[...]r />
publication of the miracle
[the miraculous in exhibitions + self-exhibiting miracles]
ds class="frds scrmbld">Renands>'s *exhibitionary heritage* of miracles
seeing (risk of sight) --> passionate misunderstanding, confusion, rejection
cultural engineering of anthropology of heritage
exhibitionary heritage: a scaffolding that times, locates, and proliferates all that is exhibitionary (like a shower, or rainfall)
curatorial subjectivity
exhibitionary complex
•describe the problems of an exhibitionary heritage
•find solutions to artistic problems in the description of exhibitionary complexes
(the
df class='thdf'>bad idea of | df>
interpreting exhibitionary
heritage as an) exhibitionary solution to problems that are re
presente
d by the works of art
--> correlate artistic solutions with exhibitionary problems
}<--ds class="frds scrmbld">Renands>
-- consumes the links between art, exhibits, an
d curation
naturally an
d atheoretically
creation of art
<--✕--> birth of exhibition
(artistic problem
~/= exhibitionary problem)
...using the concepts an
d tools of exhibition
history
the
df class='thdf'>bad idea of | df> the artistic is conceive
d in exhibitions
d'>& the exhibitionary in artworks
postulate
matter in terms of
•errors
•questions
(not necessarily in terms of)
•exhibition
•artwork
exhibitionary
heritage of
•artistic practices --> the miracle in ideas/objects
•curatorial practices --> categories of the miracle
•exhibitionary practices --> the miraculous as datum of the world
miracle can be containe
d or can burst into the stu
dy of tra
ditions an
d trans
missions
miracle
= content
+ form
miraculous
--> surrogate me
dium of the artistic
(
ds class="frds scrmbld">Renands>
:) how a miracle can turn the hopeful perplexity surroun
ding Virgin Mary into the relentless exhibitionary
----> *the power of sug
gestion is curatorial
* --> materials can be rearrange
d (or other contents can be shaken off from them
according to the
demands of art
history)
flower showers
an auspicious beginning for a lasting
devotion
گلبرگ --> the petal applie
d to the bo
dy of the sick an
d invali
d, a sacre
d relic that is progressively
distant yet proliferative
problem of the exhibitionary
heritage
--ds class="frds scrmbld">Renands>
--> discursify that even miracles can be
interprete
d art
historically, that they are worthy of belief
Julia Scher (first two weeks of April (1-14.04) an
d last two weeks of June (14-30.06))
Marie-Luise
Angerer (last two weeks of June)
Luis Negrón van Grieken (free)
ds class="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Christianson">Christiands> Sievers
Daniela Kinate
der
Davi
d Hahlbrock
Zilvinas Lilas
Matthias Müller
Phil Collins
Hei
de Hagebölling
Mischa Kuball
An
dreas Henrich
Ute Hörner
Peter Frie
drich Stephan
////////////////////
i am using these spaces basically as their potential for being a host for something else, rather than pointing their pure site
specificity.
my work has worke
d (for me
?) whenever it was an
intervention to/for its objecthoo
d as a being-in-art-form or for my own fantasies. the problem/
matter of exhibition.
the theoretical work woul
d base on
reading shyness as for a philosophical opening for the practical part of the
diploma that comes afterwar
d. By this way of
writing i operate myself, breaking free from the process of offering philosophical evi
dence.
•Maulwurfe in the Moschee (shit on the head looks like Turban(!), about action and taking the action and getting the call, over doing of anything, revenge program, revelation to other's transmission, talking about shit in a mosque, etc.)
•king lear in the Hochzeitssalon (space for speech act, ritual, marriage of daughters, etc.)
•islam intro in the Biologie Zentrum Uni Köln (hygiene in islam, work on memory relation to research, reciting Koran brings the dead as witness, etc.)
////////////////////
shyness is prescribe
d for woman, it exists in
religion as a female virtue
thinking in yoga posing (thinking, thanking), the thanking pose an
d the always thinking pose in yoga.
intervention is not always attacking the other-as-stupi
d, but rather how
do you perform your
intervention in that sense that is that YOU are stupi
d before the other
the moment of ma
dness in encountering art, un
derstan
ding has to go through that ma
dness
i am going to have a smooth
transition from my amazon project to my
diplom, via
animal talk
?
--> ‘face’ in performance. (
read Haraway,
Levinas,
Derrida)
face is linke
d to sensibility an
d vision in an intimate way. something that resists
categorization, containment or comprehension, in
finitely foreign. it is not the biological face. it is
df class='thdf'>the idea of | df> in
finity within oneself. this i
dea of in
finity which the face encapsulates is for
Levinas the key means by which thought is brought into
relation with what goes beyon
d its capacity. an
d this is crucial in art an
d specifically in performance art for encountering something such as face, face of the performer or the face of the work. the face is perceive
d as something that resists possession or utilization. the face promotes a
discourse when it invites me. (ranting against sober means of
communication). the face to face
situation foun
ds
language.
presence of the face coming from beyon
d the
world , but committing me to human fraternity (Gemeinschaft)
does not overwhelm me as a numinous essence arousing fear an
d trembling. to be in
relationship while absolving oneself from this
relation is ‘to speak’. the face always speaks
directly an
d absolutely to me.
many late 20th century
horror films feature a maske
d villain. the act of masking the face is not only
metaphorical, but also has the terrifying effect of
dehumanizing the villain. in herbert kelman's work on
dehumanization, when the perception of a person “as an in
divi
dual, in
depen
dent an
d distinguishable from others, capable of making choices is
denie
d, they no longer elicit compassion or other moral
responses. the facelessness of the alien, swarms of ants, or other villains of pop culture.
for face look at faca
de too.
--> ‘provocation’ in performance. (
read Haraway,
Levinas)
--> ‘act’ in performance. (
read grotowski)
what is to be
: ‘completely
natural an
d logical’.
dealing with the
discomfort of unreasonable
presence on the
stage. nonre
presentational aspects of performance
--> ‘teaching’ that is not
rhetorics where the revelation of the other can take place (
Avital,
Levinas). teaching is synthesizing for someone else. what kin
d of
communication is teaching involve
d?
the
discourse inherent in the
relation with the other is like or as a sermon.
--> ‘eyes’ threatening or se
ducing eyes of the performer (
Rainer)
--> ‘ranting’ of the
drunk in the face of the sober.
dist
urbance of a continuity with attack with wor
ds.
--> ‘saying’, before it conjugates a
verbal sign, is al
ready an ethical
gesture. saying is therefore al
ready the proximity of one to the other, the commitment of an approach, the one for the other.
one saying enters into the service of the sai
d, that is the thematization of being, purity of its intentions will be inevitably compromise
d. a saying that must be unsai
d. a movement of thought that continues to resist collapsing into a settle
d expression, free
dom from the cage of thematics. this
mission (
responsibility for the other) can be a
dequately expresse
d only through a certain impossible un
doing of
language.
presenting a philosophical other is only possible when we generate a saying saying saying itself.
my performance talk
: to
situate my subjectivity
linguistically (in a non
presence an
d a nonplace). (
?) (if the stakes are at
situating myself, then the
question is why
?)
saying becomes totally expose
d in its approach to the other. in limite
d social
situations it creates risks of embarrassment or rebuttal an
d perhaps soun
ding psychotic. something that will strip away all protective layers, whether cultural or
literal, from the bo
dy (of knowl
edge). it can also be masochistically painful for the subject. the absolute saying is a trauma, with vulnerability an
d passivity even is a bo
dily way, where the ethical being is
: one penetrate
d by the other. (saying is ethical while sai
d is juri
dical.)
--> ‘psychology’ not only what we do but why we do. the science that should be studied so much in art, specially in performance art. the how of human behavior, feelings and emotions.
the psychological space, the intermediary space of the ethical relation, shyness and commitment to the other. “i am infinitely more demanding of myself than of others”. (is this the realm of shyness being before god?)
--> ‘intelligence’ in the sense that what do i pay attention to and why, and what do i ignore and why, and how do i put it together. (synthesizing)
--> ‘cornered’ someone that is cornered ontologically. can not shy out of the corner.
--> ‘present’ of presence signifies nowness. The movement of time makes things present by making them now. What is the relation of this “making present” to the world? Is the movement of time ultimately to be traced to that of the world? On such a view, we take the successive nows that constitute time’s movement as a function of the world. Their origin is the successive impressions we receive from its objects. We, thus, come to affirm that nowness is the world’s presence to us in the impressions it leaves. Augustine gives the classic expression of this position when he writes: “It is in you, O my mind, that I measure time. ... What I measure is the impress produced in you by the things as they pass and [the impressions] abiding in you when they have passed."2 The impress is registered as the present now. We register the abiding impression left in the mind as the remembered now. If, however, we break the tie between presence and the world, we have to say that the impress is the result of our own activity. The impression that results in the now comes, in other words, not from the world, but from ourselves. It is a result of our affecting ourselves. In Derrida’s words, its origin is “the auto-affection” of consciousness.
--> ‘consciousness’ Since it involves the self-awareness that demands self-presence, the question of language expands once again. In answering it, we must inquire into the nature of consciousness.
--> ‘veil’ unveiled. a sign of difference, a kind of timidity? is shyness same as veil? is it a sheer projection? are we (am i) subdued?
--> ‘exhibitionist ambitions’ and idealized structures. the exhibitionist ambitions of these artists forswear all objective orientation. Their own uniqueness and grandiosity is taken for granted. it is not open to debate and need not be founded in a structured manner that is accessible and comprehensible to one's powers of appraisal and judgment. the representatives of postmodernism adopt the stylistic forms, themes and visual material of their art from the boundless treasure trove of art history so readily accessible today. dependence on what has already been formulated. the underlying tone of this art serves to flaunt an unparalleled sense of superiority and grandiose self-confidence. seen in many performance in this time too. (in my painting i have a rational point of view.) i don't want to orient myself towards ambitions, injected by libidinal energy, of my grandiose self-artist. of those, whose prime concern is to show their uniqueness find themselves faced with the question: “what is to be done?”. I too, choose to refuse to pander to the demands of innovation, style and integrity, but at the same time not to work myself up to grandiose self-image of artistic omnipotence.
look at the theory of intelligence for language and other kind of ‘enjoying’ the nature, art or other structures.
how is the philosophy of the sublime (quality of greatness) related to the format of my talks? if my work is not an endeavor on the philosophy of the sublime then what is it?
in this
writing i am not going to work in the forms of claims as
stages in a logical argument. my approach woul
d we unsubstantial to break free from the process of offering philosophical evi
dence...
mobilizing forces
scoring
system
op
position to shamanism in performance art, points in The Art of
Modernism -
Sandro Bocola, for critique on Beuys an
d Abramovich.
Face
d with objects an
d performances by Joseph Beuys, viewers are as baffle
d as they are by Marcel
Duchamp's Bottle Rack. They
do not know what is going on, are unable to relate what they see to any known
system an
d are left entirely to their own
devices, i.e. to their own emotional
responses, for all the goo
d that
does them. They feel
affecte
d, an
d have a vague an
d almost unwilling sense of being touche
d at a certain emotional
depth, but are unable to
interpret these feelings (isn't that the case with most art performances
?). Beuys celebrates complex an
d incomprehensible rituals before an astonishe
d au
dience. He subjects his person to
difficult tasks an
d appears to be making some kin
d of sacrifice in
doing so. Beuys, after all, wishes to heal. To ju
dge by his statements, he wishes to re
deem the German people an
d in
dee
d all of humankin
d from their
social evils, their petrifaction an
d impotence. In this sense, he transcen
ds the role of the artist. He sees his au
dience not, in the tra
ditional sense, as a free counterpart to whom he
presents a work (as form an
d expression of his own self), but as a
material to be forme
d. He appears as the people's tribune, as teacher, seer, healer an
d prophet, transforming the role of the artist into that of the shaman.
Kohut stresses that the effect of messianic an
d charismatic personalities is not necessarily
detrimental un
der all circumstances. At times of severe crisis, it is not the mo
destly self-
doubting type of personality that is nee
de
d (who generally makes up the lea
ding stratum in calmer times). In times of fear, the masses turn to a messianic or charismatic personality, not because above all they have recognize
d his abilities an
d competence, but because they feel that this lea
der will satisfy their nee
d to be imperturbably convince
d of being
right, or because they want to i
dentify with his strength an
d security.
(caution criticizing beuys an
d abramovic, you
don't know all about them. your criticism is certain aspect of their persona an
d performance face, in or
der to make your own point an
d argument. it is not to un
derstan
d their works. is this ok
?)
when ideas fail, words come in very handy. (Goethe?)
all serious thinking is interpersonal? it is the key to how we think by challenging each other with our ideas.
this is early, i shoul
d really give
lectures in 20 years.
intimacy
: first talking than thinking (maybe even taking it back), feeling an i
diot afterwar
d. When the saying is taken over by
rhetoric or maneuvering or calculation then the problem is persua
ding or proving, not intimacy. (intimate thoughts in Shakespear). running with strategy in conversing an
d conversation (winning a roun
d or winning an argument) is traceable back to power an
d coercion an
d its
discomforts an
d anxieties. the art that i am talking about shoul
d not win the conversation. (but why intimacy in the art project at all
?) by intimacy i fin
d a route to my true consciousness. in intimacy only there is the possibility for
love. not making the other/au
dience to think in a certain way, but exactly the op
posite, the performer has to loose the game of convincement or wit (in her work/form/performance).
shyness
: not the clinical term. i am talking about a shyness that is
deep in the character, a kin
d of trembling before the other.
the ethical
relation to the other, as always important, stakes are higher in performance
? the proximity of the art object, the
relation of the face to face
relationship between the speaker an
d the
listener, is the later container of ethical stake
?
not au
dience attention, but au
dience
imagination. not their reaction, but their
response. Usually a
response is a reply to a query not the result of a stimulus. Stimulus is an urgent vital process that acts to arouse action in shortest time. that time that is the price for thinking.
shakespear, the Everest of acting. Why performance/theater is not relate
d to thinking an
d is always setup for acting an
d action
? nee
d for
drama.
the event has happene
d off
stage, now we talk about it. Macbeth, unlike tarantino!
violence is
symbolize
d in many goo
d ol
d art. karaoke, etc.
violence is art-performance is exhibite
d...
the power of voice in islam, taboo of bo
dy.
no one is behea
de
d in the
history of islam. (
read tarikhe sakhtkoshi) contrast to French revolution.
i am not going to critique islam, i
don't know what it is, just let me perform it.
who performs
? someone
doing something
?
what is the cure for shyness.
‘performing for the other’
silent coming an
d going of the feminine, (form of shyness
?)
when we sen
d the shyest as an ambassa
dor to re
present us.
It is a self-
defining
system of signs referring to signs.
a quiet
listener. we have yet no i
dea what is speak. how taking transforms the min
d that talks. con
ditions of thinking in
relation to talking, before or after the mouth that talks. thinking in other
languages. if intimacy is saying before thinking, how fits the acts of maulwurfe
?
work on shyness, I have to start (slowly) with what i (kin
d of) know.
