Timothy Morton Ecology Without Nature Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics

July 14, 2019 | Author: turudrummer | Category: Ecocrítica, Desconstrução, Ambientalismo, Ecologia, Ideologias
Share Embed Donate


Short Description

Timothy Morton Ecology Without Nature Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics...

Description

ECOLOGY

Ecology without Nature �

EKG EVEAL AESECS

TIMOTHY MORTON

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England 2007

Copyright © 2007 by the President and Fellows of Harvard Colege ll rights reserved Printed in the United States of merica SBN13: 978-0-674-024342 SBN0 074-0243-6 The CataloginginPubication Data are available from the Library of Congress. Epigaph Epigaph to Chapter  To the Reader," by Denise Levertov, from Poems 96-967 copyrght © 9 by Dense Levertov. Reprinted by permission of New Direcions Publishing Corp., Pollinge Limited and the proprietor. Pink Foyd Gantchester Meadows" U11au1a EM 969). Words and  Music by Roge Wates © Copyright 970 Renewed) and 980 Lupus Music Co. Ltd., London, England. TROHampshire House Pubishng Corp., New York contols a pubication rights for he U.S. and Canada Used by Permission

F K

Acknowledgments

itng this book has often called to mind a pecaious pictue of walkng acoss a mneeld wth a bouquet of owes, dessed in the costume of a clown. Fo those who encouaged me acoss, I have nothing but thanks: Davd Clak, Geg Dobbns, Maaet Feguson, Kate Flnt, Dense Gigante, Geofey Hatman, Kaen Jcobs, Do uglas Kahn, obet Kaufman, Alan Lu, Jame C. McKusck, Davd Nobook, Jffey obnson, Ncholas oe, Davd Smpson, Ngel Smth, Jane Stable, obet nge, Kaen esman, and Michael Zise. The two anonymous eades appointed by Havad nveity Pess wee extaodnaly encouagng To Davd Smpson n paticula owe a debt of gattude beyond measue, fo yeas of suppot and fendship I beneted fom a Dstngushed Vsitng Fellowshp at Queen May, Univest of London whle copyeditng, poofeadng, and indexing. Thanks in paticula to ichad Schoch and Pa ul Hamilton. Thanks go to my eeach assstants, Seth Foest and Chistophe Schabeg, who helped me balance my lfe, witng, and teaching. I would lke to thank all those students, both undegaduates and gaduates, who have exploed and shaed these deas snce 1998, n classes at the Univesty of Coloado and the Unvesty of Calfona. In patcula, I am gateful to my entie  Ecomimess gaduate class of Spng 004, fo helping me to wok though to the heat and soul of ths poje ct Seth Foest, Tmothy Kene, Dalal Mansou, Eic ' Bien, Fancsco enking, Chstophe Schabeg, Daniel ThomasGlass, Sabna Tom, Kaen alke, and Claa Van Zanten. And I am equally gateful to my

viii

.

Acknowledgments

Ecology without Nature" class of Spring 2006: Tekla Babyak, Andrew Hageman, Lynn Langemade, Rachel Swinkin, Julie Tran, and Nicholas Valvo At Harvard University Press, Lindsay Waters has been everything I would wish an editor to be. John Donohue at Westchester Book Services coordinated the copyediting Last but nt least, I don't think the idea of dark ecology would have been possible without a life spent listening to the ethereal splendor of the Cocteau Twins I dedicate ths boo k to y love, y wife Kate. She was the rst to hear and discuss the ideas set down here. At every moment, she was ready with a coment, a suggestion, a kind word. And she bore our daughter, Claire, the sweetest stranger who ever arrved.

Contents

Introdction: oward a heory of Ecoogica Criticism 1



T he Art of Environmen al L anguage : "I Can' B elie ve It Isn

Natu re ! "

29

2

Romanticism and he Environmenta Sjec

3

magining Ecoogy withou Nare Notes

207

ndex

239

40

79

Eclgy wihu aur



INTRODUCTION

Toward a Theory of Ecological Criticism

Nobody likes it when you menion the unconscious, and nowadays, hadly anybody likes i when you mention the envionment. You isk sounding boing o judgmental o hysteical, o a mixtue of all hese . But thee is a deepe eas on. Nobody likes it when you mention the unconscious, not because you ae pointing out somethig obscene that should emain hiddentha is at least paly enjoyable. Nobody likes it because when you menion i, it becomes conscious. In he same way, when you mention the envionment, you bing it ino the foegound. In othe wods, it stops being the envionment It sops being That Thing Ove Thee hat suounds and susains us. hen you hink abou whee you waste goes, you wold stats to shink This is the basic mess age of citicism ha speaks up fo envionmental jusice, and it is he basic mess age of this book The main heme of he book is given away in is ile. Ecology without Nature agues that the vey idea of natue which so many hold dea will have to withe away in an ecological state of human society. Stange as it may sound, the idea of natue is geting in he way of popely ecological foms of cultue, philosophy, politics, and at. The book addesses this paadox by consideing at above all else, fo it is in at tha the fanasie s we have about naue take shapeand dissolve. In paicula, the liteatue of the omantic peiod, commonly seen as cuci ally abou natu e, is the taget of my investigaion, since it still inuences the ways in which the ecological imaginay woks.

4

.

Ecology withou Naure

how does t affect our deas about art and culture? This chapter analyzes the Romantc perod as the moment at which the captalsm that now covers the earth began to take effect. Workng forward from that moment, the book elaborates ways of understandng the dlemmas and paradoxes facing envronmentalsms. In a somewhat more synthetc manner than Davd Harvey's Justce, Nature and the Geography of Dfference, Chapter 2 accounts for why postRomantc wrtng s obsessed with space and place. It employs my existng research on the hstory of consumersm, whch has established that even forms of rebellon aganst consumersm, such as envronmentalst practces, fall under the consumerst umbrella. Becase consumersm s a discourse about dentty, the chapter contans detaled readngs of passages n envronmentalst wrtng where a narrator, an I," struggles to stuate hm or herself in an envronment. Chapter 3 wonders where we go from here. What knds of poltcal and social thnkng, making, a nd dong are possble ? The book moves from an abstract dscusson to a seres of attemts to determne precsely what our relatonshp to envronmental art and culture could be, as socal, poltical anmals. The chapter explores dfferent ways of takng an artstc stand on envronmental ssues. It uses as evdence wrters such as John Clare and Wllam Blake, who mantaned postons outsde m anstream Romantcsm. Chapter 3 demonstrates that the Aeolan," ambent poetcs outlned n Chapter pckng up the vbratons of a materal unverse and recordng them wth hgh  deltynevtably gnores the subect, and thus cannot fully come to terms wth an ecology that may manfest tself n bengs who are also personsncludng, perhaps, those other bengs we desgnate as anmals. Chapter 1 offers a theory of envronmental art that s both an expl caton of t and a crtcal reecton. Chapter 2 offers a theoretcal re ecton on ths, the dea" of environmental art. And Chapter 3 s a further reecton stll. This theory of the theory" s poltical. Far from achevng greaer levels of  theoretcal" abstracton (abstracton s far from theoretcal), the volume rises" to hgher and hgher levels of con creteness. Ecology without Nature does not oat away nto the strato sphere. Nor does t qute descend to earth, snce the earth sarts to look rather dfferent as we proceed. Ecologcal wrtng keeps nsstng that we are embedded" n nature.6 Naure s a surrounding medum tha sustans our beng D ue to the propertes of the rhetorc that evokes the dea of a surroundng

Inroducion

.

5

medum, ecologcal writng can never properly establish that ths s nature and thus provde a compellng and consstent aesthetc ba ss for the new worldvew that s meant to change socety. It s a small operaton, lke tppng over a domno. My readngs try to e symptomatc rather than comprehensve. I hope that by openng a few wellchosen holes, the entre nasty mess mght pour out and dssolve. Puttng something called Nature on a pedestal and admrng t from afar does for the envronment what patrarchy does for the gure of Woman. It s a paradoxcal act of sadstc admraton. Smone de Beauvoir was one of the rst to theorze ths transformaton of actally exsting women nto fetsh objects.7 Eclogy wthout Nature examines the ne prnt of ow nature has become a transcendental prncple. This book sees tself, n the words of ts subttle, as rethnkng envronmental aesthetcs. Envronmental art, from low to hgh, from pastoral ktsch to urban chc, from Thorea to Sonc Youth, plays wth, renforces, or deconstrcts the dea of natre. What emerges from the book s a wder vew of the possibltes of environmental art and crtcsm, the wdescreen" verson of ecological culture. Ths verson will be unafrad of dfference, of nondentty, both n textual terms and n terms of race, class, and gender, f ndeed textualcrtcal mattrs can b separated from race, class, and gender. Ecocrtcsm has held a special,  solated place n the academy, n part because of the deologcal baggage t is lumbered wth. My ntent s to open t up, to broadn t. Even f a Shakespeare sonnet does not appear explctly to be about" gender, nowadays we stll want to ask what t mght have to do wth gender. The tme should come when we ask of any text, What does ths say about the envronment? " In the current stuaton we have already de cded whch texts we wll be askng. Some readers wll already have pegged me as a postmodern theorst" on whom they do not wsh to waste ther tme. I do not beleve that there s no such thng as a coral reef. (As t happens, modern ndustral processes are ensurng they do not exst, wheter I beleve n them or not.) I also do not beleve that envronmental art and ecocrt csm are entrely bogus. I do beleve that they must be ddressed crtcally, precsely because we care about them and we are about the earth, and, ndeed, the future of lfeforms on ths planet, snce humans have developed all the tools necessary for ther destructon As muscian Davd Byrne once wrote, Nuclear weapons could wipe out lfe on earth, f sed properly."8 It s vtal for us to think and act n more gen eral, wder terms Partcularsm can mster a lot of passon, bt t can

