EINADCLUEVOLUME 6, ISSUE 2 DESIGN ANDCULTURE St Martins, University of the current workontechnology [email protected] the intersectionofcreative edited Product DesignatCentral developing linesof‘minor Arts London.Herworkat design’. Shehasrecently Press, forthcoming).Her philosophy, materialities interaction withobjects, post-human, post-user, post-cognitive modeof Programme Leaderfor digital andnon-digital. (Edinburgh University and magicconsiders Deleuze andDesign © with JamieBrassett animism asthekey Contextual Studies and designaimsat BLOOMSBURYBetti Marenko is PP 219–242 E-print nonhuman entitiespossessasoul,lifeforce, of animism–theideathatobjectsandother colored byanimisticconnotations.Traces appr ABSTRACT Betti Marenko Object Theory A and Design N objects, Internet of Things,materiality objects, Internet KEYWORDS: neo-animism,ubiquitous computing,smart their shiftingnature, purpose,andagency. everyday objectsischanging toaccommodate a shared reality. Ourwayofexperiencing longer afuture scenario;itisincreasingly washing machine,orbathroom scaleisno communicates withourthermostat,car, mainstream, thefactthatourphone ofThingsbecomes moreAs theInternet they willreply more orlessinstantaneously. smartphones, andinourexpectationsthat the waywetalktoourcomputers,cars,and and qualitiesofpersonhood–are evidentin N eo-Animism ehension oftheworldisincreasingly ew Paradigmin PUBLISHERS DIRECTLY FROMTHE REPRINTS AVAILABLE

This articlearguesthatour LICENSE ONLY PERMITTED BY PHOTOCOPYING

PLC PRINTED INTHEUK PUBLISHING PLC2014 © BLOOMSBURY

219 Design and Culture DOI: 10.2752/175470814X14031924627185 220 Design and Culture Betti Marenko ©

BLOOMSBURY1956: 1877: necting objects becomes simultaneously smarter, more pervasive, pervasive, more smarter, simultaneously becomes objects necting con- technology when emerges response animistic an that gests this discipline as a research method, a mythmaking narrative, and and narrative, mythmaking a method, research a as discipline this in deployed is Animism is design. things interaction in intelligent approbation gaining and objects smart by populated world a increasingly with better deal to animist” “turning are we that idea The Introduction our interactionwithintelligent objects. an as occur that behaviors of kinds the but alive), is laptop not so much an animistic belief (whether we actually believe that our is here most matters What responses. animistic induces computing a of basis the “forms Laurel, for agency,animism, Designed design. and human experience, on computing pervasive of impact the describe to 2008) (Laurel animism” “designed of idea the introduced 1970s, theorist Brenda Laurel, who has been writing about interaction Design since the late 2013). McVeigh-Schultz and Allen (Van interactive systems” and human between relationship meaningful and tive, produc- “fluid, the in innovation drives that fiction” “embodied an 2011: The current literature on animism and interaction design interaction and animism on literature current The tackle thetrickyquestionofanimismanew. not do we if nature, to successor a devise to way no is There of kind return tototemismandanimism. a seeing are we world, the in everywhere almost … magic. from indistinguishable is technology advanced sufficiently Any poetics for a new world new a for poetics

Albert matter ofelectricallyanimatedobjects. sparking anxieties about voice, the spirit world own embodied in the his very of reproduction a to listen to able is human a time first the for and machine,” “talking his up der,cranks T it talksbacktoyou. talk also can you talk, to phone your use Siri transforms acarintomagicalobject. semiotics, with and, things, everyday of analysis intellectual child. In the same year Roland Barthes’ a and balloon sentient seemingly a between relationship the homas Edison sings Edison homas

E-printcan you only not Now, 4S. iPhone the with launched is Lamorisse’smovie ” (Laurel 2008: 252), in which pervasive which in 252), 2008: (Laurel ” Mary had a Little Lamb Little a had Mary The Red Balloon Red The Mythologies to Arthur C.Clarke 1 your phone. And phone. your poetically traces poetically Bruno Latour Felix Guattari into a cylin- offers an effect 2

sug- PLC of an enchanted form” (Gell 1992: 44). 1992: (Gell form” enchanted an cesses have of casting a spell over us so that we see the real world in pro- technical that power “the technology.”the is of This “enchantment calls Gell Alfred anthropologist what can of terms in phenomenon described cultural be a as objects digital of objects. intelligence smart The of variety and number the in expansion mendous smartphone asifitisalive. our treating up end often we presence, responsive and animated this of Because emotions. and cognition own our of extension an whiny,obstinate, casionally moody.even becomes smartphone Our oc- giving and assertive, and generously demanding also is but accommodating, It and personality. distinct own and its with voice, friend, presence, trusted a into morphed has smartphone the sense, a In it. without live cannot simply we and interaction, neous Home monitoring devices such as mate and inanimate, and capable of expressing additive intelligence. to this new breed of human-made things that are taken to be inert or alive. Rather, it is how to characterize arethings perceptionwhether our cultural dictating of question a simply response not is face we What ago. decade a wereonly that unthinkable ways courages consideration of the animate and inanimate assemblage in in unprecedented ways. when both object and subject are able to subject talk a and reactas to count each might other what and object an as count might what explore questions These nature. philosophical a of questions other technological innovations are reshaping human behavior bring up yet revolutionary which in however,ways us, the spellbind and enchant expression ofagreater bodyofanimisticinclinations. embodied arethe argue I that phenomena new of set peculiar area holding and scrolling, dragging, swiping, stroking, stretching, ing, to employ. All our (often mildly compulsive) touching, tapping, pinch- learned have we gestures physical repertoireof new the mention to tention and in which we make an intense emotional investment – not at- undivided our give we which to object an is it army-knife”; Swiss somatically complicated. The smartphone is no longer a mere “digital cognitively,are smartphones our with emotionally,develop may and we bonds of kinds The example. for smartphones, Consider 225). writes, and nowadays everything electronic and reads and writes” (1998: reads what with intelligence associate We jungle. information and imaginatively pragmatic response to the peculiar qualities of the appropriate psychologically “a as seen be can to animism of first degree a that the argues of animism, digital) one (or techno Davis, of notion Erik the popularize critic Cultural invisible. more and appliances on or off remotely, to control when someone arrives or or arrives someone when control remotely, to off or on appliances switch to users allow that objects Internet-connected are example, What Erik Davis could not have predicted in 1998 was the tre- the was 1998 in predicted have not could Davis Erik What I would like to argue that the current pace of digital innovation en- We grow attached to our smartphone, we expect an instanta- an expect we smartphone, our to attached grow We © BLOOMSBURY E-print SmartThings 3 If technology has the power to power the has technology If , Spotter simultaneously ,