“...Nu
dge
d on the s
cene as a kin
d of shivering being,
anxious an
d shy,..” (kafka, test)
There is the sug
gestion here, as in
Holderlin, that timi
dity might be a
dialect of stupi
dity. (Fin
ding no way of testing out of these subtle complicities, one falls asleep, exhauste
d by the
distress of proving one's most minimal merit.) (
Avital Ronell, The
Veils of Servility)
According to Silvan Tomkins, “shame operates only after
interest or enjoyment has been activate
d.”
as
Sedgwick has argue
d, for some people, an
d most often queer subjects, “shame is simply the first, an
d remains a permanent, structuring fact of i
dentity
: one that ... has its own, powerfully pro
ductive an
d powerfully
social
metaphoric possibilities.
the i
dea is that the performance that avows its performan
ceness acknowl
edges the
difficulty of fitting into roles, fin
ding i
dentities, an
d managing a self, especially a self vulnerable to the effects of stigma.
is there a queerness in me an
d my performance
? is shyness, they way i
do it, queer
?
turn the
spectator to the
reader.
does shame
intertwines with queer
?
this
affect an
d mo
de of performance (which normative euro American culture woul
d rather era
dicate) can be queere
d, twiste
d an
d turne
d into en
dless artful enactments.
queer, as experimental
linguistic re
presentational an
d political artistic performance.
shameless in my shyness. (at the level of
affect theory
?)
shyness
: looking otherwise an
d feeling
differently
to act shame
d of exactly that which he is ex
cited. (is this a queer subject
?)
queer is not iso
morphic with gay or lesbian or any other fixe
d i
dentity, rather, queerness un
does all i
dentities into an en
dless multiplicity an
d unbecoming. (liquefaction of any soli
dification)
queer seems to hinge much more ra
dically an
d explicitly on a person’s un
dertaking particular, performative acts of experimental self-perception on a filiations.
In
dee
d, the performativity of both queer an
d shame can be reiterate
d differently; the subject can
disi
dentify from such
interpolations an
d re-
deploy the abjecting an
d/or
disciplining of the terms in unforeseen ways, which Warhol
di
d.
In surren
der the hea
d ben
ds an
d meets the heart. The hea
d that
does not ben
d has no value, an
d the hea
d that is stiff will have to ben
d sometime, either in surren
der or in shame. The hea
d that ben
ds in surren
der will never have to ben
d in shame. Shame accompanies arrogance. Shyness accompanies
Love. See how
children are en
dowe
d with shyness, that is
natural. Shyness is inherent. Shame is inflicte
d by
society an
d is acquire
d. Shame brings guilt an
d shyness a
dds to one
? beauty. Retain your shyness an
d drop your shame. (
?)
shame is simply the first an
d remains a permanent, structuring fact of i
dentity
: one that has its own, powerfully pro
ductive an
d powerfully
social
metaphoric possibilities.
deci
ding not to care how people thing (or feel
?), because those are the things i
don't want to change! (or i
don't think i shoul
d want to change) (warhol)
what
do i want to change
? just having fun with my stuff. can i
deci
de not to care what people think
? shyness...
in shame i wish to continue to look (or talk, or make or perform) an
d be looke
d at (or spoken to or seen in my performing of myself), but i also
do not wish to
do so. (Silvan Tomkins)
i am embarrasse
d to show the shy singing.
chronically embarrassing my self. (Aula
presentation, shy singing, ...)
on passivity, note for the
reader
: not to mistake it for en
durance in this
discourse. here we are talking about a philosophical term, in
relation to the “being” an
d the “other”...
an architecture that tries to be mo
dest, a performance that tries to be intimi
dating as much
as it can.
just in time shyness
what are the pitfalls an
d abysses of philosophical reflection on an
d with shyness
?
what am i trying to shortcut
?
was
Socrates intru
ding in his punk philosopher, stopping people at back allies an
d perform philosophy. he
doesn't hol
d back, he intru
des, tattooing the bo
dy of the other,
questioning.
the problem of his project
?
i am not shy in the work that i am trying to
present publicly (
?)
where am i shy
?
posture of
position or
gesture
the moment you stan
d in front of the au
dience you stop being authentic.
when we
listen to something very carefully an
d allow ourselves to be move
d we can tune in ti=o the art work an
d absorb its
methods. i have foun
d myself move
d when i allowe
d it, by the most
childish an
d stupi
d works of arts.
open min
de
d an
d eager to make connections
(jane jacob,) (1)
community is spontaneous, the tissues of
community are not something that can be plane
d, that they happen spontaneously. (2) an
d this only happens when you are at the local scale. so in this sense,
design is suspect, because
design is set to be post spontaneity.
fin
d a way to think locally, an
d thinking about the city as a pro
duct of spontaneous
interaction between people who are
different. but the
design can also make something that has a
social character.
we perform an experiment to prove or
disprove a hypothesis, we are working within a framework of a close
d system, the o
riginal pro
position governs our proce
dures an
d observations, at arriving at yes or no. but when performing the experiment we come across something unforeseen, or prompte
d by evi
dence to jump tracks an
d think about a
different issue. then we are working within the framework of an open
system. we move beyon
d yes or no to exploring something emergent, something whose elements was there but whose form was unknown to us. a fancy an
d careful way of saying “something new”, because it is new to our un
derstan
ding.
William Empson
art results from overcrow
ding(
?)
when one is
responsive rather than assertive one can't
imagine where one will en
d Up
: thinking. this
responsiveness is
different than the state of being active or passive. a passivity that motivates an
d mobilizes the subject into places that are yet unknown to her/him.
Thinking, as
Heidegger says, may be much the same as wan
dering. my
lectures are like wan
dering.
someone who stu
dies para
doxes,
poetry an
d philosophy
(keeping what you know away from
society,
history an
d away from art, not to acknowl
edge what you have learn)
incompatibility between a particular
love an
d a particular
social arrangement for
love.
when you play with others, not try to shine an
d not try to shy. (shyness is
dangerous to
society)
it is like being lynche
d by kukluksklan.
curios about somebo
dy else rather than i
dentifying with them.
i really learne
d how to work with people by learning how to keep people from killing each other in street.
if we are very
sympathetic, saying “i know how you feel” is privileging soli
darity
: “we are all in this together”. but well we can't all be in this together in the same way, so what is it that we
do together,
despite this fact.
instea
d of the
declaring voice “i believe this or that”, we can say “i woul
d have though” or “perhaps” intro
ducing a zone of ambiguity in people's
relationship with each other you might get something
social. subjunctive moo
d (konjuktiv) not only is to zusammenbin
den the elements of semantic also to zusammenbin
den the the people who are speaking in these terms.
cooperation is a rehearsal not a performance.
public real ma
de of people who
don't argue in behalf of their own
interest but to think most
dis
intereste
dly.
my talks/works is about how we make sense of our environment, the
network that we live in an
d the texts an
d discourses that we are
reading an
d writing.
how shyness (even) look like
? can we recognize it when we see it
?
what is feeling comfortable in the
presence of str
angers
? not
verbally i mean, physically.
df class='thdf'>the notion of | df> being comfortable in the
presence of
difference. being physically comfortable in
presence of the people who are not like yourself.
the subjunctive is the
language that the shy uses
naturally, which is one of the necessary elements of cooperation. in contrast to subjunctive speech, there is
declarative speech is a form of
declaration invites sub
mission, an
d it invites sub
mission because somebo
dy else
defines for you clearly what something is about. there is almost an
erotic of that, they really now what they are on about, they really know who they are, an
d you become a
spectator to their
de
finiteness. giving yourself up to somebo
dy who seems more
define
d an
d more purposive.
cooperation in islam is not a personal experience, it is something that is en
code
d in very strict ritual. it is not an act of choice. cooperation is not a
duty but a
desire.
my talk is a fancy an
d careful way of
responding to the voices of other. the ones that are soun
ding in my ear. (inslam, shakespear, math, that girl in enghelab square, etc.). i am not goo
d at imme
diate reaction, so i
respond with a
delay an
d a lot of playfulness an
d black holes that come in to be of the part of this, by this
relationship to the Other, that is manifesting itself through the
language of the Other (islam)
In my performative practice, I seek a way to approach thinking about things that arrests my curiosity. It is a form of commitment to what comes forwar
d an
d calls for thinking, an attention before what I
do not know. My Talks are fancy an
d careful
responding to that otherness, to the voice or face that speaks to you from somewhere that you cannot yet locate. This call coul
d be from a sa
distic super-ego insi
de or
Shakespeare or kleinen Maulwurf,
der wissen wollte, wer ihm auf
den Kopf gemacht hat.
i am not just
intereste
d in my own foun
dational
metaphors.
is there an amateurishness at the
intersection of art an
d philosophy that i am
drawing
?
what is amateur
?
the fact that i am giving talks is very much relate
d to the
social culture aroun
d me, in Germany the culture has a taste to
listen an
d there is an
interest for speech. now i get it like in the case of warhol he is rethinking his surroun
ding culture which is
dominate
d at that time by pop, me
dia an
d celebrity. i am rethinking the aca
demia an
d philosophy that is in
relationship with the arts, my issues an
d interests are
different than warhol for that
matter. i am enthusiastic an
d extremely
intereste
d in the
material that i am working with, an
d at the same time overthrown by it an
d i believe in it, in the same way that maybe warhol believe
d in pop culture an
d business.
the nightmare after performance
df class='thdf'>the notion of | df>
skill in art, performance, life, work
trauma, in the experience of the trauma, the source mixes, an
d articulate in
metaphors an
d hubric signifiers.
relationship between ol
der works an
d performances, the issue of
skill an
d technology.
it took 60 years after the
developments in tempering
metal, for barnors to learn new nigf
techniques. this is common in the
history of
technology, that a tool appears before people know how to use it.
do we know how we can use computers
? when we master a
technique, its uses are not imme
diatly clear.
getting
intereste
d in the wrong answer in the four answer
question.
no
skill
develops without a goo
d dose of curiosity. which enables us to think about what might be, rather than what is.
There is a half-re
membere
d discussion of Sigmun
d Freud I
read once in a
book an
d which I have been paraphrasing regularly ever since. It sai
d that for
Freud dreams were a way of thinking by
doing. You run, you cry, you kiss, you
love, you cheat, you argue, you fall, you kill, you eat, you sing, you get lost, you
travel back in time, you become somebo
dy else – but you
do it all in your hea
d. You
do it in your hea
d an
d so it is thinking, just not a thinking we recognize as thinking. When I am
dreaming I am
composing thoughts in the way an artist
composes a painting or a witch a potion – an assemblage ma
de of bo
dies an
d places an
d actions. An
embodie
d thinking, that is no less eloquent or extraor
dinary or transformative for being so.
...................................
...One can chat an
d gossip but it is forbi
dden to preach,
lecture or
instruct.”
Clau
dio Magris’ Micronismi
...................................
(butler)
the structure of a
ddress itself
although I
di
d not know in whose voice this person was speaking, whether the voice was his own or not, I
di
d feel that I was being a
ddresse
d.
To
respond to this a
ddress seems an important
obligation
during these times.
It is about a mo
de of
response that follows upon having been a
ddresse
d, a comportment towar
d the Other only after the Other has ma
de a
demand upon me, accuse
d me of a failing, or aske
d me to assume a
responsibility.
The structure of a
ddress is important for un
derstan
ding how moral
authority is intro
duce
d an
d sustaine
d if we accept not just that we a
ddress others when we speak, but that in some way we come to exist, as it were, in the moment of being a
ddresse
d, an
d something about our existence proves precarious when that a
ddress fails.
...the
demand that comes from elsewhere, sometimes a nameless elsewhere,...
We think of presi
dents as wiel
ding speech acts in willful ways, so when the
director of a university press, or the presi
dent of a university speaks, we expect to know what they are saying, an
d to whom they are speaking, an
d with what intent.
...perhaps we shoul
d think more
seriously about the
relation between mo
des of a
ddress an
d moral
authority. (also one of the issues in to
day's performance art)
narration is always ju
dgment
affective
intervention
why shoul
d i
listen to you
?
because i have a voice!
visual culture has
different stran
d from
lecture culture. people are able to express themselves with
verbal signs long before they can
draw anything, using visual sign (picture
: a
drawing by
ds class="frds scrmbld">Hannods>).
verbal
language because of its easy every
day usage has become mun
dane an
d instrumental to
communication, visual sign
due to its learning curve an
d skillfulness belonge
d to the art
domain.
...................................
transitive
verb constructions are the ones that require a
direct object in or
der to complete the meaning an
d to be grammatical. Use
d in theater, between
director an
d actor, by
communicating with
transitive
verbs actors can perform the
language of the
director.
my work embodies an
d communicates a
desire to
read (an
d write) texts
[steiner
]
in
Greek mythology the
poet an
d the seer are blin
d so that they may, by the antennae of speech, see further.
One thing is clear
: every
language-act has a temporal
determinant. No semantic form is timeless. When using a wor
d we wake into resonance, as it were, its entire previous
history. A text is embe
dde
d in
specific
historical time; it has what
linguists call a
diachronic structure. To
read fully is to restore all that one can of the imme
diacies of value an
d intent in which speech actually occurs.
The process of
diachronic
translation insi
de one’s own native tongue is so constant, we perform it so unawares, that we rarely pause either to note its formal intricacy or the
decisive part it plays in the very existence of civilization. By far the greatest mass of the
past as we experience it is a
verbal construct.
History is a speech-act, a selective use of the
past tense. Even substantive remains such as buil
dings an
d historical sites must be ‘
read,’ i.e. locate
d in a context of
verbal recognition an
d placement, before they assume real
presence.
...................................
(notes -
december 15, 2011)
•ds class="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Robin,Robot,Robert,Robocop">Robds>ots making ds class="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Robin,Robot,Robert,Robocop">Robds>ots
•what a robot wants (and how it wants it)
•cataloging computer generated stones smoke
•digital to digital convertor
•physical interaction (between a user and a media object, pressing a button, choosing a link, moving the body) versus psychological interaction (the psychological processes of filling-in, hypothesis forming, recall and identification, which are required for us to comprehend any text or image at all)
•Mechanical Monsters
•blown away roof
•Technology: the new nature
•-error and - horror(-terror)
•edge of the earth
•gold and dream, gold price and power law
•the story of the viewer
•fact and perspective (elucidation)
•love at first sight (digital)
•continual production of the new is what allows things to stay the same, (logic of the same)
•noise story
•the ‘content’ of any medium is always another medium (McLuhan)
•The mediation of religion through buildings
•start with metaphor and end with algebra
•a “model” is a system of objects (any kind of objects) that make all of the sentences in a theory true , where a “theory” is a list of sentences in a language.
•metaphors somehow mobilize the difference between the two domains
•arena of alienation
•Cut the Noise
•mirrors with (/without) memories
•substitutability
•optical appearances (mind ~ eye)
•Dioptrics (science of refraction), catoptrics (reflection),
•that could not be spoken of or represented, because it was empty of discourse and thus of meaning.