14



Ecology without Nature

npulaton o preormed peces on a readymade board. Ths s also how Hegel dstngushed dalectcal thnkng rom sheer gc.1 9 There must be a movement at least rom A to notA. At any moment, thought necessarly bumps ts head aganst what t snt. Thnkng must go somewhere," though whether t goes anywhere partcularly sold s up or grab s. Ths encounter wth nondentty, when consdered ully, ha s proound mplcatons or ecologcal thnkng, ethcs, and art. Nondentty has a lneage n nature wrtng tsel, whch s why I can wrte ths book at all. Peter Frtzell delneated a derence between navely mmetc and s elreexve orms o nature wrtng. In the latter,  what nature was really lke s oten not what nature was really lke (or, or that matter, what t s)." 20

Natural History Lessons One o the deas nhbtng genunely ecologcal poltcs, ethcs, phlos ophy, nd art s the dea o nature tsel. Nature, a transcendental term n a m ateral mask, stands at the end o a potentally nnte seres o other terms that collapse nto t, otherwse known as a metonymc lst: sh, grass, mountan ar, chmpanzees, love, soda water, reedom o chce, heterosexualty, ree markets . . . Nature. A metonymc seres becomes a metaphor. Wrtng conjures ths notorously slppery term, useul to deologes o all knds n ts very slpperness, n ts reusal to mantan any consstency.21 But consstency s what nature s all about, on another level. Sayng that somethng s unnatural s sayng that t does not conorm to a norm, so normal " that t s bult nto the very abrc o thngs as they are. So  nature" occupes at least three places n sym bolc language. Frst, t s a mere empty placeholder or a host o other concepts. Second, t has the orce o law, a norm aganst whch devaton s measured. Thrd, nature " s a Pandoras box, a word tha encapsulates a potentally nnte seres o dsparate antasy obj ects. It s ths thrd sensenature as antasythat ths book most ully engages. A dscplne " o dvng nto the Rorschach blobs o others enj oyment that we commonly call poems seems a hghly approprate way o begnnng to engage wth how nature" compels eelngs and beles. Nature wavers n between the dvne and the materal. Far rom beng somethng natural" tsel, nature hovers over thngs lke a ghost. It sldes over the nnte lst o thngs that evoke t. Nature s thus not unlke the subject,"  beng who searches through the entre unverse

Introduction



15

or ts reecton, only to nd none. I t s just another word or supreme authorty, then why not just call t God? But  ths God s nothng outsde the materal world, then why not just ca ll t matter? Ths was the poltcal dlemma n whch Spnoza, and the dests o eghteenthcentury Europe, ound themselves.22 Beng an out" athest was very dangerous n the eghteenth century, as evdenced by the cryptc remarks o Hume and the ncreasngly cautous approach o Percy Shelley, who had been expelled rom Oxord or publshng a pamphlet on athesm. God oten appeared on he sde o royal authorty, and the rsng bourgeose and as ocated revolutonary classes wanted another way o beng authortatve. Ecoogy wthout nature" means n p art that we try to conront some o the ntense notons whch nature smudges. Ecologcal wrtng s  ascnated wth the dea o somethng that exsts n between polarzed terms such as God and matter, ths and that, subject and object. I nd John Lockes crtque o the dea o ether to be helpul here. Lockes crtque appeared toward the begnnng o the modern constructon o space as an empt set o pont coordnates.2 3 Numerous holes n materalst, atomst theores were lled by somethng elemental. Newton's gravty worked because o an ambent ether that transmtted the propertes o heavy bodes nstantaneously, n an analog or (or as an asp ect o) the love o an omnpresent God.2 4 I ether s a knd o ambent ud" that surrounds all partcles, exstng n between" them, then what surrounds the partcles o ambent ud themselves?25 I nature s sandwched between terms such as God and matter, what medum keeps the thngs that are natural sandwched to gether? Nature appears to be both lettuce and mayonnase. Ecologcal wrtng shules subject and object back and orth so that we may thnk they have dssolved nto each other, though what we usually end up wth s a blur ths book calls ambience. Later n the modern perod, the dea o the natonstate emerged as a way o gong beyond the authorty o the monarh. The naton all to oten depends upon the very same lst that evokes the dea o nature. Nature and naton are very closely ntertwned I show how ecocrtque could examne the ways n whch nature oes not necessarly take us outsde socety, but actually orms the bedrock o natonalst enjoyment. Nature, practcally a synonym or evl n the Mddle Ages, was consdered the bass o socal good by the Romantc perod. Accordng to numerous wrters such as Rousseau, the ramers o the socal contract start out n a state o nature. The act that ths stte s not much

6



 wt te

dieent om the concete ungle  o actual histoical cicumstance has not e scaped attention. n the Enlightenment natue bec ame a wa y o establishing acial and sexual identity and science became the pivileged way o demon stating it. The nomal was set up as dieent om the pathological along the coodinates o the natural and the unnatural26 atue by then a scientic tem put a stop to agument o ational inquiy: Well it's just in my natue. He is ideological you ae pejudiced but my ideas ae natual. A metaphoical use o Thomas Malthus in the wok o Chales Dawin o example natualized and continues to natu alize the wokings o the  invisible hand o the ee maket and the suvival o the ttestwhich is always taken to mean the competi tive wa o all (ownes) against all (wokes). Malthus used natue to ague ag ainst the continuation o ealy moden welae in a document poduced o the govenment o his age. Sa dly this vey thinking is now being used to push down the poo yet uthe in the battle o the s up posedly ecologically minded against population gowth (and immi gation). atue achieved obliquely though tuning metonymy into metapho becomes an o blique way o talking about politics. What is pesented as staightowad unmaked beyond contestation is waped. One o the basi c poblems with natue is that it could be consideed eithe as a substance, as a squishy thing in itsel o as essence, as an ab stact pinciple that tanscends the mateial  ealm an d even the ealm o  epesentation. Edmund uke consides substance as the stu o na tue in his witing on the sublime .27 This  substantialism assets that thee is at least one actually existing thing that embodies a sublime quality (vastness teo magnicence). Substantialism tends to po mote a monachist o authoitaian view that thee is an extenal thing to which the subject should bow. Essentialism on the othe hand has its champion in mmanuel Kant. The sub lime thing can neve be ep e sented and indeed in cetain eligions says Kant thee is a pohibition against tying (Judaisn slam) . This ess entialism tuns out to be politi cally libeating on the side o evolutionay epublicanism.28 On the whole natue witing and its pecusos a nd amily membes mostly in phenomenological and/o Romantic witing ha s tended to avo a substantialist view o natueit is palpable and despite the ex plicit politics o the autho. Futhe wok in ecocitique should delin eate a epublican nonsubstantialist countetadition unning though wites such as Milton and Shelley o whom natue did not stand in o an authoity o which you sacice you autonomy and eas on.

ntdtn





Ecologcal oms o subje ctivity inevitably involve ideas and decisions about  group identity and behavio. Subjectivity is not simply an indi vidual and cetainly not just an individualist phenomenon. t is a col lective one. Envionmental witing is a way o egisteing the eeling o being suounded by othes o moe a bstactly by an otheness some thing that is not the sel. Although it may displace the actual social col lective and choose to wite a bout suounding mountains instead such displacements always say something about the kinds o collective lie that ecological witing is envisaging. Fedic Jameson outlines the ne cessity o citicism to wok on ideas o collectivity: Anone who eoe he tme e of the ommnt o the oe t fom  eft pepete mt fe hee pobem ) how o dn gh  poon d fom ommntnm; ) ow o dffeen e te oee pojet fom fm o nzm; 3) how to ee he o nd he eonom eeth  how o e he Mt n of ptm o demonte the nbt of o oton whn h em. A fo oee dente, n  ho moment n wh nd d peon dent h been nmed   deenteed o of m pe bje poon, e   no too mh to  tht omethng nogo be oneptzed on te oete ee. 

The idea o the envionment is moe o less a way o consideing gou ps and collectiveshumans suounded by natue o in continuity with ohe beings such as animals and plants.  is about beingwih. As La tou has ecently pointed out howeve the actual situation is a moe dastically collective than that. All kinds o beings om toxic waste to sea snails ae clamoing o ou scientic political and atistic atten tion and have become pat o political lieto the detiment o mono lithic conceptions o atue. To wite about ecology is to wite ab out society and not simply in the weak sense that ou ideas o ecology ae soci constuctions. Histoical conditions have abolished an exta social natue to which theoies o society can appeal  while at the sa me time making the beings that ell unde this heading impinge eve moe ugently upon society. Dieent images o the envionment suit dieent kinds o society. Substantialist images o a palpable distinct natue embodied in at least one actually existing phenomenon (a paticula species a patic ula gue) geneate authoitaian oms o collective oganization. The deep ecological view o natue as a tangible entity tends this way. Es sentialist ideas o a natue that cannot be endeed as an image have suppoted moe egalitaian oms. t would be vey helpul i ecoci