or Ubi , ani- 4 for Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

221 Design and Culture 222 Design and Culture Betti Marenko © BLOOMSBURY post-cognitive frameworkthatexplainshowwerelate tothings. affective, an as animism posits and connection magic–technology dubbed tential of connected objects. connected of tential po- present powerfully yet invisible, the evokes vividly “shadow” of notion The 79). (2010: shadows” information with objects collection all “the of is uber-connectivity Kuniavsky Mike designer tion interac- For information. process and sense objects ordinary which by uber-connectivity the to refers Things” of “Internet the term The The InternetofThings, Internet of the Things. through happens technology and magic between connection until the moment magic they become innovation. On this basis, I argue as that one perceived are that feats technical of result a is tion direct connection between technology and magic. Technical innova- a all, after is, There existence. technological their of function a is us devices? smart of world a in lie inanimate and animate between frontier the does Where inanimate? the and animate the between the relationship experience we way the about something reveal animism Can magic, manifested in a world in which objects are smartly animated? “values, entities, fetishes, idols and totems” (Brown magical 2001: 5). How is this excess, this into objects turns what is it and things, of is power the what constitutes and what is formed, yet characterization This not irreducible. is what – excess and latency both lated byincreasingly responsive things? popu- is the that world a be in relationship subject–object the of might character then, What, in contexts. spatial and relationships temporal specific subject–object particular denote things objects, than rather that observes Brown 9). 2001: (Brown society” in have Brown’sareBill promptedideas by my of “forcethings the of notion Some lives. our shape inanimate simply not are that objects ways powerful the acknowledge should perspective materialist new This things. with cohabitation animistic and people’saddressessomatic that paradigm new a demands objects smart with coalesce people still bedefinedintheseterms. can entities if and – subject the is who and object the is who about in charge? These kinds of scenarios suggest philosophical questions is who question me make appliance mundane this with relationship shouldn’tmy patterns, lifestyle my on based decisions autonomous objects with which we live. If the radiator in my living room can make the of nature the about questions raise but help cannot reality a ing That the once futuristic vision of a smart, responsive home is becom- on. so and not, or arelocked doors whether check to home, leaves As Gell contends (1988), the power of things to enchant and lureand enchant to things of power the (1988), contends Gell As is objects from things differentiates what Brown, to According ways the in shift driven digitally the that argue to like would I ubiquitous computing ubiquitous E-print 5 A neo-animist paradigm, I contend, captures this 6 U This uber-connectivity has also been also has uber-connectivity This bicomp- (ubicomp) (Dourish and Bell 2011), 2011), Bell and (Dourish (ubicomp) Scape , Everyware PLC ceptual tool that can illuminate this shift, as the next section explains. human andnonhumanagencies. to shift from fixed, diametrically opposite positions to a continuum of have will user/consumer/subject as role Moreover, our object. and user,form, function, of points touch design traditional repositionthe ried out automatically. Ultimately, I believe, this sort of technology will car-are they but “recipes,” to according planned are events These raining. starts it if on switch should bedroom my in light the that or morning, each bed of out get I as soon brewingas start will kitchen an up set example, fact, champions the notion that user and object should be located be should object and user that notion the champions fact, user-centeredin lar,on Neo-animism, focus design. studies’ design both the theory and practice of design assume are fixed – in particu- mentioned earlier. holding mindless and pocketing, stroking, of practices embodied the paradigm gestures, finger-based somatic, of repertoire neo-animist our capturesA also gathering. data and tagging, mapping, through intelligence ambient by producedare that – distributed and counts for new forms of cognition – embodied, sensorial, contextual, ac- paradigm neo-animist A objects. digital with relationships our of manifestations tangible striking most the of some for accounts it neo-animist paradigm can provide such a new way of thinking since to an ecosystem of responsive objects are calling for a new theory. A cognitive and somatic competencies emerging as those appropriate the that me to seems It paradigm. neo-animist a throughof lens the read best and animistically, experienced agencies, material of tion services. Such an object- sive computing, ambient intelligence, tangible interaction, and cloud scape object- connected this experience are we that they ways the and in – manifested intertwined are sensuousness and enchantment, anti- (irrational? pre-modern deploy of to prone more apprehension and more our is world objects connected want I digitally a choose, in we that term argue to Whichever 18). (2006: life” everyday of surfaces and objects the in embedded processing “information as and environment digitally by setting up a series of “recipes” based on on the formula“ifthishappens,thenittriggersthataction.” based “recipes” of series a up setting by digitally environment That) Then databases. and sensors across micro-relations of map a fashions landscape object awareness.RFID our This beyond background the in autonomously communicate – tags frequency radio- using tracked are that objects – objects tagged RFID where between user and object becomes fluid and unstable in a landscape boundary The entanglements. human–thing of ecosystems wide in Because of its boundary-disrupting nature, neo-animism is a con- Neo-animism suggests ways to rethink some of the notions that notions the of some rethink to ways suggests Neo-animism everyware m that is made of digital, post-PC devices, smart objects, perva- odern? nevermodern?) affective faculties. Animism, magic, magic, Animism, faculties. affective nevermodern?) odern?

© physical their control users lets that service online an is , which technology writer Adam Greenfield describes Greenfield Adam writer technology which ,

BLOOMSBURYIFTTT scape recipe stating that the coffeemaker in the in coffeemaker the that stating recipe

E-print should be understood as a distribu- IFTTT (If This This (If IFTTT 7 Icould,for Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

223 Design and Culture 224 Design and Culture Betti Marenko © BLOOMSBURY interaction design, ubicomp theories, anthropology, dystopian dystopian anthropology, theories, ubicomp design, interaction Guattari 1987;Bennett2001, 2010;Braidotti2002,2006). and (Deleuze materialism molecular,vitalistic radical, and a – it pins under- that materiality of notion the crucially,in and, allows it that shift epistemological and conceptual the both in lies neo-animism of power the matter.Indeed, of notion Spinozian–Deleuzian a upon predicated is it that and relational, emergent, affective, is paradigm neo-animist a that proposes motif second My 2012). Hodder 2010; Renfrew and Malafouris 2009; Holbraad 2009; Haber 2009; Bray Bird-David 1999; Harvey 2005; Brown and Walker 2008; Alberti and of material culture with anthropology and archaeology (Guthrie 1993; of agency (Latour 2005, 2009a, 2009b, 2010) and at the intersection pose a neo-animist paradigm whose genealogy is located in theories lar, in the digital devices landscape. To articulate this first motif, I pro- particu- in – agencies nonhuman and human between relationships reconfiguring culture, our through percolating is sensibility animistic tention of engaging both design and philosophy. First, I argue that an world weinhabit. also accords with the way these theories reconfigure ideas about the Design things. of theories current in perfectly questions critical the embodies – entanglements material own its with each – industries and discourses, cultures, practices, theories, of nexus complex a as Design, design. with reverberate to ought actors nonhuman and human between symmetry the and agency reflect theories terialist ma- new that ways The 2013). (Ingold it flies who person the and thing a as then glue, and paper,bamboo, ribbon, of made a object lifeless as first kite: a of description stirring Ingold’s Tim anthropologist is example apposite An design. by underestimated be not should ideas these of significance The agencies. material and intensities of distribution area things that positing meanings, fixed and bounded, self-contained, their beyond things rethinking are 2013) (Ingold ries theo- anthropological and 2010) Frost and Coole 2012; Cohen 2002; (Braidotti philosophies materialist Various “thing.” everything in interest robustobjects. current the of reflect to design world for potential the is There regarding and especially philosophers thinking, what are with theorists conversant familiar be its to outside needs It circulating domain. ideas to alert be to needs Design The EncounterbetweenPhilosophyandDesign design withphilosophy, viaareappraisal ofanimism. engaging of way a for plea a makes article this Indeed, position. cal philosophi- a as nor method, design a as exclusively neither framed entanglement. It can do so, however, provided that it is conceptually thing human–digital current the describe to conjure we figurations and images the to alternative powerful a provide can Neo-animism Materialist philosophies, technology studies, theories of affect, affect, of theories studies, technology philosophies, Materialist in- my reflect that motifs intersecting two present therefore will I E-printwind the with together parts these all of made (kite-in-the-air)