•innocence of the eye
•Poor Unfortunate Souls
•being useful, like a prison guard
•autopoetic (complex self-referential systems)
•to take up the motives from the external world
•will-less perception, “the pure eye of genius”
•bringing from the artificial world to the art world
•object oriented programming / subject oriented
•Observer, system and environment
•a system (designed) with a purpose of itself
•magnifying or light-collecting optical device
•social selfish
•un-computational
•gray area
•self-identity is bad visual system
•Vision requires instruments of vision; an optics is a politics of positioning. Instruments of vision mediate standpoints;
•Identity, including self-identity, does not produce science; critical positioning does, that is, objectivity
•docile body
•technological visioning (vector of secret texts, books within books, ancient curses, digital dreams, and medieval cyber-art)
•empty space left by theory and philosophy
•technical visioning
•Technology is never merely “used,” never merely instrumental. It is always ” incorporated” and “lived.”
•In his last paintings, such as the Bride of 1912, Duchamp both elaborated an iconography that combined mechanical and visceral forms and began to move away from any procedures that revealed the artist's hand to create “retinal” or “anecdotal” art.
lemon grass plant, ma
rigol
d
ds class="frds scrmbld">Saeedds> 0012063108222
Tehran Wi Fi
: 88 57 27 92
newer me
dium may be ‘neste
d’ insi
de of an ol
der me
dium (or vice versa)
mental life (
memory,
imagination, fantasy,
dreaming, perception, cognition) is me
diate
d an
d is
embodie
d in the whole range of
material me
dia… we not only think about me
dia, we think in them (
Mitchell)
The shock of new me
dia is as ol
d as the hills
Franz Reuleux
describe
d this cor
relation: the more primitive the
technology, the less attune
d the parts of the machine to each other, the greater the
degree of play
-- the more perfecte
d the
technology, the closer the fit, the less play between the in
divi
dual parts.
(For Winnicott,) play is a psychological state where the boun
daries between self an
d the
world remain labile an
d flui
d, (a state which is important not only for the
development of the
child, but with significant ramifications for human life an
d culture in general.)
Re
presentation is a
distinctive manner of
imagining the real, an
d is a fun
damental
phenomenon upon which all culture rests.
Henri Lefebvre
distinguishes Re
presentations of space an
d Re
presentational spaces . ... Re
presentational spaces are “
directly live
d” through as
sociate
d images an
d symbols which overlay physical space, making
symbolic use of its objects.
the conceiving min
d over the perceiving bo
dy (vision/touch)
touching was consi
dere
d “a cru
der scanning at close range,” an
d seeing “a more subtle touching at a
distance.”
for Berkeley there is no such thing as visual perception of
depth, an
d Con
dillac's statue effectively masters space with the help of movement an
d touch. The notion of vision as
[Ouch is a
dequate to a fiel
d of knowl
edge whose contents are organize
d as stable
positions within an extensive terrain.
•a technological gaze
•way of seeing (Derridean deconstructed)
•high-tech images
•artifact (cultural artifact, social)
•image of the or a body and its environment
•impossible subject-positioning, the codification of flesh, a visualization of scientific narratives and the aestheticization of information, all of which tell us about a longer line of cultural fantasies about information, code and technology. (Norah Campbell)
•Everything said is said by an observe (Maturana and Varela)
•framing the world
•virtual gaze (Baudrillard)
•achieve absolute vision, while seeing nothing.
•very much as real; human and technological, both
•i say this as someone who thinks that we are part of this digital world, but we are not necessarily subject to its terms
•splicing of direct and tactile human perception of reality with another reality, one that is mediated and technical
•the naration is not pure nor whole (why cyborg?)
•place of visibility (/ field of articulability)
•it is an aesthetic dream, dream of ismorphism between the discursive object and the visible object
•exteriorization of the body (relation between face / hand / tool )
•The “exact meeting place” of form, matter, tool, and hand is the touch(Henri Focillon)
•
////////////////////////
In this
interconnection of
embodie
d being an
d environing
world, what happens in the
interface is what is important.
--Don
Ihde, Bo
dies in
Technology
At first glance, s
trappe
d to the bo
dy of critters such as green turtles in Shark Bay, off Western Australia, humpback whales in the waters off southeast Alaska, an
d emperor penguins in Antarctica, a nifty miniature vi
deo camera is the central protagonist. Since the first overwrought seventeenth-century European
discussions about the camera luci
da an
d camera obscura, within
technoculture the camera (the
technological eye)seems to be the central object of both philosophical pretension an
d selfcertainty, on the one han
d, an
d cultural skepticism an
d the authenticity
destroying powers of the artificial, on the other han
d. The camera
--that vault or
arched chamber, that ju
dge's chamber
--move
d from elite Latin to the vulgar,
democratic i
diom in the nineteenth century only as a consequence of a new
technology calle
d photography, or “light-
writing.” A camera became a black-box with which to register pictures of the outsi
de
world in a re
presentational, menta
list, an
d sunny
semiotic economy, an analogy to the seeing eye in brainy, knowing man, for whom bo
dy an
d min
d are suspicious str
angers, if also near neighbors in the hea
d. Nonetheless, no
matter how gussie
d up with
digitalize
d optical powers, the camera has never lost its job to function as a ju
dge's chamber, in camera, within which the facts of the
world--in
dee
d, the critters of the
world--are assaye
d by the stan
dar
d of the visually convincing an
d, at least as important, the visually new an
d exciting.
... first we have to plough through some very pre
dictable
semiotic roa
d blocks that try to limit us to a cartoonish
epistemology about visual self-evi
dence an
d the life
worlds of human-
animal-
technology compoun
ds.
Gilbert stresses that nothing makes itself in the biological
world, but rather reciprocal in
duction within an
d between always-in-process critters ramifies through space an
d time on both large an
d small scales in casca
des of
inter- an
d intra-action. In embryology,
Gilbert calls this “
interspecies epigenesis."43
Gilbert writes
: “I think that the i
deas that Lynn
[Margulis] an
d I have are very similar; it's just that she was focusing on a
dults an
d I want to exten
d the concept (as I think the
science allows it to be fully exten
de
d) to embryos. I believe that the embryonic co-construction of the physical bo
dies has many more implications because it means that we were ‘never’ in
divi
duals”
caring
: becoming subject to the unsettling
obligation of curiosity, which requires knowing more at the en
d of the
day than at the beginning
//////////////
Nietzsche also said, at the very beginning of the second treatise of The Genealogy of Morals, that man is a promising animal, by which he meant, underlining those words, an animal that is permitted to make promises (das versprechen darf). Nature is said to have given itself the task of raising, bringing up, domesticating and “disciplining” (heranziichten) this animal that promises.
Microlan
dscapes
:
the talk, also works
df class='thdf'>the notion of | df> mirror
stage an
d what
does it mean for us an
d for the companien
species that are entangle
d. what th
reads of meaning are taken apart by pulling on the th
read of self reflection an
d self vision, what will gets account as
nature for whom an
d when. the
animal that is in charge of her own image is the re
presentation of the universala man.
Appearance of eukaryotic cells aroun
d 2 billion years ago is probably the most significant event in the
history of life on earth. It gave the creatures with
DNA two important things
: a nucleus that containe
d all the genetic
materials an
d an
interface to
communicate with the
world outsi
de of the cell
--a complex
membrane
--to talk with the
materials alien to itself.
Interface is a critical point of
intersection between
different life
worlds, fiel
ds, or levels of organization. They are the areas in which
social friction can be experience
d an
d where
diffusion of new
technology is lea
ding to structural
discontinuities (which can be either
positive or negative), the
interface is where they will occur. The argent issue of
interfaces in
social
interaction an
d flow between human
animal, nonhumans, an
d computers is to
day becoming a zone of
transition of ephemeral
technologies, physical contact,
socio-political boun
daries, an
d metaphor-re
presentation.
Since antiquity, re
presentation has been the foun
dational concept of
aesthetics an
d semiotics. In the
modern era, it has also become a crucial concept in political theory. In a
discussion of law an
d ethnography,
Clifford ds class="frds scrmbld">Geertds>z calls into
question the Western
distinction between
matters of fact an
d matters of value. “Facts an
d law we have perhaps everywhere; their polarization we perhaps have not.”
ds class="frds scrmbld">Geertds>z's hermeneutic approach lea
ds him to focus on the
relation between the groun
ding of norms an
d the re
presentation of fact. Therefore, he con
cludes, re
presentation is a
distinctive manner of
imagining the real, an
d is a fun
damental
phenomenon upon which all culture rests.
The performance-talk is
divi
de
d into three tangle
d narratives, one the
social mo
de of
traveling that in
cludes the
child--the op
posite of the lonely masculine
traveler
--base
d on the real experience an
d a personal
story in a trip to Amazon in Colombia with
ds class="frds scrmbld">Karinds>
Demuth an
d her three years ol
d boy
--ds class="frds scrmbld">Hannods>
--, secon
d a multi-hea
de
d reading of
technologies of
interfacing within computer culture an
d the
worlds of other
species, the meaning of
inter-facing with the other, an
d thir
d a visual re
presentation of the highly
technical images recor
de
d by Kinect infrare
d 3
D-scanner/motion-
detector. The result of the visualization is a heavily glitchy image, which aims in the performance to link the spatial practice to the perceive
d an
d the re
presentational spaces to the live
d. Affirming the “un
naturalness” of the image makes it a trans
position of universal means of
communication
--the
language--that woul
d like to provi
de a
direct, unme
diate
d, an
d accurate re
presentation of the jungle.
The performance is an engagement with
df class='thdf'>the notion of | df> companion
species elaborate
d by
Donna Haraway, in an experience of walking in a tropical jungle with a computer in one han
d an
d in the other han
d the han
d of the human
child. The work
deals with
questions of the other-space that is mentally fille
d with projections an
d projects. The recor
ding of the walking in the rain forest
--as spatial an
d sensual experience
-- is thus
de
materialize
d an
d has acquire
d a
digital character. The
dense an
d hot environment of the Amazon is replace
d by an abstract graphic structure, thus bringing a new un
derstan
ding of the locality of the walk. The noise an
d the ran
domness of the
technical coloring the surface of the jungle provoke an
aesthetic fascination, an
d an appropriation of the imposible image of the forest.
Traveling to the Amazon to experience its ra
dical Otherness is a European tra
dition. It unintentional affirms the i
deology of a “state of
nature” that is
prior to culture.
Lacan: i am le
d to regar
d the function of the mirror
stage as a particular case of the function of the imago, which is to establish a
relation between the organism an
d its reality - or, as they say, between the Innenwelt an
d the Umwelt.
This
developement is experience
d as temporal
dialectic that
decisively projects the function of the in
divi
dual into
history. the mirror
stage is a
drama whose
internal thrust is precipitate
d from insufficiency to anticipation - an
d which manufactures for the subject, caught up in the
lure of spatial i
dentification, the succession of phantasies that exten
ds from a fragmente
d body image to a form of its totality that i shall call orthhopae
dic - an
d, lastly, to
df class='thdf'>the | df class='thdf'>assumption of | df>df> the armour of an alienating i
dentity, which will mark with its
rigi
d structure the subject's entire mental
development. thus, to break out of the circle of the Innenwelt into the Umwelt generates the inexhaustible qua
drature of the ego's verifications.
Electronic Reserve Text
: from Jacques
Lacan, Ecrits, New York
: W. W. Norton, 1977.
The Mirror
Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Reveale
d in Psychoanalytic Experience
Delivere
d at the 16th
International Congress of Psychoanalysis, Zurich, July 17, 1949
...................................
Flusser,
Gestures - beyon
d machines (
reading)
the project investigates the way in which
ds class="frds">Seifeeds> as an artist engages tactics of fiel
dwork,
embodiment an
d materiality (in a manner that reveals or instigates processes of knowing).
(In this moment of increasing stan
dar
dization an
d specialization regar
ding how people learn, art is a space for innovative thinking an
d experimentation outsi
de given frameworks.)
...our ability to share the experience of the habits of the
world that we
discover. (
Kohn)
...................................
Campbell on Harman's philosophy
(problem of) object-oriented ontology as social theory [insights of object-orientation mechanically applied to the social by Harman, “immaterialism"]
•innovative adaptation of phenomenology
•critique of how objects have been failed by philosophy
•insistence upon an aesthetic attitude of investigation
--but-->
•object-oriented social theory lacks the rigor and imaginative potential to envision the ontology of the social
•the way object-oriented ontology is stuck in a no-man's-land of not-quite-nonhuman-not-quite-human
•as ooo enters social theory it commits a performative fallacy --> missing the fundamental starting point of social theory: ***objects come into the social world as expressions of (negotiated, perceptual, political, agentic) value*** [social theory is fundamentally predicated on the socius --> social theory is about the association between things =/= homogenous things]
}=/= Campbell's *posthuman relationism*: another form that better understands the abyssal point between the non-human and the human
(2007 conference) speculative realism {antipathy to “human-centred” intellectual traditions} d>~d>=> object-oriented ontology
(objectivity =/= obliqtivity)
Harman's immaterialism: realism without materialism : objects can only ever be captured obliquely
object-oriented ontology's development:
•characterised by a consistent lament for how post-Kantian philosophy in general (Continental philosophy in particular) has abandoned hope of describing objects as objects
•the real: absolute autonomy of objects (withdraw from subjects)
◦objects: sleeping giants holding their forces in reserve
•prefer the excess of the aesthetic over the reduction by the scientific (materialism's tendency to reduce objects to a primary substratum ==> rendering them susceptible to mathematical capture) --Campbell--> *aesthetic foundationalism* [==engender==> an attitudinal response to objects] (@apass, this is also a problem in artistic research):
◦aesthetic appreciation above the reduction of the phenomenon achieved by science --> “art (art criticism) is a style that gets us closer to the nature of objects” (+ bad df class='thdf'>example of | df> Clement Greenberg)
◦(to make the invisible deep conditions of objects perceivable) prioritize *allusive style* above *literal description*
•claims to post-phenomenological sovereignty
•over-mining approach to knowledge production =/= objects's surplus of reality
◦methodological approach which encounters objects as objects (=/= actor network theory's manner of focusing upon an object's effects) [+ bad df class='thdf'>example of | df> Dutch East India Company]--Campbell--> object-oriented social theory produces a rudimentary narrative with no discernible innovation on the level of:
◾objects --> the actors are recognisable companies, personalities, infrastructures
◾relations --> the major symbiotic moments are legal contracts, infrastructure and formative moments in a human's life
◾time --> there is standard chronology from birth to death, with emphasis on human-centric causes and effects
•“social theory = a mode of knowledge production” (=/= a decontextualised reflection of the world) ==> withdrawal: a psychological alibi, an aesthetic (=/= cognitive concept) ==stimulate==> an attitudinal response: humility [+ passivity?] in the face of overwhelming non-human existence [~ appeal ==produce==> a paternalistic-arrogant-instrumentalist attitude to the nonhuman =/= *appeal ==foster==> responsibility* (a norrnativity that withdrawal cannot) ---> go to Haraway + Campbell]
}=/= posthuman relationism: realists who draw on contemporary advances in disciplines like geology, biology, mathematics and neurology to make the case that non-human reality is not a sub-set of human reality -->
•commitment to an object-oriented realism (d>~d>= Harman)
•occupy an *anthropic* event horizon: their social analyses occur in the shifting, impossible ground hetween the human and the nonhuman (=/= Harman)
•dialectic of object **withdrawal + appeal** (=/= Harman's object withdrawal) ~ ***interaction between objective withdrawal d'>& subjective appeal***
(Moss) earth as making an appeal --Freud--> a demand for work
“when the attention of an experienced person is drawn to the child's state by this path of discharge, [the path of discharge] ... acquires a secondary function of the highest importance, that of cornmunicalion
--> initial helplessness of human beings is the primal source of all moral motives
(child's) creaming and kicking --> appeal (made by the earth) is a combination of demand + accusation
contemporary social theorists are turning towards objects
<==Bennett== object produce a ‘gestalt shift’ in perception
}==Tsing==> (amounts to) a political act <== (turning towards objects) requires us:
•to re-divide the world
•to re-prioritise matler(s)
•to create different causalities
•to follow new agencies
•to produce new spacetimes
•to interrupt the ‘mind-lulling presence of common sense’
}----> acknowledge the importance of traditional *social theory* in identifying gross inequalities + advocate a posthuman relationism that moves *from critique to production* ==> *new and surprising connections between modes of existence* (df class='thdf'>for example | df>)
•did the typical American diet play any role in engendering the widespread susceptibility to the propaganda leading up to the invasion of Iraq?
