Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Continuing from yesterday’s post on Graham Harman… (Warning: This post is long.)


Where Tool-Being presented a Heidegger flushed clean of his anthropocentrism, Prince of Networks takes Bruno Latour for a ride on a philosophical adventure toward a world not of actors and networks but of objects, pure if not so simple. The book’s first half provides a detailed, clear, entertaining, and precise exegesis of Latour’s metaphysics through an examination of his claims in four books: Irreductions, Science in Action, We Have Never Been Modern, and Pandora’s Hope. The second, slightly longer half investigates some philosophical problems his actor-network theory opens up; explores lengthy detours through Meillassoux (on relationism and correlationism), Whitehead, Husserl (immanent objectivity), speculative realism, and other by-ways; and ends with a detailed explication of Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, which, the argument goes, is made possible by Latour’s ‘flat ontology’ and deepened through Heidegger’s tool-being (with the aid of Zubiri and others), but which is ultimately Harman’s own. In effect, this is Harman building an all-star collective, enrolling Latour (who participates vicariously) and Heidegger (who’s too dead to tell us whether he’d go along with the project or not), with assistance from others, against the revolution by which Immanuel Kant installed humans at the philosophical center of everything.

Continue Reading »

I’ve been reading Graham Harman’s Tool-Being: Heidegger and the Metaphysics of Objects and Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. More accurately, I’ve been dipping into and sipping from the first and systematically digesting the second. Given the amount of blogging that goes on under the rising star(s) of ‘object-oriented philosophy,’ ‘speculative realism,’ and Graham Harman himself, I figure it’s okay and may even turn out productive for me to air some of my reactions in public.

To start with, I will say that Graham is one of the most engaging, entertaining, enjoyable, rhetorically satisfying, and utterly lucid of the contemporary philosophers I have read in recent memory. And his project, as far as I can discern it so far, is of fairly direct relevance to the thinking through of socio-ecological issues, or at least to the philosophical working-out of some of the dilemmas, the conceptual blockages and theoretical miasmas, that have made it difficult for us to think our way through the complex socio-ecological issues that confront us.

Continue Reading »

A propos yesterday’s post on transition culture and the Bataillian (versus Malthusian) thermodynamics of ecopolitics, the new issue of the Harvard Design Magazine, on “(Sustainability) + Pleasure,” turns out to be all over this topic.

Wendy Steiner’s “The Joy of Less” introduces it well, positing a sensualism that’s quite happy with the “pleasure economy” of an “age of surplus” and that locates its heroes and prophets among such figures as Walt Whitman, William James (with his redefinition of meaning as “feelings of excited significance”), and the sensibility of European modernists (Baudelaire’s flaneur, Breton’s surrealist vagrant, and Nabokov’s Lolita-loving Humbert Humbert) — as opposed to the rhetoric of sustainability, which “is all about limits on freedom and the thwarting of desire.” “The disconnect between sustainability and pleasure is profound,” she writes, but then goes on to point out the blurrings and conciliations of the two both in children’s culture (school ecology programs, Wall-E) and in the postmodernist arts of Pynchon, Delillo, Chadwick and Spector, and others.

Continue Reading »

Reading about the growing “transition towns” movement back to back with a read-through of Design Philosophy Papers’ latest issue on Bataille and “Inefficient Sustainability” has gotten me thinking about some of the unspoken premises that make their way into environmentalists’ prognostications of the future.

The transition towns movement began in Totnes, England, home of the Schumacher Society, and was spurred into motion in part from permaculturist Rob Hopkins’ work on transitioning to a sustainable economy, but it has now spread to hundreds of towns, villages, cities, and regions in the UK, US, Ireland, Canada, and elsewhere. Drawing from permaculture founder David Holmgren’s modeling of energy transitions and associated crises, Eco-Mag’s Future Scenarios issue offers a particularly useful and concise synopsis of four possible futures, intended to be taken up in transition town salons and community forums and to help guide in the development of local transition plans and sustainability policies. The four scenarios are distinguished by differential rates of fossil-fuel energy decline (slow or fast) and of climate change symptoms (mild or severe) and by people’s responses to these changes. The general idea is that human use of oil and other fossil fuels is “peaking” and we need to transition toward more sustainable power sources, but that these aren’t readily available; they require more systematic social, political, technological, and economic changes than most are prepared to work toward; and any transition will be marked by the effects of climate changes already, to some extent, set in motion.

