Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Death Stranding, Hobbes and the Problem of Social Order

Where (and How) Should we Haul the Sovereign

Bibliographic Data

ID19483045
AuthorsMoscow Russia Independent researcher (corresponding author), S V Kozlov (0000-0002-6784-8992), Stepan Kozlov (0000-0002-1674-9310)
Year2020
Volume32
Issue3
Pages142-164
Publication date2020-10-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSociology of power (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2074-0492 • E-ISSN: 2413-144X
PublisherThe Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.22394/2074-0492-2020-3-142-164
OpenAlexW3114651438
LanguageEN

In this article I describe the implicit conceptualization of social order which exists in Death Stranding — localized in both the setting and the mechanics of the game — and compare it with the conceptualization of Thomas Hobbes’s “Leviathan”. First, the theoretical tension between Death Stranding and “Leviathan” is traced: the speculative conceptualization of the Leviathan and the procedural conceptualization of Death Stranding are compared by clarifying the role that the concepts of action, authorization, right and sovereignty play in Hobbesian theory and the video game. Sec­ondly, the theoretical tension between the political and natural capacities of the Sovereign according to Hobbes is explicated; with the help of mate­rial from Death Stranding, a variant of its resolution is proposed, suggest­ing the conceptualization of the Sovereign-without-a-body: an instance devoid of physical capacity and materiality, yet still capable of maintaining social order as a product of its activity. Subsequently, attention is paid to the mechanics of state expansion in Death Stranding: I describe and analyze how the Sovereign-without-a-body’s messenger — the protagonist of the video game — interacts with people outside the Sovereign’s zone of influ­ence, convincing them to consent to return to the commonwealth. This theoretical move makes it possible to supplement Hobbes’s binary scheme of the state of nature and commonwealth with a third concept — the state of memory, in which the memory of the Sovereign turns out to be a deci­sive factor influencing whether the commonwealth will be restored to its former boundaries. By explicating the Hobbesian theory of imagination, I demonstrate that — in the state of memory — the Sovereign is contingent, not fully defined, and virtual

Commonwealth · Conceptualization · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Sovereign state · Sovereignty · Computer Science · Digital Games and Media · Gothic Literature and Media Analysis · Law · Violence, Religion, and Philosophy · Artificial Intelligence

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae