld. Thus, he e y exis ence o he cybo g is a esponse o landscape: echnology a ises
o sa egua d a communi y in an en i onmen ally and poli ically hos ile u u e. Pie cy’s desc ip ions
o he Glop emphasize ecological uin (“en i onmen ha has mainly been des oyed”), which
implici ly jus i ies he communi y’s d as ic measu e o c ea ing an a i icial de ende . The con as
be ween he lush, ga den-like spaces inside Tik a and he oxic was eland ou side unde sco es a key
poin : Yod, hough a i icial, is aligned wi h p ese ing li e and cul u e, symbolized by Tik a’s
g eenhouses and lib a ies, agains he ba en, machine-like sp awl o co po a e powe . In an eco-
eminis eading, one could say he landscape is almos a cha ac e i sel – a wounded Ea h ha
necessi a es a new kind o gua dian (a cybo g golem) o heal and p o ec wha emains o human
socie y.
Pie cy also ex ends he concep o landscape o he i ual ealm. Communica ion in his u u e
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
273
is handled ia a global ne wo k ha allows people o “p ojec hemsel es in o Cybe space”. The no el
includes scenes o cha ac e s en e ing his digi al landscape ( he Ne ) o e ie e in o ma ion o
communica e o e dis ances. Shi a, o ins ance, is adep a na iga ing cybe space, and a one poin ,
Yod accompanies he on a hacking o ay. The depic ion o he Ne in He, She and I is no ably
di e en om Gibson’s amous neon-li “Ma ix” cybe space in Neu omance . Pie cy’s cybe space
is less glamo ized; i ’s po ayed as a ool – almos mundane, some imes h ea ening, some imes
use ul – a he han a mys ical on ie . This migh e lec Pie cy’s emphasis on communi y and
embodimen : while he cha ac e s use he Ne , hei physical eali y in Tik a emains cen al. Yod’s
connec ion o he i ual landscape is in e es ingly p agma ic: he is capable o in e acing wi h
compu e s and e en assis s in cybe de ense (e.g. helping Malkah end o an online a ack wi h a
chime ical secu i y p og am). Ye Yod ne e “escapes” in o cybe space he way Gibson’s hacke s
do; he is i mly oo ed in he physical wo ld, igh ing physical ba les o p o ec physical people. This
sugges s Pie cy’s poe ics o he cybo g is g ounded in place and body. The landscapes – uined ci ies,
sa e encla es, digi al ne wo ks – all es he cybo g’s abili ies and e hics. Yod mo es h ough each
landscape: om he lab whe e he was c ea ed (a sec e i e, claus ophobic space) o he open ma ke
o Tik a (whe e he lea ns o in e ac publicly), o he dange ous Glop (whe e he mus conceal his
na u e). Each en i onmen e eals a ace o his cha ac e : in he lab he is a nascen ool, in Tik a’s
communal spaces he’s a cu ious ci izen, and in he Glop’s uins he’s an almos my hical a enge .
