[...]and time. The ="nms">body image is not only a picture of the body but also an anticipatory plan for the detailed movements of the body, and rather than a fixed structure, it is dynamic and plastic, capable of reorganizing itself radically with the ="trms">contingencies of experience.

The ="nms">body image can also incorporate external object, implements, and ="trms">instruments. When they are being used, they can become intimate, vital, even libidinally cathected parts of the ="nms">body image.



(Don ="ppl">="ppl">Ihde='lgc'>:) “To ="trms">embody one's praxis through ="trms">technologies is ultimately an existential ="trms">relation with the ="trms">world.” (="trms">Technology and Life="trms">world, p.72)

="trms">Embodied ="trms">relations such as the experience of “seeing through” glasses (or the use of hearing aids, blind man's cane, or driving a car) take the ="trms">technology into the perceptual-bodily self-experience. The mediating ="trms">technology becomes part of the ="nms">body image, and achieves “="trms">instrumental transparency”

="large lg2" stl="font-size:112%"> ="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">Giuliana ="ppl">Bruno)

This tangible, superficial contact, in fact, is what allows us to apprehend the objects and the spaces of art, turning contact into the ="trms">communicative ="trms">interface of a public intimacy. (but not in the Amazonian skin contact) (it is ="trms">different than ="ppl">="ppl">Lucretius reflecting upon the ="trms">nature of things)

(="trms">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 ="trms">materiality as they convey the virtual transformation of our ="trms">material ="trms">relations. And these screens, which have become ="trms">membranes of contact, exist in our environments in close ="trms">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 ="trms">matters='qstn'>?

="large lg18" stl="font-size:122%"> layered space of ="trms">interaction between subject and object

surface can be ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">read as an architecture

from mediated encounters with ="trms">material space to mobilization of cultural space (the exhibition)

="large lg6" stl="font-size:133%"> ="trms">memory, ="trms">imagination, and ="trms">affect are linked to movement ='lgc'>-- ="trms">embodied in jungle walk='qstn'>?



="trms">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 ="trms">imagination ='lgc'>-- effects of a ="trms">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='lgc'> = ="trms">interconnection in the sequence of ideas expressed during a connected discourse and how this sequence leads from one idea to another (="trms">modernity).  

(i don't do filmic voyage)

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

By Consequence, or train of thoughts, I understand that succession of one thought to another which is called, to distinguish it from discourse in words, 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 succeeds in="trms">differently.” (— Thomas ="ppl">Hobbes, Leviathan, The First Part='lgc'>: Of Man, Chapter III='lgc'>: Of the Consequence or Train of ="trms">Imagination)

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

the current forms of biotic forests is due to the sp="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading of seed-dispersing plants millions years ago (what about abiotic='qstn'>? Kinect)

one of issues related with rate/speed is ="trms">synchronicity

the effects of bio="trms">technically / bioculturaly ="trms">situated people

Amazon's ="trms">nature in op="trms">position to slave gar="trms">dens (slave plantation ="trms">systems with factory machine) (along with imperial botanical gar="trms">dens)
for ="trms">travel and propagation of...
moving ="trms">material ="trms">semiotic
part-time organisms


when visuality is looked at in a haptic modality (the tentacular face for example), vision can be figured as touch, not distance. negatively curving in loops and frills, not surveying(/surviving) from above.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

when a depiction (="trms">poetic, visual, etc.) is d="trms"nttrm="danger,stranger">angerously ambiguous='qstn'>?

are we really immersed in ="trms">data realities='qstn'>? and that really means we are losing the sight on experiences fetched by our bodies='qstn'>?

co-existing and contradictory incomplete models that ground us in our critically limited existence. what does beyond the (="trms">techno-cartographic-episto-cogno-="trms">histo-) map's horizon means for this ="trms">situated “us”='qstn'>?