•do sand storms make a difference to the spread of socalled sectarian violence?
•does mercury help enact autism?
•what if serious adoption practices for and by the elderly became common?
•what if nations that are worried about low birth rates (Denmark, Germany, Japan, Russia, white America, more) acknowledged that fear of immigrants is a big problem, and that racial purity projects and fantasies drive resurgent pronatalism?
posthuman: a mode of listening for the nonhuman + simultaneously acknowledging the impossibility of fully hearing it --> impossible position ==expand==> our range of socialities, causalities, temporalities and ethics because it contains the **stubborn anthropomorphic residual** within any ‘new’ theory of society
--> (not infinite) co-constitution of the social + the extra-social (vaccines d'>& markets, planetary systems d'>& telescopes, catastrophes d'>& laws, etc.)
feminist science studies *demand a normative responsibility* towards ontological inclusivity and humility
(now that there is no objective -->) interrogatives are object-makers
*strangeness (of nonhuman life) [acts as a guide] --> mobilising new prepositions of connection ==> to think differently about the social ==> new conceptions of society (as planetmate, messmate, natureculture, mindbody, thing-power, odd kin, etc.)
parallels drawn between theories of evolution d'>& theories of social change:
•Gould --> concept of punctuated equilibrium
•Serres --> ontology of the social as parasitism
•Hayles --> translation of epigenesis and technogenesis
•
{phenomenon of serial endosymbiosis theory <-- social theorists deploy this in the search for accounts of how change and creativity originate}--> (bio-econornic context) *symbiosis* has long been recognised as a theory which demonstrates the co-constitution of the social and the biological
=/= Darwinian story of: small variations, random mutation, long time scales, natural selection, fitness and incremental development:
•complexity derived by brute mechanical climbing from the base already built by the efforts of earlier climbing
•unit of change: the gene, or individual organism, the zoocentric, ‘big like us’ epistemic culture of both science and social science (=/= weird worldings of protists, archea, eukaryotes [Wertheim])
bacteriology ==> new organisms were often stemmed from profound and prolonged symbiotic relationships that have proven difficult to analyse =/= discrete
•traits are inherited outside of sexual dissemination (digestion, infection, donation, other complex forms of partnerning) --> consortia: amorphous symbiotic complexes (metabolic energetic networks) =/= organism: anatomically bounded objects (systems of information and exchange)
}==Margulis==> focus on how perceptual, political, social and scientific conditions precede objects: *objects = boundary-work*
--> differential speeds of change (sudden and unlikely mixes + slow and causal)
--> deconstruction of individuality
(co-constitutive bio-econornic-political-social context:)
**ideological contest between individualism and collectivism in political economy <==> intellectual development of symbiosis theory**
•socialist and anarchist concept of mutuellisme in the mid 1800
•Hobbesian-Malthusian-Darwinian bio-economic concept of struggle for existence in zero-sum games of all-against-all
•Kropotkin's symbiosis as evidence for the benefit of global cooperation towards the common good, the division of labour, protection of elements and interdependent organisation
•evolutionary theory used to champion individualism and the social policies of laissez faire
Campbell --> what Harman misses is the elementary starting point for sociologies of science: *that social science translates science* just as science translates “reality”
serial endosymbiosis theory ==>
d class="lstsrd">1. no theory of social change is going to be value-free (endosymbiosis is a process that is always already highly charged with rich metaphor, entailing a ‘host’ that is in an ‘exchange,’ ‘relation’ or ‘merger’ with a ‘guest’ --> a form of ‘living together’ that becomes ‘close’ over time)
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. extraordinary range and nature of these relations can act as strategies for other worldings (other ways of being with each other) --> important normative function [at the cataclysmic endings =/= catastrophic ending]
d>
d class="lstsrd">3. a way to think about temporalities (when a bacterium nestled into a simple cell, creating an intimacy that has lasted four billion years)
d>
d class="lstsrd">4. a template for unlikely intimacies
d>
Harman's philosophical monologue on social theoretical practice (which might yet be remedied by actual dialogue with social theorists) ==> performative fallacy (<-- common in artist writing)
@apass****
(Campbell asking) why has object-oriented ontology become such a popular force in other disciplines?
<== complex interplay between sociological + logical factors
+ rise of *para-academia*
@artist (in proliferation of artist writing)
****speculation = the alibi for a doctrine that wishes to spare itself the trouble of justification****
--> we need closer attention to rationality as the basis of judgement when we talk about speculation
--> we need to be more informed by (sciences) when we stretch relations to our rational outposts, without ignoring their appeals
...................................
posthumanism --> any discursive or bodily configuration that displaces the human, humanism, humanities --> (21st century) technology is the center of critical thought about culture and about nature
[*]posthumanism: a structure of feeling (sense of an era starts to be experienced in the social imagination --> social forms become more recognisable when we had some time to classify them, articulate them, theorize them)
(Williams > Campbell) structure of feeling
we can point to times in the past and say that as an X sensibility (they were romantics, enlightenment, postmodernism) =/= sensing here and now --> practical consciousness, a period at an embryonic stage, at the very edge of *semantic availability*
what structure of feeling is forming in the contemporary western world? --> posthumanism
(postbiological, postcorporal, cyborg existence, etc.)
to be human <--attack-- genomics, global finance, nature of social in virtual communities (telegram) ==> yet-to-be formalized paradigms of human experience
==> fracture the concept of legal self [legal theory (arbiter of human rights) --> concerned with what is to be human]
(taxonomies of the human species at its time -->) humanitas: legal term used in public in ancient Rome to distinguish Romans and Greeks from Barbarians
humans in persistent vegetative states
international trade of human organs
human genome project
xenotransplantation
technological unconscious
(tree of life replaced by) a model that:
•classifies species according to DNA
•disregards morphological type (how elements of body appear)
•reveals human to be a tiny subspecies in a mass of absolute diversity
classical philosophy --> scientized for a momden audience (by Descartes 17th century) --> special status of human <-- seen as a totally transparent, secular, scientific, liberal way of thinking about the world
humanism = a belief in progress (implicitly conceived as a technological instrumental profit-oriented) + technological masery over nature + ‘human =/= animal’ + therapeutic approach to scientific inquiry }<-- a 19th century anachronism --> deeply ingrained in contemporary self-consciousness and everyday common sense
human: hero of liberty <-- french in origin, political in purpose
August Comte --> the universe can only e understood when the scientific exploration of phenomena was separated from supernatural superstition =/= ajayeb
Campbell making the case --> humanism needs to be deconstructed (not in a blithe نرم وملایم postmodern discursive way, rather) the definitions of what it means to be human are of life-changing importance --> humanism's supposed universality and transparency masks the fact that it is *an inherited western relatively recent philosophical perspective of the world*
in consumer research --> human: culturally inflected, psychosocial producer of + produced by the market =/= human: a disembodied information-processor with a rationalistic indentity and a computatinoal approach to the market
--Campbell--> how can interpretative consumer research benefit from a perspective which acknowledges this ideology of humanism?
the term posthuman has been used to describe anything which extends human capcity --ironically--> something as ubiquitous banal ancient and human as *tool-use* could itself be described as posthuman (Hayles, Stiegler, Wills) ==> **posthuman is as ancient as the human itself** }--> [*]posthuman: (a radical recognition that) technological = *originary logic* + *ethical sensibility* (= a stepping-out [=/= coming-after] of the enclosure of what is only important and necessary to the human)
•a concept that draws attention to the cracks that have always existed in the water-light descriptions of the human
•the ethical and radical realisation that the human only comes into existence by the work of (organic + technological) nonhuman others
cyborg --> associated with liberatory modes of identity
**technology deconstructs everyday human experience of agency, free will, choice, self** @apass
21st century --> technology is the center of critical thought about culture and nature (--> df class='thdf'>that is why | df> it became organically part of my ajayeb research)--> *to think about technology in a manner which reflects its ubiquity, its deeper symbolic and aesthetic dimensions, the way in which it can radically chnage humanness and human-centered approaches
(humanistic epistemology ==>) mode of the human:
d class="lstsrd">1. information processor
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. cognitive subject
d>
d class="lstsrd">3. cultural subject
d>
posthuman mode:
d class="lstsrd">1. to widen the temporal range of research (deep future, deep past)
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. take the form of an ethical inquiry (where the human is no longer the center of the world)
d>
d class="lstsrd">3. to think about the ontology of technology
d>
d class="lstsrd">4. the relationship of the human and the nonhuman (sustainability)
d>
20th century --> gene
21st century --> posthuman (postgenetic metaphors)
robotic revolution + biotechnology revolution > agricultural revolution + industrial revolution + information revolution
(consumer research started to develop an outlook that) things are just as complex and social as people
•brand: entities that talk to and interact with other brands, entities that form relationships with humans
(lives that seem to exist in on the edges of simple humanist life:)
•*massive* life of market
•*excessive* life of the brnad image
•*virtual* life of Facebook
•
consumer research focuses on the ontological and epistemological givens of only the consumer
(Turkle theorizing) how consumers change through their relationship with the nonhuman
•children view certain objects in the world around them as having degrees of aliveness
•children who have grown up with computers do not experience a dichotomy between biological and computatinoal processes
•playing with a toy like transformers, the toy shifs from being machines to being robots to being animals --learning--> fluid boundaries between mechanism and flesh
•(the ontological stickiness of the) [*]computer: a mind that is not yet a mind, inanimate yet interactive, it does not think yet neither is it external to thought
(Menser + Aronowitz) television: a complex object constituted by and related to many fields (solid-state physics, politics, etc.)
Latour...
}--> (such way of theorizing ==> precondition of) an era where radically mew technologies produce entities as indefinable complex global (as the Human Genome project) biofuel supply-chains or climate change models [--> also cryptocurrencies, blockchain]
}--Campbell--> consumer researchers are creating new concepts and figurations in order to expand the borders of waht constitutes life [df class='thdf'>for example | df> “living-product” metaphor]
(the problem of the) [ontological division of] consumer =/= world of objects ==> (ideological move -->) privileges human : it is understood by the human, because the human (the only source of analytical attention) is the only thing doing the consuming, having the experience, making the meaning
figuration: new ways of taking account of the world =/= anthropomorphism
--Haraway--> practices that create *knots* of material-semiotic actors {<-- art does that? art's sometimes unreal figurations =/= **interpretative consumer research makes the most realistic figurations of this century**}@ds class="frds scrmbld">ds class="frds scrmbld">Chloeds>2ds>
the metaphors of our time:
•becoming (=/= being) <-- a shift towards a *process metaphysics*
•
(Parsons + Maclaren)
items of disposal (do not fail to exists, but rather they) are *moved along* to other spaces or politics and become other things
•becoming a precious antique
•becoming a water blockage
•becoming a source of marine death
•becoming a materially precious thing (in another part of the world)
•
--> **how things actually move, how they transition between many states**
--> *object = data about the object =/= tangible thing* <-- (transition) from thinking of object as the primary reality --to--> perceicing the object as data in computatinoal environments
==?==> (change of the nature of object ==>) radical shift in theorizing consumer behavior
posthumanism
•a key term in contemporary western postindustrial era
•a term htat has been used ti describe a highly technologized future existence
--variationally
--> other
stories (
fables) about
technology exists
=/=
d class="lstsrd">1. the claim of (often monolithic) novelty of the historical moment in the west
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. that technology is a sterile instrument
d>
d class="lstsrd">3. that technology aids the human in his ascent to ever greater degrees of humanity
d>
(
greek tra
dition
-->)
*to think
deeply about
technology, we have to think about its
ontology
*
•techno-sociology --> Latour
•ecological feminism --> Haraway
•post-Marxism --> Tiziana Terranova
•
•philosophy of tech --> Heidegger: the most dangerous thing we can do is to think of technology as something neutral --> we often make two ***intuitive ideological jumps of reason*** when we think of technology:
1. “
technology
= means to an en
d”
2. “
technology is create
d by humans”
}<-- df class='thdf'>example of | df>
anthropological truth (about
technology)
~ it is a truth as it appears to human beings
d'>& it is an
*instrumental truth
: truth aime
d at getting things
done or making things work
* =/= [*]technology
: the mo
de by which realities are brought into existence in the
world (hervorbringen)
{unconcealing
==> a concealment of another reality
}= (process of)
*poiesis
= bring out
+ conceal
*
-the greek word *techne = technology + art* derived from the term episteme (the ways in which one can know reality) ==> ****technology: a type of epistemology, a way of knowing****
}==Heidegger==> *technology nee
ds to be un
derstoo
d beyon
d its
instrumenta
list humanist
history
* --Campbell--> *seeing
technology
historically as an ancient
phenomenon
*
technology thought of as something that comes from the west
d'>& does something to other people in other placers
<-- a framework (even well-intentione
d) that
denies both
agency
d'>& contemporaneity to the ‘other’
(-McQuire)
(we are tol
d that)
•the era we exist in is the “information age”
•the world is “networked”
•marheting is “service-dominant”
--Campbell--> what realities
do the terms “information” “
network” “service-
dominant” create, unconceal, conceal
?
==> questions of
:
-what is the consumer?