nrdn

 w re

single, independent, and lasing ut deluded ideas and ideological xations do exist  atue is a ocal point that compels us to assume cetain attitudes deology esides in the attitude we assume towad this ascinating object y dissolving the object, we ende the ideological xation inopeative At least, that is the plan The ecocitical view o postmodenism, o which theoy is a shibboleth, has much in common with the English dislike o the Fench Revolutionindeed, it is in many ways deived om it5 Theoy, goes the agument, is cold and abstact, o ut o touch 6 t oces oganic oms into boxes that cannot do them j ustice t is too calculating and ational Postmodenism is just the latest vesion o this soy state o aais O  couse, the English position against the Fench was its own abstaction, a selimposed denial o histoy that had aleady happenedthe behea ding o Chales , o instance Academics ae neve moe intellectual than when they ae being antiintellectual o selespecting ame would compot himsel o hesel quite like Aldo Leopold o Matin Heidegge What could be moe postnden than a poesso eexively choosing a social and s ubjec tive view, such as that o a ame What could be moe postmoden than ecociicism, which, a om being naive, consciously blocks its eas to all intelletual developments o the last thity yeas, notably (though ot necessaily all at once) eminism, antiacism, antihomophobia, deconstuction ust as the Reagan and ush administations attempted a eun o the s, as i the s had neve happened, so ecociticism pomises to etun to an academy o the past t is a om o postmoden eto  ecocitics dislike what  say, howeve, so will poststuctualists Poststuctualismciticism that acts as i the s had occued has its own views o natue, though it may not name it so baldly t is just tat these views ae supposedly moe sophisticated than pevious ones Thee is still the basic seach o something in between categoies such as subj ect and object, act and value Thee exists a class divide between the enjoymentobjects o ecociticalconsevative and poststuctualistadical e ades  ecocitics pee Aldo Leopold's almanac style, complete with cute illustations, poststuctualists tend to go o the latest compilation album by an amb ient techno D t may not be eethoven, but it is still polite a t a cocktail paty o at opening, i not moe so Leopold and The Ob ae eally two sides o the same coin, accoding to ecocitique Whethe they ae highbow o middlebow, installation o pastoal symphony, atwoks exhibit what  call comimsisJ a hetoical om descibed in detail in Chapte , and ex





ploed thoughout this book Thundebid o Chadonnay, eto o utuistic, it's all the same ecomimesis Postmodenism is mied in aestheticism t eezes iony into an a esthetic pose Whe n  suggest that we dop the concept o natue,  am saying that we ally dop it, athe than ty to come up with hastily conceived, new and impoved solutions, a new om o advetising language This is about what you think without me ns in the title o this book Deida's poound thinking on the  without, the ssJ in his witing on negative theology comes to m ind D econstuction goes beyond just saying that something exists, even in a hypeessential way beyond be ing And it goe s beyond saying that things do not e xist  ' Ecology without natue is a elentless questioning o essence, athe than some special new thing Sometimes the utopian language o a wite such as Donna Haaway ushes to jeybuild ideas like natueculte8 These nonnatues ae still natue, b ased on hopeul intepetations o emeging ideas acoss disciplines such as philosophy, mathematics, and anthopology, ideas that tun out to be highly aesthetic Chapte  ocuses on a set o altenatives to taditional ideas o natue that lie just to the side o it Assuming that natue itsel is too sot a taget these days,  analyze possible ways o thkng the same idea bigge, wide, o bette unde the geneal heading o ambience  To get popely beyond postmodenism's pitalls, genuinely citical ecociticism would engage ully with theoy  we conside the nontheological sense o natue, the em collapses into impmac and his toy ways o saying th same thing Lieoms ae constantly coming and going, mutating and becomng extinct iosphees and ecosystems ae subject to aising and cessation Living beings do not om a solid pehistoical, o nonhistoical gound upon which human histoy plays ut natue is oten wheeled out to adju dicate between what is eeting and what is substantial and pemanent atue smoothes ove uneven hstoy, making its stuggles and sueings illegible Given that much ecocitcism and ecologcal liteatue is pimitivist, it is ionic that indigenous societies oten ee to natue as a shapshiting tickste athe than as a m basis The nal wod o the histoy o natue is that atu is histoy. atual bea uty, pupotedly ahistoical, is at its coe histoical 9 What Is Nature For? Ecolo without Natu stats as a detailed examinaton o how at

epesents the envionment This helps us to see that natue is an a





 w e

bitay hetoical constuct empty o independent genuine existence behind o beyond the texts we ceate about it The hetoic o natue depends upon something  dene as an ambien poeics a way o con juing up a sense o a suounding atmosphee o wold My agument ollows Angus Fletche's ecent wok on an emeging Ameican poetics o the envionment4 His suggestive idea that the long sinuous lines in Whitman and his descendants establish ways o eaching out towad and going beyond hoizons and o ceating an openended idea o na tue is a va luable account o a specic om o poetics  associate it as he d oes with developme nts in postmode n an d de constuctive thinking  am howeve less condent than Fletche o the utopian value o this poetics n Chapte 2, we see that this poetics has its own histoy and that people have invested vaious deologcal meanngs n t ove tme When we histoicize ambient p oetics we nd out that this too is de void o any intinsic existence o va lue Some contempoay atists use ambient poetics to ise above what they see as the kitsch quality o othe oms o natual epesentation ut in so dong they ignoe the ideological qualities o the hetoic they ae using They isk ceating just a new and impoved vesion o the kitsch they wee tying to es cape The hstoy o ambent poetcs depends upon cetain oms o identity and subjectivity which Chapte 2 also discoves to be histo ical Chapte  goes still uthe Rathe than esting in histoicization we should begin to politicize envionmental at which means begin ning to become less blind to its opeations We ouselves must not ven tue omulating a  new and impoved vesion o envionmental at This will involve us in some paadoxes Fo example since thee is no escapng kitsch the only way to b eat it is to  join it  The thing we call natue becomes in the Romantic peiod and a tewad a way o healing what moden society has damage d4 Natue is like that othe Romanticpeiod invention the aesthetic The damage done goes the agument has sundeed subjects om objects so that human b eings ae olonly alienated om thei wold Contact with natue and with the aesthetic will mend the bidge between subject and obje ct Romanticism saw the boken bidge as a lamentable act o philosophical and s ocial lie PostKantian philosophySchelling and Hegel in Gemany Coleidge in Englandoten wishes o reconciliaion o subject and object  they met unde the ight cicumstances they would hit it o Subject and o bject equie a cetain envionment in which they can join up togethe Thus is bon the special ealms o

ndn





at and natue the new secula chuches in which subect and object can be emaied42 This all depends upon whethe subject and object eve had a ela tionship in the st place; and indeed upon whethe thee re such things as subject and object which leads us to a cental knot the poblem posed by some oms o utopian envionmental at  subject and object do not eally exist then why bothe tying to econcile them O i hey do exist why would some esh amalgamation o the pai be bette than what we have now Would this amalgamation look any dieent than the subj ectobject dualism that concens us   the solution to subj ectobject dualism wee as easy a s changing ou minds then why have ountless texts seeking to do exactly that not done s o al eady  the solution is some sense o an envionment then wha pe cisely is it i it is not  aound anything Will it not tend to collapse ei the into a subj ect o an object Thee ae at least two ways o looking at these iksome qustions The st examines the idea that we need to change u minds In stead o looking o a solution to the subjectobject poblem a moe paadoxical stategy is in ode t questions what is poblematic about the poblem itsel I at bottom here is no problem eality is in deed devoid o eed igd o conceptual notions o subj ect and ob ject a nd we coexist in an innite web o mutual intedependence whee thee is no bounday o centewhy then do we need to make all this ecocitical uss Suely theeoe the uss is like scatching an itch that doesn't existtheeby binging it into existence n which case one o the tagets o genuine citique would be the vey (eco)citical lan guagesthe constant elegy o a lost unalienated state the esot to the aesthetic dimension (expeie ntial/peceptu al) a the than ethica l political paxis the appeal to solutions oten antiintellectual and o onwhich sustain the ith albeit in a subtle way The second appoach is to wonde whethe the poblem lies not so much in ou heads as out thee in social eality What i no matte what we thought about it cetain eatues o the deaded du alism wee hadwied into ou wold Ecocitique in that case takes the cy against dualism at least hal seously It peceives it to be a symptom o a malaise that was not an idea in ou heads but an ideo logical eatue o the way in which the wold opeates Ecocitique is indeed citique; but it is also eco My aim is not to poke un at hopeless attempts to join togethe what could neve be ton asunde o to supplant ecological thnking with a hippe om o belie

24



 w re

a nhlstc ceed that anythng goes The am s to stengthen envonmentalsm Appealng to natue stll has a poweful hetocal effect n the shot tem, elatvely speakng, natue stll has some foce But envonentalsm cannot be n the game just fo the shot tem And that natue emans an effectve slogan s a symptom of how fa we have not come, not of how fa we have "Ecology wthout natue could mean "ecology wthout a concept of the natual Thnkng, when t becomes deologcal, tends to xate on concepts athe than dong what s "natual to thought, namely, dssolvng whateve has taken fom Ecologcal thnkng that was not xated, that dd not stop at a patcula concetaton of ts object, would thus be "wthout natue To do ecoctque, we must consde the aesthetc dmenson, fo the aesthetc has b een posted as a nonconceptual ealm, a place whee ou deas about thngs dop away Fo Adono, "The descence that emanates fom atwoks, whch today taboo all affmaton, s the appeaance of the affmatve ineffabie, the emegence of the nonexstng as f t dd exst 4 At gves what s nonconceptual an llusve appeaance of fom Ths s the am of envonmental lteatue: to e ncapsulate a utopan mage of natue whch does not eally exstwe have destoyed t whch goes beyond ou conceptual gasp On the othe hand, a nonconceptual mage can be a compellng focus fo an ntensely conceptual systeman deologcal system The dense meannglessness of natue wtng can exet a gavtatonal pull The aesthetc s also a poduct of dstance: of human bengs fom natue, of su bjects fom objects, of mnd fom matte s t not athe suspcously antecologcal Ths s a matte fo debate n the Fankfut School Benj amns famous descpton of the aesthetc aua does ndeed use an envonmental mage44 ebet Macuse clams that "The aesthetc unvese s the Lebenswet on whch the needs and facultes of feedom depend fo the lbeaton They cannot develop n an envonment shaped by and fo aggessve mpulses, no can they be envsaged as the mee effect of a new set of socal nsttutons They can emege only n the collectve practice of creting n environment 45 At could help  ecology by modelng an envonment based on love (eos) athe than death (thanatos)as s the cuent technologcalndustal wold, accodng to Macuse Macuse uses Lebenswet (lfewold), a tem developed n phenomenology out of Romantcsm's constucton of wolds and envonments that stuate the thnkng mnd As we shall see n Chapte 2, ths lne of enquy lnked togethe the env

nrdn



25

onment and the aesthetc N o wonde Macuse thnks o f the aesthetc as a " dmenson e wtes "At beaks open a dmenson naccessble to othe expeence, a dmenson n whch human bengs, natue, and thngs no longe stand unde the law of the establshed ealty pncple46 Dimension, lke the aestetc tself, sts somewhee between an objectve noton (n mathematcs, fo nstance) and a sub jectve expeence Many of the wtes ths study encountes teat the aesthetc and natue as f they compsed a sngle, uned dmenson But even f thee wee moe than one dmenson, ths would not solve the poble ms of ths ntnscally spatal way of thnkng No matte how many thee ae, a dmenson s somethng we ae o notand ths assumes a dchotomy between nsde and outsde, the vey thng that has yet to be establshed Adono s moe hestant than Macuse Fo hm, the aesthetc helpfully dstances us fom somethng we have a tendency to destoy when we get close to t e dne of e ee em from  of p m pper nneee  e dane of ee obje fom e o ben bje; j   wo nno eene e bje nn neene n em; dne  e pma ondon fo n oene o e onen of wo.   mp n n onep of bene of nee w de mnd of ee ompomen   o ap  e bje no de or .

