Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Hot on the heels of yesterday’s UCLA summit on speculative realism, which Tim Morton has been podcasting with relentless (and admirable) abandon, Graham Harman is now at Claremont and appears to be live-blogging the Whitehead conference:

Stengers keynote in progress

Donna Haraway response to Stengers.

And follow it live at his blog.

From patient and deliberate thinking and slow writing, philosophy has become a live, blazingly high-speed (and partly vicarious) art form. Fantastic. If the production of concepts continues to speed up, we will need the philosophical equivalent of a slow-food movement. (That is, if we don’t ascend into some transconceptual hyperspace.) A slow thought movement. But for now, eyelids pressed to our screens and neurons firing, we enjoy.

gleanings

(findings, briefings, reports, call them what you will… I’m in an Agnes Varda mood, which is helping me deal with the loss of several weeks of gleanings in the hard drive crash that will define my life as “before 11/20/10” and “after” it)

Scientists found that Asian and American brains respond completely differently when faced with images of dominance and submission, and when evaluating character traits of themselves as opposed to other people. Asians and Americans gathered with other world leaders to fiddle at a Mexican resort while buildings burned. (Some Americans stayed away. Activists grew distressed.) Hermetic libraries began giving off their own whiff of smoke amidst the dust. Google added trees and climate prognoses to the digital Earth. James Cameron tried to add a whole forest. U.S. corporations, meanwhile, gave thanks for their record profits.

Irish humanities academics called upon Irish humanities academics to help save the country’s sinking economic ship. Worldchangers sadly jumped their own ship, with barely a whimper. Anthropologists convening in the shipwrecked city of New Orleans slugged it out over whether or not they were scientists. Graham Harman and Steven Shaviro got ready to slug it out in the middleweight neo-realist philosopher category of the international thought-wrestling society. (The heavyweights are mostly dead, though their thoughts persist, and a few of them linger on.) A heavyweight of another kind, Chalmers Johnson swam away from it all quietly.

(More on the Harman-Shaviro showdown, as well as other object-relational matters, soon. And of course I’m being facetious with my terms here. Both are great intellectual role models, among the best and most public and genuine of the new breed of philosopher-metaphysicians, and I eagerly await the results of their deliberations. You all know which of them I agree with more, but the debate has been truly invigorating, and has been the main cause of my own interloper’s slide into philosophy sui generis – or so I hope that it’s generis. Wish I could be there at the Whitehead conference.)

PC040014invhuegreen.jpg

Here’s a version of the theoretical model I develop in Ecologies of the Moving Image. (An earlier version can be found here.) Following Peircian phenomenology (or “phaneroscopy”) and Whiteheadian ontology, that model is process-relational and triadic. (*See Note at bottom for more on the relationship between Peirce, Whitehead, and their leading synthesist, Hartshorne.)

This means:

Everything is three. Or, everything there is can be thought of in terms of three relational processes:

(1) The thing itself, which is a qualitatively distinctive phenomenon. Let’s call it the thing-world, since it is an unfolding of a particular kind, which sets up a formal structure of internal relations and (externally) interactive potentials as it unfolds, and since our relationship to it is generally from its ‘outside,’ though we can enter into a relationship with it.

(2) The interaction of that thing with another. Let’s call this the thing-experience, since we (or others) experience it from the ‘inside.’ This experience is what happens with us when we enter into the relationship with (1). (Other things may be happening with us simultaneously; this thing-experience doesn’t exhaust us. It’s just what we’re trying to understand here.)

(3) The relating of the thing-world and thing-experience with the whole world. To keep things simple, we can call this the thing-world/extra-thing-world relation (with the thing-experience being a subset of this whole relation, and the only piece of it that is distinctly “ours”). Or we can call it the world-earth relation, or the world-universe relation, with the ‘world’ being the thing-world and the ‘earth’ or ‘universe’ being the unencompassable ground (considered either in its earthbound or its cosmic aspect) within which all thing-worlds have their being/becoming. This relation is the full set of connections and interdependencies within which the thing has its action. To map out this relation in its entirety is impossible, but to understand the more proximal and direct parts of it is possible and useful. It is, in effect, the thing come into its fullness: both its full glory and its full dispersion into (other) things.