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">Amanda ="ppl">Boezkes)

the ="trms">ontological purification ="trms">apparatus

we are now on an idea of the earth in so to calibrate our sensorial ="trms">systems to adjust to human-born unpre="trms">dictabilities that override and neutralize long-standing ="trms">histories of local knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge.

how an ="trms">ecological perspective can be incorporated into vision ='lgc'>-- become a visuality='qstn'>? ='lgc'>-- mobilization of visuality

how an artwork may account for the ways ="trms">ecological change registers in vision='qstn'>?

geo-="trms">aesthetics

information is not energy-="trms">specific (="ppl">="ppl">Gibson)

theory of affordance ='lgc'>: information pick-up process ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> threshold between the sense-="trms">system of organism and the invariance of the environment
an experience of an observer that is not a property of the observer, it is invariant and ="trms">relational.
that is, it acknowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edges that objective information about an environmental ="trms">system can be obtained both in spite and because of perceptual change. in this respect an indigenous knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge is not simply an order of cultural perspective, they are rather a form of objective testimony, by the people who are attuned to the environment's invariant structure. they are not simply a traditional or local “point of view.”

in this sense what kind of info is the image of Kinect about the environment='qstn'>? it is not objective info nor culture, what is it='qstn'>? personal testimony='qstn'>? descriptions of a ="trms">technological ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading='qstn'>?!

affordance, as a concept, allows complexity and refusal to reduce environments, objects, and actions to the basic function they may have to the perceiver in her/his/its ="trms">world ='lgc'>-- it permits a level (horizon) of consciousness of the ="trms">world beyond function.

how a beetle may rest on the retina of ="trms">bird's eye like pieces of puzzle fitting together

facts of environment

to what extent can an ="trms">ecological perception become virtualized, re="trms">presented, and returned to vision as a condition, or style of being='qstn'>? that is how to take con="trms">scientious of the ="trms">ecological beings that we are in any project='qstn'>? ='lgc'>-- that is attuning vision to an ="trms">ecological reality

E. h. Gombrich understood the perception of art as a process of cultivating the visual ="trms">skills of recognition in the eye itself
="trms">historical ways of seeing
any ="trms">skill we have in spite of environmental variances, is operating from visual schema that are geared to t="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigger pattern recognition, (art='qstn'>?)

visuality vs vision
the caricaturist does not teach us how to see, but rather instantiates a new ="trms">code of recognition. a visuality is nested into vision; vision is reciprocally primed to recognize a visuality ='strcls'>***

visuality involves more than pattern recognition

="large lg1" stl="font-size:121%"> perception is not the tool by which we experience art, but its very content and substance. john Onians con="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">cludes that “each painting forms its own ‘eye’.”

what kind of eye the art (of my Kinect) cultivates='qstn'>? (a ="trms">techno-="trms">aesthetic eye='qstn'>?) (the diagrammatic eye='qstn'>?) (referring to the diagram project “sadistic statistics”)

the ways we see ...ly (="trms">historically, ="trms">ecologically, evolutionary, ="trms">technologically,) more part and parcel of the visuality of the ="trms">anthropo="trms">cene

the ="trms">neuro-="trms">aesthetic eye

to “="trms"nttrm="already,spread">read” environment in terms of info pick-up and accommodation
to simply perceive as we do
but to parlay (double up) our perceptual ="trms">system into a modality of processing, ="trms">response, and ="trms">responsiveness
(the ="trms">aesthetics of) the visual brain is the contact (not contract) between the individual and the eco="trms">system

="large lg22" stl="font-size:116%"> modulation of ethos in landscape='qstn'>?

Kinect is not bringing a knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge that is ="trms">neurobiologically imperceptible to the naked eye nor is it ="trms">technologically making a ="trms">worldview accessible.