Compa a i ely, William Gibson’s landscapes in Neu omance and o he Sp awl ilogy wo ks
a e amously u ban, high- ech, and g imy. The Sp awl (a megaci y s e ching om Bos on o A lan a)
is Gibson’s equi alen o Pie cy’s Glop – a nea - u u e ci yscape o neon ligh s, c owded s ee s, and
decaying in as uc u e. Cybo gs and augmen ed humans in Gibson’s wo ld a e e y much p oduc s
o his en i onmen . Fo example, Molly’s cybo g augmen a ions (mi o ed eyes, blades, enhanced
e lexes) a e in pa a esponse o he iolen s ee s she inhabi s; she ema ks ha she had o do make
a lo e wo k and unde go dange ous su ge ies in Chiba Ci y o su i e. The Sp awl’s landscape is one
o hype -capi alism and unde g ound ma ke s (o gan clinics, black ICE so wa e, e c.), which os e s
me cena y cybo gs like Molly who ea hei bodies as weapons o commodi ies. Gibson’s na a i e
s yle ein o ces his se ing: s acca o desc ip ions o ci y ligh s and machine pa s c ea e a
echnological sublime inged wi h dys opia. No ably, na u al landscape is almos en i ely absen o
a i icial ( he sky i sel is amously desc ibed as he colo o a dead TV channel). In such a wo ld,
cybo g cha ac e s seem like na u al ex ensions o he en i onmen – hey a e li e ally wi ed in o he
landscape. Case, he hacke , expe iences cybe space ( he “ma ix”) as a geome ic, spa ial ealm ha
he “ lies” h ough; i ’s an abs ac landscape o da a ha pa allels he conc e e ci y. Gibson’s poe ic
ea men o landscape ends o emphasize agmen a ion and diso ien a ion. The en i onmen o en
o e whelms he cha ac e s, which aligns wi h he heme o human insigni icance in he ace o
sp awling sys ems. The cybo g, in Gibson’s poe ics, can be seen as an embodimen o he ci y’s
ha shness – a s ee samu ai buil o na iga e an u ban jungle. This is qui e di e en om Pie cy’s
po ayal o Yod as a gua dian o a small, cohesi e communi y. The scale and na u e o landscape
(massi e me opolis s. illage encla e) deeply in luence how he cybo g is depic ed (wa y lone s.
in eg a ed amily membe ).
Neal S ephenson’s Snow C ash p esen s a hyb id landscape: a sa i ical u u e Los Angeles
agmen ed in o co po a e anchises and so e eign encla es. In his wild pa chwo k, S ephenson also
gi es us he i ual landscape o he Me a e se – a sha ed online wo ld whe e a a a s in e ac . The
p o agonis Hi o P o agonis spends signi ican ime in he Me a e se, which S ephenson desc ibes
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
274
wi h almos physical geog aphy (s ee s, buildings, he Black Sun club). In e es ingly, Snow C ash’s
cybo g elemen s (like he Ra Things) highligh he in e sec ion o physical and i ual landscapes.
The Ra Things pa ol he physical ou ski s o M . Lee’s G ea e Hong Kong anchise, bu hei
minds a e kep docile by being imme sed in a VR simula ion o a pe ec dog pa adise. This li e alizes
he idea ha a cybo g s addles wo wo lds: Fido’s conscious landscape is i ual ( omping in
simula ed ields), while i s body is acing a 700 mph on he conc e e s ee s o s op in ude s.
S ephenson’s landscape hus encompasses bo h he comically dys opian eal wo ld and he imme si e
digi al domain, and his cybo gs ope a e in bo h. Howe e , unlike Pie cy’s ea nes one, S ephenson
uses landscape la gely o sa i e and high ad en u e. The anchises wi h hei absu d laws, he Ma ia-
un highways, he neon cybe punk deco o he Me a e se – all c ea e a ongue-in-cheek a mosphe e.
The Ra Thing Fido’s inal he oic ac (sac i icing i sel by leaping in o a illain’s ai plane engine)
happens li e ally in be ween landscapes – i launches om land o ai , dying in a blaze. This d ama ic
se ing unde lines he cybo g’s ole as liminal. Ye , because S ephenson’s one is mo e comic book
han philosophical, he eade ’s emo ional engagemen wi h he landscape is di e en . We ma el a
he c ea i i y and humo o he wo ld, bu we’ e no in i ed o mou n he Ea h o yea n o los na u e
in he way Pie cy’s scena io implici ly does. Landscape in Pie cy’s no el ca ies mo al weigh –
Tik a (meaning “hope” in Heb ew) is wo h sa ing, he Ea h is some hing you belong o. In Snow
C ash, landscape is an absu d playg ound whe e cybo g dogs and hacke s chase illains; i ’s h illing
bu delibe a ely shallow in emo ional e ms, a commen on he pos mode n condi ion.
Annalee Newi z’s Au onomous chooses a less adi ional se ing o cybe punk: much o he
ac ion occu s in he Canadian wilde ness and mid-sized ci ies a he han majo me opolises. Newi z
consciously se s pa o he no el in places like Saska oon and he A c ic, highligh ing how he u u e
impac s no jus he usual cybe punk hubs bu also “places ha o en ge o go en” in u u is ic
scena ios. This shi in landscape has signi icance o he po ayal o he cybo g Paladin. As a
mili a y obo , Paladin is ini ially deployed in a a ie y o locales – chasing he pi a e Jack ac oss a
mel ing A c ic and dus y Canadian p ai ies. These en i onmen s es Paladin’s adap abili y. Unlike
he neon ci yscapes o classic cybe punk, Newi z’s landscapes include s a k, na u al se ings and s a k
economic zones (like he esou ce-ex ac ion ou pos s and a lawless au onomous bo ha en in
Vancou e ). The ela i e emp iness o openness o hese landscapes (e.g., a ek h ough a lonely
no he n oad) mi o s Paladin’s own jou ney o sel -disco e y – he e is space o hink and ques ion.
Mo eo e , because Au onomous o eg ounds issues like inden u ed se i ude and en i onmen al
sca ci y, he landscape is laden wi h socio-poli ical meaning. The ee ho izon o he A c ic Sea s ands
agains he cons ained co po a e labs whe e Paladin was “bo n,” symbolizing he eedom Paladin
yea ns o . Newi z’s depic ion o a nea - u u e Ea h whe e bo h humans and obo s can be li e ally
owned as p ope y means ha e e y ci y o egion is de ined by i s laws on au onomy. Paladin mo es
h ough landscapes o a ying deg ees o eedom – om he igh ly con olled u ban cen e s o he
inges whe e au onomous bo s hide ou . Thus, landscape in Au onomous unc ions almos
allego ically: he u he om he cen e , he close o au onomy. This jou ney is di e en om Yod’s
in Pie cy’s no el (whe e Yod en u es ou om he sa e own in o he dange ous Glop and back), bu
in bo h cases, a eling ac oss physical spaces e lec s a cybo g’s pa h o agency. Pie cy’s Yod lea es
Tik a o escue Shi a’s child in co po a e e i o y, wi nessing he b oade wo ld’s co up ion, and
e u ns home wi h a clea e sense o why he mus sac i ice himsel o Tik a. Paladin simila ly a els
a and ends up making choices independen o i s mas e s. The landscapes hey a e se – whe he
blas ed was elands o windswep highways – a e he es ing g ounds o hei e olu ion.
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
281
comes o accep and e en ely on him as one o hei own). This is a no ably op imis ic s ance
compa ed o he nihilism o some cybe punk. I aligns wi h eminis and pos humanis schola s who
a gue ha emb acing he cybo g me apho allows o imagining mo e inclusi e u u es. Pie cy’s
no el is a p ac ical demons a ion o ha idea in s o y o m – a “u opian” h ead wo en in o
cybe punk’s ab ic.
In conclusion, Ma ge Pie cy’s ea men o cybo g cha ac e s, exempli ied by Yod in He, She
and I , ep esen s a pi o al momen in science ic ion li e a u e whe e he cybo g is po ayed wi h
unp eceden ed dep h and empa hy. Th ough ly ical monologues, dynamic dialogues, ichly d awn
se ings, and nuanced cha ac e iza ion, Pie cy c ea es a cybo g who is no he O he bu one o us.