n ths way, the aesthetc pomotes nonvolence towad natue At s not so much a space of postve ualtes (eos ), but of negatve ones t stops us fom destoyng thngs, f only fo a moment Fo Benj amn, on the othe hand, the aesthetc, n ts dstancng, alenates us fom the wold What we need s some knd of antaesthetc stategy Benjamn nds a model fo ths n the age of techncal epoducblty, whee we can download MPs of Beethoven's Pastoal Symphony, o dstbute photocopes of a landscape pantng48 t s stll uncetan whethe the aesthetc s somethng we should shun, n the name of geneatng a lbeatng ecologcal atstc pactce, o whethe t s an nevtable fact of lfe that eappeas n evesu btle guses j ust as we thnk we have gven t the slp We could clam that thee s a dffeence beween the aesthetc and aesthetcaton49 But ths s athe Romantc t bngs to mnd the noton of a "good aesthetc and a " bad  one The st s good because t essts becomng objected o tuned nto a commodty, f only be cause t oncally nte

30



 w e

The moe  ty to evoke whee  amthe " who s wtng ths textthe moe phases and gues of speech  must employ  must get nvolved n a pocess of wtng, the vey wtng that  am not descbng when  evoke the envonment n whch wtng s takng pla ce The moe convncngly  ende my suoundngs, the moe guatve language  end up wth The moe  ty to show you what les beyond ths page, the moe of a page  have And the moe of a ctonal "   havesplttng "me nto the one who s wtng and the one who s beng wtten aboutthe less convncng  s ound My attempt to beak the spell of language esults n a futhe nvolvement n that vey spell Pehaps ths envonmental language offes a dgesson fom the man pont O p ehaps t s a compellng llustaton, o a n ndcaton of my sncety The wtng beak s out of phlosophcal o lteay ctonal o poetc modes nto a jounal style, somethng wth a date o a tme make, somethng wth a sgnatue and thus falls back nto the wtng t was tyng to escape Many dffeent types of lteatue ty t Consde the begnnng of Chales Dckenss Beak House wth ts  ounalstyle evocaton of Mchaelmas tem and ts allpevasve ondon fog2 The " as  wte tag s optonal, beng nealy always mplct n the naatve mode of ths hetoc, whch has a decdedly ecologcal usage But n attemptng to ext the genec hoon that contans t, o any suggeston of hetocal stategy altogethe ( "Ths snt wtng, ts the eal thng), the "as  wte gestue entes an neluctable gavtatonal eld t cannot acheve escape velocty fom wtng tself The moe the naato evokes a suoundng wold, te moe the eade consumes a potentally ntemnable steam of opaque scbbles, gues, and topes t s lke the house n ews Caolls Aice Through the LookingGass Ty as she mght to leave the font gaden, Alce nds heself back at the font doo Dense evetovs poem "To the Reade nvets "as  wte nto "as you ead But the effect s the same, o even stonge, fo, as n advetsng language, "you becomes a nche n the text, speccally desgned fo the actual eade 4 Ths hetocal stategy appeas wth astoundng fequency n a v aety of ecologcal texts n tyng to evoke a sense of the ealty of natue, many texts suggest, often explctly, that ( 1 ) ths ealty s sold, vedcal, and ndependent (notably of the wtng pocess tself) and that (2) t would be bette fo the eade to expeence t dectly athe than just ead a bout t But n makng the case these texts ae pulled nto the obt o f wtng, wth ts slppey, tckstesh qu altes of neve

e  f nnmen ne



3

qute meanng what t says o sayng what t means"tunng / ts dak pages Neve mnd that fo many cultues natue s a tckste, and lteay lluson would aptly summon ts evechangng, elusve "essence The hetocal devce usually seves the pupose of comng clean about somethng "eally occung, dentvely "outsde the text, bot authentc and authentcatng Ecommess: Naue Wtng and he Natue of Wrtng

The devce call t wants to go beyond the aesthetc dmenson altogethe t wants to bea out of the nomatve aesthetc fame, go beyond at ntoducng Waden Thoeau wtes: "When  wote the followng pages     lved alone, n the woods, a mle fom any neghbo, n a house whch  had bult myself, on the shoe of Walden Pond, n Concod, Massachusetts, and ea ned my lvng by the labo of my hands onl Thee s nothng moe "lteay than ths actvty of acknowledgng, n the negatve, the sucton of ctonal wtng6 And t s not a matte of beng moe, o les, sophstcated tha othes The ktsch of an Aldo eopold, wtng a  ounal (a n " almanac) to convey natue n a sutable (non)aesthetc fom, meets the avantgade stategy of a mnmalst pante who puts an empty fame n an at galley, o a ple of " stuff wthout a suoundng fame o a John Cage, makng musc out of slence o out of ambent nose eopolds A Sand County Amanac tes to escape the pull of the lteay, n much the same way as avantgade at tes to escape the conventonal aesthetc evetovs "To the Reade is hghly lteay, gong so fa as to compae the ollng waves wth the tunng of a texts pages Thee s no gult about wtng hee evetov does pont beyond the specc event of the wods on the page, the voce ntonng the wods But somehow "To the Reade acheves a sense of the suoundng envonment, not by beng le ss atful, b ut by beng moe so Ths conscous, eexve, postmoden veson s all the more ecommetc fo that Contempoay at evoes what s often excluded n ou vew of the pctue: ts suoundng fame, the space of the galley tself, the nsttuton of at altogethe n a vey sgncan way, these expements ae envronmenta Only the taste and habts of the academy have pevented us fom seeng the connecton between ths supposedly " sophstcated at and the ktsch we know as "natue wtng Roland Bathes wtes, n a passage of avantgade ecommess, a bout the expe

32



 wtt te

rience of walking through a dry riverbed. The experience, he writes, is analogous to that of what he calls x-an innite play of interweaving

sgns e ede o te et m be omped to omeone t  ooe end . . . t pb empt bj et tot  wt ppened to te to of tee ne, ten t w tt e d  d de of te eton te de o  e,  oued [Ab  temb ed tt    d eept dng te n eon owng down beow oued  tee to be wtne to  e tn feeng of nfmt); wt e peee  mtpe, edbe omng fom  donneted, eteogene et of btne nd pe pete gt, oo, egetton, et, , ende epoon of noe nt e of bd, den oe fom oe on te ote de, pge gete, ote of n btnt ne o f w.

We nomally thnk of natue wtng a s havng a cetan knd of contentsay the ake Dstct But hee we have the oentalst deset Ths s oentalst ecommess, n contast to the famla Euocentc o Amecan vaety t succnctly demonstates how avantgade ecommess s cut fom the same cloth as the ktsch vaety, despte appaent dffeences (the one ogancst, the othe atcal, the one abo ut beng "home, the othe about beng "away, and so on) Oue conj ues up an opaque, exotc land teemng wth what Bathes calls "h alfdentable  sgncance  Bathes opens up ths vson wth a stng of wods that conm the supposed mysteousness o  the Aabc wod athe than explanng t The wod tself s teated as foegn, and so s the clmate and envonment that t sgnes a wet season and a dy season, a ve whee people walk, evokng the medeval mone renvers o wold tuned upsde down Ths s not a wold you could lve n, but a wold you could vst, as a toust All the tats of ecommess ae thee the authentcatng " t s what happened to the autho of these lnes, bngng us nto a shaed, vtual pesent tme of eadng and naatng the paatactc lst the magey of dsjonted phenomena suoundng the naato the quetness (not slence, not full sound) of the " slende explosons and "scant ces that evoke the dstance between the heae and the sound souce ee n the vey gospel of poststuctuasm, of the supposedly antnatua b lss of shee textualty, we nd ecommess Bathes offes us a vvd evocaton of atmosphee An Ambent Poetcs Strong ecommess pupots to evoke the hee and now of wtng t s