“it is low tech”, its images are born of partial recognition, attunement, and attention

low-tech works may be critical for developing a visuality that is not yet ="trms">integral to or explicit within new media, visualising the ="trms">specifically ="trms">neurological dimension of ="trms">ecologicity and mobilizing vision as a perceiving organ to cultivate this self-awareness.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">McKenzie ="ppl">Wark)

climate ="trms">science, a key ="trms">science of our time, rests on an ="trms">apparatus of very powerful computers and ="trms">communication vectors, which overcome the “friction”, as ="ppl">Paul ="ppl">Edwards calls it, between ="trms">data and ="trms">communication. it brings together global ="trms">data ="trms">according to global standards, mathematical models of physics of climate drawn from fluid dynamics, and massive computational power. the model and ="trms">data coproduce each other in a way, as the ="trms">data sets are all partial, and many ="trms">data points have to be ="trms">interpolated to make the models work. and then all of that has to be mediated back to human awareness via tables, graphs, computer simulations, and so forth.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">Irmgard ="ppl">Emmelhainz)

(="trms">anthropo="trms">cene) change in the conditions of visuality
transformation of the ="trms">world into images
="trms">phenomenological ='lgc'>+ ="trms">epistemological consequences

images participate now in the forming of ="trms">worlds, they have also become forms of thought

the optical mind

the radical change in the conditions of visuality has brought about a new subject ="trms">position or point of view, announce by the ="trms">trajectories of='lgc'>:
="lstsrd">1. antihumanism (between impressionism and cubism)
="lstsrd">2. posthumanism (between cubism and experimental film)
="lstsrd">3. non-grounded form of vision (from experimental film to digital media)

this regime of visuality implies='lgc'>: automatization, tautological vision, and signs leading to other signs
resulted to ='lgc'>=> the proliferation of images also implying the cancellation of vision

“vision cancelled”

linearity of the Renaissance perspective plan created the illusion of a view to the outside ="trms">world, analogous to a window.

cubism='lgc'>: showing a perpetual ="trms">present in a parallel temporality.
perspectival multiplicity became embedded in the picture plane.
invented a discontinuous space, making identity and ="trms">difference relative (="trms">questioning the classical ="trms">="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphysics), by subverting the ="trms">relations between subject and object.

does my Kinect pictural model employs the architectural space='qstn'>? is camera architectural='qstn'>?

in experimental film, duration became a key component of ="trms">aesthetic experience, analogous to human consciousness, a prosthetic vision

identity and ="trms">difference, rejection of a ="trms">priori space

how to release the subject from human coordinates='qstn'>? what are references to human coordinates='qstn'>? screen's rectangular frame='qstn'>?

the machine (optical perception) delivers a posthuman, prosthetic enhancement of vision, which announces, first the incipient (initial) normalization of perception as augmented reality and ="trms">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="trms">different to “me”

the exhaustive visualization and documentation of ="trms">wildlife is effectively concealing its ongoing extinction (one of the reasons i am not using the zeiss-lens-camera recordings)
(for Susan Sontag) taking photographs ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>] 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. ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>] the very activity of taking pictures ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>] assuages (erleichtern) general feelings of disorientation that are likely to be exacerbated (worsened) by ="trms">travel.

cognitive activity

giving form to experience, also transforming things into signs, welding image and discourse

the contemporary experience is also made of sharing/tweeting/liking images

the contemporary political economy='lgc'>: ="trms">communicative capitalism derives surplus value from the volume and velocity of sings and ="trms">data circulating in the infosphere.

proliferation of cognitive signs is another feature of ="trms">communicative capitalism, submitting the mind to an ever-increasing pace of perceptual stimuli

(for Berardi) seeing means accelerating perception in the fields of everyday experience, accelerated tautological vision derived from constant passive observation. this is another of ="trms">communicative capitalism's form of governance, as this kind of vision generates ="trms">techno-="trms">linguistic automatisms by carrying information without meaning

is Kinect image-compilation a creature of infosphere='qstn'>? (boring ="trms">question='qstn'>?)

normalization of groundless seeing (exemplified 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 ="trms">imagination, ceasing to cohere into a higher truth. (Fox, cold ="trms">world)