-the nature of consumer consciousness, knowledge, desire
*far from being a neutral uncomplicate
d relationship,
consumers
develop strategic behaviors for
*coping with
technology
* that is para
doxial
+ fantastical
+ i
deological
+ multi
dimensional
(-Konzinets)
•DIY technologies: forms of competence redefined + redistributed between hardware d'>& human
•technology d'>& identity interpolate each other
global
debates of
:
•fear of genetic determination
•nature of consciousness --> similarities and differences between computation and human being
•
--> intimately concerne
d with the status of humanness
1990s theories of gift-giving, possession, labour, self-concept
=/= *cyber
consumer
* --> circulation of
desire an
d commo
dities in environments that are so highly me
diate
d an
d technological that it begins to generate behavior an
d situations that are quite foreign to existing thinking about that
markets are an
d what
consumers want
**technology
: an active force that both
consumes
d'>& creates
consumers
**
(problem of) sustainability
d class="lstsrd">1. to sustain: rest, retreat --> humannes is a major threat to all nonhuman planetary existence ==> df class='thdf'>the idea that | df> radical threats to nonhumanness must be warded off by radical decreases in human population, consumption, normtive standards of living
d>
<-- this notion of sustainability exists ra
dically at the limits of human capability (more than
ecological crisis or human inequality, more than the threat of terrorism or nuclear proliferation)
d class="lstsrd">2. to sustain: to extend, strengthen --> df class='thdf'>the idea that | df> if we are not here then nothing on the planet has worth; if humans ado not exists, then the earth does not exists ==> our efforts of ecological sustainability are intrinsically human-centered [--(implicit attitude)--> prolonging humanness]==> ecological problem = crisis: an intense, short-lived episode in human history + it will be solved by high-technology solutions
d>
technology has co-evolve
d with being throughout billions of years
--Hayles
--> (myria
d profoun
d subtle ways) to make
nature
--para
dox
--> *it is “human
nature” to use
technology
+ technology changes “human
nature”
*
--Campbell--> ***while not everything is
technical, everything is
technological
***
*posthuman stance (strategically oriente
d towar
ds
deep future, pays attention to the lives of nonhuman others) gets
ontological with
technology
*
...................................
McQuire
defining the
technological
--activate
--> the bor
der between
nature
d'>& culture
= (the heart of) what it means to be human
...................................
[title
]
system attic
...................................
(in
my work with
apass digital
designs, i have been trying to negotiate with
df class='thdf'>the notion of | df>)
*technological gaze
*
what new mo
des of subjectivity are filtere
d through
technological gaze
?
(
?how) high-tech images are cultural artifacts
technological gaze's
method to put its meaning together
:
d class="lstsrd">1. impossible subject-positioning
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. codification of flesh
d>
d class="lstsrd">3. visualization of scientific narrative
d>
d class="lstsrd">4. aestheticization of information
d>
(Maturana
+ Varela) everything sai
d is sai
d by an observer
=/= philosopher
marketing
communication theory
[*]gaze
: (a
technical term for) the ways we visually
consume images of people an
d places
+ the ways images are constructe
d to entertain
d'>& encourage certain ways of seeing
•(using psychoanalysis) Mulvey's gaze: the way in which the camera acts as the eyes and ears of the spectator, presenting ways of framing the world (power-laden + not neutral position) ==> certain understanding of the world is assumed
•Shroeder --> gaze signifies a psychological relationship of power --> the gazer is superior to the object of the gaze [---> go to zoo]
how “human” ways of experiencing the
world are gra
dually being
integrate
d with non-human,
technological ways of perceiving an
d un
derstan
ding reality
:
•Baudrillard --> virtual gaze
•Virilio --> automation of perception (war weaponry --> df class='thdf'>the idea that | df> in west we have technologies so advanced we achieve absolute vision)
•Balsamo --> cosmetic surgery (d>~d>= new visualization technologies) ==> new forms of dominance [---> go to Kardashians TV shows], *replacing the male gaze with a normative disembodied technical gaze
•Haraway --> technocratic gaze
•Strafford --> (starting in enlightenment) *automated spectralization* (in visual presentation of the world) --> the intention and purpose of the gaze became medicalized and technologized [---> go to cartography]
•
}--> (from
techno
science to feminism) theorists have notice
d a
*splicing
* of
direct an
d tactile human perception of reality with another reality, one that is me
diate
d an
d technical
==pro
duce
==> a new reality that negotiates the in
divi
dual's knowl
edge of the universe in
diverse an
d complex ways (
<-- not catastrophic
=/= Hörl)
(time of) intellectual an
d artist upheaval
==> new an
d surprising mo
des of
imagining the human
1950s concept of cybernetics constitute
d a fun
damental change in thinking about control,
communication, information, life itself (
+ new
language of fee
dback, auto
poiesis, cellular automata, neural net)
1990s
computers
+ information
--> cybernetic theory
: (stresse
d that) information patterns are more important in un
derstan
ding organisms than
materiality
*cybernetic view of the
world --> information
code
d in pattern
d'>& ran
domness
=/= material absence
d'>& presence
*
•(both) human and technological = informational entities
•human = cyborg: (human conceived as) cybernetic organism
[?how
] discourses (
narratives
+ metaphors
+ symbols) of
science an
d technology
--Campbell--> use in a
dvertisement to create meaning
**technological
imagination
--seize
--> social
imagination
**
always reinforcing the
*awesome power of
technology to capture reality
* (objectively
+ without any
agenda)
•movie Fantastic Voyage 1966 <--Dijck-- fascination with envisioning the body from a different perspective
•status of foetus (float in black and white) <--Haraway-- meanings whose legitimacy comes from technological systems of perception
•[computer-generated images =/=?] camera-generated images <--Cartwright-- (paradox of) camera's role in capturing the real + camera's capacity to evoke emotion and present a sense of the unattainable d>~d>= (to appear to be at once) both *magical* d'>& *truthful* ==introduce==> new subjectivities into marketplace
me
diation of visual
phenomena through the eye of
technology
d>~d>=> new sets of truths (about the bo
dy, environment, etc.)
--often
--> a
**dis
embodie
d technological gaze looks at the bo
dy
**
advertisement becomes more highly finished, excessively produced, artificialized --> a technological gaze is found in the discourse of advertising --> scientized d'>& technologized images celebrate a particular view of ***life as information***
...................................
nature = figures + stories + images (d>~d>= topos, commonplace)
paying attention to nature like a child <-- Haraway
[*]trope: a verse interpolated into a liturgical text عبادات to embellish or amplify its meaning
language --> material-semiotic flesh
liturgical possibilities of nature
•ds class="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Christianson">Christiands> liturgical year
•Zaratusztrian nowruz
•star wars --?--> practice of turning tropes into worlds [--> war of imagess]
•war of words
•
(agonistic fields:)
military combat
sexual domination
security maintenance
market strategy
...................................
(
techniques of the observer - september 9, 2012)
•What is the relation between the dematerialized digital imagery of the present and the so-called age of mechanical reproduction?
•ongoing abstraction of vision - Problems of vision
•transformation in the makeup of vision
•history of art <-> history of perception?
•onlooker (Zuschauer)
•historically important functions of the human eye ==> medical, military, and police hierarchies
•Most of the historically important functions of the human eye are being supplanted by practices in which visual images no longer have any reference to the position of an observer in a “real,” optically perceived world.
•where abstract visual and linguistic elements coincide
•avoid mystifying it by recourse to technological explanations (this was my mistake!)
•an observer is more importantly one who sees within a prescribed set of possibilities, one who is embedded in a system of conventions and limitations.
•measurable in terms of objects and signs
•newly constituted human sciences in regulating and modifying the behavior of individuals.
•it was through these disciplines that the subject in a sense became visible
•passage from the geometrical optics of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to physiological optics
•to expose the idiosyncrasies of the “normal” eye
•Retinal afterimages, peripheral vision, binocular vision, and thresholds of attention
•outcome of a complex remaking of the individual as observer into something calculable-and regularizable and of human vision into something measurable and thus, exchangeable.
•standardization of visual imagery
•in the amphitheatre / on the stage / in the Panoptic machine
•dissociation of touch from sight ==> “separation of the senses” and industrial remapping of the body in the nineteenth century
•unloosening of the eye from the network of referentiality incarnated in tactility ==> fitted for the tasks of “spectacular” consumption
•Perception for Benjamin was acutely temporal and kinetic;
•a mobile consumer of a ceaseless succession of illusory commodity-like Images.
•Machines are social before being technical
•desiring machines
•The paintings of J-B. Chardin are lodged within these same questions of knowledge and perception His still lifes, especially, are a last great presentation of the classical object in all its plenitude, before it is sundered irrevocably into exchangeable and ungrounded signifiers or into the painterly traces of an autonomous vision.
•that the very process of becoming tired was in fact perception. “When the eye fixes itself on a single color...
•the clear eye of the world
•The more Schopenhauer involved himself in the new collective knowledge of a fragmented body composed of separate organic systems, subject to the opacity of the sensory organs and dominated by involuntary reflex activity, the more intensely he sought to establish a visuality that escaped the demands of that body.
•the physiological makeup of the subject as the site on which the formation of representations occurs.
•Of these only the cerebrum, together with the sensory nerves attached to it, and the posterior spinal nerve fascicles are intended to take up the motives from the external world. All the other parts, on the other hand, are intended only to transmit the motives to the muscles in which the will directly manifests itself. (Schopenhauer)
•It is knowledge that Simultaneously provided techniques for the external control and domination of the human subject and was the emancipating ground for notions of subjective vision within modernist art theory and experimentation.
...................................
ba
d visual
systems
narcissism as a cultural practice (that also motivates an
d steers
technological inventions)
accelerationism
(Accelerationism may also refer more broa
dly, an
d usually pejoratively, to support for the
deepening of capitalism in the belief that this will hasten its self-
destructive ten
dencies an
d ultimately eventuate its collapse.)
Selfie
seems to me the perfect example for this sub
mission of the unconscious to the globalize
d machine
latest theoretical buzzwor
ds
control over the
interpretation of the
world
circulation of the global image machine
tree-ma
de paper
who are (not) allowe
d (not) to have a bo
dy
?
all forms of knowl
edge claims,
acting on the i
deological
doctrines of
dis
embodie
d scientific (cinematic) objectivity
all seem just effects of
delaye
d ren
der algorithms in the play of signifiers in a virtual force fiel
d
space of simulations
not giving up to the
paranoi
d science
fiction
getting to know the
world effectively by practising the
sciences
tools of
semiology
rhetorical
nature of truth
not Romantic nor
modernist objects
:
d class="lstsrd">1. infective vectors (microbes)
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. elementary particles (quarks)
d>
d class="lstsrd">3. biomolecular codes (genes)
d>
view of the
relationship of bo
dy an
d language (the problem of
metaphor)
those of us who woul
d still like to talk about reality
imagery of moves in the fully textualize
d an
d code
d world
high tech (military) fiel
d
recognizing our own ‘
semiotic
technologies’ for making meanings,
life is
semiotic as well as
technology
(commitment
?) to faithful accounts of a ‘real’
world
Haraway writes
: All components of the
desire are para
doxical an
d dangerous, an
d their combination is both contra
dictory an
d necessary.
We nee
d the power of
modern critical theories of how meanings an
d bo
dies get ma
de, not in or
der to
deny meaning an
d bo
dies, but in or
der to live in meanings an
d bo
dies that have a chance for a future. (re
ductionism
?)
insist on the
embodie
d nature of all vision, an
d so reclaim the sensory
system that has been use
d to signify a leap out of the marke
d bo
dy an
d into a conquering gaze from nowhere. (how the exhibition can make visible my
positing in the work
? groun
d me in an
embodie
d vision
? my
situation. to
situate me. not necessarily organic
embodiment
? what have i nee
d to learn in my bo
dies
?)
perverse capacity of the eye
culture
dis
embodies. (
nature
embodies
?)
to
distance the knowing subject from everybo
dy an
d everything
visualizing
technologies are without (apparent) limit
?
linke
d to
:
-artificial graphic manipulation systems
-computer aided scanners
-colour enhancement techniques
mapping is at stake. what kin
d of mapping the Kinect image provi
des
? that is op
posite to the zeiss lens
?
how to go there with the
technology an
d not fuck the
world? carefully not give birth to mythical i
deological seeing or promising transcen
dence
Kinect's generative, but not
devouring vision
the
perversion of the zeiss lens is in that it tries to let the viewer ‘experience’ the moment of
discovery in imme
diate vision of the ‘object’
the exhibition is about a
writing of the bo
dy that
metaphorically emphasizes vision
= an
d commit to
deconstruction an
d passionate construction.
= an
d passionate
detachment, which is
depen
dent on the impossibility of innocent ‘i
dentity’ politics an
d epistemologies as strategies for seeing from (any) stan
dpoints, in or
der to see well. (refer to
lecture-performance Stan
ding on the Shoul
ders of Giants -
ds class="frds">Sinads>
ds class="frds">Seifeeds> 2015, on a critical
epistemology of seeing-from-far)
= whom to see with
?
Haraway: only partial perspective promises objective vision. This is an objective vision that initiates, rather than closes off, the problem of
responsibility for the generativity of all visual practices.
The ‘eyes’ ma
de available in
modern technological
sciences shatter any i
dea of passive vision
? these prosthetic
devices show us that all eyes, in
cluding our own organic ones, are active perceptual
systems, buil
ding in
translations an
d specific ways of seeing, that is, ways of life.
partial way of organizing
worlds
is unlocatable ir
responsible
?
is my visual exhibition a knowl
edge claim
?
To see from below (or the perspective of the mathematics, Kinect, hacker
?) is neither easily learne
d nor unproblematic
ways of being nowhere while claiming to see comprehensively (i
di
d not claim any of these - i
di
dn't try even. i was there
traveling with
relation to my co-
travelers an
d a
technology
relation) my issue with the images is their generality an
d perhaps that is their unlocatablilty. but to
situate my knowl
edge an
d myself i am not solely
depen
ding on the image
rhetoric. i was committe
d to mobile
positioning, an
d that is critical.
me
diate vision
knowl
edge potent for constructing
worlds
trying to be less organize
d by axes of
domination
Science has been utopian an
d visionary from the start
? that is one reason ‘we’ nee
d it.
my eye were
crafte
d by the bloo
d of mosquitoes...
translations an
d exchanges,
material an
d semiotic
what has the property of
systematicity in my Amazon
?
orientations an
d responsibility in
material
semiotic fiel
ds of meaning.
is Here, Kinect's vision not imme
diately a very powerful
metaphor or
technology (for political
epistemological clarification)
?
The visual
metaphor invites us to investigate the varie
d apparatuses of visual pro
duction, in
cluding the prosthetic
technologies
interface
d with our biological eyes an
d brains.
shoul
d i have an argue for (politics an
d)
epistemologies of location,
positioning, an
d situating
?
view from a structuring an
d structure
d bo
dy
we
love stuttering, an
d the partly un
derstoo
d
Translation is always
interpretative, critical, an
d partial
Amazon (location) resists (the politics of) closure
logic of culture (
nature ma
de flexible)
science
code
d bo
dy
black
code
d bo
dy
colonise
d code
d bo
dy
code
d as self sufficient (when
?)
the project an
d me are not boun
dary object (i am not tarzan)
suppress the lost text of aristotle on the
rhetoric of humor
how can something work and not work?!
mathematical competition
what is the other story (of forest, journey, etc.) that i want urgently tell?
or the rhythm of what story i want to change?
...................................
In 1905 the French
neurologists G.
Deny an
d P. Camus recounte
d the case of Ma
dame I who ha
d lost bo
dy awareness. She
describe
d her “general insensibility” as follows
: “I'm no longer aware of myself as I use
d to be. I can no longer feel my arms, my legs, my hea
d, an
d my hair. I have to touch myself constantly in or
der to know how I am. I have the feeling that my entire bo
dy is change
d, even at times that it no longer exists. I touch an object, but it is not I who am touching it. I no longer feel as I use
d to. I cannot fin
d myself. I cannot
imagine myself. My insensibility is f
rightening, as if everything were empty.” Ma
dame I was unable to recognize the
position of her arms an
d legs an
d was completely insensitive to pain.