an nsdeout fom of "stuatedness hetoc Rathe than descbe

e At  nnent  ne



33

"whee  am comng fom (" as a bl ueblooded young Potuguese hot dog salesman),  nvoke "whee  am ("as  wte ths, the smel of hot dogs wafts though the sbon nght a ) The eade glmpses the envonment athe than the peson But the effect s much the same Ecommess s an authentcatng devce Weak ecommess opeates wheneve wtng evokes an envonment Rhetoc used to have a whole poply of tems fo ths weak fom of ecomme ss  geographia (the descpton of eath o land), topographia (place), chorographia (naton), chronographia (tme), hyrographia (wate), anemographia (wnd), enrographia (tees)0 (Angus Fletche has esusctated choro graphia to descbe exactly what  am afte n ths chapte, the "envonmentpoem)   But the emphass on stuatedness s dstnct and moden Stuatedness s a hetoc that Davd Smpson has lnked to the ugency of mpendng and "theatenngly nondscmatoy ecologcal pel Stuatedness s pevasve, he agues, because "no one now thnks hmself mmune fom adcal theat 12 The patcula  ases ts lone voce n the jaws of geneal doom Ecommess s a pessue pont, cystallng a vast and complex deologcal netwok of belefs, pactces, and pocesses n and aound the dea of the natual wold t s extaodnaly common, both n natue wtng and n ecologcal ctcsm Consde awence B uells The Environmental Imagination: "The gove of secondgowth pne tees that sway at ths moment of wtng, wth the blueyellowgeen veneedle clustes above spky ccles of atophed lowe lmbs O James McKusck "As  wte these wods,  pee out of the wndow of my study acoss open elds and gnaled tees custed wth ce Beyond those tees  see cas and tucks dashng aong a busy ntestate hghway past dty ples of meltng sow that stll eman fom last weeks snowstom Ths s the cty of Baltmoe, whee  lve 1 Fo ecologcal ctcsm to be popely ctcal, t must get a puchase on ecommess Ecommess s a mxtue of excursus and exemplum Excursus s a "tale, o ntepolated anecdote, whch folows the exposton and llustates o amples some pont n t ExempJ also known as paraigmaJ o paraiegesisJ s "an exampe cted, ethe tue o fegned an] llustatve stoy   What then, of the specc featues of ecommess Paraiegesis speccally mples naatve Bu s some emaks a bout the descptve popetes of ecommess e n ode Ecommess nvolves a poetcs of ambience. Ambence denotes a sense of a ccumambent, o suoundng, worl t suggests somethng mateal and physcal, though somewhat ntangble, as f space tself had a mateal aspectan dea that should not, afte Ensten, appea

36



Ecology without Naure

At snce the age of sensb lty has sought ths mmedacy. f only the poet could do a ubbng of hs o he ban, and tansmt the feelngs to us dectly. Ths s the logc of a cetan type of Romantcsm, and doubtless of ealsm, natualsm, and mpessonsm (and expessonsm, and so foth). We have only to thnk of suealsm and automatc wtng, a "dect endeng of unconscous pocesses; of abstact expessonsm wth ts monumental canvases; of concete musc 's samplng and splcng of envonmental sound (by uc Fea, fo nstance); o of envonmental at that ceates a "space we must nhabt, f only fo a whle. Nam June P ak's TV Garden ( ).24 tuns televsons boadcastng mages of leapng dances nto buddng owes. t s mmesve yet humoous and oncal n a way that s, n Schlle's language, sentmental athe than nave. Rendeng pactces sk fogettng the othe sde of Romantcsm, the value of hestaton and ony. They ovelook why Wodswoth nssted that poety not onl s "the spontaneous oveow of poweful feelngs, but also s "ecollected n tanqulty Although eecton then dssolves ths tanqulty untl "an emoton, smla to that whch was befoe the subject of contemplaton, s gadually poduced, and does tself actually exst n the mnd, the pocess thus becomes delayed and medated.25 Aleady we can s ee cacks n the ecommetc lluson of mmedacy. T  Md n  nn

The medial deves fom the agument n Roman Jakobson's "Closng Statement, wth ts analyses of phatc statements.26 Jakobson exploes sx aspects of communcaton and the attendant lteay effects These effects ae acheved by foegoundng one of the pats of communcaton. The sx pats ae addesse, addessee, messa ge, code, contact, and context. Emphaszng the addesse gves us a "conatve statement that dectly focuses on the ntentons of the eceve of the message "You must feel that Jakbson's model s vald. Stessng the addesse esults n an "emotve statement "et me tell you how  feel about Jaobson. Foegoundng the message tself esults n a poetc statement, snce Jakobson, a stuctualst, thnks that poetc language s peculaly selfefeental.  f the code s foegounded, we obtan a "metalngustc statement "You can't say that t sn't allowed n stuctualst theoes of language. f we focus on the context, we get a "efeental statement "Ths s a message about Jakobson's sxpat model of comm uncaton.

The Art of Environmental L anguage



3

f we foegound the contactJ we obtan a phatc statement (Geek phasisJ speech) . "Can you ead ths awfully small typeface  " Ths telephone lne s vey cackly. Call me back n ve mnutes can't hea you. "Check, check, check one, mcophone check. "Testng, testng. "You'e on the a. The contact s the dmensonas lteally as you would lke to undestand that wodn whch communcaton takes place Phatc statements make us awae of the actual a between us, o the electomagnetc eld that makes t possble to lsten to ecoded musc, o see a move. They pont out the atmosphee n whch the message s tansmtted Jakobson clamed that talkng bds shae ths functon alone, of all the dffeent types of communcaton.27 Futue ecoctcsm must take the phatc dmenson of language nto account. When explong the a dcally new envonment of the moon, the st wods between the Amecan astonauts and ouston wee phatc "You can go ahead wth the TV now, we'e standng by. The enonmental aspect of phatc communcaton explans the populaty n contempoay ambent electonc musc of samples fom ado talk shows (" ello, you'e on the a ), scanned telephone convesatons and othe phatc phenomena.28  pefe the tem medial athe than phaticJ because  see no eason that a statement that foegounds the medum should necessaly have to do wth speech pe se. Medial wtng, fo nstance, hghlghts the page on whch the wods wee wtten, o the gaphcs out of whch tey wee composed. Meda l statements petan to pecepton. Usually we spend ou lves gnong the contact When the medum of communcaton becomes mpeded o thckened, we become awae of t, j ust as snow makes us panfuly awae of walkng. The Russan F omalsts, the pecusos of the stuctualsts, descbed lteaness a s an mpedng of the nomatve pocesses of language. Vkto Shklovsky declaed, "The technque of at s to make objects unfamla' . . . to ncease the dffculty and length of pecepton because the p ocess of pecepton s an aesthetc end n tself and must be polonged.29 When the phone s not wokng popely, we notce t as a medum of tansmsson. The convese s also tue to pont out the medum n whch communcaton s takng place s to nteupt that communcaton. Notce how the black maks on ths page ae sepaated fom the edge by an empty magn of blank pape When ecommess ponts out the envonment, t pefoms a medal functon, ethe at the le vel of content o at the level of fom. Contact ecomes content Ecommess nteupts the ow of an agument o a sequence of naatve events, thus makng us awae of the atmosphee

38



e r o nrnen n e

oo wo tre

"aound  the acton o the envonment n whch o a bout whch the phlosophe s wtng Avantgade and expemental atwos that ae not dectly ecologcal n content ae envonmental n fom, snce they contan medal elements Keth Rowe, gutast n the mpovsatonal musc goup AMM, tals of the ncluson of "unntenton (hs techncal tem fo slence) n the pantngs of Ma Rotho Unntenton geneates a cetan atmosphee suoundng Rotho's gant squaes of vbatng colo0 Mauce Blanchot taced the ealest moment of ths featue of at to what he calls the dsoeuvement (" unwong) n Romantc poety1 Ths unwokng accounts fo the automated feel of ambent poetcs, the "found qualty, the sense that t s wong "all by tself o " comng fom nowhee (see the su bsecton afte next) "As  wte ( bds ae sngng, the gass s gowng) s a medal statement tealy, and the medal s always lteal to some extent, the dmenson s the page we ae eadng The dea s to enfoce the luson that the dmenson of eadng s the same as nscpton: that eade and wte nhabt the same dmenson, the same place Ou awaeness of ths dmenson s avaable pecsely beca use ts tanspaency has been mpeded by the addton of the exubeant, exobtant ecommess to the agument The "as, posed between "snce and "when, between a tempoal mae and an ndcato of logcal analogy, seduces us fom one level of hetoc to the next We ente the wam bath of ambent ecomme ee comes the twst One of the meda that medal statements can pont out s the vey nedum of the voce o of wtng tself Snce the sound of musc s avalabe va the medum of, say, a voln, then a medal muscal passage would mae us awae of the "volnness of the soundts tmbe The tmbe s the qualty wth whch the soundemttng matte s vb atng So one of the contents of a medal mess age could be the medum n ths sense Ths undemnes the nomal dstncton we make between medum as atmosphee o envonmentas a bacgound o " eldand medum as mateal thngsomethng n the foegound n geneal, ambent poetcs seeks to undemne the nomal dstncton between bacgound and foegound Medal statements can nclude meda n the sense of tmbe Suely th s why much expemental "nose  mu scwhch sees pecsely to undo the bounday between what we consde nose and what we consde sounds nteested n tmbe Cage's pepaed pano maes us awae of the matealty of the pano, the fact that t s made of taut vbatng stngs nsde a had wooden box The sustan pedal, nvented n the Romantc peod as an addton to the panofote, pefoms ths



39

functon tself Convesely, the sustaned vbaton of a note o done maes u s awae of the spae n whch the vbaton s occung Ambent musc can ende a pctue of an envonment usng sound effects (bdsong, waves) o make us awae of the space n whch we ae sttng though dones, evebeaton, and feedback The obj ect, the mateal, of concete musc s tmbe ngustc at can do the same At the end of evetov's "To the Reade, we don't now what s wtten on the "dak pgesthey ae obscue as well as vsually dak We become awae of the text as mateal, as pape and pages, and the physcal hythm of tunng The tun (talan: volta s a moment n a sonnet at whch the thought pocesses n the sonnet begn to shft t s also a tope, a hetocal tunng And t s the clnamen of ucetus, the tun o sweve of patcles that bngs about te geneaton of wolds evetov's "tunng s a tope that physcalzes the noton of topng o of volt of swtchng fom one dea to anothe, of negaton n Thoeau's Walden the dstant sound of bells bngs to mnd the atmosphee n whch they esonate: A ond erd  e ree pobe dne prode one n e me effe  bron of e ner re   e nerenn o pere me  dn rde f er neren o or ee b e zre n  mpr o . ee me o me n  e  eod w e r d rned, nd w d onered w eer ef nd neede of e wood,  poron of ond w e eemen d en p nd mod ed nd eoed from e o e. e eo , o oe een, n or n ond, nd eren  e m nd rm of .   no ere  ep eon of w w wor repen n e be, b pr e oe of e wood; e me r word nd noe n b  woodnp. 