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">Ada ="ppl">Smailbegovic)

="trms">nature of things (2013, ="frds">Sina ='lgc'>+ ="frds scrmbld">Elisa)

related to temporalities and velocities (plant politics of movement)

the video registers ="trms">different rhythms and textures of change in the event of weather
="trms">methodological impulse to draw on descriptive practices of ="trms">natural ="trms">history
attuning to p="trms">articulate ="trms">differences that ="trms">compose change

the temporal dimension of human “umwelt” is tuned into a limited set of rhythms and 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 compound entity of other variables. (temperature, etc.)

binding times together

an alternative perspective on (="trms">anthropo="trms">cene) temporality involves developing a ="trms">poetics of description as a mode of ="trms">affective and ="trms">aesthetic amplification

='lgc'>=> developing an experimental ="trms">poetics of ="trms">technology as a mode of ="trms">aesthetic amplification towards a less perspectival visuality ='lgc'>-- the ="trms">writing tends to operate in a more tentacular mode of perception ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> sweating on every negative space
='lgc'>+='lgc'>+='lgc'>+ sweating again was crucial in our sensorial (and therefore cognitive) ="trms">relation when we were in Amazon. Kinect and sweating both propose modes of perception other than perspectival shadow casting ="trms">system of vision.

(organic or inorganic/="trms">technological='qstn'>?) processes that constitute the planet/plant

='lgc'>=> intimacy with the organic/inorganic/="trms">technological processes that constitute the planet

(='mywrk'>my work is to create or find out) ="trms">poetics and the ="trms">methodologies that register the bite and indexes its significance
(='lgc'>+ bite of the critter on my skins)

(="ppl">Chakrabarty in The climate of ="trms">history='lgc'>:) “man's environment did change but changed so slowly as to make the ="trms">history of man's ="trms">relation to his environment almost timeless and thus not a subject of ="trms">historiography at all”

the collapse of this age-old humanist distinction between ="trms">natural ="trms">history and human ="trms">history

plant ="trms">writing
="trms">formulate ="trms">transitional ="trms">categories that would be ="trms">responsive to ="trms">differentiated modes of activity attuned to the difficulties of depicting ="trms">natural ="trms">phenomena that are continuously in flux.

="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reader of the meteorological registers

envision the temporal flux

the shifting ="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edges (of the Kinect building generics)

(Kinect image) as architectural form ="trms">composed of ="trms">different (="trms">transitional) ="trms">materially instantiated temporalities

trans="trms">position of qualities

within grammatical and ="trms">figurative textures (of ="trms">poetic)

between the ="trms">material and the ="trms">="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphorical

modes of ="trms">materiality

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(W.A.G.E. working artists and greater economy)
for artists who don't have secondary jobs, their mobility='lgc'>--despite being under="trms">written in many cases by class privilege='lgc'>--is forced. they are wired-up, ="trms">networked carriers of ="trms">social and cultural capital set in perpetual motion, transforming cities in their passage through them on the art circuit='lgc'>--sophisticated nomadic clans who ="trms">travel to survive.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

="trms">nature of things (2013, ="frds">Sina ='lgc'>+ ="frds scrmbld">Elisa)

places marked with zones of limited habitation='lgc'>--you can't live there, you are a visitor

a place that is both wasteland and ="trms">wilderness at the same time

wasteland tourism (museum in chernobyl)

="lstsrd">1. the christian tradition='lgc'>: it was our ="trms">obligation to use up the earth before the apocalypse
="lstsrd">2. the romantic view='lgc'>: we humans are the servants of the land, we are its eyes, we are its expression

we are becoming visitors of waste ="trms">wilderness, most ="trms">natural and un="trms">natural land ="trms">simultaneously

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

the moment the ="trms">world enters my body it has al="trms"nttrm="already,spread">ready been transformed

for ="frds scrmbld">Elisa and me Bochum's forest was a location, with its decay, it's subtropical humidity and toxins, and because of the way it is ="trms">trapped between the ="trms">natural and the man-made.

“we are forever collecting ourselves” (="ppl">Baudrillard)

we have always encountered the ="trms">world via ="trms">technology
(now ="trms">internet)

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">Zoe ="ppl">Todd)
Zapatista (a revolutionary leftist political and militant group based in Chiapas, the southernmost state of Mexico) principles of “walking the ="trms">world into being” (as locus of thought and practice to decolonize posthumanist geographies)
(for ="frds scrmbld">Juanita Sundberg) the zapatista movement theorizes walking as an important practice in building the p="trms"nttrm="failure,blur,plur,lurk,tallur,slur">luriversale, a ="trms">world in which many ="trms">worlds fit. ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>] as we humans move, work, play, and ="trms">narrate with multiplicity of beings in place, we enact ="trms">historically ="trms">contingent and radically distinct ="trms">worlds/="trms">ontologies.

the ="trms">epistemic violence inherent both in academic treatment and dance (they both bring things to life='qstn'>?) (is dance controlled form of violence='qstn'>? does violence always bring things to life contrary to the belief that it kills life='qstn'>?)

(i don't want to) trivialize (Amazon and my Amazon trip) as case-study and neutralize its indigenous ="trms">ontologies

(John Hartingan='lgc'>:) ="trms">Anthropo="trms">cene as “charismatic mega-="trms">category”
(of the white intellectual space of the Euro-Western academy)
(which sweeps many competing ="trms">narratives under its roof='qstn'>?)

(indigenous artists, Rebecca Belmore ='and'>& Jolene Rickard='lgc'>:) ="trms">material might act as a bridge, instead of a mirror
(="trms">narcissistic obsession of Western civilization/art with ="trms">material-as-mirror)

(Dwayne Donald='lgc'>:) place-based cultures and knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge ="trms">systems
colonialism is basicly “disconnection”, denial of ="trms">relation
(in its heart is ="trms">written “we are not related”)

(so few indigenous bodies are ="trms">present in sites where academic discourse are being forged and practiced) when they are ="trms">present, they are often dismissed as biased, overly emotional, or unable to maintain objectivity over the issues they ="trms">present. (can i say the same treat is with ="nms">iranians='qstn'>? and in which s="trms">cene or context='qstn'>? ='lgc'>-- ="nms">iranians are “not” famous for exhaustive discursive unemotional and unopinionated maintenances)

(around me / around here) ='lgc'>=> importances and pleasures of going from “around me” to “around here”

(how can we stop in art to) recreate exploitative patterns from the ="trms">past (='qstn'>?)

="trms">ecological ="trms">imagination is a turn towards reciprocity and ="trms">relationship

in Kinect the path of a journey is refracted, mirroring a critical site of refraction, as a practice. walking with ="frds scrmbld">Hanno in the Amazon forest is a joyful and critical engagement through a form of practice that resists universalizing tendencies.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

tree is never tree-like (filial, Arborescent, versus rhizomatic)
vertical vs. lateral
Arborescent vs. reticulated (like the patterns on a giraffe or spots on the python)
stake at “="trms">relationships”



how can we problematize ="trms">narcissism='qstn'>? what if it is the wrong word describing a certain property of life='qstn'>? ="trms">Narcissus is recognizing himself in his environment and he dissolves himself in that image. the main thing about this ="trms">story is that he is most alive via the ="trms">story, ="trms">Narcissus is basically undead.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

close-range vision

how can we practice movement and touch in the physio-locality of the eyes='qstn'>?
tentacularity
touching was considered a cruder scanning at close range and seeing a more subtle touching at a distance
importance of far distance over close range ='lgc'>=> refer to project Standing on the Shoulders of Giants (2015, ="frds">Sina)

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

forest's “space”

Hernri Lefebvre distinguishes Re="trms">presentation of space and Re="trms">presentational spaces. ... Re="trms">presentational spaces are “directly lived” through as="trms">sociated images and ="trms">symbols which overlay physical space, making ="trms">symbolic use of its objects.