The four scenarios are “Brown Tech: Top Down Constriction”, where slow energy decline rates accompanied by severe climate change symptoms allow for aggressive “resource nationalism” and centralized government and corporate investment to prevail, but with wars and chaos looming in the background; “Green Tech: Distributed Powerdown,” where slow energy decline rates and mild climate change symptoms allow for greater diversity of responses at multiple scales, including strengthened “cultures of place”, distributed energy economies, and the like (this is perhaps a best-case scenario); “Earth Steward: Bottom Up Rebuild,” in which rapid energy declines but mild climate change symptoms bring about financial and economic shock, reduction of mobility, increases in crime, malnutrition, and disease, and a hollowing out of cities, but also the rise of a kind of quasi-feudal, neo-monastic ecodecentralism rising up in the ruins (akin to what Theodore Roszak described back in his 1970s Person/Planet); and “Lifeboats: Civilization Triage,” a kind of worst-case scenario where rapid energy decline accompanied by severe climate change leads to global breakdown, significant population decline, and the abandonment of cities, but with “oasis agriculture” and regional survivalism helped out by new opportunities — such as by the creation of “highly productive shallow waters and estuaries” in and around the “complex reef structures” made possible by urban architectures newly flooded in coastal lowlands around the world. (I love it.)

Continue Reading »

The obits have been coming in, albeit a little slowly, for Edward “Teddy” Goldsmith, founder of the fearless and influential British journal The Ecologist, co-founding member of Britain’s Green and Ecology parties, and publisher of the instrumental 1972 manifesto A Blueprint for Survival. Goldsmith, who died in his sleep on August 21, was a controversial figure, as well known in some circles for his conservative, some might say paleo-conservative, social views as for his ecological activism. Despite its faults and cringe moments, his 1992 book The Way: An Ecological Worldview synthesized a certain subset of environmental theories — ecological holism (Gaia, systems theory, etc.), anti-modernism, pro-indigenous and “vernacular culture” traditionalism (premised on a somewhat timeworn cultural ecology and an incipient ecopsychology), and anarcho-decentralism — as lucidly and ambitiously as anyone had done at the time (save perhaps Murray Bookchin). The fiery dust-up at The Ecologist over Goldsmith’s cavorting with figures in the European New Right in the mid-1990s left that magazine a little tattered (and a few editors short), though it’s recovered well since then. As a side effect of the split, former co-editors Nicholas Hildyard, Larry Lohmann, and others founded Corner House, which has been producing some of the most incisive left-green assessments of the state of the world since then. Hildyard et al’s earlier document Whose Common Future? Reclaiming the Commons remains a socio-ecological classic.

Continue Reading »

Just by linking Carl Sagan’s eloquent little Pale Blue Dot to the teachings of Gautama Buddha, James Ure’s Buddhist Blog brings out the buddhism inherent both in Sagan’s words and in the imagery of the Earth from space. That imagery (as I’ve discussed before here and here) is multivalent, but Sagan’s spin on it — the pale blue dot as “the aggregate of our joy and suffering” on which “everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives” — deepens its ability to carry useful meaning. That ability will one day exhaust itself, if not turn into its opposite, but for now I don’t think it has. “The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled [. . .] the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner [. . .] Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.”

Continue Reading »

prairiedog.jpg

Over the past several days I’ve gone from the cool wetness of Alaska’s southeast coast to the high dryness of north-central New Mexico. The first was pure holiday, accompanied by loved ones (including those who generously funded it) and featuring glaciers, salmon, a black bear (devouring one of the salmon), a ride on one of the most scenic train routes in the world, and the ambiguous eco-ethics of spending a week on a cruise ship (but I decided not to look such a gift horse too closely in the mouth). The second has been a kind of work vacation involving a week of conversations on the topic of science, nature, and religion, generously funded, hosted (and wined and dined — there’s even a book about their culinary tradition) by the School for Advanced Research in Santa Fe.

The SAR has been funding anthropological research, hosting seminars and residencies, publishing books, and working alongside Native American artists to collect and preserve art and material culture for over a hundred years now. Its campus, a former artist’s colony called El Delirio and cheekily referred to as an “anthropologists’ resort,” is just outside downtown Santa Fe, which, at 7000 feet, is a deceptively uncitylike state capital; buildings are restricted to three stories and a limited range of variations on deep-cream-colored adobe (or adobe-style) architecture. The late summer days here heat up, albeit sweatlessly, but the mornings, evenings, and nights swell up invitingly into the big starry sky, with sweet summer smells of lush semi-desert vegetation (pinyon pine and juniper, cottonwood, fruit trees, yucca, Russian olive blossoms, cholla cactus), layers of soft cricket chirpings, and the occasional coyote chorus or quite (but communicative) prairie dog (see above) scurrying around in the grasses. The city is greener than I remember it from a brief visit in 1994, and it seems to be dealing with its water issues reasonably well (water being the limiting factor in these parts). It feels good to be in the southwest again (having visited this part of the country only briefly a few times since my fieldwork in Arizona in the mid-1990s).