n ths ema able pas sage, Thoeau theozes the medal qualty of ambent poetcs Notce how "staned, "a, and "melody ae all synonyms fo musc Thoeau s descbng how sound s "lteeda common dea snce the advent of the synthesze, whc electoncally ltes sound waves An echo s evdence of a medum of the a that ntevenes between thngs le a bell and the human ea, b ut also of wood that vbates We shall see , howeve, hat we cannot be as c ondent as Thoeau about the "ognal qualty of echoed sound The echo undemnes notons of ognalty and pesence Te Tmal

The tmal s about sound n ts physcalty, athe than about ts symbolc meanng ( "tmbal  comes fom time "The chaacte o qualty

40



 w e

of a m uscal o vocal sound (dstnct fom ts ptch and ntensty) de pendg upon the patcula voce o nstument poducng t). Tmbe, whch ntally meant a p atcula pecusson nstument, ethe a dum o a bell wthout a clappe ("tamboune s a elated wod), cam e to descbe the way sound stkes o stamps (Fench timbre ou eas, sometme aound the late Romantc and Vctoan peods. Tmbe deves fm the Geek tympanon The taut skn of the dum, even of the eadum, sepaates the nsde fom the outsde lke a magn, and gves se to esonant sound when stuck. The tympn n a pntng pess makes sue the pape s at enough to egste the type coectly. s ths dum, ths magn, pat of the nsde o the outsde Deda has shown how ths suggestve tem evokes the dffculty of ds tngushng popely between nsde a nd outsde.4 The tmbal voce s vvd wth the esonance of the lungs, thoat, salva, teeth, and skull: the gan of the voce, as B athes called t.35 Fa fom the tanscendental "Voce of Dedean theoy, ths voce does not edt out ts mateal embodment. acan's "llanguage, "lalangue, s the m eanngless uctuton of tongueenjoyment. Ths me anngless uctuaton makes us thnk a bout a space (the mouth) that s thooughly mateal Nusey hymes enable the baby to hea the sound of the paent's voce, athe than any specc wods. One of the stongest am bent effects s the endeng of ths tmbal voce. Ou own body s one of the uncannest phenomena we could eve encounte. What s closest to home s also the stangestthe look and sound of ou own thoat. Thus, tmbal statements can be stongly medal, evokng the medum that uttes them. And medal statements can be tmbal, pontng out the physcalt and matealty of the language. Ths s stongly envonmental A guta note bngs to mnd the wood out of whch t s made . The tmbal and the medal a e two ways of descbng the same thng. Ths axom assets that at bottom, foegound and backgound ae moe than ntetwned. Matn edegge affms that we neve hea sound n the abstact. nstead, we hea the way thns (a vey ch wod fo edegge) soundJ n an alm ost actve sense of the veb. We hea " the stom whstlng n the chmney, the sound of the wnd in the doo, the wal of the hound across the moo.38 Fo edegge thee s no such thng as a "pue tone all by tself. ee s a paadox. The peceptual phenomena we have been explong possess mateal thnglness. They ae nsepaa ble fom matte, ncludng elds of foce. Even a supposedly "pue tone such as a sne wave stll emeges fom mateal (say, an electcal c

e A  nnmen ne



4

cut), and  s ampled and tansmtted by vous mateals and enegy elds. Fo edegge, the dea of "pue  sound deves fom a noton of the thn as a sensoy manfold (a mxtue of how thngs feel, touch, taste, and so on): "the isthetonJ that whch s peceptble by sensatons.9 B ut such deas sk suggestng that thee s nothng othe than subjectve expeence. Moden at and theoy, howeve, expement wth pue tone. We could pont to the use of shee sound o colo n atYves Klen's and Deek Jaman's use of blue ae exteme examples. Klens pue blue c anvases hang n numeous gallees. e wote of ntenatonal Klen Blue, a specal suspenson of ultamane ( cystals of gound laps laul) n a clea commecal bnde, Rhdopas: "IKB / spt n matte.4  We could also nvoke the ntepetaton of shee sound o colo n psychoanalytc and lteay theoy.4 Whethe we thnk of natue as an envonment, o as othe bengs (anmals, plants, and so on), t keeps collapsng ethe nto subjectvty o nto objectvty. t s vey had, pehaps mposs ble, to keep natue just whee t appeassomewhee n between. The dffculty used to be esolved by deas s uch as that of the elements. Befoe they became specc atoms n the peodc t able, the elements wee manfolds of what we conventonally sepaate as "subjectvty and "objectvty. The phlosophy of elements beas stong esemb lances to phenomenology. We stll descbe vese as lqud, hetoc as ey o eathy. Thnkng n elemental tems s thnkng that matte has cetan ntsc qualtes wateriness s not just "panted on to the suface of the thng called wate; wate s watey though and though. These tems have gadually come to have a puely subj ectve sense (ths oom fees dy;  am hot tempered ke tmbe and tone (see the late sub secton), the elemental s a way of descbng a " thng that s aso an " envonent. t s sub stantal, yet suoundng. The Classcal elements (e, wate, eath, a ) wee about the body as muc h as they wee about the atmosphee. Te Aeoian The Aeolan ensues that ambent poetcs establshes

 sense of pocesses contnung wthout a subj ect o an autho. The Aeolan has no obvous souce. "Acousmatc sound, fo nstance, s dsemboded sound emanatng fom an unseen souce. t comes " fom nowhee, o t s nextcably bound up wh the space n whch t s head. Consde the voceove n a move. t does not ognate anyhee n the pctue on the sceen. Cnematc " endeng employs acousmac sound to ll the audtoum ( suound sound) . The specc sound fom of a patc

42



 w e

ula place s epoduced, athe than shee slence Jet planes unseen on the lm's suface appea to y ovehead The suoundng quet of a deset of shftng sands s head as we watch the potagonst ecallng hs o he expeences thee Expemental musc contans examples of acousmatc sound, emegng fom loudspeakes So does the eveyday technology of lstenng to ecoded sound: "The tue theat of phonogaphy came not fom ts ablty to dsplace a voce but ts ablty to dsplace a peson's own voce42 n poety, mages can appea to ase wthout o despte the naato's contol A poem called "A Geology, n CascadiaJ Benda llman's expement wth =A=N=G=U=A=G=E poety, s both a montage of descptons of Calfona though geologc tme and an account of gettng ove an addcton t s mpossble to detemne whch laye has poty Each laye mnmes the nput of a conscous subject: by compason wth geology, addcton and wthdawal ae ntensely physcal pocesses that must be endued The fom of the poem heghtens the physcalty by playng wth typogaphcal aangement Thee s often somethng gong on n the magn, out of each of ou eadng gae One metapho blends nto anothe n a dstubng, punnng way that makes t mposs ble to decde whch level of ealty s, to use a geologcal gue, the bedock A cetan degee of audovsual hallucnaton happens when we ead poety, as Celeste angan ha s demonstated concenng Walte Scott's long naatve poem The La of the Last Minstel43 Aeolan phenomena ae necessaly synesthetc, and synesthesa may not gve se to a holstc patten Because we cannot dectly peceve the souce, those ogans of ou pecepton not engaged by the dsemboded event become occuped wth dffeent phenomena Ths s the mpot of contempoay sound at, compsng poductons that ae supposed to be dffeent fom conventonal musc Sound at s sometmes exhbted n places tadtonally eseved fo vsual a t n these envonments, thee s less focus on the muscans (f any) and the musc (f any) Acousma tc sound can compel us to a state of dstacton athe than aesthetc ab sopton Ths s not nevtable: synaesthesa could become an even moe compellng fom of Gesamtkunstwek than mmesve, Wagean foms The dea of sounds wthout a souce has come unde attack fom poponents of acoustc ecology R Muay Schafe, who coned the tem oundscape n  labeled t schophona Acoustc ecology ctces dsembodment as a featue of moden alenaton ke othe

e A f nnmen  ne



43

foms of Romantcsm, acoustc ecology yeans fo an oganc wold of facetoface contact n whch the sound of thngs coesponds to the way they appea to the senses and to a cetan concept of the natual The Aeolan povokes anxety, because bult nto t s a hestaton between an obscue souce and no souce at all f the soce s obscue, the phenomenon dwells n ou wold We need to expand ou pecepton to take stock of t t s lke what Tvetan Todoov calls the supenatual uncanny: an unusua l occuence that s ultmately explcable 44 f, howeve, thee s no souce at all, the phenomenon does not esde n ou wold t adcally bsects t Ths s akn to Todoov's supenatual mavelous: an event that must be beleved on ts own tems We thus face a choce between a tanscendental expeence and a psychotc one Most ecommess wants to eassue us that the souc s meely obewe should just ope n ou eas and eyes moe But ths obscuty s always undewtten by a moe theatenng vod, snce ths vey vod s what gves ecommess ts dvne ntensty, ts admonshng tone of "Shh sten  Even at the vey depth of the lluson of endeng, thee s a blankness that s stuctual to ou acceptance of the lluson tself ne IntenitJ taiJ enin