PLC development of individual and society.and individual of development the in stage immature an or,epistemology,best, error failed at an a techno-scientific progress and empirical methods – saw animism as in faith its and phenomena, social of view rational and pragmatic its 2010, Franke 2011; Papapetros 2012). 2009; Nineteenth-century positivism (Marenko – with spirit current the of as signifier new animism potent out a singled also has revaluation This century. teenth nine- the in it generated that enterprise anthropological the from it redeemed has that revaluation a undergone recently has Animism Animisms Oldand to attemptthinkaboutphilosophyasadesigner. philosopher,a also as but design about think to only not and ways, both look to me allows it as one, privileged a as precarious a much philosopher speculating on design. My in-between position is not so I reflect upon our entanglement with things from the perspective of a chemistry.” I have made Guattari’s dictum my own, even more so as “conceptual a build to tools as use to sources different from steals who idea-thief an being about wrote famously (1995) Guattari Felix Philosopher capture. to attempting is it phenomena animist the as emergent as paradigm a formulate to order in so do I anew. think I fields intellectual the to which with and of – with think to tools conceptual as use to harvest some are design critical and literature, “we animate the computers we use, the plants we grow and the the and grow we plants the use, we computers the animate “we She uses this relational epistemology to explain what happens when animism’sfor accounts aspects. situated and pluralistic, composite, that framework relational a for instead argues she animism, on pus ization of animism. Taking a critical stance against the canonical cor- cars we drive” (Bird-David 1999: 78). According to According 78). 1999: (Bird-David drive” we cars straddles fixedboundaries. naturewhose and morecategory to one belong than might that ties ontologies capture the fluctuating and less permanent nature multiple of enti- mineral), vegetable, animal, (say, another to typology one from transferred be cannot that notions fixed upon predicated are (singular) to ontologies (plural). While scientific Cartesian taxonomies ontology from shift a suggest to appropriated be also could tinction with do to less has taxonomies than with entirely differentnon-living concepts of life itself. This and dis- living the between This given. distinction never is non-living the and living the between – of being nature the of study the is ontology – distinction ontological the Ingold (2006) states that when determining what counts as animism, and nonhuman, livingandnon-living,mightbelocated. human between frontier the where and world, the with ships relation- our rethink to us prompts Neo-animism inanimate. the and animate the as well as (nonhuman), world material the and (human) on the other hand, question the boundaries between the social world Anthropologist Nurit Bird-David offers a significant reconceptual- significant a offers Bird-David Nurit Anthropologist In his passionate call for a re- a for call passionate his In © BLOOMSBURY N ew: ACritique 9 E-print animation 8 Current notions of animism, of notions Current of Western thought, thought, Western of B ird-David, by by ird-David, Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

225 Design and Culture 226 Design and Culture Betti Marenko © BLOOMSBURY properties projected upon inertenvironmental matter, butis instead: a belief that imputes life to things. Animism is not about non-material as animism of notion classical the disputes paradigm neo-animist A For a “animistic the called turn” been has what Indeed, culture. and nature between dichotomy the bypassing by terms humans animistic in things and between relationships the reframing are anthropologists how of example good a is above described epistemology relational from which to rethink the centrality of human rationality. Bird-David’s standpoint the becomes animism important, more Even objects. to relationships our explore to tool a becomes animism situated-ness, and emergence, mutuality, by characterized is that ontology tional rela- a as Reconfigured the nexus. in subject–object the part of a constitution playing each relationships, of ecology entire an and 1988: 178). There is therefore continuity between people and things, (Strathern another” by absorbed and one from “extracted are They symbolically that something not for example, through gifts to others. Objects that are exchanged are themselves, of part a give People divisible. and partible but sense, individuals as Melanesia in people describes Strathern nonhuman and humans things such as including objects, animals, minerals, plants, and natural others, events. with relationships her Melanesian his/ on of sum the by defined work is individual any which in (1988) cultures seminal Strathern’s Marilyn echoes position anthropologist This 78). (ibid.: is” matter) constitutive their than (rather behaviour emergent and situational their what us, towards act they how behaviour, our to relation respond in they how do do, we they what to “what learn we relationally, objects reframing and, asIargueinthenextsection,weshouldrethink matteritself. animism of root the is that vitalism inorganic the acknowledge must properties. To avoid what Holbraad calls a “cognitive trap,” “cognitive a calls Holbraad what Toavoid properties. (spiritual) non-material with imbued is matter affirm that ontologies appropriatinganimist – “cul-de-sac” epistemological the to leads so doing Holbraad, For object. an of inside living soul a as animism of animism. Anthropologist Martin Holbraad (2009) warns us of not “return” a foundational to advocating think not am I that reason the nineteenth-century is imaginary.This its aside casts it if only though, Western socialtheory(Haber2009). into existence. The animacy of the lifeworld, in short, is not into not agency or substance into spirit of is infusion an of result the short, in lifeworld, the of animacy The another existence. one into bring reciprocally and continually thing-like, or person-like less moreor kinds, all of beings which within tions The dynamic, transformative potential of the entire field of rela- Animism as a disruptive, boundary-breaking force can succeed, can force boundary-breaking disruptive, a as Animism 10 is one of the most relevant contributions by anthropology to anthropology by contributions relevant most the of one is N eo-Animist Paradigm

E-print – not self-contained, bounded, and whole in the Western stand for people, Strathern argues. Strathern people, for dividuals rather than than rather

11 PLC we we anthropology, science and technology studies, and thing theory theory thing approachesthese What 2006). Ingold 2005; Latour 2005; and (Knappet studies, technology and science anthropology, culture, material in focus major a become has action change, induce and generate to things nonhuman/non-subject of capacity the (Thrift able” 2011: 11). become to able are things world more a and in “more living which are in we Thrift, Nigel scientist social to According 1996: (Abram 130). The number of dynamic, potencies” affective, animate things is increasing. powers, entities, subjects, “expressive glow that are but inert never arebuttons things – on switched with is phone the when red designed – (2006) phone Chocolate LG the of interface designed exquisitely the to chair designed skillfully a From discovery. motivate that directives contains (1998), Lingis Alphonso philosopher to The according us. things, affect of density” things ways “sensuous the on in” “zoom to us forces render have in common is the view that things matter because they shape they because matter things that view the is common in have and Guattari1987:408). (Deleuze matter” a upon form a imposing of “instead propensities and material’s fibers the follow must they how wood, to surrender relate to it. Deleuze and Guattari famously write of how artisans must should we ways indicates matter and animated, is matter vibrates, Matter form. of determination any to prior occurs – effervescences and velocities, differentiations, their and particles, of flows – mism dyna- nonhuman This 6). (2001: things” of law and life other some lurks there touch and see we phenomena the beneath or beyond “somewhere Brown’spassage by evoked is that image electrons” of “swarm the by exemplified is idea This agencies. nonhuman of ally traversed by flows of inorganic life and animated by a multiplicity ceaseless and spontaneous persistence. Imagine matter as perpetu- its through world the of constitutive fully is however,matter (1988), Deleuze Gilles For 1999). Landa (De essentialism to according ideal transcendent a by or ideas, constructivist to according conventions human by either shaped and passive as matter view substance) to meaning gives that essence universal an assuming later the tions, interac- social by created actively is reality that assuming former given ratherthanemergent. as and social, than rather natural as things and humans between matter is external and inert – an idea that configures the relationships strikingly antithetical to the traditional Western–Cartesian notion that is notion This world. the on impact continual a has matter spective, per- Spinozian–Deleuzian a matter.In of theory radical a by pinned under- is paradigm neo-animist the that suggests Ingold’squote My analysis above makes it clear that the agency of things, and things, of agency the that clear it makes above analysis My Interestingly, both constructivist and essentialist positions (the (the positions essentialist and constructivist both Interestingly, tion. (Ingold2006:68) differentia- their to prior ontologically rather is materiality,but The notion that matter has propensities to which we can sur- can we which to propensities has matter that notion The © BLOOMSBURY E-print Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

227 Design and Culture 228 Design and Culture Betti Marenko © BLOOMSBURY of sticky, messy explorations that are at once material–semiotic, material–semiotic, once at are that explorations messy sticky, of means by things of world the know to come We events. future to shape gives that agent active an likewise is Matter sensibility. and production both instead is Matter outside. the from imposed form needs that mass inert it is nor thought, to subordinate neither is ter ciated by the hylomorphic model” (Deleuze and Guattari 1987: 411). renderedcovered,disso- unrecognizable, or hidden ordinarily is but everywhere exists doubtless that vitalism material a such, as matter matter,of to properstate life vital a a is light to bring metallurgy and demonstrate the capabilities of a material. They explain, “What metal to metallurgy cite Guattari and affect.Deleuze circulationof the with mating a body. Rather, it is a vitalism that strongly equates materiality ani- and entering force life external an postulates that one term, the it” (ibid.: xiii). This is, therefore, spiritual supplement or ‘life force’ added to the matter said to house a not is vibrancy material or affect “impersonal that is point crucial own” (Bennett 2010: viii). This is nonhuman agent territory. Bennett’s quasi as act to agents or also forces with trajectories, but propensities, or tendencies of humans their of designs and will the block or impede to only not – metals storms, commodities, edibles, – things of capacity “the is vitality that argues She made. is everything which to aims particular, reclaim (and boost in the process) the status of the vibrant matter of in project, materialism vitalist Bennett’s this topic. on reflections rich contribute 2006) (2002, Braidotti Rosi and 2010) (2001, Bennett Jane Philosophers 2013). (Ingold entities man nonhu- and human both traversing forces the acknowledges that is notsomethingthatobjects act. us make Instead, this is to a relational, emergent, and or fully embodied agency – it react to power object’s an upon based not is agency,of which notion broad a suggests This interacting. is which the from emerges with environment particular the that and object the between relationship property a but itself, object a the not of is quality agency Landa, De to according Thus, in contexts. only specific actualized becomes but properties, intrinsic its with do to nothing has object’s potential an how emphasizes Landa the De user. with engagements latent contain objects which in affordance of theory Gibson’sclassic J. James psychologist reconsidered has (2002), actualization agency of idea the proposed has who Landa, things and things – that agency is actualized. Philosopher Manuel De between and us, and things between – encounters these of milieu the in is It things. with encounters of out emerges that something is (Ingold objects intentionality that something not their is Agency 2013). signifies agency that or things, of erty conceptual processes thatweusetomakesenseoftheworld. cultural and social practices, human behavior, subjectivities, and the Spinoza’smat- that argues he resonatesdiscussion: voice this in E-print materialism radical a need we reason the is embodiment This prop- innate an be to however,agency not, consider should We have not a vitalism in the traditional sense of butsomethingthatobjects have . Rather,agency .

are PLC . and variety of objects. of variety crucially,and, manipulated, increasingan in embedded and number handled, is information processing”: “information expression the of meaning the explains (2010) Kuniavsky material. as information ates situ- instance, for computing, Ubiquitous experiences. or systems, distribution systems, belief territories, behaviors, patterns, habits, but “stuff,” not are encounter we materials the of some materials; they and matter mold matterinasimultaneous,mutuallyconstitutiveprocess. by molded are Humans 1995). (Hutchins things and people experiential between relationships sensuous the from a emerges is that it process interrelational; as understood ingly increas- is Cognition affective–emergent. and sensuous–cognitive, tion of souls taking place – going back and forth between production radiates in the digital glow of our devices? Can we envision a circula- that thingswere robbed oftheirpowertoenchant. meant Enlightenment the Adorno, and Horkheimer For 21). (2002: things” into souls makes industrialism souls; with things had endowed “animism wrote: Horkheimer and Adorno Philosophers 166). capitalist “a Bracken’sexpression, Christopher critic be understood as a form of secular sympathetic magic or, to borrow can commodities within harbored is that “enchantment” wondrous Apple make that products into such seductive, alluring, attributes and mesmerizing entities. The experiential the about think we when evident certainly is it good, produced every to applies fetishization Marx’sIf commodities. with contact our of form defining the is and consumer the over spell a casts that glow animistic of sort a is sues commodity the conceals the social nature of the processAs of its production, what en- 117). (2001: fetishization” of practice atavistic an to it “reduces he as animism” of dismissive “too likewise is Marx Bennett, For “fetishism.” of instead “animism” term the used could have Marx that maintains (1993) Taussig Michael anthropologist the Indeed, fetishism. on namely,Marx’scommodity – things of perspective animation another evokes animate” to things inanimate of ability 2010: “curious whose (2001), (Bennett Brown to back subtle” us brings and This 6). dramatic effects produce to act, to of talks she “ Indeed, objectification. human by objectification irreducible as human and exceeding vividly as things describes She emanating from a random assemblage of objects found in the gutter. data theycollecthelpsmoldtheuser’s behavior. The sleep. of quality the or eaten, food of type the walked, steps of number the as such metrics personal collect that form, wristband in often devices, wearable wireless-enabled trackers, activity are jects ob- These habits. eating and patterns sleep like activities everyday Thing-Power Materiality, however, is not only the consideration of physical physical of consideration the only not is however, Materiality, This is also Bennett’s point when she recounts the intrinsic vitality Can it be, though, that this power to enchant still persists and and persists still enchant to power this that though, be, it Can FitBit , 13

© on data utilize and collect to users allow example, for : the curious ability of inanimate things to animate, animate, to things inanimate of ability curious the : 12 BLOOMSBURY as such devices Self-monitoring E-print Jawbone’sUp mana ” (2007; (2007; ”

Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

229 Design and Culture 230 Design and Culture Betti Marenko © BLOOMSBURY that reminds people to take their medication via light, sounds, or or sounds, messaging. light, via medication their take to people reminds that winner Award forms of embodied and intuitive knowledge. The 2011 Global Mobile objects and having “conversations” with them; Apple’sthem; with “conversations” having and objects with talking of experience the have may we increasingly and alarm, new the to GPS car our from us, to talking objects to from issue talking the to things about talking shifting explicitly by also but things, investigate to which with perspective new a providing by move dichotomy this can beyond paradigm neo-animist A reality. of evidence trovertible loquitur ipsa other,the on deceiving; and cunning be to prone gods false as are we when evidence” confronted with things that versus “talk.” On one hand, things are“idol perceived of ambivalence the by ated perme- is culture our that believes (2008) Daston Lorraine Historian U looking closelyatfamiliar, embodiedexperiencesofdigitaldevices. animistic persistence is what my neo-animist paradigm explicates by stay.This to here is objects of power animistic and magic the ism, tion? Taussig (1993) maintains that no matter the destinies of capital- consump- during one another with recharged then and production in soul one with charged are commodities as – consumption and our embodied brain and thought processes thought and brain embodied our as defined – wetware meets technology which in landscape this In 2011) escalates newly emerging thing–human interaction processes. (Hunt encounters” electronic “animated in increase exponential The inhabit. we networks human–thing entangled the on commentary back, and they talked to each other – all the while providing a critical talked they wrote, and read they agency: intelligent with devices of of this process (see Antonelli 2011). 2004; (McCullough Allison 2006;Shepard 2011). conversation ongoing the in fully participate they people; between mediate just don’t technologies Digital terms. animist in decoded be to tends objects these of agency emergent the because objects and users between interactions social of types Samantha. of a man who falls in love with his voice-activated operating system, movie Jonze’sSpike latest director a that times the with of sign a “chats” surely is car. It useful have to possible be then will it and system, Siri behavior. this normalizes and fosters interaction This them. to talk personal assistants and “knowledge navigators” that exhort users to Google Voice Search are familiar examples. Both are voice-activated bicomp- The 2011 MoMA exhibition MoMA 2011 The ubicomp- The will soon be integrated into cars with the Her

