{"id":1294,"date":"2010-06-18T12:43:21","date_gmt":"2010-06-18T17:43:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/06\/18\/half-way-house\/"},"modified":"2010-06-18T12:43:21","modified_gmt":"2010-06-18T17:43:21","slug":"half-way-house","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/06\/18\/half-way-house\/","title":{"rendered":"half-way house"},"content":{"rendered":"

The further I have gotten into Vibrant Matter<\/em>, the more I have been thinking of it as a kind of half-way house on the route to a process-relational ontology. (I’ll admit I’ve read the whole book now, but I’m trying to defer my comments on the final chapter till next week. And I also strongly suspect that object-oriented ontologists might say it’s the same thing en route to an object-oriented ontology; but I’ll leave that particular debate aside, as it’s being taken up in many other places already.)<\/p>\n

It’s a weigh station, a place for mulling over, with its host Jane Bennett, the virtues of a less anthropocentric worldview; a welcoming retreat center for trying on ideas — about the vitality and agency of things, of metal (ch. 4), of stem cells (ch. 6), of worms (ch.7), and about what these things imply for existing political theory.<\/p>\n


\nChapter Seven is particularly effective at this. It’s where a lot of the threads come together — Darwin (and a wonderful account of how worms “make history”), Latour, a careful and nuanced defense of anthropomorphism — and where Bennett’s generosity in reading other people’s writing shines. In this case that’s with John Dewey, whose process-pragmatist political philosophy is clearly aligned with her project, and with Jacques Ranci\u00e8re, whose theory of politics falls far short of Bennett’s de-anthropocentric goals, but which she swerves ever so nimbly (against Ranci\u00e8re’s will) to a vital-materialist end.<\/p>\n

Her conclusions are, as always, tentative and hesitant:<\/p>\n

\n

“Since I have challenged the uniqueness of humanity in several ways, why not conclude that we and they are equally entitled? [. . .] To put it bluntly, my conatus will not let me ‘horizontalize’ the world completely. [. . .] The political goal of a vital materialism is not the perfect equality of actants, but a polity with more channels of communication between members.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Who can disagree with this? Yet (as she acknowledges) it leaves many questions unanswered: about who qualifies as a “member,” what degrees of membership may be available and what each provides and requires in return, and so on. She notes that Latour’s “parliament of things” is “as provocative as it is elusive,” and turns instead to Ranci\u00e8re’s theory of democracy as disruption, a singular disruption that “repartitions the sensible” and “overthrows the regime of the perceptible.”<\/p>\n

The emphasis, then, is on the sensible, perceptible, and the communicable:<\/p>\n

\n

“If human culture is inextricably enmeshed with vibrant, nonhuman agencies, and if human intentionality can be agentic only if accompanied by a vast entourage of nonhumans, then it seems that the appropriate unit of analysis of democratic theory is neither the individual human nor an exclusively human collective but the (ontologically heterogeneous) “public” coalescing around a problem. We need not only to invent or reinvoke concepts like conatus, actant, assemblage, small agency, operator, disruption, and the like but also to devise new procedures, technologies, and regimes of perception that enable us to consult nonhumans more closely, or to listen and respond more carefully to their outbreaks, objections, testimonies, and propositions<\/strong><\/em>. For these offerings are profoundly important to the health of the political ecologies to which we<\/em> belong.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

I couldn’t agree with this more. Bennett’s writing is suggestive and, on the whole, convincing (if we need to be convinced of these things). Both the methods — the perceptual and communicative strategies — and the metaphysical frameworks (that would catalyze a more conclusive, inter- and transdisciplinary shift in the intellectual framing of these issues) remain to be worked out, however. But the threads she is weaving into her discussion help to clarify the stakes and prepare the terrain as we embark on both those projects.<\/p>\n