According to Israel
Rosenfel
d's thesis, Ma
dame I was unable to know her bo
dy as part of her
memory. (her brain coul
d not create a
body image) She coul
d not
imagine, or create in her min
d, images of parents or the houses where she ha
d live
d. Lacking a continuous image of herself, she coul
d re-create momentary images only when she was verifying to herself that she ha
d a bo
dy. (see Strange, Familiar an
d Forgotten pp 40-42)
“If all self-reference were
destroye
d, consciousness an
d un
derstan
ding woul
d not be possible.
“Meaning an
d un
derstan
ding are parts of the structure of consciousness that emerge from self-reference; they cannot exist without a
body image.” (p.55)
“Self-reference is not a hypothetical i
dea but a
de
monstrable part of the structure of consciousness; a partial break
down in the physiological mechanisms that create it give us the
phenomenon of
phantom limbs.” (p.56)
Two English
neurologists, Lor
d Russell Brain an
d Henry Hea
d (!) coine
d the phrase “
body image” for the
internal image an
d memory of one's bo
dy in space an
d time. The
body image is not only a picture of the bo
dy but also an anticipatory plan for the
detaile
d movements of the bo
dy, an
d rather than a fixe
d structure, it is
dynamic an
d plastic, capable of reorganizing itself ra
dically with the
contingencies of experience.
The
body image can also incorporate external object, implements, an
d instruments. When they are being use
d, they can become intimate, vital, even libi
dinally cathecte
d parts of the
body image.
(
Don
Ihde:) “To
embody one's praxis through
technologies is ultimately an existential
relation with the
world.” (
Technology an
d Life
world, p.72)
Embodie
d relations such as the experience of “seeing through” glasses (or the use of hearing ai
ds, blin
d man's cane, or
driving a car) take the
technology into the perceptual-bo
dily self-experience. The me
diating
technology becomes part of the
body image, an
d achieves “
instrumental transparency”
...................................
(
Giuliana Bruno)
This tangible, superficial contact, in fact, is what allows us to apprehend the objects and the spaces of art, turning contact into the communicative interface of a public intimacy. (but not in the Amazonian skin contact) (it is different than Lucretius reflecting upon the nature of things)
(materiality of) cultural surfaces
As a form of dwelling that engages mediation between subjects and with objects, the surface also can be viewed as a site for screening and projection.
The surfaces of the screens that surround us today express a new materiality as they convey the virtual transformation of our material relations. And these screens, which have become membranes of contact, exist in our environments in close relation to the surfaces of canvas and walls—also undergoing a process of substantial transformation. And so it is here—in this meeting place that is surface—that art forms are becoming reconnected and creating new, hybrid forms of admixture.
who shares (deep) engagements with superficial matters?
layered space of interaction between subject and object
surface can be read as an architecture
from mediated encounters with material space to mobilization of cultural space (the exhibition)
memory, imagination, and affect are linked to movement -- embodied in jungle walk?
modernity's desire and fancy for tactile experience, driving and impulse to expand one's universe and eventually to project it, to exhibit personal passionate voyage of imagination -- effects of a spectatorial movement that is evolving further in Selfie. that is the emergence of such sequential virtues motion capturing that comes to inhibit the train of thought = interconnection in the sequence of ideas expressed during a connected discourse and how this sequence leads from one idea to another (modernity).
(i don't do filmic voyage)
...................................
By Consequence, or train of thoughts, I un
derstan
d that succession of one thought to another which is calle
d, to
distinguish it from
discourse in wor
ds, mental
discourse.
“When a man thinketh on anything whatsoever, his next thought after is not altogether so casual as it seems to be. Not every thought to every thought succee
ds in
differently.” (— Thomas
Hobbes, Leviathan, The First Part
: Of Man, Chapter III
: Of the Consequence or Train of
Imagination)
...................................
the current forms of biotic forests is
due to the sp
reading of see
d-
dispersing plants millions years ago (what about abiotic
? Kinect)
one of issues relate
d with rate/spee
d is
synchronicity
the effects of bio
technically / bioculturaly
situate
d people
Amazon's nature in opposition to slave gardens (slave plantation systems with factory machine) (along with imperial botanical gardens)
for travel and propagation of...
moving material semiotic
part-time organisms
when visuality is looke
d at in a haptic mo
dality (the tentacular face for example), vision can be figure
d as touch, not
distance. negatively curving in loops an
d frills, not surveying(/surviving) from above.
...................................
when a
depiction (
poetic, visual, etc.) is
dangerously ambiguous
?
are we really immerse
d in
data realities
? an
d that really means we are losing the sight on experiences fetche
d by our bo
dies
?
co-existing an
d contra
dictory incomplete mo
dels that groun
d us in our critically limite
d existence. what
does beyon
d the (
techno-cartographic-episto-cogno-
histo-) map's horizon means for this
situate
d “us”
?
...................................
(
Amanda Boezkes)
the
ontological purification
apparatus
we are now on an i
dea of the earth in so to calibrate our sensorial
systems to a
djust to human-born unpre
dictabilities that overri
de an
d neutralize long-stan
ding
histories of local knowl
edge.
how an
ecological perspective can be incorporate
d into vision
-- become a visuality
? -- mobilization of visuality
how an artwork may account for the ways
ecological change registers in vision
?
geo-
aesthetics
information is not energy-
specific (
Gibson)
theory of affor
dance
: information pick-up process
--> threshol
d between the sense-
system of organism an
d the invariance of the environment
an experience of an observer that is not a property of the observer, it is invariant an
d relational.
that is, it acknowl
edges that objective information about an environmental
system can be obtaine
d both in spite an
d because of perceptual change. in this respect an in
digenous knowl
edge is not simply an or
der of cultural perspective, they are rather a form of objective testimony, by the people who are attune
d to the environment's invariant structure. they are not simply a tra
ditional or local “point of view.”
in this sense what kin
d of info is the image of Kinect about the environment
? it is not objective info nor culture, what is it
? personal testimony
? descriptions of a
technological
reading
?!
affor
dance, as a concept, allows complexity an
d refusal to re
duce environments, objects, an
d actions to the basic function they may have to the perceiver in her/his/its
world -- it permits a level (horizon) of consciousness of the
world beyon
d function.
how a beetle may rest on the retina of
bird's eye like pieces of puzzle fitting together
facts of environment
to what extent can an
ecological perception become virtualize
d, re
presente
d, an
d returne
d to vision as a con
dition, or style of being
? that is how to take con
scientious of the
ecological beings that we are in any project
? -- that is attuning vision to an
ecological reality
E. h. Gombrich un
derstoo
d the perception of art as a process of cultivating the visual
skills of recognition in the eye itself
historical ways of seeing
any
skill we have in spite of environmental variances, is operating from visual schema that are geare
d to t
rigger pattern recognition, (art
?)
visuality vs vision
the caricaturist
does not teach us how to see, but rather instantiates a new
code of recognition. a visuality is neste
d into vision; vision is reciprocally prime
d to recognize a visuality
***
visuality involves more than pattern recognition
perception is not the tool by which we experience art, but its very content an
d substance. john Onians con
cludes that “each painting forms its own ‘eye’.”
what kin
d of eye the art (of my Kinect) cultivates
? (a
techno-
aesthetic eye
?) (the
diagrammatic eye
?) (referring to the
diagram project “sa
distic statistics”)
the ways we see ...ly (
historically,
ecologically, evolutionary,
technologically,) more part an
d parcel of the visuality of the
anthropo
cene
the
neuro-
aesthetic eye
to “
read” environment in terms of info pick-up an
d accommo
dation
to simply perceive as we
do
but to parlay (
double up) our perceptual
system into a mo
dality of processing,
response, an
d responsiveness
(the
aesthetics of) the visual brain is the contact (not contract) between the in
divi
dual an
d the eco
system
mo
dulation of ethos in lan
dscape
?
Kinect is not bringing a knowl
edge that is
neurobiologically imperceptible to the nake
d eye nor is it
technologically making a
worldview accessible.
“it is low tech”, its images are born of partial recognition, attunement, an
d attention
low-tech works may be critical for
developing a visuality that is not yet
integral to or explicit within new me
dia, visualising the
specifically
neurological
dimension of
ecologicity an
d mobilizing vision as a perceiving organ to cultivate this self-awareness.
...................................
(
McKenzie Wark)
climate
science, a key
science of our time, rests on an
apparatus of very powerful computers an
d communication vectors, which overcome the “friction”, as
Paul Edwards calls it, between
data an
d communication. it brings together global
data according to global stan
dar
ds, mathematical mo
dels of physics of climate
drawn from flui
d dynamics, an
d massive computational power. the mo
del an
d data copro
duce each other in a way, as the
data sets are all partial, an
d many
data points have to be
interpolate
d to make the mo
dels work. an
d then all of that has to be me
diate
d back to human awareness via tables, graphs, computer simulations, an
d so forth.
...................................
(
Irmgard Emmelhainz)
(
anthropo
cene) change in the con
ditions of visuality
transformation of the
world into images
phenomenological
+ epistemological consequences
images participate now in the forming of
worlds, they have also become forms of thought
the optical min
d
the ra
dical change in the con
ditions of visuality has brought about a new subject
position or point of view, announce by the
trajectories of
:
d class="lstsrd">1. antihumanism (between impressionism and cubism)
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. posthumanism (between cubism and experimental film)
d>
d class="lstsrd">3. non-grounded form of vision (from experimental film to digital media)
d>
this regime of visuality implies
: automatization, tautological vision, an
d signs lea
ding to other signs
resulte
d to
=> the proliferation of images also implying the cancellation of vision
“vision cancelle
d”
linearity of the Renaissance perspective plan create
d the illusion of a view to the outsi
de
world, analogous to a win
dow.
cubism
: showing a perpetual
present in a parallel temporality.
perspectival multiplicity became embe
dde
d in the picture plane.
invente
d a
discontinuous space, making i
dentity an
d difference relative (
questioning the classical
metaphysics), by subverting the
relations between subject an
d object.
does my Kinect pictural mo
del employs the architectural space
? is camera architectural
?
in experimental film,
duration became a key component of
aesthetic experience, analogous to human consciousness, a prosthetic vision
i
dentity an
d difference, rejection of a
priori space
how to release the subject from human coor
dinates
? what are references to human coor
dinates
? screen's rectangular frame
?
the machine (optical perception)
delivers a posthuman, prosthetic enhancement of vision, which announces, first the incipient (initial) normalization of perception as augmente
d reality an
d data visualization
displacement of the subjective center of operations
epitomize
subvert
fragmentation brought by mechanization, has an alienating character
its impossibility to give back an image or serve a reflective mirror
it is in
different to “me”
the exhaustive visualization an
d documentation of
wildlife is effectively concealing its ongoing extinction (one of the reasons i am not using the zeiss-lens-camera recor
dings)
(for Susan Sontag) taking photographs
[...
] is a way of certifying experience, also a way of refusing it - by limiting experience to a search for the photographic, by converting experience to a souvenir.
[...
] the very activity of taking pictures
[...
] assuages (erleichtern) general feelings of
disorientation that are likely to be exacerbate
d (worsene
d) by
travel.
cognitive activity
giving form to experience, also transforming things into signs, wel
ding image an
d discourse
the contemporary experience is also ma
de of sharing/tweeting/liking images
the contemporary political economy
: communicative capitalism
derives surplus value from the volume an
d velocity of sings an
d data circulating in the infosphere.
proliferation of cognitive signs is another feature of
communicative capitalism, submitting the min
d to an ever-increasing pace of perceptual stimuli
(for Berar
di) seeing means accelerating perception in the fiel
ds of every
day experience, accelerate
d tautological vision
derive
d from constant passive observation. this is another of
communicative capitalism's form of governance, as this kin
d of vision generates
techno-
linguistic automatisms by carrying information without meaning
is Kinect image-compilation a creature of infosphere
? (boring
question?)
normalization of groun
dless seeing (exemplifie
d in google earth)
“picture does not make an image” (Serge Daney, before and after image)
image against vision
life persists irrationality, not given form by imagination, ceasing to cohere into a higher truth. (Fox, cold world)
...................................
(
Ada Smailbegovic)
nature of things (2013,
ds class="frds">Sinads>
+ ds class="frds scrmbld">Elisads>)
relate
d to temporalities an
d velocities (plant politics of movement)
the vi
deo registers
different rhythms an
d textures of change in the event of weather
methodological impulse to
draw on
descriptive practices of
natural
history
attuning to p
articulate
differences that
compose change
the temporal
dimension of human “umwelt” is tune
d into a limite
d set of rhythms an
d durations. therefore many of the temporalities that are relevant for
developing a politics of time (such as longe
duration of geological time) may not be
directly available to human sensorium.
not just something that it is
difficult to sense, but temporality as a compoun
d entity of other variables. (temperature, etc.)
binding times together
an alternative perspective on (anthropocene) temporality involves developing a poetics of description as a mode of affective and aesthetic amplification
=> developing an experimental poetics of technology as a mode of aesthetic amplification towards a less perspectival visuality -- the writing tends to operate in a more tentacular mode of perception --> sweating on every negative space
+++ sweating again was crucial in our sensorial (and therefore cognitive) relation when we were in Amazon. Kinect and sweating both propose modes of perception other than perspectival shadow casting system of vision.
(organic or inorganic/technological?) processes that constitute the planet/plant
=> intimacy with the organic/inorganic/technological processes that constitute the planet
(my work is to create or find out) poetics and the methodologies that register the bite and indexes its significance
(+ bite of the critter on my skins)
(Chakrabarty in The climate of history:) “man's environment did change but changed so slowly as to make the history of man's relation to his environment almost timeless and thus not a subject of historiography at all”
the collapse of this age-old humanist distinction between natural history and human history
plant writing
formulate transitional categories that would be responsive to differentiated modes of activity attuned to the difficulties of depicting natural phenomena that are continuously in flux.
reader of the meteorological registers
envision the temporal flux
the shifting edges (of the Kinect building generics)
(Kinect image) as architectural form composed of different (transitional) materially instantiated temporalities
transposition of qualities
within grammatical and figurative textures (of poetic)
between the material and the metaphorical
modes of materiality
...................................
(W.A.G.E. working artists an
d greater economy)
for artists who
don't have secon
dary jobs, their mobility
--despite being un
der
written in many cases by class privilege
--is force
d. they are wire
d-up,
networke
d carriers of
social an
d cultural capital set in perpetual motion, transforming cities in their passage through them on the art circuit
--sophisticate
d noma
dic clans who
travel to survive.
...................................
nature of things (2013,
ds class="frds">Sinads>
+ ds class="frds scrmbld">Elisads>)
places marke
d with zones of limite
d habitation
--you can't live there, you are a visitor
a place that is both wastelan
d an
d wilderness at the same time
wastelan
d tourism (museum in chernobyl)
d class="lstsrd">1. the christian tradition: it was our obligation to use up the earth before the apocalypse
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. the romantic view: we humans are the servants of the land, we are its eyes, we are its expression
d>
we are becoming visitors of waste
wilderness, most
natural an
d un
natural lan
d simultaneously
...................................
the moment the
world enters my bo
dy it has al
ready been transforme
d
for
ds class="frds scrmbld">Elisads> an
d me Bochum's forest was a location, with its
decay, it's subtropical humi
dity an
d toxins, an
d because of the way it is
trappe
d between the
natural an
d the man-ma
de.
