----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
Dear all, Daniel
Thanks, this is - for me! - useful and welcome; the language questions you
outline obviously espouse those I deal with in French, though I'm not aware
of "embodiment" being integrated as a solution - l'incorporation and
l'incarnation have tricky resonance, as you say. In the mystical vein,
"transsubstantiation" can perhaps interestingly (and translatably) get
closer to interim/ limbo zones some of the list's reflection about "virtual
embodiment" seems to touch on ("intertwinedness in-and-as-the system", as
per Sue's last posting). I'd love to hear more on your take on ghosts and
haunting and resonance, Sue, as I'm also grappling with this stuff -
something I've previously tried to articulate as "registers of presence"
where this allows for slippage, movement across (translation), etc. Notions
of kinesthetic/ kinetic melody are exciting - as is Lefebvre's rhythmicity
(?). Etienne Souriau's "modes d'existence", makes a claim for the equal
and concurrent viability of multiple (infinite) "species" of existence,
where memories, fictive personalities or absent beings may be construed as
just as, or more present, than those physically around us. Souriau
emphasises as fundamentally dynamic, the proxemics and positioning of and
between these different modes of existence, potential for movement between
them, more than any inherent dynamics they may respectively manifest.
I do like your skiing, pillion-riding account, Sue - hitching a ride on
someone's physical skills negotiating a particular kind of space. A
beautiful example of physical enjoyment not-quite-by-proxy. Our kinesthetic
pleasure at the soaring of the trapezist is procured somewhere else along
the gradient you mention, to which I thoroughly adhere. And yes to
entanglements of embodiments and technologies. Co-implications of being and
environment (Varela et al...). Pierre Rabardel differentiates metaphors
associated with the black box with those of the glass box, looking at
issues of functional/ operational and cognitive transparency; maybe his
thinking, which goes back a couple of decades, lets us imagine an evolving
gradient between opacity and transparency in our design and use of our
different corporeal/ interactive extensions and counterparts?
best from sunny Brighton, where it's currently a delight to rove across
embodiment and milieu models with plunges into the brine
sj
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:30 PM, Daniel Tércio <danielter...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> Dear all
>
> Sorry for being absent during the last days/weeks. Traveling and
> answering urgent posts put me out of the empire list.
>
> It seems to me that the term embodiment is definitively a milestone in
> our discussion. In the last posts, I have been particularly sensitive
> to the Garth Paine’s conceptualization of the three sub dimensions of
> the Experience and Embodiment.
> However, even before (re)visiting the triad of
> porosity-perception-presence, let me return naively to the use of the
> term embodiment in different languages. And let me use the experience
> of Portuguese language that adopted this term, at the same time
> questioning its adequacy and its translation. Two points arise on
> this: in Portuguese one may find the term “carne” (chain). Embodiment
> = “encarnação”? This sounds very mystical when one thinks in Crist as
> the incarnation of God. The other term is “corpo”… Embodiment =
> incorporação? This could sound very much economically, as an
> enterprises’ issue, like a firm incorporating other firm, or medical,
> when someone incorporates a chemical substance. Both terms are not
> normally adopted in the arts field, and that’s why the term embodiment
> is being adopted into the Portuguese language. Nevertheless, the
> terminological issue allows rethinking the articulation between
> incarnation, incorporation and embodiment.
> My point is that embodiment should be considered as a process in two
> directions. I mean: we are not just embodying technologies; the
> technologies are embodying the human behavior.
> A third question arises from this: the absolute necessity of the
> interface. Is the interface the “box” (the black box) that mediates
> and connects and articulates the human, the device and the happening?
> I imagine that a black box of an airplane should record the pilot
> actions, the instruments behavior and (in case of a catastrophe) the
> context/situation. The interface is a machine in Deleuze/Guatari
> terms.
> In past posts, I found the concept of dispositive, which is
> articulated with the concept of machine. Maybe we could return to this
> issue.
>
> (By the moment this is my small contribution to the empire list,
> hoping that I am not interrupting other argumentation line)
>
> best regards
>
> Daniel Tercio
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre
