[...]diffracted) light, how might we reconsider theoretical investigations (filmic, philosophical, etc.) that ='strcls'>*rely ex="trms">="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">clusively on untroubled reflectivity='strcls'>*. yes, “clear” vision is secured by corrective ="trms">measures in the eye (and elsewhere) but conversely sight is always multiply altered and realtered by transmedium movement of light.
there is an embedded conceptual tension in refraction between ='strcls'>*lucidity='strcls'>* and ='strcls'>*degradation='strcls'>*
“as it is” ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> the object is always troubled by obscuration
='strcls'>***things do not have fully determinate boundaries or properties. things happen ‘in’ and ‘by’ encounter='lgc'>--refraction is one critical mode of encounter
object is altered by ='strcls'>*scale='strcls'>* and ='strcls'>*encounter='strcls'>* (through refraction)
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> “="trms">="trms">empirical perspective” ='lgc'>: the ='strcls'>*altered scale='strcls'>* also allows the object to reveal its ="trms">specificity, its particularity; boundaries are rendered indeterminate and exist only to the extent that they are continually enacted.
="large lg2" stl="font-size:110%">
(="ppl">="ppl">Hayward > ="ppl">="ppl">Barad='lgc'>:)
="trms">Phenomena do not merely mark the ="trms">epistemological inseparability of “observer” and “observed”; rather, ="trms">phenomena are the ="trms">ontological inseparability of ="trms">agentially ="trms">intra-acting ‘components.’ That is, ="trms">phenomena are ="trms">ontologically primitive ="trms">relations='lgc'>--="trms">relations without preexisting ="trms">relata. ='lgc'>[='strcls'>*relatum='lgc'>: one of the objects between which a ="trms">relation is said to hold. ='strcls'>*="trms">relata='lgc'>: would-be antecedent (tabar تبار) components of ="trms">relations.='lgc'>]
reverie of reflectivity ='lgc'>=/= refraction (='lgc'>='lgc'>--> makes explicit transforms the tendency of the image to orient re="trms">presentation, foregrounding the th="trms"nttrm="already,spread">readed visual space between the image and the ="trms">spectator.)
='strcls'>***dynamic (re)configurings of the ="trms">world, ="trms">specific ="trms">agential practices/="trms">intra-actions/performances through which ="trms">specific ex="trms">="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">clusionary boundaries are enacted='strcls'>***
(Kaja Silverman, the subject of ="trms">semiotics)
="trms">spectatorships ='lgc'>=/=! re="trms">presentations ='lgc'>=/=! referents
(="trms">ontological distinction='lgc'>: “='lgc'>=/=!”)
the surreal ="trms">techno="trms">scientific look ='lgc'>--='qstn'>?='lgc'>='lgc'>--> allowing wondrous but ="trms">material extensions into the ="nms">ajayeb domain
in creating a “look” for ="nms">ajayeb='lgc'>: whether or not a used/user ="trms">interaction can have ethical dimensions='qstn'>?
refraction is not framework, but a pathway. it engages patterns of ="trms">interference and exchange
the xeno-="trms">sensual in the ="nms">ajayeb
="trms">different ="trms">differences that are sensed and mediated
="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................
="large lg1" stl="font-size:125%">
="trms">poetic ="trms">historiography
(="trms">historiography='lgc'>: the study of the ="trms">writing of ="trms">history and of ="trms">written ="trms">histories)
="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................
to begin ="trms">writing about ="nms">ajayeb with the ="trms">citational, ‘avardeand ke...’ (...آوردهاند که)
="trms">citation, an important characteristic of ="trms">fables, is about ="trms">relational ="trms">histories.
absence of de="trms">finitive source (in my old ="trms">childhood favorite radio show, by bring an endless ="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list of fantastic source and bodies of ="trms"nttrm="failure,blur,plur,lurk,tallur,slur">lures) allows ="trms">monsters to flourish and me the full range of my passionate ="trms">crafts. ="nms">ajayeb's compelling mystery ="trms">demands (from me) an unorthodox and omnivorous approach (hame-chiz-khar همه چیز خوار).
اما راویان اخبار و ناقلان آثار و طوطیان شکرشکن شیرین گفتار و خوشه چینان خرمن سخن دانی و صرافان سر بازار معانی و چابک سواران میدان دانش توسن خوش خرام سخن را بدینگونه به جولان در آورده اند که ...
="lsts lst1">•Mirabile dictu... (miraculous to say...)
towards ="ppl">="ppl">Despret's talking parrots
parrots (shekar-shekan) (and philosophers) really like to control the exchange, to keep control of a conversation ='lgc'>: their refusal to let another individual choose the topic of conversation
='strcls'>***(parrots have) a ="trms">pragmatic rather than a referential conception of ="trms">language
='lgc'>[am i also referential (='lgc'>=/= ="trms">pragmatic) in my conception of ="trms">language='qstn'>?='lgc'>]='lgc'>='lgc'>--> to teach a being to speak pre="trms">supposes not only a tolerance of but also ='strcls'>*a profound ="trms">interest in misunderstanding='strcls'>* (this ‘profound ="trms">interest in misunderstanding’ is precisely both cognitive and political aspect of what I am trying to bring forth) ='lgc'>~-> (how ="trms">language-learning with ="trms">animals can help us learn) restating and inverting the ="trms">question of control
='strcls'>*exchange can only be achieved when there is “a continous reprisal of ="trms">translations and betrayals of meaning”='strcls'>* ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> understanding itself is compromised
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]="nms">ajayeb='lgc'>: a non-stop betrayal of ="trms">translations (of perspectives) and continuous redressal of meanings (of things)
“as if” has to do with misunderstanding
“meanings are constructed in a constant movement of ‘attunement,’ which makes them emerge.”
