436 RüdigerKunow
mostly transcends the space-time coordinates by which humans usually
organize their existence. It is true, as is often alleged in the precincts of
constructivist cultural criticism, that biology may be a mercurial
signifier and that it is ultimately culture, as an archive of discourses,
which makes the body appear. But such a diagnosis does definitely not
tell the whole story. For it is equally true that biology makes culture
appear:itsconflictsandcontradictions,itsconfidencesandcrises.Issues
thatanimatepublicdebatesarefrequentlyaddressedinbiologicalterms,
asforexamplewhenitcomestoquestionsofresponsiblebehaviorinthe
contextofdiseasetransmissionorsocialentitlements.
Againstthisbackground,ithasbeenthepurposeoftheconstellations
presented in this volume to demonstrate how biology as a figure for the
collective also interrogates the very structures sustaining this same
collective.Interrogatingbiologythusopensupwaysforaninterrogation
of what in a given constellation is considered as "common." In this
sense, then, I have sought to establish biology as a tool of cultural
critique, awayofaddressingthecollective, especially the problems and
controversies of shared lives, a perspective which makes it necessary to
ask critical questions about the role of the state, of governance, of
economicandsocialarrangementspertainingtohumanlife.
Suchquestionswouldneedtoaddressthefactthathumanbiologyis
basedonandregulatedbymaterialprocessesoperatingwhichareforthe
most part independentof or at least eluding human agency. Because of
that and because biology's operations produce material results—again
often independently of or in excess of human will—the biology-culture
dialectics has in the present inquiry been the object of a materialist
critique. To speak of materialism here does not mean that biology is
taken simply as a name for the physical dimension of life or for
economic patterns of distribution. Instead, my discussions and analyses
were designed to demonstrate that biology has meaning and makes
meaning,butnotalwaysandoftenunevenlyso.Infact,itisapartofthe
"troubling surplus of human meaning" (Jameson, Valences of the
Dialectic262)alwayspresentbutoftentimesoverlooked,notonlyinthe
mundane world of everyday human interaction but also in that of
academic research and criticism. What is "troubling" here has been
showninaseriesofexplorationswherefactorsbasedinhumanbiology,
such as non-normative corporealities, degenerative processes,
contagious mass diseases, or cancerous cell growth, while resonating