Ambence s an expanson of the spacetme contnuum n an atwok, to the pont at whch tme comes to a standstll To nvestgate ths, let us escue the dea of tone fom ts awful fate n Amecan hgh schools Tone s a notoously casual tem t has somethng ktsch about t: t s too emotonal, too physcal When we consde t closely, tone has a moe pecse sgncance t efes to the qualty of vbaton Tone can denote the tenson n a stng o muscle (muscle tone), o a cetan ptch: the way n whch matte s v batng t also, sgncantly, efes to a noton of place hence "ecotone, a one of ecologcal tanston A ough aesthetc equvalent s the Geman timmung (" mood, "attunement), used by Alexande von umboldt n hs descpton of how dffeent at emeges fom dffeent clmates, and mmanuel Kant n hs analyss of the sublme45 Tone accounts mateally fo that slppey wod atmosphee Multmeda, musc, and vsual at play wth atmosphee as nstument and as aw mateal Thee s a lteay anaogy n envonmental wtng and foms of poetcs gong bac k to the cultue of sensblty n the eghteenth centuy46 Tone s useful because t ambguously efes both to te body and to the envonment Fo "the body (as t s so often called n contempoay at and theoy) is the envonment, n the conventonal, vulga

44



 w e

Catesan sense "We nhat the ody lke a peson lvng n a house Envonmental at makes us awae of ou eas, j ust as much as t makes us awae of the atmosphee But n so dong, t nudges us out of the vulga Cate sansm, lke phenomenologcal phlosophy The lnkage of peceve and peceved s a pedomnant theme n Mauce MeleauPontys phenomenology4 Thee also exsts a Btsh lneage ockean empcsm assets that ealty wll e dffeent fo dffeent peceves4 8 ate n the eghteenth centuy, the dscouse of sentmentalty, whch egsteed tuth on the ody, was developed nto an ethcs n Adam Smths Theor of Moral Sentiment wth mplcatons fo the evoluton of the nove49 Synesthetc woks of at ty to dsupt ou sense of eng centeed, located n a specc place, nha tng "the ody fom a cental pont Ou senses ae dsoented we notce that ou gae s "ove thee, ou heang s " outsde the oom we ae sttng n Bodly pocesses ae cyclc Plateaus of tenson and elaxaton take place ove tme The naatve aspect of ecommess geneates tone Speccally, ths s a stong fom of ekphass decriptio vvd descpton) Ekphass exsts when a naato says "pctue ths It often takes a vsua l fom, ut tadtonally ekphass can emody any sensoy nput, and thus t s appopate to ou multmeda a ge50 Vvd descpton slows down o su spends naatve tme et us dstngush etween plotthe events of a naatve n chonologcal sequenceand tor the events n the ode n whch the naato tells them Suppose that n the plot, event B follows event A afte an nteval of ve seconds, ut that n the stoy an ntevenng ekphass s nseted that takes seveal pages fo the eade to get though, such as Homes descpton of Achlles sheld dung the ntense descpton of attle at the end of the Ilad The effect on the eade s that the tme of naaton s held n stass In naatve, suspenson occus when the tme of the plot (the events as they would have occued n "eal tme) dveges wdely fom the tme of the stoy (the events as they ae naated)  In the second decade of the nneteenth centuy, S Thomas Raffles en oyed the epettve musc of the Indonesan gamelan, and eonhad Hunga late declaed, "It s a  state, such as moonlght poued ove the elds1 Statc sound ecame a ass of contempoay musc, as composes such as Claude Deussy ncopoated nto the compostons what they had leaned fom the gamelan snce ts appeaance at the Expoiton Univerelle n Pas (). Stass ecomes audle n muscal upenion whee one laye of sound changes moe slowly than anothe laye Dsco musc compels dances to stay on the dance

e A f nnmen n e



45

oo not only ecause t nvolves epettve eats, ut also ecause t sustans s uspende d chods that do not pogess fom A to B,  ut eman "n etween wthout esoluton Ths can only e a matte of semlance, even n vsual at  Snce epetton s tself a functon of dffeence, funk, then dsco, then hphop, then house, we pogessvely ale to mne eve moe deeply the asc lues stuctue fo a sweet spot, a suspended chod pulsatng n hythmc space Ton s anothe wod fo ths sweet spot, somewhee wthn the thd pat of a foupat lues, always nea the e soluton ut neve qute makng t Ths s how amence entes the tme dmenson Tone s a matte of quantty, whethe of hythm o magey stctly speakng, the ampltude of vatons An AA hyme scheme nceases the enegy level of a poem, as would a pepondeance of epeated eats A moe complex hyme scheme, a less epettve hythmc stuctue, endes the text "coole Texts also explot negatve hythm to geneate tone The asence of sound o gaphc maks can e as potent as the pesence Gaps etween stanas, and othe knds of oken lneaton, ceate tone out of shee lankness In tems of magey, tone s also quanttatve It s not necessaly a matte of what ort of magey, just how much. Just as wods come n phases, magey comes n clustes Metonymc lstng can geneate an ovewhelmng tone As wth hythm, thee s such a thng as negatve magey, o apophai sometng n the negate Negatve theology assets that od s not g, sm all, whte, la ck, h ee , th e e    Exteme negatvty conssts n ellpss (    ) o slence Even moe exteme s placng a wod unde easue, a s Mallam does (o consde Hedegge s wod ) How do you ponounce a cossedout wod The easue compels us to pay attenton to the wod as gaphc mak, and to the pape on whch t s wtten (and the slence of the unspoken) Thnk of the use of shadow n dawng, o slence n musc Cage scoed optonal quanttes of slenc of exactly the same length as postve muscal phases, fo the pefome to susttute spontaneously A text can desce somethng y delneatng t negatvely Occupato gves apophass a selfeexve twst, consstng n complanng aout how wods fal ou alty to desce somethng Ths negatve delneaton s especally mpotant n ament poetcs Snce a mence tes to evoke the ackgound a ackgoundto dag t nto the foegound would dssolve tt must esot to olque hetocal stateges Thee s a school of thought that negatve ecology, lke negatve theology, s a moe apt descpton of natue I eman convnced y

46



 w re

Deda's emaks that negatve theology s stll plague d y the meta physcal 2 t s poale th at a negatve poetcs of the envonment also suffes fom these symptoms Kants vew of the su lme povdes a lmt case f o ths secton of the agument much moe so than that of Buke who evokes the sulme n actually exstng thngs athe than n mental expeence f Kant hm self tanscendental dealst that he s povdes tools fo eadng am ent poetcs how much moe would someone nclned towad mate alsm o empcsm do the s ame The shee quantty of natue wtng s a cause of ts powe And what could e moe evocatve of ths than a swathe of lankness language that evokes an endless mumung o sclng o gltteng colo o the dffuson of a huge cloud of scent Ths language estalshes a plateau on whch all sgnals ae equal n n tenstywhch mght as well e slence A negatve quantty the a sence of somethng "thee evokes a sense of shee space n Kants tems ou mnd ecognes ts powe to magne what s not thee Sublime is wat even to be able to tink proves tat te mind as a powe surpassing any standard of sense. Kant demonstates ths y

takng us on a jouney of quantty, fom the se of a tee though that of a mountan to the magntude of the eath and nally to "the m mense multtude of such Mlky Way systems The sulme tanspots the mnd fom the extenal wold to the ntenal one Negatve quantty has ecome a poweful tool of moden at, ut also of moden deology Fo example consde the use of slence n na tonalst tuals Ths suely explans the cenotaph the empty tom of the unknown solde Befoe Cage the two mnutes slence on Amstce Day was ntended fom ts ncepton as a ado oadcast that would make Btons awae of the countys dea d The compose Jonty Sempe ecently comned evey avalale BBC ecodng of the two mnutes' slence complete wth newseel hss ds callng can nons ng and an6 The desgn that won the commsson o Gound Zeo n New Yok Cty s enttled " Reectons of Asence Negatve quantty sgned though ellpss o some othe effect s a suggestve tanspotaton pont n the text whch allows sujectvty to eam down nto t The Romantc oheman consumest Thomas De Quncey, expemented wth hs own knds of psychc and physcal n tensty n takng opum De Quncey theoes how fom the eade's (o lstenes, o dances) pont of vew tone gves us pause Ths pausng s not a mee hatus o stoppng t s athe a stayngnplace endowed wth ts own ntensty Thee s "not much gong on, whc h s

e Ar  nrnmen ne



47

not the same as no nfomaton at all We ae thown ack on the hee andnow of odly sensaton n the anechoc chame at avad Cage hed the sound of hs own ody as f t wee ampled 7 Ths heghtenng of awaeness takes place n what De Quncey calls parentesis o syncope. Syncope commonly efes to aevaton and moe aely to a loss of conscousness ut De Quncey makes the tem expeental Pa enthess usually places a phase o senence nsde an othe one ut De Quncey extends the tem towad the noton of tone a plateau o suspenson what Wodswoth called a "spot of tme RMa  Can't Bive t n't At

We geneally take one knd of medum to e the background the am ent a o electomagnetc eld the pape on whch text appeas The othe knd o medum, the one we exploed as the tmal appeas as foreground. A dsemoded Aeolan sound emanates "fom the ack gound ut appeas "n the foegound Wth Aeolan events we have a paadoxcal stuaton n whch ackgound and foegound have col lapsed n one sense, ut pesst n anothe sense We a e appoachng the fundamental popetes of am ent poetcs the ass of ecommess Backgound and foegound ely upon dstn gushng etween hee and thee ths and that We talk aout "ack gound nose whle musc appeas as n the foegound tems nd catng dstnct poltcal and hstocal eangs60 Backgound musc Muak o speccally ament musc attempt to undo the nomal df feence etween foegound and ackgound The Aeolan attempts to undo the dfeence etween a peceptual event uon whch we can focus and one that appeas to suound us and whch cannot e d ectly ought "n font of the sense ogans wthout losng ts env onng popetes Cuent neuophysology has suggested that a e cepto n the hypothalamus Alpha enales the dstcton etween foegound and ackgound sound A eakdown n the neuotans msson acoss ths ecepto may n pat e esponsle fo scho phenc symptoms such as heang voces ( foegound phenomena) em anatng fom sonc souces (adatos a vents) that ae nomaly consdeed as lyng n the a ckgound61 Alvn uce's  Am Sitting in a Room () s a poweful demon staton o the shftng and ntetwned qualtes of foegound and ackgound62 A voce speakng n a oom s ecoded ove and ove agan, such that each pevous ecodng ecomes what s then e ecoded n the same oom The text that uce eads s a out ths po