Continue Reading »

Himanshu at Doxic Shock shares a couple of great Latourisms… The details may be past their expiry dates (the generalities less so), but they’re still pretty funny.*

For a French person, saying that facts are constructed is a banality. Relativism is like an infantile disease: for us, who contract it in our high school philosophy class when we are 18, it is harmless. Yet, when it is transferred to the US, it can infect entire departments of philosophy and literature.

[France is a] new Columbia, a land of dealers producing hard drugs (‘derridium’, ‘lacanium’) to which graduate students on American campuses cannot resist any better than crack.

(The first is apparently a quote from Nathalie Levisalles, “Le Canular du Profesor Sokal,” Liberation, December 3, 1996; the second from Latour’s “Y a-t-il une Science apres la Guerre Froide?”)

Now if only actor-network theory had spread as quickly as the others… But it’s a Franco-Anglo hybrid – do they reproduce? And what happens when its pushers keep changing its street name and the color of the pill? (Latour keeps modifying his; John Law has completely shed ANT in favor of heterogeneities and other such things; and now this transmogrification by Harman…) Ah, but then it’s that much harder to resist!

(For the record, I’m a user… Been one for a long time 🙂

*Originally this post was titled “those good French drugs,” then “those sweet French drugs.” They are more like potions, love potions… Potent potions.

Here’s a fragment from Chapter 3 of Ecologies of the Moving Image. This chapter covers cinema’s “geomorphism,” by which I mean the part of cinema’s world-making capacity, its becoming-world-ness, that presents us with an objectscape, a territory within which things happen and action occurs. This is in contrast to cinema’s “anthropomorphism” (a subset of “subjectomorphism”), which refers to the cinematic production and distribution of agency, the capacity to act (which is the film-world’s subjectscape). Between these two poles is the “biomorphic field,” the interactive liveliness within which subjectivation and objectivation are distinguished and separated from each other, moment to moment.

Chapter Three is the longest chapter in the book, featuring theoretical discussion as well as analysis of emblematic films by directors including John Ford (The Searchers), Alexander Dovzhenko (Earth), Pare Lorentz (The River), Dennis Hopper (Easy Rider), Michelangelo Antonioni, Stan Brakhage, Jia Zhang-Ke, and Peter Greenaway. The excerpt below comes at the chapter’s end. One of the central conceits of the book is that film constitutes a journey into a film-world, a cinematic Zone, a world defined by the three dimensions mentioned (geomorphism, anthropomorphism, biomorphism), and that the film-experience is a specific viewer’s negotiation of the lures offered by a film to be drawn into that film’s film-world. The two films discussed below provide different variations of that journey into the Zone of cinema.

Continue Reading »

manuscript update

I’m recovering from a hard drive crash that occurred late last week. The only significant part of Ecologies of the Moving Image that I’ve completely lost are some fairly substantial recent revisions and additions to Chapter Six. I can reconstruct other pieces from earlier saves and from revisions made on hard copy print-outs. The crash will slow me down, but I still expect to complete the book by the end of December. Here’s a progress report…

Continue Reading »

No comment.

(Except this.)

Jon Stewart does Glenn Beck (again), spinning his George-Soros-as-Darth-Vader routine to its logical culmination… “Only Rupert Murdoch” — well, with this ragtag bunch of conservative billionnaires, media organizations, PACs, et al. — “stands between George Soros and Amerika.” This is laugh-(or-cry)-out-loud hilarious.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Or watch the whole episode at the Daily Show web site.

And yes, Fox News chairman Ailes actually did say that National Public Radio “are, of course, Nazis.” Bill McKibben provides a more reasoned assessment of public radio here in the New York Review of Books — the same issue that has Soros chiming in on Obama’s economic missteps, Diane Ravitch effectively shredding the Davis Guggenheim pro-charter schools film Waiting for “Superman,” and Anne Applebaum reviewing Tim Snyder’s excellent Bloodlands (which has little to do with America except for the historical ground-truthing it provides on the more bizarre expressions of this current culture war — like Ailes’s “Nazis”).

