Saint Eustace‘s journey begins very similarly to that of Guigemar, featuring the hero meeting a peculiar, talking white stag while off hunting. How are these two interactions compared when pitting our new understanding of holy matter (as seen in Saint Eustace) against the thing powered, object focused ecology we used to analyze Guigemar?
Bynum, while obviously drawing from earlier philosophers and theorists we’ve studied (such as Latour), makes sure to draw a divide between her arguments and that of total ‘thing power’. Based on our early readings of her theories, how does Christian Materiality differ from the thing power found within Vibrant Materialism and Latour’s theories? What do you think are, or will be, the defining characteristics separating the two?
Bennet references Nietzsche and his idea of edible objects (in this example, beer) “as a contributing source” but also “as part of a diet consisting also of German “newspapers, politics, … and Wagnerian music” to the cultural state of Bismarck controlled Germany at the time. Do you agree with this intermixing of edible and non-edible objects? Can all objects a human is subject to be considered edible as they’re ‘digested’ to form these types of societal diets?