For the next task we are assigned to design a space keeping in mind the process we have been engaging in. It doesn't have to be a single site, there can be interventions.
Then what? Bennett stumbled a little after staring at some trash? Who gives a damn? What good does it serve to acknowledge this "thing-power" and does it accomplish anything other temporarily making us feel strange? According to Bennett, if we were to genuinely consider the notion that everything is living, we would have to acknowledge the fact that a vital materiality can never really be thrown "away" because it still functions even as a useless or unwanted item. Garbage dumps are alive, and their toxins are constantly seeping into the ground and bubbling into the atmosphere, proving that being alive doesn't necessarily equate to being "good". Bennett believes that we wouldn't treat our possessions with such sloppiness if we paid attention to the aliveness of matter.
The vast quantity of commodities and the hyper consumptive need to discard them in order to create way for new ones obscure the vitality of matter, which is how capitalism materialism can be seen as an anti-materialism.
We are always involved in and enmeshed in complex assemblages, yet we frequently divide these into foreground (passive, inert) objects and background (active, human) topics. But it's generally recognized that the "background" has significant impacts on us, frequently more significant than those of other people. For example, casinos keep the air a little chilly to keep patrons awake, temples' serene design inspires awe, and music may elicit a wide range of emotions. According to Bennett, these non-human entities possess their own agency outside of only their "cultural significance."
Comments