Arachne’s Web of Resistance
by Jelena Petrovic
With annotations by Aslihan Demirtas and Erëmirë Krasniqi
The process of creating both art and politics through continuous metamorphosis of the archaic plot of Arachne puts into question the meaning of political art and its strength to break through the ruling social order and its im/material heritage, knowledge and existence. Arachne appears today as a lost, censored and forgotten mythological formula, as a political metaphor of marginalization and punishment of all the efforts to confront patriarchal, capitalist and colonial forms of power and exploitation. The Arachne’s web of resistance as well as many other inherited narratives that remain invisible or weak are blind spots of our common knowledge and politics. Blind spots that need to be revealed and revived through the future ideological transformation of society, transformation that uses art as a powerful tool for affecting political consciousness.
“Truth to tell, God chose to provide the world with endlessly useful and important technics through the effort of those women as of many others too. One such example is an Asian maiden named Arachne, daughter of Idomnius of Colophon. Being extraordinarily resourceful and clever, this Arachne was the first person to create the arts of dyeing wool in different colours and of producing what we would call fine tapestries from weaving pictures on cloth to make them look like paintings. Indeed, she mastered every aspect of the art of weaving. There was even a fable about Arachne which tells how she was turned into a spider by the goddess Pallas whom she had dared to challenge.” 6
During the 1970s, the weaving process and the myth of Arachne were inscribed into essential meanings of text. In accordance with the etymological background, their mythological formula was applied in semiotic codification of the key post-structuralist term – theory of textuality. This theory refers to a cyclical rewriting of those forever-determined truths/notions, as well as the need for a deconstruction of the patriarchal canon, with the aim of interrupting the linear course of authoritative production of meaning (sense) and a transference of the entrenched positions of power. The first to emphasize this was Roland Barthes, defining text as tissue:
“Text means tissue; but whereas hitherto we have always taken this tissue as a product, a ready-made veil, behind which lies, more or less hidden, meaning (truth), we are now emphasizing, in the tissue, the generative idea that the text is made, is worked out in a perpetual interweaving; lost in this tissue-this texture-the subject unmakes himself, like a spider dissolving in the constructive secretions of its web. Were we fond of neologisms, we might define the theory of the text as an hyphology (hyphos is the tissue and the spider’s web).“
More recent feminist theories, which insist on the potential parabola, that is, a critical modelling of feminist poetics based on the original myth of Arachne, set forth the category of gendered identity which corresponds to the notion of authorship and as such also invokes a possible figuration of creative and productive women in relation to the dominant culture. It’s a figuration based on the semantic relation between Arachne and Athena (feminocentric deconstruction vs. phallocentric transformation of dominant discourses). This feminist reading of the myth is also proposed by Nancy Miller, who introduced into the theory the notion of arachnology as a form of theoretical interpretation of the text:
“By arachnology, then, I mean a critical positioning which reads against the weave of indifferentiation to discover the embodiment in writing of a gendered subjectivity.“8
Textuality as weaving (in accordance with the etymological meaning of text itself) and the construction of knowledge as web (particularly well defined with the development of hypertextuality) constitute inherent elements of feminist theory, not only as a metaphorical re-imagining of women’s writing as the typically female skill of weaving, but also in the sense of “unravelling” the existing textiles/texts into their constituent textual forms/threads, which further enable the writing/reading of new textual meanings and emancipatory signification. The purpose of unravelling and reweaving is in the process of creating new forms of textuality, which allow for writing/inscribing resistant knowledge, as well as de-instrumentalising hegemonic aesthetics. The process of weaving implies, among other things, the absence of voice, so silence is metaphorically equated with a feminist concept which points on the one hand to the silencing of women’s voices, which has figured throughout history in the context of each new politics of memory, while on the other hand it refers to the subversive creation of textual space that is open to all “others” – those that have continually been excluded from the inaccessible textuality of hegemonic and dogmatic power structures.9
This epistemological value of the Arachne myth determines the concepts of women’s authorship and text is, in accordance with the myth narrative, open for the inscription of the feminist concept of the process of metamorphosis, used by Rosi Braidotti to indicate the need for positioning the resisting women’s subjectivity (constantly in the process of women-becoming) as the basic starting point for engaged (political) action which initiates new forms of expression and production, that is, for a permanent transformation of knowledge cartography which defines glocal positions of power. The notion of women’s authorship can analogously be determined by the following definition of feminist subject given by Braidotti:
“(…)the subject of feminism is not Woman as the complementary of Man and as his specular other, but rather a multi-layered and complex subject that has taken her distance from the institution of femininity. ‘She’ no longer coincides with the disempowered and oppressed second sex, which is the reflection cast by the masculine subject in his universalistic posture and imposture. She is the subject of quite an-other story, a subject-in-process, a post-Woman woman who may not even be a ‘she’ in any classical sense of the term. Some would say: a mutant, and proudly so. In any case, the feminist subject is one that has undergone some fundamental metamorphosis.“10