Following Jussi Parikka’s posting, thoughts towards a Media Object-oriented OnTology[ref]Perhaps we can play with the language a little further and move from a media object-oriented ontology to a medial object-oriented ontology. An ontology of the middle objects. In Harman’s model, objects connect in the molten core of other objects, in the middle, the medial[/ref]. An …
Category Archives: objects
What does jpeg do and how do I know?
Jpeg is an object within digital imaging apparatuses, both the ones I ‘build’ and the ones for sale in the Apple Store and Jessops. It is not the only object in those apparatuses and those devices, technologies or assemblages are constructed in different ways with different object-components. What is clear though is that the jpeg …
Struggle at the scale of objects not the level of networks
By working solely with objects rather than objects and relations, it is possible to explore the specific configurations of computational/governmental networks and approach political change at the scale of those objects rather than ‘network’. Galloway and Thacker subtitle their book (2007) “A Theory of Networks” but in some ways this is to miss the point …
Continue reading “Struggle at the scale of objects not the level of networks”
I object
The debate between Steven Shaviro and Graham Harman in the first real collection of speculative realist writings (Bryant et al 2010), clarifies a number of issues, most particularly Harman’ attitude to Whitehead. Shaviro of course has been at the forefront of the recruiting of Whitehead for a new form of postmodern critique. In particular Shaviro …
Somewhere between pressing the button and doing the rest
The mashup happens downstream. The stream of imag(in)ings that jpeg enables, whether they are instantiated on a Flickr page, connected to a Tweet, on a Facebook wall or as part of slideflow or maps mashup happen at the end of the digital imaging pipeline. More correctly they happen at the end of one form of …
Continue reading “Somewhere between pressing the button and doing the rest”
Inner and outer, visible and invisible
Although Adrian Mackenzie does not use the language of Actor-Network Theory or object-oriented philosophy, his account of the experience of ‘wirelessness’ shares a number of common themes, notably the way in which “wirelessness is thoroughly entangled with products and promises of economic value” (Mackenzie 2010: 145). What Latour would call ‘alliances’ are integral to wirelessness’ …