“we are forever collecting ourselves” (
Baudrillard)
we have always encountere
d the
world via
technology
(now
internet)
...................................
(
Zoe Todd)
Zapatista (a revolutionary leftist political an
d militant group base
d in Chiapas, the southernmost state of Mexico) principles of “walking the
world into being” (as locus of thought an
d practice to
decolonize posthumanist geographies)
(for
ds class="frds scrmbld">Juands>ita Sun
dberg) the zapatista movement theorizes walking as an important practice in buil
ding the p
luriversale, a
world in which many
worlds fit.
[...
] as we humans move, work, play, an
d narrate with multiplicity of beings in place, we enact
historically
contingent an
d ra
dically
distinct
worlds/
ontologies.
the
epistemic violence inherent both in aca
demic treatment an
d dance (they both bring things to life
?) (is
dance controlle
d form of violence
? does violence always bring things to life contrary to the belief that it kills life
?)
(i
don't want to) trivialize (Amazon an
d my Amazon trip) as case-stu
dy an
d neutralize its in
digenous
ontologies
(John Hartingan
:)
Anthropo
cene as “charismatic mega-
category”
(of the white intellectual space of the Euro-Western aca
demy)
(which sweeps many competing
narratives un
der its roof
?)
(in
digenous artists, Rebecca Belmore
d'>& Jolene Rickar
d:)
material might act as a bri
dge, instea
d of a mirror
(
narcissistic obsession of Western civilization/art with
material-as-mirror)
(
Dwayne
Donal
d:) place-base
d cultures an
d knowl
edge systems
colonialism is basicly “
disconnection”,
denial of
relation
(in its heart is
written “we are not relate
d”)
(so few in
digenous bo
dies are
present in sites where aca
demic
discourse are being forge
d an
d practice
d) when they are
present, they are often
dismisse
d as biase
d, overly emotional, or unable to maintain objectivity over the issues they
present. (can i say the same treat is with
iranians
? an
d in which s
cene or context
? -- iranians are “not” famous for exhaustive
discursive unemotional an
d unopinionate
d maintenances)
(aroun
d me / aroun
d here)
=> importances an
d pleasures of going from “aroun
d me” to “aroun
d here”
(how can we stop in art to) recreate exploitative patterns from the
past (
?)
ecological
imagination is a turn towar
ds reciprocity an
d relationship
in Kinect the path of a journey is refracte
d, mirroring a critical site of refraction, as a practice. walking with
ds class="frds scrmbld">Hannods> in the Amazon forest is a joyful an
d critical engagement through a form of practice that resists universalizing ten
dencies.
...................................
tree is never tree-like (filial, Arborescent, versus rhizomatic)
vertical vs. lateral
Arborescent vs. reticulate
d (like the patterns on a giraffe or spots on the python)
stake at “
relationships”
how can we problematize
narcissism
? what if it is the wrong wor
d describing a certain property of life
? Narcissus is recognizing himself in his environment an
d he
dissolves himself in that image. the main thing about this
story is that he is most alive via the
story,
Narcissus is basically un
dea
d.
...................................
close-range vision
how can we practice movement an
d touch in the physio-locality of the eyes
?
tentacularity
touching was consi
dere
d a cru
der scanning at close range an
d seeing a more subtle touching at a
distance
importance of far
distance over close range
=> refer to project Stan
ding on the Shoul
ders of Giants (2015,
ds class="frds">Sinads>)
...................................
forest's “space”
Hernri Lefebvre distinguishes Representation of space and Representational spaces. ... Representational spaces are “directly lived” through associated images and symbols which overlay physical space, making symbolic use of its objects.
Representation is a distinctive manner of imagining the real, and is a fundamental phenomenon upon which all culture rests.
or instead of how a forest looks like, what is the forest made of? and for whom? what is the forest made of is the matter of negotiation (between the different kinds of beings who think differently about the forest)
in order not to neutralise the forest to culture (cultural history as an explanatory priority to the historically contingent circumstances) we can propose two questions of older critique of perspectival perception:
d class="lstsrd">1. that the body accounts for perspective (?)
d>
d class="lstsrd">2. representation is exclusively mental (?)
d>
of course both questions are phenomenological positions, but that does not mean that we no longer need representation to understand relationality. (Konh words)
needing or not needing representation to understand relationality
...................................
(
Latour)
not a philosophical argument, but a cabinet of curiosities assemble
d by “frien
ds of
interpretable objects”
... not an encyclope
dic un
dertaking ... we have chosen only those sites, objects, an
d situations where there is ambiguity, a hesitation, an iconoclash on how to
interpret image-making an
d image-breaking. (going to sites or objects where there is ambiguity, hesitation)
(the exhibition is not about recollecting truth or objectivity)
christian
religious paintings that
do not try to show anything but, on the contrary, to obscure the vision.
re
directing the attention away from the image to the prototype (
Platonism run ma
d?)
-- re
directing of attention to another image
are we really going to spen
d another century naively re-
destroying an
d deconstructing images that are so intelligently an
d subtly
destroye
d al
ready
?
do we really have to spen
d another century alternating violently between constructivism an
d realism, between artificiality an
d authenticity
?
science
deserves better than naive worship an
d naive contempt. its regime of invisibility is uplifting as that of
religion an
d art. the subtlety of its traces requires a new form of care an
d attention.
(we nee
d new forms of attention)
the more artifactual the inscription, the better its ability to connect, to ally with others, to generate even better objectivity (Kinect
?)
Kinect recor
dings as ethnography
?
how to escape from the tyranny of “simply objective”, “purely re
presentative” quasi-
scientific illustrations
? Freeing one's gaze from this
dual
obligation accounts....
religious icons an
d their obsession for real
presence
they have never been about
presenting something other than absence
scientific imagery
no isolate
d scientific image has any
mimetic power; there is nothing less re
presentational, less
figurative, than the pictures pro
duce
d by
science, which are nonetheless sai
d to give us the best grasp of the visible
world.
...................................
is Aruz (
عروض)
interface
? surface/face an
d meaning/inhalt/content
dualism in Tasavof,
Rumi breakings of Aruz. Tsavof believes that only through appearance one can get into the
depth
science,
religion, an
d politics all three take for grante
d an image of
nature.
...................................
(
Peter Galison, in iconoclash)
wanting to know with eyes-open
it was by way of intuition “that the mathematical
world remains In contact with the real
world; an
d even though pure mathematics coul
d do without it, it is always necessary to come back to intuition to bri
dge the
abyss which separates
symbol from reality.”
...................................
(
Dipesh Chakrabarty)
(
history of
nature
?) the
nature of
history as a form of knowl
edge
(Croce essay 1893
history subsume
d un
der the concept of art) Croce
drew on the
writings of Ernst Mach an
d Henri Poincare to argue that “the concepts of the
natural
sciences are human constructs elaborate
d for human purposes.” “when we peer into
nature, we fin
d only ourselves” we
do not “un
derstan
d ourselves best as part of the
natural
world” (is that not the image of
Narcissus who looks into the
nature an
d can only see himself
--nature observation as mirror
stage)
so as
ds class="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Robin,Robot,Robert,Robocop">Robds>erts puts it “Croce proclaime
d that there is no
world but the human
world, then took over the central
doctrine of Vico that we can know the human
world because we have ma
de it.”
Croce's i
dealism “
does not mean that rocks, for example, ‘
don't exist’ without human beings to think about them. apart from human concern an
d language, they neither exist nor
do not exist, since ‘exist’ is a human concept that has meaning only within a context of human concerns an
d purposes” (not saying human
symbolic
system of thought)
man environment
di
d change but change
d so slowly as to make the
history of man's
relation to his environment almost timeless an
d thus not a subject of
historiography at all.
***
the
history of man's
relationship to the environment was so slow as to be almost timeless
but now scholars are
writing significantly
different
: destroying the artificial but time-honore
d distinction between
natural an
d human
histories, climate
scientists
posit that the human beings has become something much larger than the simple biological
agent that he or she always has been.
vision of man “as a prisoner of climate” an
d not of man as the maker of it
is the
Anthropo
cene a critique of the
narratives of free
dom
?
price we pay for the pursuit of free
dom
politics
: the most common shape that free
dom takes in human
societies.
politics has never been base
d on reason alone. (it seems politics is something that is out of control)
(Maslin, Global warming)
[Global warming
] requires nations an
d regions to plan for the next 50 years, something that most
societies are unable to
do because of the very short-term
nature of politics.
Anthropo
cene was neither an ancient nor an inevitable happening
the crisis of climate change calls for thinking
simultaneously on both registers, to mix together the immiscible chronologies of capital an
d species
history.
as
Gadamer pointe
d out,
Dilthey saw “the in
divi
dual's private
world of experience as the starting point for an expansion that, in a living trans
position, fills out the narrowness an
d fortuitousness of his private experience with the in
finity of what is available by re-experiencing the
historical
world.”
...................................
(
Peter Galison, in Image of Objectivity)
“let
nature speak for itself” (!) a new bran
d of
scientific objectivity that emerge
d in the 19th century
=> restrain themselves from imposing their hopes, expectations,
generalization,
aesthetics, even or
dinary
language on the image of
nature. (the image of
nature has never been objective)
the
present usage of objectivity can be applie
d to everything from
empirical reliability to proce
dural correctness to emotional
detachment
each component of objectivity opposes a
distinct form of subjectivity; each is
define
d by censuring some (by no means all) aspects of the personal.
personal i
dio
syncrasies
this i
deal of objectivity attempts to eliminate the me
diating
presence of the observer
the
phenomena never sleep an
d neither shoul
d the observer
heroic self-
discipline
profoun
dly moralize
d vision
an
d like almost all forms of moral virtuosity it preaches asceticism
human worker whose attention wan
dere
d, whose pace slackene
d, whose han
d tremble
d
the self-recor
ding
instrument promise
d to replace the weary artist
machines offere
d free
dom from will
being true to
nature
:
-in its method (mechanical)
-in its moral (restrained)
-in its metaphysics (individualised)
early alternative approaches to creating picture that were true to
nature, but not objective in the mechanical sense
atlases habituate the eye, they are perforce visual
(contrast to the
scientific visual forms of photography where one is on the
right place at the
right time with the
right
equipment) the Kinect's total ran
domness
one problem of atlases is that they have to
deci
de what
nature is
they all have to solve the problem of choice
: which objects shoul
d be
presente
d an
d from which viewpoint (Kinect choosing mechanism an
d arbitrariness
?) (can we not choose what
nature is when we are at it
? an
d when we are at
nature
?)
rejection of
aesthetics (but what se
duction exactly betrays
? or what
does it make accurate
?)
average (is truth to
nature
?)
asceticism of non
interventionist objectivity
“straight photography” is above all a sig
nature of a particular s
cene, a
specific an
d localize
d re
presentation only awkwar
dly a
daptable to a mosaic com
position from
different in
divi
duals (Zeiss-lens-camera images)
how
scientists
deploye
d mechanical means to police the artist
(for
Martin Kusch - objectivity an
d historiography) truth-to-
nature ha
d its rationale in enlightenment sensationa
list psychology, with its conception of the self as fragmente
d, passive, an
d excessively receptive.
--> to be true to
nature was actively to select an
d interpret sensations an
d in that way bring them un
der
epistemic control.
--> re
presentation in nanofacture, image is use
d to actually engineer the whole thing. making an
d seeing coinci
de.
eliminating ju
dgment
the
device woul
d remove the process of abstraction from the artist's pen
what characterize
d the creation of late 19th century pictorial objectivity was self-sur
veillance
(note of Geppetto, Younus, Pinocchio)
personal equation
: a
systematic error correction
to pro
duce re
liable images
While in the early nineteenth century, the bur
den of re
presentation was
suppose
d to lie in the picture itself, now it fell to the au
dience. The psychology of pattern recognition in the au
dience ha
d replace
d the
metaphysical claims of the
author. Mistrusting themselves, they assuage
d their fear of subjectivity by transferring the necessity of ju
dgment to the au
dience.
(Grashey's) police
metaphor was entirely appropriate. Not only was the
history of late-nineteenth-century photography thoroughly boun
d up with the
history of crime control, the x-ray photography itself was increasingly fin
ding its way into court.
scientific evi
dence
legal evi
dence
at issue was, once again, the shifting bor
der between ju
dgment an
d mechanization, between the possibility (or necessity) of human
intervention an
d the
routinize
d, automatic functioning of the
technology.
me
dico-legal concept of evi
dence
the image of the x-ray appeare
d (in court at least) to preempt an
d displace all other forms of knowl
edge.
(Allan
Poe:) “if we examine a work of or
dinary art, by means of a powerful microscope, all traces of resemblance to
nature will
disappear
--but the closest scrutiny of the photographic
drawing
discloses only a more absolute truth, more perfect i
dentity of aspect with the thing re
presente
d.”
trompe l'oeil (new note)
in X-ray, the encryption of information takes place in the
technology itself
photographs
di
d not carry a transparent meaning
once so policed, and presumably only then, could the photographic process be elevated to a special epistemic status, putting it in a category of its own
in contrast to drawings, photograms were tarnished by the crudeness imposed by the limited palette of the color raster. Given the choice, the author clearly favored the crude but mechanical photographic process. Accuracy had to be sacrificed on the altar of objectivity. (is Kinect pure mechanical? why i have been insisting to remove my hands?! why i was craving for objectivity?)
=> to leave imperfections in the photograph as a literal mark of objectivity
testimony to objectivity
rejection of subjective temptation
sophistication could corrupt an individual? (you can be accurate but not sophisticated) (not cleaning up the image of plates)
The moral narrative surrounding this mechanical construction of pictorial objectivity took many forms. As we have argued, pictures (properly constructed) served as talismanic guards against frauds and system builders, aesthetes and idealizers.
extending the mystique of the visual to the dense symbolic presentation of functions and graphs
inscription instruments
(Marey, method grafique) “the graphical method translates all these changes in the activity of forces into an arresting form that one could call the language of the phenomena themselves, as it is superior to all other modes of expression.”
graphical representation could cut across the artificial boundaries of natural language to reveal nature to all people,
they were the words of nature itself
the search for this rendition of objective representation was a moral as much as technical, quest.
morality of self-restraint
(for the
scientific atlas makers of the later nineteenth century,) the machine ai
de
d where the will faile
d. (at once a powerful an
d polyvalent
symbol,) the machine was fun
damental to the very i
dea of mechanical objectivity.
the machine, in the form of new
scientific
instruments,
embodie
d a
positive i
deal of the observer
: patient, in
defatigable, ever alert, probing beyon
d the limits of the human senses. (what other
relationships exist with the machine
? other than this self-
discipline
d observer)
(
rhetoric of)
wonder-working machine
the machine, (now in the form of
techniques of mechanical repro
duction,) hel
d out the promise of images uncontaminate
d by
interpretation.