48



 wtt tre

cess  t s medal Afte a shot whle, the ecodng pcks up the esonance of the oom and feeds t back, amplfyng and atculatng t though the sound of the speakng voce (kewse, ample feedback n geneal lets us hea the sound of the techncal medum of tansmsson ) We lose the wods and gan the sound of the oom "tself  put "tself n quotaton maks because what we come to eale s that the voce and the oom ae mutually detemnng One does not pecede the othe The wok s stuated on a waveng magn between wods and musc, and between musc and shee sound, and ultmately between sound (foegound) and nose (backgound) Retoactvely, we eale that the oom was pesent n the voce at the vey begnnng of the pocess The voce was always ale ady n ts envonment "  am sttng n a oom sts n a oom Thee was neve a pont of "handove at whch the sound of the voce "n tself modulated nto the sound of the oom "n tself Voce s to oom, not even as sound souce to medum, but as tongue to bell They wee always mplcated n each othe Ths at s as envonmental as wtng about bds and tees, f not moe so, because t tes dectly to reder the actual (sensaton of) envonment altogethe  We could easly thnk of vsual equvalents, such as envonmental sculptue Andy Goldswothy's wok gadually dssolves nto ts ste6 Aesthetc, and futhemoe, me taphysca l dstnctons, nvolve d scmnatons between nsde and outsde 64 We can be sue that ths dscmnaton s metaphyscal, snce  eally what we ae dealng wth s the dea of medum splt nto two aspects ( foegound and backgound) We must be caeful not to asset that a medum exsts " befoe the splt occus, snce the noton of medum depends upon ths vey splt (between "hee and "thee) Thee s a Buddhst sayng that ealty s "not one, and not two Dualstc ntepetatons ae hghly dubous But so ae monst onesthee s no (sngle, ndependent, lastng) "thng undeneath the dualst concept Othewse Alvn uce would not have been able to geneate I Am Sttg  a Room ow does the splt that sepaates backgound and foegound occu Thee s a devce that poduces t n at Jacques Deda ha s bllantly analyed t n such woks as Dssemato and Te Trut  Patg. e calls t the remark65 The emak s the fundamental popety of ambence, ts ba s gestue The emak s a knd of echo t s a specal ma k ( o a sees f them) that makes us awae that we ae n the pesence of ( sgncant) maks ow do you dscmnate between the lettes on ths page an d andom patches of dt, o patches of pant and

e Ar  nvrnmen ne



49

"extaneous matte on the canvas O between ose and soud (how about armoy and dssoace O between grapcs and letters? O a nonspecc smell and a specc o sgncant scet? O, even moe subtly, between a ngng bell and a soundng tongue6 6 Between a substance and ts attbutes A emak dffeentates between space and place n moden lfe ths dstncton s between objectve (space) and subectve (place) phenomena67 Evey tm  teach a class on ecologcal language, at least one student assets that "place s what a peson makes of " space, wthout efeence to an utsde Even when  s extenal, place has become somethng tat people d o constuct; a space that, as t wee, appes to someone Despte the gdty of the student esponse,  am suggestng hee that subjectvty and objectvty ae just a has beadth (f that) away fom each othe The llusve play of the emak establshes the dffeence out of an undffeentated gound n T S Elot's poety, how do we ecogne that some mag e of an extenal thng s actually an "o bjectve coelatve fo a sbj ectve state Some vey small cke occus A emak ps an "objectve mage nto a "subjectve one The emak s mnmalstc t doesn't take much fo ecommess to suggest a qualty of place The subj ectve value that shnes out of places such as Thoeau's Walden Pond ema nate fom mnute, as well as fom lage, sgnals n the text To dentfy the emak s to answe the queston: how lttle does the text need to dffeentate between foegound and backgound, o between space and place t s a tusm that contempoay at tes to challenge such dstnctons But the emak occus m oe wdely The emak s behnd the humo of the Chale Bown catoons When the bd Woodstock speaks, we don't know what he s sayng, but we know tat e s speakg because the lttle squggles above hs head ae placed n a speech bubble, whch pefoms the acton of the emak and makes us pay attenton to tese squggles as meanngful n some uspeced way (Woodstock hmself, who appeaed afte the Woodstock festval, s close to the subject of ths book, nsofa as he embodes the natual wold " beyond Snoopy's gaden lawn) Gestalt psychology establshes a gd dstncton etween gue and gound such that gue and gound ental each othe (the faces and candlestck lluson s the classc example ), whle t emans stctly mpossble to see both as gue, o both as gound, at the ame tme The emak s a quantal event What happens at the level of the emak e

50

.

Ecoogy without Nature

sembes what happens in quantum physcs, at the eve of the very small . This sounds abstruse, even mystical, but really I mean it in a very straightforward sense. The occurrence of the remark is always a "oneshot deal. In quantum mechanics, a choice presents itself between waves and particles. We could measure things one way or another; never as an amalgam of the two simultaneousy.6 8 Until the measurement takes place, both possibilities are superposed, one on the other. Reality, at that "moment (though that word only makes sense after the quantum wave reduction), is only a ser ies of probabilities. We cannot claim that there is a spe cial entity that exists as a comb ination of both wave and particle. There is nothing underneath the wave/particle distinction. The same is true of the remark. Either the inside/outside distinction is constituted, or notin which case the dis tinction will appear at another date, in another place. T he level of the remark is a fundamentally indeterminate one, at which a squiggle could be either ust a s quiggle or a letter. However close we get to the (admittedly articial) boundary between inside and outside (sound/ noise, smell/scent, squiggle/letter), we won't nd anything in between. This is related to a mathematical paradox. It is impossible to establish in advance (using an algorithm) whether a point will lie on the boundary of a set, even a very simple one "Imagine two algorithms generating the digits 0. . . . a nd  . 00 00 . . . respectively, but we mght never know if the s, or the Os, are going to continue indenitely, so that the two numbers are equal, or whether some other digit will eventually appear, and the numbers are unequal.69 The brilliance of ambient rhetoric is to make it appear as if, for a eeting second, there is something in between. Calling William Wordsworth a minimalist, Geoffrey Hartman praises the idea of Wordsworthian nature as a contemplative space in his book on culture: "The spacious ambience of nature when treated with respect, allows physical and emotional freedom; it is an outdoor room essential to thought and untraumatic (that is, relatively unforced) development.7 This "outdoor room  is the result of ambient rhetoric (and a certain attachment to an idea of a tempe ate climate; untraumatic development would be less possible if one were freezing to death). This is not to say that ambience i s not incarnated in physical things. Am bient rhetoric is present, for instance, in the common su burban lawn, which acts as an etension of the inside of the house and is referred to as a carpet.71 Actually existing spaces can have ambient qualities; otherwise, certain forms of contemporary architecture would not be poss ible.

The Art of Envronmental Language

.

51

Margin (French marge) denotes a border or an edge, hence "seashore. Indeed, if current industrial poicies remain unchecked, these very spaces, such as coral reefs, and liminal species ( Latin, limen� boundary) such as amphibians, wil be increasingly at risk of being wiped out. But because of the logic of the remark, such spaces, whether they are outside or inside our heads, emboy what is, at bottom, illusory. I mea n here to suppot these margins. A s a matter of urgency, we just cannot go on thinking of them as "in between. We must choose to include them on this side of human social practices, to factor them in to our political and ethical decisions. A Bruno Latour states, "Political phiosophy . . . ds itself confronted with the o bligation to internalize the environment that it had viewed up to now as another word.7 Since it appears to lie in between oppositional entities, the effect of ambience is always anamorphic can only be glimpsed as a eeting, dissolving presence that ickers across our perception and cannot be brought front and center. Georges Bataille was s ubstantializig it too much when he labeled what he called the informe "unassimilable waste, but it is a suggestive image for the ecological critic, preoccupied with waste products that will not be ushed away 3 Miimalist experiments with empty frames and also with frameless and formless "found objects  or installations make this apparent.74 In these works, at tries to sneak a glimpse of itself from the side, or from ground level, like an animal5 We have returned to the idea of rendering, but with greater understanding. Rendering appears to dissolve the a esthetic dimension because it depends upon a certain necessarily nite play with the remark. The more extreme the play, the more art collapses into nonart. Hence the infamous stories of anitors clearing away installations, thinking they were  ust random ples of paintbrushes and pots of paint. There is a politics to this aesthetics. It says that if we point out where the waste goes, we won't be a ble to keep ourselves from taking greater care of our world. In the rhetoric of juxtaposing contents and frame, product and waste, the antiaesthetics of the high avantgarde meets moe common varieties of ecologica anguage. A question to which we shall return does not this collapse of art into nonart actually paradoxically serve to hold open the sace of the aesthetic " until something better comes along in an age where all art has been commercialized ?7 And therefore is not the collap se a strongy Romantic gesture of defying the commodity world? I reiterate that this is not to say that there do not eist actual anamorphic lifeforms. These

52



 wtt te

very lifeforms (coral, sea slugs, invertebrates) are vital for sustaining life on earth. Beause they have no distinct shape, it is very hard to make them cute, to turn them into objects of consumerist enironmental sympathy. A doeeyed coral ree f is more likely to elicit a gasp of horror than a coo of identication. Although it tries with all its might to give the illusion of doing so, ambient poetics will never actually dissolve the difference between inside and outside. The remark either undoes the distinction altogether, in which case there is nothing to perceive, or it establishes it in the rst place, in which case there i s something to perceive, with a boundary. On this point, there is an a bsolute difference between my argument and that of JeanFran
View more...

Comments

Copyright ©2017 KUPDF Inc.
SUPPORT KUPDF