Continue Reading »

I recently worked my way through Charles Taylor’s A Secular Age, which, since its publication in 2007, has become one of the most widely reviewed and critically lauded books on religion and secularism — and which, in a tangential way, was one of the provocations that led me to start this blog in the first place. What follows are some thoughts on Taylor’s notions of immanence and transcendence, and on the “third way” of radical immanence, or immanent naturalism, that has become an important conversation partner in the debate that has arisen in the wake of Taylor’s book. (See The Immanent Frame for some of this debate, especially the contributions by William Connolly, Elizabeth Hurd, Lars Tonder, Patrick Lee Miller, and Taylor himself.) These thoughts are taken from a longer argument that I presented at last week’s ISSRNC conference in Amsterdam.

It’s rare that a nearly 900-page tome of dense and circuitous philosophical and historical prose gets the kind of attention A Secular Age has gotten, and the fact that Taylor is as brilliant, respectful, and nuanced a thinker as he is makes it a book well worth celebrating. Conferences have been held in its honor, and the Social Science Research Institute-supported blog The Immanent Frame, on “secularism, religion, and the public sphere” and named after one of the book’s central concepts, has attracted the contributions of dozens of high-profile thinkers to weigh in on the themes raised by Taylor. (The list includes Talal Asad, Arjun Appadurai, Robert Bellah, Barbara Herrnstein Smith, Martin Marty, Wendy Brown, Craig Calhoun, Jose Casanova, William Connolly, Saba Mahmoud, Donald S. Lopez, Jr., Roger Gottlieb, Timothy Fitzgerald, Todd Gitlin, Christina Lafont, and Taylor himself.)

Continue Reading »

3272263118_c6ff7e5b8c.jpg

Today, my last day in Amsterdam, I finally made it to the monument unveiled last year honoring Baruch de Spinoza. Since the talk I gave at the ISSRNC conference here was on immanence (specifically, Charles Taylor’s concept of the ‘immanent frame’ and William Connolly’s and others’ immanent naturalism), there was no way around visiting the eminent philosopher of immanence himself.

The bronze monument stands in front of the city hall and at the entrance to the old Jewish Quarter in which Spinoza grew up (he was born in Amsterdam to a family of Sephardic Jewish refugees from Spain). Spinoza’s back is to one the tree-lined canals floating to the Amstel, and a few feet away from him is an icosahedron, a 20-faced geometric form that refers to the geometrical method that informed his philosophy. The coat he is wearing features several birds — rose-ringed parakeets and sparrows, the former being bright green birds that are exotic to Amsterdam and that first settled in the nearby Vondelpark, the latter a diminishing native breed — and roses, which apparently symbolize Spinoza, whose name means “thorn” in Portuguese, but which to my mind also represent the love that infused his philosophical writings. A thorn in the side of authoritarians (the text on the base of the statue is a rather optimistic quote from Spinoza, “The purpose of the State is freedom”), Spinoza preached democracy, tolerance, freedom of thought and expression, a monism which he opposed to Cartesian mind-body dualism, and an immanent naturalism that equated nature with God, for which he was excommunicated from his synagogue and his books banned by the Catholic church. The Spinoza Monument Publication quotes his words in its dedication of the statue: “Gratitude or thankfulness is love’s desire or endeavor to do good to someone who has done us a service out of an equal love affect.”

Earlier this year, local artists along with the Amsterdam Spinoza Circle put on a series of events in his honor, including performances, installations, discussions, a series of posters exhibited around the city, and more, under the title My Name is Spinoza. I can’t think of a more appropriate place to do that than friendly, liberal, multicultural Amsterdam, which no matter how thoroughly humanized its nature may be, is a place that, with its famous tolerance for the virtues and vices of human nature, well reflects Spinoza’s sentiment that you can’t hate nature. That said, incidents of intolerance have marred the city’s and country’s reputation recently, but they seem, from my brief visit and the reading I’ve done while here, like exceptions to a general rule of getting along, parakeets and sparrows and all, infused by a love of knowledge and of life.