The new issue, meanwhile, includes a thoughtful piece by Mark Lilla on that same Beck of Revelation. Searching for the “real” Glenn Beck, Lilla argues, “makes no sense. The truth is, demagogues don’t have cores. They are mediums, channeling currents of public passion and opinion that they anticipate, amplify, and guide, but do not create; the less resistance they offer, the more successful they are.” It’s this that distinguishes Beck from his Fox confreres: “Rush Limbaugh plays the loud, steamrolling uncle you avoid at Thanksgiving. Bill O’Reilly is the angry guy haranguing the bartender. Sean Hannity is the football captain in a letter sweater, asking you to repeat everything, slowly. But with Glenn Beck you never know what you’ll get. He is a perpetual work in progress, a billboard offering YOUR MESSAGE HERE.” There’s a lot to that characterization.

things

. . . scribbled on a restaurant napkin:

1. Things are always already in process.

2. More complex things are more in process, or in more (and different) processes, than simpler things.

3. Growing/developing/evolving things tend to become more complex. Other things tend to become less so.

4. Being in process, things elude capture. Those that don’t become other things, and generally simpler things, than they were.

5. You can never do only one thing.

6. You can never isolate one thing from the rest. When you try, that thing ceases to be what it is, or it drags other things with it.

7. Knowing is doing; doing is knowing. But neither of them is only and fully the other.

8. Every moment presents options. Its passing alters the options presented to future moments.

9. Every action feeds a relation, tweaks a process, builds a network.

10. A world full of things made by the human Thing makes it seem that things are merely things, simple things, dead things. Even those things aren’t that, but other things certainly aren’t that.

EA6929-005.jpg

Notes:

(1) “Things” is a generic term for bits and pieces of world/universe. Things do; things are done.

(2) Complexity and simplicity are relative; entropy and negentropy are general trends. In reality, most things don’t just move all in one direction.

(4) Everything becomes different from itself anyway. The question is always what to become.

(5) But you can try.

(7) Form is substance; substance is form. But… same story.

(9) Or many at once.

(10) The “human Thing” includes humans, ruminants and cereal grasses, fossil fuels, cities, techno-economic networks, and an ever diversifying range of things made for the Thing and things made to make other things for the Thing. Things made by the human Thing even seem to be getting livelier and more complex (e.g., digital life, nanotechnology, online worlds). We are building a complex (mega)network atop a complex (mega)network, but with relations between the two (Terra 1.0 and Terra 2.0, if you will) growing more tenuous and fragile.

When I first heard that an Egyptian university placed fourth worldwide in scholarly productivity, and that it was due to the work of a single scholar, I couldn’t help thinking of Graham Harman churning out brilliant philosophical tomes out of American University in Cairo… Turns out this guy beats Graham handily in quantity and — inversely speaking (!) — in quality. A good reason to edit one’s own journal?

See Questionable Science Behind Academic Rankings – NYTimes.com

Peaksurfer‘s Albert Bates has a very good article up called The Great Change: Slouching towards Cancun.

A few tidbits:

Because of the huge outpouring of non-profit energy, money and effort at Copenhagen last year, and the subsequent meltdown of the Copenhagen round, the approach to this year’s COP (Conference of Parties to the Framework Climate Convention) has been like a drunk waking up with a really bad hangover. A hot shower and several carafes of coffee later, many are really wondering if we want to go back into the bar again tonight.

There is fresh meat in Cancun, including some inexperienced groups still enamored of the vision of a low carbon future that might be achieved just by signing a few international agreements, eating fewer animals, driving hybrid cars and changing light bulbs.

To the veterans, who are less like drunks and more like near-suicidal PTSD sufferers, a dramatic reduction of energy consumption in a complex society seems quite unlikely, absent some catastrophic event, which in their darker moments some have even begun to hope for. Even Peak Oil is moving too slowly, with shale gas and biofuels propping up near-term supplies. We need a supervolcano.

[. . .]

Political and military power seeks only to continue itself, by any expediency, no matter how short-sighted. Student protests over tuition increases and most labor union agendas fall into this same expediency. Sooner or later, they are all as deer, frozen in the headlight of an approaching freight train. Nothing in their cultural conditioning or centuries of military history has prepared them for this moment. Nature is no machine, and she is angry when revved up.

I recommend the whole article.

I somehow missed that the Ecomedia Studies group (which I was a co-founder of) has launched an eponymous blog. (It used to be a group wiki page, but now has morphed into a public blog.)

It looks very good, and features some of the more prolific young scholars in ecomedia criticism, green media studies, ecocinecriticism, and what have you. It may even give the (now hot, now cold) Indications a run for the money among group blogs in the environmental communication field. I send it good wishes (and hopefully subscribers, too). And might show up there myself from time to time.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Skip to toolbar