Note: This week’s discussion is being hosted over at Anthony Paul Smith’s An und f\u00fcr sich<\/a>. Next week we’ll be coming here to wrap things up.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The further I have gotten into Vibrant Matter, the more I have been thinking of it as a kind of half-way house on the route to a process-relational ontology. (I’ll admit I’ve read the whole book now, but I’m trying to defer my comments on the final chapter till next week. And I also strongly […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":99,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[688977,4422],"tags":[16787,16901],"class_list":["post-1294","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-geo_philosophy","category-process-relational-thought","tag-bennett","tag-ranciere"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4IC4a-kS","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":5586,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2012\/02\/28\/process-objects-at-the-nonhuman-turn\/","url_meta":{"origin":1294,"position":0},"title":"Process-objects at The Nonhuman Turn","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"February 28, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"The preliminary schedule is out for The Nonhuman Turn in 21st Century Studies. The list of speakers reads like a \"who's who\" of the neo-ontological, speculative-realist crowd in cultural and media theory: Steven Shaviro, Jane Bennett, Brian Massumi, Erin Manning, Mark Hansen, Ian Bogost, and Tim Morton are among the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Philosophy"","block_context":{"text":"Philosophy","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/geo_philosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1366,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/11\/05\/process-relational-theory-primer\/","url_meta":{"origin":1294,"position":1},"title":"Process-relational theory primer","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"November 5, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"One of the tasks of this blog, since its inception in late 2008, has been to articulate a theoretical-philosophical perspective that I have come to call \u201cprocess-relational.\u201d This is a theoretical paradigm and an ontology that takes the basic nature of the world to be that of relational process: that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Eco-theory"","block_context":{"text":"Eco-theory","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/ecophilosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1230,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/04\/06\/space-junk-the-relational-real\/","url_meta":{"origin":1294,"position":2},"title":"space junk & the (relational) Real","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"April 6, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=wzUYiOV2-kE?fs=1&hl=en_US (This post spun off from the last, where I concluded by noting the increasing amount of debris out in the upper atmosphere. Somehow I couldn't resist pulling that image into the vortex of ecopolitics and the objects-relations debate, which is carrying on at hyper tiling, Object-Oriented Philosophy, Larval Subjects,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Philosophy"","block_context":{"text":"Philosophy","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/geo_philosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/img.youtube.com\/vi\/wzUYiOV2-kE\/0.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":4794,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2011\/06\/22\/after-nature\/","url_meta":{"origin":1294,"position":3},"title":"After Nature","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"June 22, 2011","format":false,"excerpt":"After Nature, the new blog hosted by process-relational ecophilosophical fellow traveler Leon Niemoczynski, now has an RSS feed. That means that I can enthusiastically recommend that philosophically inclined readers of this blog subscribe to it. Leon is author of Charles Sanders Peirce and a Religious Metaphysics of Nature. The five\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Philosophy"","block_context":{"text":"Philosophy","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/geo_philosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1256,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/05\/04\/ontologizing\/","url_meta":{"origin":1294,"position":4},"title":"ontologizing","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"May 4, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"I'm looking forward to Graham Harman's forthcoming review of Jane Bennett's Vibrant Matter, and I'm glad to see that this discussion between object-oriented philosophy and Bennett's vibrant materialism (and, by extension, the other theoretical impulses she draws on, which this blog, for the most part, enthusiastically shares) is getting underway.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Philosophy"","block_context":{"text":"Philosophy","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/geo_philosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1257,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/05\/04\/a-symmetrical-peace\/","url_meta":{"origin":1294,"position":5},"title":"a symmetrical peace?","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"May 4, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"I should probably resist from critiquing blog posts, since these rarely capture one's considered thoughts the way print articles and books do. So rather than replying in detail to Graham's rejoinder to my previous post, I'll agree to the cease-fire he proposes (though I hope we weren't really sniping at\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Philosophy"","block_context":{"text":"Philosophy","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/geo_philosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1294","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/99"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1294"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1294\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1294"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1294"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1294"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}