This has opened he doo o subsequen au ho s like Newi z (and e en cinema ic/ ele ision
na a i es) o u he explo e cybo gs as complex beings. The compa isons wi h Gibson and
S ephenson highligh how dis inc i e Pie cy’s app oach was in he ea ly 1990s – she b ough a
humanis and eminis sensi i i y in o a gen e ha , up o hen, was o en seen as slick and male-
o ien ed. He in luence can be disce ned in he way mode n science ic ion cen e s ques ions o
iden i y and e hics o a i icial cha ac e s ( o example, he ecen and oid cha ac e s o Ma ha
Wells, o he and oids in Blade Runne 2049, echo hemes Pie cy engaged wi h, such as he igh o
exis and o choose one’s a e).
Ul ima ely, he poe ics o cybo g cha ac e s in Pie cy’s ision is abou b idging di ides:
be ween human and machine, be ween sel and o he , and e en be ween p esen and pas (as he
golem ale b idge sugges s). I is a poe ics ha inds he poe ic – he meaning ul, he anscenden –
in ci cui s and code, as much as in lesh and blood. By analyzing monologue, dialogue, landscape,
and po ai in he wo k and o he s, we gain insigh no only in o li e a y echnique bu in o he cul u al
signi icance o he cybo g igu e. The cybo g, once a symbol o dys opian dehumaniza ion o a me e
ech e ish, eme ges in Pie cy’s He, She and I as a symbol o possibili y: he possibili y ha h ough
unde s anding and c ea i i y, we can ede ine wha “human” means in a way ha is mo e inclusi e
and jus . In he end, he cybo g’s s o y – Yod’s s o y – is p o oundly a human s o y, and i s elling
en iches he apes y o li e a u e as bo h a and e lec ion o socie y.
Re e ences
1. Ba , M. S. (Ed.). (2000). Fu u e Females, The Nex Gene a ion: New Voices and
Veloci ies in Feminis Science Fic ion C i icism. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Li le ield. (Includes J.
Dee y, “The Biopoli ics o Cybe space: Pie cy Hacks Gibson,” pp. 87–108)
2. Cado a, K. (1995). Feminis cybe punk. Science Fic ion S udies, 22(3), 357–372.
3. Gibson, W. (1984). Neu omance . New Yo k, NY: Ace Books.
4. Ha away, D. J. (1991). Simians, Cybo gs, and Women: The Rein en ion o Na u e.
New Yo k, NY: Rou ledge. (O iginal wo k “A Cybo g Mani es o” published 1985)
5. Ha ison, K. (2010). Gende esis ance: In e oga ing he punk in cybe punk. In D.
Riha (Ed.), Humani y in Cybe ne ic En i onmen s (pp. 103–115). Ox o d, UK: In e -Disciplina y
P ess.
6. Newi z, A. (2017). Au onomous. New Yo k, NY: To Books.
7. Pie cy, M. (1991). He, She and I . New Yo k, NY: Al ed A. Knop .
8. S ephenson, N. (1992). Snow C ash. New Yo k, NY: Ban am Books.
9. Vlasopolos, A. (1998). Technology as E os’s da : Cybo gs as pe ec (male?) lo e s.
Founda ion, 73, 59–66.
ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261, 2022-2.889, 2023-
5.384, 2024-6.875 Resea chBib IF: 9.948 / 2024
VOLUME-5, ISSUE-10
282
10. Von We heime , E. (T ans.). (2001). He, She and I (Ma ge Pie cy) – Summa y and
analysis. Wikipedia. (Fo plo and hema ic summa y e e ence)
11. Wahl, W. (1993). Bodies and echnologies: Do a, Neu omance , and s a egies o
esis ance. Con igu a ions, 1(2), 249–272. (Quo e discussed in ex )
12. Yi, D. (2010). A Genealogy o Cybo go hic: Aes he ics and E hics in he Age o
Pos humanism. Fa nham, UK: Ashga e. (Con ex on cybo g as nex s age in e olu ion)
13. Zah a, K., & Eh sham, M. (2023). Gende , machine, and socie y: Explo ing pos human
iden i ies in Pie cy’s no el He, She and I . PalA ch’s Jou nal o A chaeology o Egyp /Egyp ology,
20(2), 439–448.