(="ppl">="ppl">Despret, ="trms">animal breeding practices)
(='mywrk'>my work on ="nms">ajayeb is also much about) ='strcls'>*="trms">language-learning='strcls'>* ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>]in its ="trms">pragmatic function='lgc'>: it is an effective means of acting and of making others act
keep your end up
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]type='lgc'>: identifying ="trms">language use with modes of existence ='lgc'>[="ppl">Wittgenstein's mistake='lgc'>] (maybe useful to reanimate the ="trms">question of ‘becoming’ for ="frds scrmbld">Marialena)
the mode of existence of lions is subordinated to that of an essence “lioness,” guaranteed by the identity of the ="trms">species and the stability of its repertoire of behavior ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> a bur="trms">densome conception of the ="trms">naturalness of ="trms">animals
='strcls'>***the ="trms">question is not what ‘is’ a lion, but “how does one become a lion,” not only in lion ="trms">community and ="trms">species, but also in the work of ="trms">scientists, constructing what it is to be a lion.
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> this is about becoming='lgc'>: of that of which the ="trms">animal is rendered capable by the ="trms">apparatuses that ="trms">interrogate it
how can what I say about lions or baboons (or oceans or jinns) be ="trms">authorized by them='qstn'>?
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]we='lgc'>: constituted by the assemblage of ="trms">different (="trms">animal-, nonhuman-, machine-, human-)beings ="trms">="trms">equipped with an ="trms">apparatus aimed at making them talk well ='lgc'>--='lgc'>{by taking an ="trms">interest in what constitutes the appropriateness of a ="trms">material ="trms">apparatus that transforms those it ="trms">interrogates='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>--> fully agreeing to ="trms">situate oneself in a regime of transformations and accomplishments ='lgc'>==='lgc'>{that mingle with and give form to='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>==> ='strcls'>*desires='strcls'>*
="prgrph">-rese="trms"nttrm="search">archer's desire is one the modes of their efficacity
="prgrph">-“our” problems are not a ="trms">priori
a “we”='lgc'>:
='lgc'>+ “know full well”
='lgc'>+ “are ="trms">different”
='lgc'>+ “who work”
="trms">rhetorics of pronouns, acts of crude ="trms">generalizations='lgc'>: something is being ="trms">specified and something ="trms">generalized. ='lgc'>[='at'>@="frds scrmbld">Xiri's “I am the one who... your...” the ="trms">specificity and generality of “I” and of “you” in her text. how the ="trms">difference of “you” and “I” was envisaged in her ="trms">poem='qstn'>?='lgc'>='lgc'>-->='lgc'>{I, the effected by ='lgc'>=/= you, the haver='lgc'>} how can this I/you impose itself not as the effect of a strong-arm tactic='qstn'>? ='lgc'>=/=='qstn'>? I want to find out how to live together; refuse to deepen the contrast between “us” and “them"='lgc'>] ='lgc'>[in ="frds scrmbld">Xiri's ="trms">poem='lgc'>: who/what makes her pronouns='qstn'>?='lgc'>] ='lgc'>[to address people ‘as’ refugees, subjugated, poor, or victim, to recognize them by these identities, only repeats the process of ex="trms">="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">clusion(='qstn'>?) could be experienced as disabling.='lgc'>]
="large lg3" stl="font-size:111%">
='strcls'>*/ ="trms">generalization is constructed bit by bit
(that which constitutes) an expression of the parrot's opinion in relevance to what it is asked, the fact that it engages with, accepts and activly transforms what becomes a part of its ="trms">world, ="trms">translates an extension of this ="trms">world and therefore an extension of its subjectivity as “parrot-with-human”
="prgrph">-when an ="trms">animal escapes me, in fact it is making a form of the “judgement of ="trms">relation” that ="trms">animals make about humans
="large lg4" stl="font-size:110%">
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]anonymity='lgc'>: (a certain manners of ="trms">presenting oneself,) that un="trms">questioned condition of research that ="trms">translates a certain type of ="trms">relationship and a certain manner of defining those whom one addresses
I am against “feel free to say what you want” because it means actually what you say will have no consequences ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> (radical) a="trms">symmetry of expertises='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•rese="trms"nttrm="search">archer-="trms">author ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> knows better
="lsts lst1">•="trms">social actor ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="trms">interchangeable holders of opinions
“="trms">scientist”='lgc'>: that who “knows better”
(if the fish cannot become a ="trms">scientist, then I also don't want to ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> let's change how one becomes a “fish” or a “="trms">scientist”)
="large lg5" stl="font-size:113%">
(="frds scrmbld">Laleh) could ask her subjects='lgc'>: “so, in your opinion, ‘as a ="trms">child,’ how do you think I should construct my ="trms">question so that it has a chance of being understood and of being ="trms">interesting='qstn'>?”
="lsts lst1">•the ="trms">question, that was my ="trms">responsibility, that of ="trms">difference, ="trms">formulated in ="trms">different ways
="lsts lst1">•“they” ='lgc'>[your “subjects"='lgc'>] might unproot your ="trms">question, displace it, modify its ambit (hoze حوزه), and when they find the ="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">right way of ="trms">formulating it, they answer='strcls'>*
[...]