Technoshamanism

As a person who grew up in a culture that has both Shamanic and Buddhist practices, I found the discussion of “Birdman” (2005) by Kim Jeong Han to be the most interesting. In his work, it questions and reflects some of the most prevalent ideas in Buddhism and Shamanism, which are the belief in Buddhism that “the self and other are the same,” and the Shamanic practice of experiencing others through the self, reflecting a similar idea. He describes the idea that the self and other are not separate. In this artwork, this idea allows people to feel and empathize with others more deeply, as he questions the life of a half-bird and half-human by realizing it is both at the same time.

Shanken’s idea at the end of the paper on Technoshamanism as an art for healing and a tool for sustaining life on Earth felt like a very compelling way to connect everything he discussed. I understand that technology, tools, and instruments are often rooted in hard science and mathematics, which can sometimes make them feel metallic or soulless. However, shamanic practice creates shared consciousness and connects indigenous knowledge with technoscience. To support his point, he also referenced Donna Haraway’s ecofeminist theories, where everything is seen as connected and originating from one. I think this strengthens his argument that shamanism shows we are all connected and part of one whole. It reminds us that we are spiritual human beings, rather than turning us into something like AI or abstract robots. In this way, he is saying that employing such tools (computers, AI) to create artistic experiences can help sustain life and support healing.

I found Edward Shanken’s take on Technoshamanism deeply fascinating, especially his refusal to treat nature and technology as opposing forces. What really stood out to me was the idea of artists acting as modern shamans using wet (biological), dry (silicon), and moist technologies to build symbiotic relationships between humans, machines, and the broader ecosystem. His framing of interdisciplinary art as a psychic dress rehearsal for the future is a compelling way to look at how we might navigate our current ecological crises. Ultimately, the paper completely shifted my perspective, leaving me thinking a lot about how we can repurpose emerging tech not just for standard innovation, but as genuine tools for expanding consciousness and planetary healing.

I did not expect a paper about shamanism to make me think about my Hydra and TidalCycles setup, but here we are. Shanken’s framing of technoshamanism as a merger of ancient tranceinducing technologies with digital tools actually relates onto what live coding feels like from the inside. There is something about writing patterns in real time and watching sound emerge from syntax, that feels less like programming and more like tuning into something. You are not always fully in control and that is kind of the point.

The part that stuck with me most was Pauline Oliveros. Shanken describes her relationship to music as bodily and preconscious, and her ideal AI chip as something that could “perceive the spiritual connection and interdependence of all beings.” That is a wild ask for a piece of hardware, but I think I get what she means. Deep listening is never passive but a practice of expanding your attention until the boundaries between you and the sound start to blur.

What I am still sitting with is whether the technology actually enables that expanded consciousness or just simulates it. I am curious and that gap feels worth exploring more.