Spinoza has been rediscovered repeatedly, more recently by post-Marxist political theorists like Althusser, Deleuze, and Negri in the 1960s and 1870s, but also, as I’ve discussed here, by deep ecology founder Arne Naess and, a little later, by anti-Cartesian neuroscientist Antonio Damasio. While the world has caught up with him, to some degree, in its political liberalism, his non-Cartesianism represents, to many, the philosophical path not taken — until now, perhaps, as mind-body dualism winds its way down and is replaced by a more subtle understanding of how thinking, feeling, and bodily affects interact to produce the relations that constitute us.

More information about the monument can be found here. More detailed photographs can be seen here and here. And for eloquent Spinozist blogging, I recommend kvond’s Frames /sing.

Paul Ennis has posted an interview with me over at Another Heidegger Blog. It follows a few great interviews with distinguished company — philosophers Graham Harman, Levi Bryant, and Lee Braver — and I hope it and the rest of the series generate productive cross-currents and conversations between philosophers, greens, and others.

EveningCanal2-m.jpg

Meanwhile, I’m in Amsterdam for a meeting of the ISSRNC, an interdisciplinary association that’s been producing some very interesting conversations about the intersections of religion, nature, and culture — without taking any of those three terms for granted — since its inception just a few years ago. More on that soon.

But what a lovely city. Last night, as the sky was finally beginning to darken after 10 pm, the lanterns on the streets were aglow and the lights beneath the bridges reflected on the canals, all of it blanketed by the soft hum of people’s voices, and I could imagine myself enjoying the same scene in the fall, with red and orange leaves on the ground, and in the spring, with smells of blossoms in the air, and in a winter covered in snow, skaters lazily moving down the frozen canals. (I’m told, though, that the snow doesn’t stay around long any more when it does fall. Europe’s warming, too.)

buzz-aldrin-moon-msfc-6900952-ga.jpg

This image of Buzz Aldrin on the moon, photographed forty years ago by his Apollo 11 spacemate Neil Armstrong, has haunted me for decades. Not so much because it’s taken on the moon, as because of the image on his helmet, a mirror image that suggests there’s nothing behind the mask, inside that cavernous helmet, except for a kind of deadly infinite blackness, a void beyond which is nothing. (Except that we are there, whatever the ‘we’ are, and not necessarily just us humans.) It’s one of those images that seeped in and triggered the growth of the budding Buddho-Lacanian in me, the one who suspects that within and between the myriad things of beauty and color and sound and joy and sadness and struggle and sorrow and loss, there is some kind of space that’s dark and calm and empty, a place of infinite rest, the Buddhists’ calm abiding and the Slavic Christian’s vichnyi spokij, but a place that’s also somehow bottomless, one of Pascal’s infinite spaces, where planting a flag will hardly make a home. Where Elton John’s rocket man burns up his fuel alone, and Ground Control’s call to Major Tom gets lost, his circuit dead for good.

As for Neil Armstrong’s walk itself, my memory of it is steeped in the hypnotic ambiance of the eerily blue screen and tinny sound of the black-and-white TV that filled up the summer cottage where we spent that part of the summer of ’69 with our extended Ukrainian family of siblings and cousins, aunts and uncles, against a background of crickets and rotting wood and septic tank smells. It’s all mixed together with the distinct memory I still carry around with me of walking down the country road outside that cottage with my dad and a friend of his talking about space and the future, the space between us and the moon filling up with the weirdly vertiginous understanding that someone was up there walking on that white orb, just as we were walking down here on this earth, in some sort of bizarre mirroring between earth and space. “We came in peace for all mankind”, they said, just as Jesus did, planting flags on a flagless, lifeless, inert, and in the end perhaps futile new world.

Conspiracists continue to deny it, but according to established consensus, twelve men have walked on the moon. All have been Americans. One of them golfed there. One, Edgar Mitchell, went on to found the Institute for Noetic Sciences, write a book on psychic phenomena, and claim that “we are being visited” by extraterrestrials and have been contacted by them several times, but that governments have hidden the truth from us for over sixty years. Another, James Irwin, went on to form the High Flight Foundation, a religious organization based in Colorado Springs (the epicenter of American evangelical Christianity) to encourage people to “the Highest Flight possible with God”; Irwin has led trips in search of Noah’s Ark on Turkey’s Mount Ararat, and has said that “Jesus walking on the earth is more important than man walking on the moon.” As for Buzz Aldrin, he reported Apollo 11’s apparent UFO encounter (later clarified to remove any suggestion of aliens), but didn’t get Ali G. (But would he get Bruno?)

