Melion and mediators – 9 OCT 2014

How do you think that objects with magical transformative qualities would be considered, such as the ring which turns Melion into a wolf? Could this ring be considered a meditative object because of its ability to shift the translation and trajectory of Melion character and form?  Could this ring be compared to Cleges and his “ten blows” — an actant which brings about justice and truth? How so?

“Medieval Things” (Robertson) / The Franklin’s Tale [T Oct 7]

“Post-Enlightenment common sense encourages us to view things as inert, mute witnesses to the life of active agents, to train our attention on the human subjects who look at, move around, and organize nonhuman things. Premodern things have no such reticence and premodern subjects are often shown to be at the mercy of ‘their’ things. “

How would you consider the relationships between the actants in the assemblages in “The Franklin’s Tale” if you were to read the tale from a Post-Enlightenment perspective? How would you consider these relationships from the perspective of Robertson (and her view on Pre-Modern objects)? How would these two readings differ?


We Have Never Been Modern vs. Vibrant Matter

In the reading there is an entire section on the “quasi-object” or “hybrid.” Latour, a nonmondernist, stands by the theory that adding “quasi-”  “removes any lingering hint of solid natural objects approached through a colorful diversity of equally valid cultural standpoints.” He offers a few examples of “hybrids” such as “frozen embryos, expert systems, digital machines…” etc. What do you think Bennet’s views on the hybrid or quasi-object are based on what we have read so far in Vibrant Matter? Could Bennet be considered a nonmodernist? Or does her theory reject the classification of object/ non-object/ quasi-object completely?