E-printstory mundane?) prophetic? (disturbing? the tells (2013) Scape : things do speak for themselves as the purest incon- purest the as themselves for speak do things : Clocky GlowCaps scape andTechno-Animism is an alarm clock that jumps off the bedside bedside the off jumps that clock alarm an is in which we are immersed fosters new new fosters immersed are we which in , for instance, is the first “smart” pill bottle pill “smart” first the is instance, for , with TalkMe to things. We are now accustomed now areWe things. Talk to Me was a dazzling showcase dazzling a was Eyes Free 14 presented a collection – we assimilate new new assimilate we – voice control Nest Siri smoke PLC and and res bank balanceis“inthered.” user’s the in balance the accounts, and also resists attempts to be opened when the owner’sreflect to shrinks and swells physically Lab’sDesign MIT off. it switch to bed of out get don’t you if hides and runs then and table, nudge to one of a the them: between distance physical significant despite “presence” movements other’s even when physically each separated. Two mirror people can sense each that other’s objects egg-like of pair a 2), is example Another inhabitants. its and home tient sen- and acting, living, a between interactions embodied fully gests on. so and intruders, floods, leaks, TV,detect watching and been have kids your hours many how reveal done, is laundry your if you alert settings. domestic in changes notices it whenever more) with an interface that sends notifications (via email, SMS, Twitter, and home monitors with sensors for moisture, temperature, and vibration is tendency this shows already that we stories the more the employ to make sense of them tilt intelligent, toward animism. One seem smart object devices “smart” these more the And devices. smart increasingly to delegate to tend users Andrejevic (2005), the more interactivity becomes invisible, the more Mark scholar media According(Greenfieldto 2006). technology tion This informa- by background. life everyday of the colonization a to equates into phenomenon merge seamlessly and Wi-Fi through Ubi monitoring home the like devices Voice-activated horizon. the on are devices such more and updates, automatic and storage, data connectivity, Wi-Fi with already happens incognizance This radar.” areoperations ordinarythe technological use “below whose objects more it goes unnoticed. Users are particularly incognizant when they is woven seamlessly into the fabric of everyday life (Weiser 1991), the driver of innovation in the ubicomp- potent a is sentience animated with us around objects imbuing that similarly (2006) Greenfield 34). (2010: animist” sense a in is “Virtually every project that emphasizes how devices react to people as two of the most powerful narratives we use to explain interaction: enchantment incomprehensible and animism cites (2010) Kuniavsky fairly objects. of world otherwise an to meaning give to outlook animist an deploy we backdroplives, on” daily “switched our and to this landscape of uber-connectivity becomes the invisible, intangible, As inanimate. and animate the between distinction the questions responsiveness and animation emergent which in agencies tributed adaptive, and vocal – cannot be ignored. This ubicomp- emergent, soft, immersive, entities pervasive, – active agency “smart,” whose as them experience we contrary, the On in its twin. its in We don’t experience these devices as “dumb,” passive things. things. passive “dumb,” as devices these experience don’t We mentioned earlier, for instance, connect directly to the Internet Internet the to directly connect instance, earlier,for mentioned Twine ’s tagline – “

More frivolous perhaps, but nonetheless symptomatic of symptomatic nonetheless but perhaps, frivolous More ©

RolyPoly BLOOMSBURY Listen to your home, wherever you are Proverbial Wallet Proverbial 15 pair will create a simultaneous reaction E-print scape Twine . The more that technology is a prototype wallet that that wallet prototype a is (Figure 1), one of the first the of one 1), (Figure scape RolyPoly is a field of dis- Twine ” – sug-

(Figure argues can

Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

231 Design and Culture 232 Design and Culture Betti Marenko RolyPoly. Imagecourtesyofandusedwithpermission oftheDesignIncubationCentre, NationalUniversityof © BLOOMSBURY either fragrances or gumballs. of system rewardtailor-made a with media social on user’sactivity the to respond that devices USB-connected both are They sweets. smells, customizable into notifications verts Webrobots.While media social of pair a 4) and (Figures3 are here, discussing am I tendencies animistic the Singapore. ©DesignIncubationCentre, NationalUniversityofSingapore. E-printTwine. Imagecourtesyof andusedwithpermissionofSupermechanical Molly counts the number of re-tweets, (http://supermechanical.com). Molly turns tweets into tweets turns Olly and Olly Figure 2 Figure 1

con- Molly PLC

what’s wrong, where the problem is and what to it before “thinks that the piercing sound of conventional alarms in favor of a talking device forsakes that alarm monoxide carbon and smoke of typology new a The same company that created this thermostat has just introduced patterns. living their to adapt to learns and day the throughout ties Nest device, smart best-known the perhaps Finally, sweet. a with user and once a certain number of re-tweets is reached, she rewards the There’s carbonmonoxideinthebedroom. Movetofresh There’s“Heads-up. like living the in smoke (Figure 5) is an intelligent thermostat that monitors users activi- Molly. Imagecourtesyofandusedwith permissionofMintDigitalLtd. © Olly. ImagecourtesyofandusedwithpermissionMintDigitalLtd.

BLOOMSBURY speaks.”

E-printexactly user the tells voice human A

r oom.” and “Emergency.and oom.”

do using sentences

air.” Figure 4 Figure 3 Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

233 Design and Culture 234 Design and Culture Betti Marenko ©

increasingly neutral, standardized, and rational, while their content content their while rational, and standardized, neutral, increasingly are entangled are we which with objects of forms physical the that argues (1999) Stivers Richard Sociologist premise: different a upon old modernist above. The uniformity of design language has nothing to do with the the discuss I that devices smart the of several of be language design go-to to seems that box square white commonplace the of true also is It tablet. a or smartphone, a iPod, an is it whether our – in hands holding to used BLOOMSBURY so are we that shape pocket-size angular, rect- black, omnipresent the for true is This uniform. become increasingly to tend designs their datasphere, the in a presence shadow, digital information an possess they because Precisely vices. accommodate the enrollment among us of these assertive objects assertive these of us to among enrollment order the in accommodate changing is world this in occupancy Our world. the of restthe on impact invisible, yet pervasive, a have agents nonhuman other In imaginations. our for words, spimes and blogjects are and part of a field of interaction in which devices with interactions of our embodiment the for consequences remarkable have blogjects and Spimes objects. other with conversations in engage that and time and space in traceable are that identities immaterial with jects call author Bruce Sterling (2005) and technologist Julian Bleecker (2009) of concerns (2009a). of concerns whose agency, as Bruno Latour would say, speaks loudly of matters This situation reverberates in the design language of digital de- digital of language design the in reverberates situation This what of instances considered be all can examples above The E-printspimes and dictum blogjects Nest. Imagecourtesyofandusedwithpermission “form follows function.” Rather, it is predicated . These two terms describe material ob- material describe terms two These .

Figure 5 PLC world. It is usual for theoretical discourses to play catch-up with with Ruskin’sJohn catch-up upon building – that propose to play like would I practice. to discourses theoretical for usual is It world. this underpin that ontologies the capture to needs things of world the encapsulate to hopes that lexicon theoretical Any paradigms. that coalesce aroundpractices things shape-shift much faster for than do cultural vocabularies” “practical the that explains Thrift Nigel C of ourinteractionswiththeresponsive agentsinourobject- tenor animistic the with integrate should competencies somatic and technology.”Gell’sGell’sof on “enchantment irrational builds article this in describe I that competencies somatic and thinking magical irrational, of combination peculiar The devices. digital with actions inter-to pertain only they do nor 2005), (Bailey new not are devices that experiences sensory mingled ware, software, and interaction dissolves, producing a brand of com- hard-between distinction The 12). (2012: interface” the be also can user the so and environment; the in is user the and interface, the is longer a box, a user, and an interface between them. The environment is become the app that the user is running. For these gadgets, the app “slabs,” calls (2011) Allen van Philip designer interaction which ties, meshed withintensesomaticandsensorialactivity. are work, devices these how know not do typically we that fact the by part great in triggered thinking, magical and Fascination tences. compe- somatic and irrational of combination a via understood is ing insurrection of objects. of insurrection ing impend- an of vision nightmarish its with fallacy,” “techno-pathetic the avoids paradigm neo-animist a – fallacy” “pathetic the of notion needs. Neo-animism tenders a landscape a tenders Neo-animism needs. and wants, habits, users’ mining by and modulations algorithmic to according themselves modify and respond, react, that things of full world a includes paradigm neo-animist This us. to and other each the complexity and pervasiveness of a world full of things that talk to rethinkto way new bold offersa it Instead, spectacle. the of society scape them. with This paradigm also offers an to alternative considering the ubicomp- engagement affective our alongside presence right agency material and objects’ articulates it because fallacy pathetic they are closer tothatthingwecall“us” than everbefore. because precisely things of uprising an fear not should We it. enter we as but – Odradek Kafka’sof Joseph story in enigmatic or fables animate to begin now objects that is happening is What literature. and in feared of dreamed both objects of insurrection the not is us around happening is What alive. and autonomous, intelligent, were they if the device. Jeremy Pitt advocates a related concept: “There is no “Thereis relatedconcept: a advocates JeremyPitt device. the onclusions The wonder and delight with which we experience technological experience we which with delight and wonder The These rectangular handheld devices that have a range of capabili- as solely the last upgrade of commodity fetishism in the the in fetishism commodity of upgrade last the solely as not

as we leave the room – as in Hans Christian Andersen’s © BLOOMSBURY 16 Neo-animism sidesteps the techno- E-print transfix

and transport their users. their transport and of agents of

that behave as behave that scapes . Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

235 Design and Culture 236 Design and Culture Betti Marenko © BLOOMSBURY toughest audienceyet. my are They London. Martins, Saint Central at Design Product BA Finally,2012. the of students year final the greatestto my go thanks the of in College invitation her for Mukherjee Ranu to Thanks Francisco. California San Arts, Practice, Social from Art, Fine students with Graduate the debated) animatedly (and tested were Ideas me. inviting for Microsoft, now Nokia, at Dalby Anthony to Thanks 2013 with a fiercely engaging audience of designers and innovators. September in London Nokia at talk a during ideas these discuss to opportunity the the had also I 2013. June in at Contemporary Nottingham University Trent Nottingham and Society Research Design Things” Bad and Things “Good the at presented was version Another Objects.” of Lives the and Theory, panel Forum Studies Design the to participate to me invited Leslie when Angeles Los in Conference Association Art College 2012 the of occasion the on First, audiences. of variety a from feedback and response positive receive to fortunate was I and time, of period a over presented been have article this of versions Different claims. my further interrogate to me prompting and important issues raising for draft first my of thanks reviewers Also, anonymous the support. to overall unflagging their and editing tentive at- their for Boradkar Prasad and Atzmon Leslie to grateful am I Acknowledgments 2. 1. N 5. 4. 3. otes

who discusses some aspects of animism and enchantment in in enchantment and animism of aspects some discusses who (2007) Kuniavsky also See papers (2010). Kera and Rod (2012), pertinent al. et McVeigh-Schultz (2011), (2013), al. et Beran are topic this addressing McVeigh-Schultz and Allen Van mentioned previously the from Aside growing. steadily is it but The Films Montsouris(originaltitle: T devices, mobile devices, and the new industrial and consumer consumer and industrial new the and devices, computer mobile devices, traditional includes number This (According 2012. reached in world billion devices 8.7 the Internet-connected in of number people the Cisco, of to number having the mainstream Internet the more to surpassed connected becoming objects of now number the is with concept This orated. elab- first was identities digital their have should things tronic non-elec- that idea the where 1999 in Labs Auto-ID MIT the T http://theubi.com/. www.quirky.com/shop/609-Spotter-Multipurpose-Sensors; See magic. See design. interaction he Red Balloon Red he he term the “Internet of Things” was coined by the staff at at staff the by coined was Things” of “Internet the term he literature on design interaction and animism is not abundant, also Gell (1988) on the relationship between technology and relationshiptechnology the between on (1988) Gell also SmartThings E-print , (1956). Directed by Albert Lamorisse. Paris, Paris, Lamorisse. Albert by Directed (1956).

http://www.smartthings.com/; Le BallonRouge

symposium organized by the by organized symposium ).

“Design, Thing Thing “Design, Spotter ,

http:// PLC Ubi Ubi 17. 16. 15. 12. 11. 10. 13. 9. 8. 7. 6.

December 10,2013). Mankind to Risk A html. Wallet http://www.nandahome.com/products/clocky/; G 2013). 10, December (accessed blog/2007/08/25/what-is-wetware/ organism an for code generative the indicates broadly it term, this employed first Sterling Bruce Accor www.fitbit.com/. necessary theoretical frameworks to support it. For Holbraad, Holbraad, For it. the support to having frameworks theoretical necessary without beliefs animistic understand to assumes H turn.” of Archaeological Method and Theory See animate to according dispositions isambivalentandunpredictable” (2009:409). class given a objects in about “membership writes whose and ontologies multiple discusses of sorts Zedeno these Maria anthropologist world, material the In both have adeliriousanddeludedperception oftheworld. they and inanimate, from animate distinguish to unable both are they as animists of examples best the are primitives For See magnetic stripes (Kuniavsky2010). cards, SIM (RFID), ID Radio-frequency Codes, QR packaging, retail most in barcodes shadow: a have to objects T around 40billiondevicesby2020(seeEvans2011). and 2015, by connected devices billion 15 about be will there devices S number ofways(i.e.smartmaterials). a in objects into incorporated be can information as are tions are chips called no “housewares.” He but shows how unnecessary these material distinc- same the with electronics” made objects “consumer while called normally are and information without devices those fromdifferently designed are processing K only inaderivativeandsecondarymanner. things in invested Gell’sand human irreduciblyremains agency echnically, there are several systems of identification that allow s the recently established recently the s ee uniavsky (2010) notes how devices made with information information with made devices how notes (2010) uniavsky olbraad critiques Alfred Gell’s (1998) notion of agency as it it as agency of notion (1998) Gell’s Alfred critiques olbraad lowcaps her work on the interaction between Native Americans and Americans Native between interaction the on work her anthropologist Edward B. Tylor (1958 [1871]), children and children Tylor[1871]), B. (1958 Edward anthropologist IFTTT Brown and Walker (2008) for a special issue of the of issue special Walkera Brownand for (2008) Jawbone’s Up Jawbone’s ding to Rudy Rucker,Rudy to ding with together who writer cyberpunk , © http://eco.media.mit.edu/static/proverbialwallets/index. that we think of as things. Cisco projections state that state projections Cisco things. as of think we that ,

, https://ifttt.com/.

BLOOMSBURYhttp://www.vitality.net/glowcaps.html; seems to suggest. http://cser.org/(accessed suggest. to seems , https://jawbone.com/up; , E-print Cambridge Project for Existential Existential for Project Cambridge . http://www.rudyrucker.com/. devoted to the “animistic FitBit Proverbial Proverbial , Clocky

Journal http:// ,

Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

237 Design and Culture 238 Design and Culture Betti Marenko ©

BLOOMSBURYBraidotti, Rosi. 2002. Christopher.2007. Bracken, ol, in ad aata rs. 2010. Frost. Samantha and Diana Coole, JefferyCohen, Jerome. 2012. Brown, Linda A. and William H. Walker. 2008. “Archaeology, Animism Brown, Bill.2001.“ThingTheory.” 2006. Rosi. Braidotti, for Manifesto A Matter: Things “Why 2009. Julian. Bleecker, Kuzyk, Roman Ramirez-Serrano, Alejandro N., Tayna Beran, 2010. Jane. Bennett, Bennett, Jane. 2001. Bailey, Lee Worth. 2005. 2011. Paola. Antonelli, Andrejevic, Mark. 2005. “Nothing Comes Between Me and My CPU: 2006. Anne. Allison, Alberti, Benjamin and Tamara L. Bray. 2009. “Introduction to Special 2002. Horkheimer. Mark and Theodor Adorno, Abram, David. 1996. References Bird-David, Nurit. 1999. “‘Animism’ Revisited: Personhood, Environ Savage Philosophy Press, 2010. Politics Ontology,Agency,and Objects Theory Agents.” Non-Human and Cambridge: PolityPress. of Becoming (eds.), Raiford Guins and Candlin Fiona In Things.” of Internet the in Networked Objects–Cohabiting with Pigeons, Arphids, and Aibos (Special Issue, Interaction.” Child-Robot in Animism Perceived Robots: Understand Children How “Understanding 2011. Nugent. Sarah and Fior, Meghann Durham, NC:DukeUniversityPress. Crossings, andEthics University ofIllinoisPress. Art. Objects and People between Society Computing.” ‘Ubiquitous’ and Clothes Smart Global Imagination Section.” Enlightenment House. m 69(7–8): 539–50. ent and Relational Epistemology.”Relational and ent The Object Reader , 15(4SpecialIssue). , 22(3):101–19.

. Brooklyn, NY: PunctumBooks. E-print Cambridge ArchaeologicalJournal . Cambridge:PolityPress. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Human-Computer of Journal International . Stanford, CA:Stanford UniversityPress. Culture: ASecondChance? The Spell of the Sensuous The Enchantment of Modern Life: Attachments, . Berkeley, Press. CA:UniversityofCalifornia Metamorphoses: Towards a Materialist Theory Millennial Monsters: Japanese Toys and the the and Toys Japanese Monsters: Millennial . Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress, 2007. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things of Ecology Political A Matter: Vibrant Talk to Me: Design and the Communication the and Design Me: Talkto The Enchantments of Technology . Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress. rnpstos O Nmdc Ethics Nomadic On Transpositions: , pp. 165–74. London: Routledge, 2009. Journal of Archaeological Method and Method Archaeological of Journal Animal, Mineral, Vegetable:Mineral, Animal, and Ethic Magical Criticism: The Resource of of Resource The Criticism: Magical . New York: Museum of Modern Modern of Museum York: New . Critical Inquiry . Durham, NC: Duke University University Duke NC: Durham, . Current Anthropology Current ): 67–91. . New York: Random , 19(3):337–43. New Materialisms: Materialisms: New 28(1):5–9. Theory, Culture, & Culture, Theory, Dialectic of of Dialectic . Chicago: PLC 40 40 - . , .

Gell, Alfred. 1988. “Technology and Magic.” “Technologyand 1988. Alfred. Gell, 2011. Lazzarato. Maurizio and Folie, Sabine Anselm, Franke, Franke, Anselm. 2010. of Things: How the Next Evolution Evans, Dave. 2011. “The Internet 2011. Bell. Genevieve and Paul Dourish, 1987. Guattari. Felix and Gilles Deleuze, Deleuze, Gilles. 1998. 2002. Manuel. Landa, De the in Transcendence and “Immanence 1999. Manuel. Landa, De 1998. Erik. Davis, 2008. Lorraine. Daston, Gell, Alfred. 1992. “The Technology of Enchantment and Enchant and Enchantment Technologyof “The 1992. Alfred. Gell, Greenfield, Adams. 2006. 1998. Alfred. Gell, Guthrie, Stewart. 1993. Stewart. Guthrie, Guattari, Felix.1995. Harvey, Graham. 2005. Graham. Harvey, Post- Life: Relatedness, “Animism, 2009. H. Alejandro Haber, Holbraad, Martin. 2009. “Ontology, Ethnography, Archaeology: Archaeology: Ethnography, “Ontology, 2009. Martin. Holbraad, 2012. Hodder,Ian. der BuchhandlungWalther Konig. Glass Looking the Through Modernity Animism: City. (accessed 10December2013). com/web/about/ac79/docs/innov/IoT_IBSG_0411FINAL.pdf Everything.” Changing is Internet the of MIT Press. Computing Ubiquitous in Mythology and Mess Capitalism andSchizophrenia City LightsBooks. London: Continuum. pp. 119–34.Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress. (ed.), Buchanan Ian In Form.” of Genesis Age ofInformation and Science Oxford: Clarendon Press. Clarendon Press. (eds.), m 4(2): 6–9. 418–30. Western Perspectives.” Religion Computing aeological Journal Things.” of Ontography the on Afterword An between HumansandThings London: Hurst&Company. ent of Techonology.” In Jeremy Coote and Anthony Shelton Shelton Anthony and Coote Jeremy In Techonology.” of ent Anthropology, Art, and Aesthetics

© . Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. . Berkeley, CA:NewRiders. . NewYork: ZoneBooks. Techgnosis: Myth, Magic, and Mysticism in the the in Mysticism and Magic, Myth, Techgnosis: Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships the of Archaeology An Entangled:

BLOOMSBURYTheory Anthropological An Agency: and Art , 19(3):431–41. . NewYork: HarmonyBooks. Chaosophy Spinoza: Practical Philosophy Animism 1 Things that Talk: Object Lessons from Art Art from Lessons Object Talk: that Things Everyware: Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Animism: Respecting the Living World Living the Respecting Animism: Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of of Theory New A Clouds: the in Faces Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy Virtual and Science Intensive Cambridge Archaeological Journal E-print . London:Wiley-Blackwell. . London:TheAthlonePress. . NewYork: Semiotext(e). . Berlin: Sternberg Press and Extra Divining a Digital Future: Future: Digital a Divining Cisco A Thousand Plateaus: Plateaus: Thousand A A Deleuzian Century? Deleuzian A , pp. 40–66. Oxford: Oxford: 40–66. pp. , Anthropology TodayAnthropology . http://www.cisco.. . Cambridge, MA: Cambridge, . Cambridge Arch Cambridge . San Francisco: . Berlin: Verlag Berlin: . , 19(3): - - . . , .

Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

239 Design and Culture 240 Design and Culture Betti Marenko © BLOOMSBURY aek, et. 09 “betRlc ad hi Efcs fr a for Effects: their and “Object-Relics 2009. Betti. Marenko, Life Cognitive “The 2009. Renfrew. Colin and Lambros Malafouris, 1998. Alphonso. Lingis, Thomas, Binder, In Animism.” “Designed 2008. Brenda. Laurel, Manifesto.’” ‘Compositionist a at Attempt “An Latour,2010. Bruno. The Masses? Missing the are “Where 2009b. Bruno. Latour, Steps Few A Prometheus? Cautious “A 2009a. Bruno. Latour, 2005. Latour,Bruno. 2010. Kuniavsky,Mike. Ubicomp a in Expectations User “Animist 2007. Mike. Kuniavsky, 2005. Carl. Knappett, 2006. E. James Katz, 2013. Tim. Ingold, Ingold, Tim. 2006. “Rethinking the Animate, Re-Animating Thought.” 1995. Edwin. Hutchins, Infrastructure.” Anxious and Systems “Nervous 2011. James. Hunt, of Paris. (eds.), Neo-Animist Paradigm.” In Bernard Darras and Sarah Belkhamsa Cambridge: UniversityofCambridge. Mind the of Boundaries the Recasting Things: of Life Mind.” In Lambros Malafouris and Colin Renfrew (eds.), Extended the and Engagement Archaeology,Material Things: of University Press. Digital Bauhaus (eds.), Malmorg Lone and Lowgren Jonas History New Literary and Candlin Fiona Raiford Guins In Artifacts.” Mundane Few a of Sociology In Design.” pp. 2–10.BocaRaton,FL:UniversalPublishers. of Society History Design the of Conference International Annual Philosophy a Toward Actor–Network Theory Experience Design CHI2004_lost_in_AmI.pdf (accessedSeptember16,2013). http://www.orangecone.com/kuniavsky_ 2007. Francisco, San Intelligence.’” Ambient in ‘Lost for paper position A World: Pennsylvania. Perspective Interdisciplinary NJ: Transaction Publishing. Life Social Transformationof the Architecture Ethnos Press. Art. Modern Objects and People between In Paola Antonelli (ed.), Meditation and Information and Meditation

E-print , 71(1):9–20. . London:Routledge.

(eds.), , pp.251–74.London:Springer. Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and and Art Archaeology, Anthropology, Making: . Amsterdam: Elsevier. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to to Introduction An Social: the Reassembling Magic in the Air: Mobile Communication and Communication Mobile Air: the in Magic , 41(3):471–90. The Object Reader Smart Things: Ubiquitous Computing, User Computing, Ubiquitous Things: Smart Cognition in the Wild the in Cognition Talk to Me: Design and the Communication Thinking Through Material Culture: An An Culture: Material Through Thinking The Imperative The . Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. , pp. 48–55. New York:New of 48–55. Museum pp. , . Philadelphia: University of of University Philadelphia: . . London and New Brunswick, Brunswick, New and London . , pp. 239–53. Paris: University Paris: 239–53. pp. , . Bloomington, IN: Indiana Indiana IN: Bloomington, . Proceedings of the 2008 2008 the of Proceedings , pp. 225–58.: Routledge. . Cambridge, MA: MIT MA: Cambridge, . Re(Searching) the the Re(Searching) , pp. 1–12. pp. , Cognitive PLC , Mccullough, Malcolm (ed.). 2004. (ed.). Malcolm Mccullough, Strathern, Marilyn. 1988. Marilyn. Strathern, 1999. Richard. Stivers, Sterling, Bruce.2005. 2011. Mark. Shepard, Subjectivity and Agency “From 2010. Kera. Denisa and Jan Rod, Jeremy.2102. Pitt, 2012. Spyros. Papapetros, Duff, Emily Boyle, Jacob Stein, Jennifer Joshua, Mcveigh-Schultz, Taussig,1993. Michael. Van Allen, Philip and Joshua Mcveigh-Schultz. 2013. “AniThings: “AniThings: 2013. Mcveigh-Schultz. Joshua and Philip Allen, Van Van Allen, Philip. 2011. “The New Ecology of Things: Slabs, Sofducts, it.” [1871]). (1958 Tylor,B. About Edward do to What and – Inc. “Lifeworld 2011. Nigel. Thrift, Zedeno, Maria N. 2009. “Animating by Association: Index Objects Objects Index Association: by “Animating 2009. N. Maria Zedeno, Weiser,Century.”21st the for Computer “The 1991. Mark. Irrational Press. i Systems.” Digital Creativity Techno-Social Large of Design to Approach (STS) TechnologyScience Studies and Phenomenological Animism: to Computing Pervasive Chicago Press. Life of Extension the and Architecture, 221–230. NewYork: ACMPress. Contexts New and Methodologies for Human-Car Interaction.” In Lifelogging: “Vehicular 2012. Fisher. Scott and Wiscombe, Tasse,Simon Amanda Syam, Avimaan Watson, Jeff MA: MITPress. Knowing Environmental and Computing, Pervasive University of California Press.University ofCalifornia 19(3): 407–17. Taxonomies.”Relational and American 56. NewYork: ACMPress. Animism and Heterogeneous Multiplicity.” In objects/ (lastaccessedMay13,2014). the-new-ecology-of-things-slabs-sofducts-and-bespoke- http://johnnyholland.org/2011/05/19/ Objects.” Bespoke and ally Environment andPlanningD:SocietySpace the Senses tecture, and the Future of Urban Space Urban of Future the and tecture, published as

© . NewYork: Continuum. , 265(3):94–104. . London:Routledge. , 21(4):70–6. Primitive Culture BLOOMSBURY of Perils and Potential The Day: Pervasive This Shaping Things Sentient City: Ubiquitous Computing, Arch Computing, Ubiquitous City: Sentient . London:ImperialCollegePress. Mimesis and Alterity: A Particular History of History Particular A Alterity: and Mimesis Technology as Magic: The Triumph of the the of Triumph The Magic: as Technology The Gender of the Gift the of Gender The E-print Art, Inorganic: the of Animation the On Cambridge Archaeological Journal Archaeological Cambridge Religion in Primitive Culture Primitive in Religion ]. New York: Harper & Brothers. Digital Ground: Architecture, Architecture, Ground: Digital . Cambridge,MA:MITPress. . Chicago: University of of University Chicago: . . Cambridge, MA: MIT MIT MA: Cambridge, . CHI 2013 , 29(1):5–26. . Berkeley, CA: CA: Berkeley, . CHI 2012 . Cambridge, . , pp. 2247– Scientific [origin , pp. - - , Neo-Animism andDesign PLC

241 Design and Culture PLC

E-print

BLOOMSBURY ©