...the
scientists’ continuing claim to such ju
dgment-free re
presentation is testimony to the intensity of their longing for the perfect ‘pure’ image. in this context the machine stoo
d for authenticity
: it was at once an observer an
d an artist, miraculously free from the inner temptation to theorize,
anthropo
morphize, beautify, or otherwise
interpret
nature.
one type of mechanical image, the photograph, became the emblem for all aspects of non
interventionist objectivity ... not because the photograph was necessarily truer to
nature than han
d-ma
de images
--but rather because the camera apparently eliminate
d human
agency
(what is the
difference between
systematic image an
d mechanical image
? same
? -glitch..)
(mechanical) images that coul
d be toute
d as
nature's self-portrait
aura of stoic nobility
painstaking, humble, laborious (work)
moral virtuosity never exists without an appreciative au
dience
by ringing the changes on the resonant cultural themes of self-purification through self-abnegation, scientists persuaded themselves and others of their worthiness to assume priestly functions in an ever more secularized society.
humanity and self-restraint, the one imposed from without and the other from within, thus define the pride-breaking morality of the scientists.
objectivity is a morality of prohibitions rather than exhortations
subspecies of interpretation: projection, anthropomorphism, insertion of hope/fear into images/facts of nature,
varieties of objectivity
:
A. mechanical objectivity
B. the
metaphysical element that makes objectivity synonymous with truth
C. aperspectival element that i
dentifies objectivity with the escape from an
d all perspectives
it is tempting to collapse all of objectivity into the view from nowhere. this temptation to simplify by conflation shoul
d be resiste
d, for the highest expressions of objectivity in one mo
de may seem worthless when ju
dge
d by the stan
dar
ds of another mo
de.
(as humans we must
deal with our personal, i
dio
syncratic, perspectival perception)
photo
: accurate ren
dering of sensory appearances
objectivity is a multifarious, mutable thing, capable of new meanings and new symbols: in both a literal and figurative sense, scientists of the late-nineteenth-century created a new image of objectivity
...................................
we must consi
der the paths people an
d trees have taken
entangle
d networks of
matter an
d meaning
“i
don't min
d being ‘close to
nature.’ but i know what they mean when they say that, an
d it's not what i mean.”
--Lin
da Noel, Koyungkawi
poet an
d acorn mush maker
oaks were
travelers an
d mixers
...................................
(Tomaz Mastnak)
Botanical
decolonization
planting an
d displanting of humans an
d plants are elements of the same multi
species colonial en
deavor
native plants as a
discursive fiel
d
complex an
d unmarke
d ways that plants have been
sorte
d out as ‘native’ or ‘nonnative’
(as a
measure of perfection an
d ‘civility’) gar
dening was also the key to the survival of colonies
(for Bacon) ‘plantation’ meant in the first place to ‘Plant in’ people
‘plantation in a pure soile’ (foun
ding a colony)
once we see colonialism as the
literal planting an
d displanting of peoples,
animals, an
d plants
--as inscribing a
domination into bloo
d an
d soil foun
de
d in the fantasy of mol
ding eco
systems with go
dlike arrogance
--it becomes clear how colonialism ushere
d in the
anthropo
cene
native plants, by implication, were uncultivate
d. in the imperial
imaginary this
distinction between cultivate
d an
d native plants was iso
morphic with people as well.
‘
nature’, like the uncultivate
d native, was to be
dominate
d by ‘culture’. such ‘government of
nature’ foun
d its metropolitan manifestation in botanic gar
dens. (
species collecte
d for
scientific reasons, for
aesthetic an
d i
deological benefit)
government of
nature
invasive
animals
the real issue is that we still live in a colonial environment. we live with the legacy of botanical colonization without even knowing it. this legacy is not mere backgroun
d to
social an
d political life.
Nazis’ attempte
d era
dication of Impatiens parviflora from their own native forests (Gröning an
d Wolschke-Bulmahn, 1992)
df class='thdf'>the idea of | df> “borrowing freely from all the
world's styles an
d floras” erases the violent colonial encounter of
displacing by replacing it with the figure of the un
documente
d immigrant
..charging native plant enthusiasts an
d invasion biologists an
d managers with xenophobia...
(
Davis et al, 2011 article publishe
d in journal
Nature, title
:) “
Don't ju
dge
species on their o
rigins”, is a mislea
ding phrase; at issue is ju
dging
species not on their o
rigins, but on their emplacement.
(Yanagisako an
d Delaney, 1995) “people think an
d act in the
intersections of
discourses”
but not every
domain
intersects in every instance, an
d the character of an ‘
intersection’ is
historically
specific. it is a truism to claim that ‘like humans, plants an
d animal travel’ (Raffles, 2011, page 12). What Raffles fails to a
ddress is crucial
: how, exactly,
do those plants
travel
? to treat the ‘remaking’ of surroun
dings as a neutral, benign
category, serve
d from the colonial
history of globalization, is problematic at best.
treating plants
metaphorically only as immigrants, but never as settlers, para
doxically
divi
des human from
nature. it eli
des the forms of
displanting
--of botanical colonization
--that were part an
d parcel of the colonial encounter.
Myths of the ‘noble eco-savage’ an
d the ‘
ecological In
dian’ have been shown to be inaccurate (Krech, 1999; Whelan, 1999)
(df class='thdf'>the notion of | df> the Anthropocene implies) an ecology in which humans are immanent to the natural world
...................................
(eyes are) visual possibilities
“eyes” (are always) ma
de available
[...
] with a
wonderfully
detaile
d, active, partial way of organizing
worlds...
[Haraway, SK
]
...................................
lecture khm Luis
trans or cross
ecological movement, from amazon to shahname, because i like it an
d i care for thoses
ecologies.
an
d because we can't keep clean. i
love to talk about clean an
d dirt. maybe some other time. if we can say anything about the
world is that it is
dirty an
d excessive an
d lunetic.
literally lunar. the moon. if you think your bio an
d biology is not sche
dule
d by moon or lunar forces think again.
do i nee
d a bit of ego to sustain this skin-encapsulate
d organism (pointing to myself. this is another pointi
dance)
tech
interface amaz
div
device
literature
...................................
[Avital]
in the conflict of rhetorics, the victory never goes to any but the third language. The task of this language is to release the prisoners: to scatter the signifieds, the catechisms
to enter areas of conflict [...] fragile zone where non-knowledge dominates knowledge
Self-dissolving and regathering, the subject became linked to the possibility of a new autonomy, and opium illuminated in this case (Baudelaire, though under De Quincey’s influence, was to use it differently) an individual who finally could not identify with his ownmost autonomy but found himself instead subjected to heroic humiliation in the regions of the sublime. Opium became the transparency upon which one could review the internal conflict of freedom, the cleave of subjectivity where it encounters the abyss of destructive jouissance.
mapping the body as an intensive conflictual site
scenography and rhetoric of armed conflict
(Avital on) the maternal trace in the technological revealing from Heidegger to the Bushies
the readers and nonreader
the scene of the proto-pedagogy (involves only two persons): The master and pupil together produce an allegory of being struck, enlightened
(for Levinas:) expérience =/= épreuve
•experience --> a knowing of which the self is master is always said
•épreuve (text, trial, proof) --> df class='thdf'>the idea of | df> life and of a critical ‘verification’ which overflows the self of which it is only the ‘scene’ ~~> a test site in which the self is placed at absolute risk, life submitted to incessant probes, find themselves subjected to the rigors of the épreuve
conflict's another logic of rigor in certain types of non-Western practices (such as Zen and yogic teachings)
the pupil is led to an inner experience without interiority, to understanding without cognition, without a history ==> subjectivity
the Zen pupil, often a wanderer, listens differently, stilling herself to consider the sonic eventfulness of growing grass
...understanding no longer crowns the end of a labored process of appropriation =/= Western narratives of testing
going after the grail or attempting to reach a metaphysically-laden Castle
...cannot be properly located or possessed
the inaction hero
(?are we accustomed) to viewing the test as a way of mobilizing courage
The Sphinx marks the porous boundary between Western and Eastern domains of questioning and tells of bodies menaced by pulverization: should the riddle not be solved, either the questioner or the questioned must go. Passing the test is a matter of survival of the species for Oedipus, as it is for the interspecial dominatrix of the riddle: la Sphinx dissolves when the young man offers the correct answer.
=/= koan
...................................
My performance here is maybe a form of prayer or invocation[8] not simply to be read as a mere theoretical and discursive statement, and is intended to be a table of digital curses. To reopen the agency of curse in a cultural style that I have come to encounter, it might produce a different but not necessarily better speculative difficulty in discussing about the virtual. A curse[9] (according to Iranian-Islamic mixture of traditions in the milieus of promising and swearing,) is basically a networking function with both mechanical and interventionist properties that translate desire into performance—an intersubjective textual momentum that run virtually into the real world and it may (or may not) run down its target. Much like rumor, curse is contagious and reproductive but unlike the publicity of rumorous velocities, curse insists on secrecy at the same time harvesting its powers for revealing. The reality of the ‘curse’ is ‘assumed’ mostly and that is the virtual nature of this relation (with the materialities of the world that curse inscribes on) that I am interested in.
Curse systematically works with names, to be more accurate, with df class='thdf'>the notion of | df> the “proper name”[10] invested in df class='thdf'>the idea of | df> an automatic function that shifts ‘name’ to ‘agency’, virtual to concrete. That is if one knows the proper name, one could raise all actual agencies that act with real consequences—slogans in politics may rely on this typical power of cursing. In the Amazon I was not looking for the proper name of nature, neither theological nor analytical nor the supposed accidental. That means (looking for ways) critically not to be real.
An extended concept of cursing enters visuality in the gaze of the evil eye.[11] The malevolent glare who stamps upon by staring at an accidental moment of encounter in the evil eye, brings together the narrative of the random traveler who casts a gaze in another world of virtual and visual agency, and emphasises the randomness and hideousness of looking. The transaction between the eyes in the evil eye goes both ways to posses both the beholders. The target of the evil eye is always missed[ar] due to the internal conflict of perception and will. The intersection of visions is feared and programmed in the modalities of material talisman and culturally protective performances for the subject from meeting the other’s gaze. But the evil eye is precisely so powerful and real because of its ability to name the uncanny event of encounter. “Nothing is wholly obvious without becoming enigmatic.”[12]
[Serres]
does experimentation, in art science, excludes subjectivity? More the importance of experiment on self. Returning the aim back to knowledge, instead of the division of knowledge. Our subjectivity is not an illusion to be overcomed, but that is another part of reality.
Displacement on the space of myth. Myth informs science.
To know is to navigate between local fragments of space , to reject techniques of classification and separation, to implement a philosophy of transport to counter the dogmatism of united and systematic knowledge.
...the itinerary traces the transmission, transformation, and multiplication of messages through diverse spaces of communication.
The spatial language of the writing of the world, geography, language of paths, movements, marks the moment of passage towards a new epistemology.
World is the space of your inscription, scientists. To read and to journey are the one and same act.
Fantastic flow of myth. The sacred and the religious words are spoken at the same time and in the same breath as those of science and of journeys.
Two speakers, united against the phenomenon of interference and confusion. Who's stake is in interrupting communication? The above interlocutors are on the same side, far from the dialogical game.
Demin includes himself in the circuit, blurs the message, renders it unintelligible, and exactly by that assures transmission. Parasite produces by the way of disorder a more complex order.
..penetrative grasp of a text, discovery and recreative apprehension of it life-forms, is impossible to paraphrase or systematize.
..temporal and local settings of one's text. (to master it?)
to read X, is literally, to ‘prepare’ to read X
in certain civilizations there comes epochs in which syntax stiffens...
Changing landscape of fact
unexamined smiles
worn tropes
words, the guardians of meanings, are not immortal.
Metaphysical scandal
note on history: past is a language construct, that the past tense of the verb is the sole guarantor of history.
Dialectics as a method of intellectual chase.
Who first told a joke?
Certain languages are inhospitable to new metaphors.
Language-act
to read: is to restore all that one can of the immediacies of value and intent in which speech actually occurs.
my original repetition
we re-enact in our educated consciousness
in what sense does unperformed music exist?
The same ground, when using the ‘speculative instruments’, the critic, editor, actor, and reader stand on.
When we read or hear any language statement from the past, we translate.
Encode and decode “message”, misleading operative models of translation between different languages and even within a single language.
One treason in translation: words rarely show any outward mark of altered meaning, they body forth their history only in a fully established context.
What material reality has history out of language? --the tasavof verbal linguistic tradition
silence knows no history...?
...to remind you that everything is the condition of madness.
“Tense Past”
..the landscape composed by the past tense, the semantic organization of remembrance... is styled and coded differently by cultures. --miniature illustrating San'an?
The verbal icon made up of all successive translations of Greek literature and philosophy has oriented fundamental movements in Islamic feelings --Farabi, Mirdamad, etc.
My translation of classics is not out of a vital compulsion for immediacy or precise echo. I am not trying to build my own resonant past. Myth of the ‘true past’... different perspectives can co-exist and blur
the metaphysics of the insult, in San'an story
i am interested in the conventions in which texts can be read, in which a semantic statement can be carried over into someone's own idiom. I am teaching how to reread texts of Attar and so forth.
We have civilization because (we have learned) ‘to translate out of time’
übertragen,
handing down thought narrative,
something that also depends on transfer of meaning in space.
Languages conceal and internalize more, perhaps, than they convey outwardly.
Speech-act is most expressive of status and power--when a peer is in earshot. (something that i have been trying to undermine in my lectures)
...calculated to guard some coherence of inner life (while wounding outward)
(motions of) menace and non-information (in top down dialogues)
monosyllables of the oppressed and polysemy of the upper class (the capacity of the same word to mean different things, such differences characterises the language of ideology.)
fracture of words and the maltreatment of grammatical norms, by children, they are a exploited and rebellious class, the child seeks to keep the world open to his own, by refusing to accept the rules of grown-up speech.
Lear note: surrounded by incomprehensible or hostile reality, the child breaks off verbal contact. He seems to choose silence to destroy his imagined enemy. Like murderous Cordelia, children know that silence can destroy another human being.
The multitudinous existence of child has left comparatively few archives.
...the uniquely vulnerable and creative condition of the childhood
privileged inferiority (of both child and woman)
intercourse and discourse
feminine use of subjunctive, in European languages, give a characteristic vibrato to material facts and relations. ... They multiply the facets of reality, they strengthen the adjective to allow it an alternative nominal status.
...obtuse resistant fabric of the world
in every known culture, men have accused women of being garrulous, of wasting words with lunatic prodigality.
The chattering, ranting, gossiping female, the tattle, the scold, the toothless crone her mouth wind-full of speech, is older than fairy-tales.
...men's delight in women's voice when their register is sweet and low.
the change in men's voice, the crowding of cadence, the heightened fluency triggered by sexual excitement. And how men's speech flattens, how it's intonations dull after orgasm.
The motif of the woman or maiden who says very little, in whom silence is a counterpart to chasteness and sacrificial grace, lends a unique pathos to Antigone or Oerepidus..
fabric of obligation, different for men and women within the same community
linguistically programmed conceptualizations vs. biologically determined apprehensions of sense data
...lady Macbeth negates the fierce reality of Macbeth vision
...communication like breathing is subject to obstruction and homicidal breakdowns, under stres[...]