Re="trms">presentation is a distinctive manner of ="trms">imagining the real, and is a fundamental ="trms">phenomenon upon which all culture rests.

or instead of how a forest looks like, what is the forest made of='qstn'>? and for whom='qstn'>? what is the forest made of is the ="trms">matter of negotiation (between the ="trms">different kinds of beings who think ="trms">differently about the forest)

in order not to neutralise the forest to culture (cultural ="trms">history as an explanatory ="trms">priority to the ="trms">historically ="trms">contingent circumstances) we can propose two ="trms">questions of older critique of perspectival perception='lgc'>:
="lstsrd">1. that the body accounts for perspective (='qstn'>?)
="lstsrd">2. re="trms">presentation is ex="trms">="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">clusively mental (='qstn'>?)
of course both ="trms">questions are ="trms">phenomenological ="trms">positions, but that does not mean that we no longer need re="trms">presentation to understand ="trms">relationality. (Konh words)

needing or not needing re="trms">presentation to understand ="trms">relationality

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">="ppl">Latour)

not a philosophical argument, but a cabinet of curiosities assembled by “friends of ="trms">interpretable objects”

... not an encyclopedic undertaking ... we have chosen only those sites, objects, and ="trms">situations where there is ambiguity, a hesitation, an iconoclash on how to ="trms">interpret image-making and image-breaking. (going to sites or objects where there is ambiguity, hesitation)

(the exhibition is not about recollecting truth or objectivity)

christian ="trms">religious paintings that do not try to show anything but, on the contrary, to obscure the vision.

redirecting the attention away from the image to the prototype (="ppl">Platonism run mad='qstn'>?) ='lgc'>-- redirecting of attention to another image

are we really going to spend another century naively re-destroying and deconstructing images that are so intelligently and subtly destroyed al="trms"nttrm="already,spread">ready='qstn'>?

do we really have to spend another century alternating violently between constructivism and realism, between artificiality and authenticity='qstn'>?
="trms">science deserves better than naive worship and naive contempt. its regime of invisibility is uplifting as that of ="trms">religion and art. the subtlety of its traces requires a new form of care and attention.

="large lg10" stl="font-size:135%"> (we need 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='qstn'>?)

Kinect recordings as ethnography='qstn'>?
how to escape from the tyranny of “simply objective”, “purely re="trms">presentative” quasi-="trms">scientific illustrations='qstn'>? Freeing one's gaze from this dual ="trms">obligation accounts....


="trms">religious icons and their obsession for real ="trms">presence
they have never been about ="trms">presenting something other than absence

="trms">scientific imagery
no isolated ="trms">scientific image has any ="trms">mimetic power; there is nothing less re="trms">presentational, less ="trms">figurative, than the pictures produced by ="trms">science, which are nonetheless said to give us the best grasp of the visible ="trms">world.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

is Aruz (عروض) ="trms">interface='qstn'>? surface/face and meaning/inhalt/content dualism in Tasavof, ="ppl">Rumi breakings of Aruz. Tsavof believes that only through appearance one can get into the depth


="trms">science, ="trms">religion, and politics all three take for granted an image of ="trms">nature.

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

(="ppl">Peter ="ppl">="ppl">Galison, in iconoclash)

wanting to know with eyes-open

it was by way of intuition “that the mathematical ="trms">world remains In contact with the real ="trms">world; and even though pure mathematics could do without it, it is always necessary to come back to intuition to bridge the ="trms">abyss which separates ="trms">symbol from reality.”

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

="large lg3" stl="font-size:112%"> (="ppl">Dipesh ="ppl">Chakrabarty)

(="trms">history of ="trms">nature='qstn'>?) the ="trms">nature of ="trms">history as a form of knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge

(Croce essay 1893 ="trms">history subsumed under t[...]