If Apollo (alongside other missions) brought us the Earth as picture, a planet captured by technology, visualizable as an entity we (or our experts) can map, measure, quantify and manage — in all its boundaryless, post-nationalist glory (choose the interpretation you favor, the globalist or the planetarian), then the moonwalk — brought to us by Bill Bailey, Marcel Marceau, James Brown, David Bowie, Neil Armstrong, and most famously by Michael Jackson — gave us the Moon as dancefloor. (Both Theory Vortex and Moving Images compare the two most famous moonwalks, Neil Armstrong’s and Jackson’s.) Sun Ra, George Clinton, and other Black musicians have, of course, been traveling to outer space for decades, as John Akomfrah argues in the film The Last Angel of History. Just as Ray Bradbury displaced the American frontier to our neighboring red planet in his Martian Chronicles, lyrically evoking the disappearing native culture in the face of the incoming settlers, African Americans, whisked off and carried forcefully to new worlds, have been mapping out alien space for centuries.

How do we walk on the moon? How do we dance onto that surface that has never been danced on by one of us, and how do we shuffle forward on it, when there is neither forward nor back anymore (it’s too late for that), just a nervous tiptoeing into the blackness of a nowhere on the other side of the Cocteauian mirror of a “small step” taken, a “huge leap for mankind“? The Independent reported the other day that among the results of the Millennium Project’s 6700-page, 2700-expert, UN- and World Bank-supported State of the Future report is the recognition that climate change “will cause civilisation to collapse.” Where to, then? How do we step into that mirror? Benjamin knew what Klee’s Angel of History was saying, but we aren’t sure of anything anymore. (are we?) (take another step, slowly, feel the dirt, the sand between your toes; take off that boot, astronaut, and lift those rose-petals to your face, so soft, sweet smelling, delicate, red) (Tarkovsky’s Solaris is the antidote to Kubrick’s 2001, but even it is haunted and dark; the real antidote is life itself) (the planet I would cherish is the one that would turn our flags into roses, and it’s right here, where I’m sitting)

First%20Step%20Moon.jpg

The eco-arts blogosphere has kept simmering through the early summer. Greenmuseum.blog, connected to the excellent online environmental resource and exhibition space Green Museum, has taken on a new look. The blog had recently covered the Earth Matters on Stage EcoDrama Symposium, held at the University of Oregon. Mike Lawler’s EcoTheatre blog also provided coverage of EMOS. Ecoartspace has been blogging from the Seattle Public Arts Conference, the theme of which this year was Renewable Resources: Arts in Sustainable Communities.

Over at Sustainability and Contemporary Art, Maja and Ruben Fowkes have been blogging about the Hard Realities and New Materiality Symposium, which took place at Central European University recently. Antennae magazine has an interview with the Fowkes in which they discuss the sustainability of contemporary art, the ethics vs. the aesthetics of form, Felix Guattari’s ‘three ecologies,’ and other topics. Some of the Fowkes’ writings, including Unframed landscapes: Nature and Contemporary Art and Towards the Ecology of Freedom, can be found at Translocal.org. (Some of these overlap with issues I discussed in my piece Sustainable vision from the 2004 Natural Grace exhibition catalogue; you can find a brief overview of the environmental and eco-art movements there.)

Smudge has been blogging about the massive LAND/ART exhibition/project in New Mexico. In many ways, land art reflects an earlier moment in the evolution of ecological art, one premised on making statements in wild or open landscapes, but much of what’s presented in this exhibition goes well beyond that, for instance, to the documentation, questioning, and interrogation of land uses in their social, perceptual, and ecological contexts. Among the events is an Experimental Geography exhibition, featuring The Center for Land Use Interpretation, Trevor Paglen, and others. See the CLUI’s database of unusual and exemplary sites — which range from nuclear and industrial accident sites and weapons plants to tourist caves, ghost towns, and UFO sites across the U.S. — to get an idea of what this unusual ‘research organization’ does. Artist and “experimental geographer” Paglen‘s work on “black sites” — secret military landscapes and other “blank spots on the map” — has even gotten him onto the Colbert Report; see his media page for articles, reviews, and videos. Paglen writes about Experimental Geography over at Brooklyn Rail, while Rhizome provides a good list of reading materials on the topic. See also art:21’s interview with EG curator Nato Thompson.

Sustainable Practice is a good place to keep up to date with a lot of these types of things, while Critical Spatial Practice focuses more on the geographical interventions.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Skip to toolbar