This is a push right now
But I’m trying to comprehend avenues of exploration for research
And I’m thinking looking at ideas of phenomenology in relation to digital life/space is interesting. This can link into to research around repetition. Which I think is inherent in my practice. And often the forms i can be creating/reproducing (maybe regenerating) pieces (I was going to use work, but I don’t know if I want to distance myself somewhat from that word).
As an initial reading list
- Fred Moten - ‘The Universal Machine’
- Sara Ahmed - ‘Queer Phenomenology’
- Giles Deleuze - ‘Difference and Repetition’
- Laura U. Marks - ‘Skin of the Film’
- Emanuel Levinas - unsure.
- Martin Heidegger?
This list will expand. Some of it is coming off of who I know moten and Ahmed look at in their writings (Levinas and Heidegger). Marks’ ideas around hapticality I think will be interesting to look into and think about how touch can inform phenomenological perspectives — often a sensual experience of something can lead to the belief of it being real.
Maybe there’s interesting angles in looking into Cartesian dualism? And the schools of thought that go against certain strains of phenomenology.
This is a side thought — but does digital phenomenology create what can maybe only be described as a digital proximity, or at least a belief in such a proximity, to those that only exist digitally to us? I guess I’m trying to think about this in the way people create certain fan cultures, speak about celebrities as though they are friends, and have the ability to interact online with them, although most of the time only in a one directional way — fan to celebrity, though communication never returned — I dunno this is interesting because it feels like it links in to conversations we’ve been having to do with the ways in which social media, isn’t a space for particular discourses due to its limitations. It doesn’t encourage conversation as much as a cacophony of multitudes, voices from every direction saying the same and different. But without the unison that is apparent in a conversation. And I guess in this way it becomes (I’ve forgotten the word right now, but there’s a great word in 1000 Plateaus, to do with trees and linked to roots growing down from the tree) but it’s that, it’s coming from a particular stem every time. So you get these different roots that always link up to the main stem, but sometimes have their own offshoots as well.
And obviously there is something interesting existing within this practice of communication. In a lot of ways it feels like it emulates the manner in which books/magazines can operate. It’s like the editors letters, but more immediate. That you might ask something, but you probably won’t get a response from someone deemed bigger/reputable. This has kinda spiralled, but there’s maybe something to look at here that links.
as I'm copying and pasting this, I have this funny moment of pause
I couldn't exactly say what it is that is making me want to publish this out - I mean it really is just some inner thought scrawlings in relation to having been reading some of The Universal Machine
and there are some interesting things here, and I thinks it (alongside exploring different online exhibitions) has made me feel excited to try and put something together, hopefully with a group of people, I guess just depending on what the people I speak to think about it
I'm going to try and post on this more regularly again
I lost a lot of energy over the past few months and was only doing things sporadicly, so maybe trying to keep more of a digital record could be helpful