“Was not their mistake once more bred of the life of slavery that they had been living?—a life which was always looking upon everything, except mankind, animate and inanimate—‘nature,’ as people used to call it—as one thing, and mankind as another, it was natural to people thinking in this way, that they should try to make ‘nature’ their slave, since they thought ‘nature’ was something outside them” — William Morris

Thursday, June 4, 2015


"Cole also claims that artists and architects only read Speculative Realism because they misunderstand it, and really think that it’s about doing what all disciplines have always already done when they talked about objects and their histories. This is condescending on Cole’s part toward artists and architects, and also incorrect, as I can assure him from my discussions with hundreds of artists and architects. There’s been brewing resentment in the humanities at how OOO in particular has taken off in disciplines outside philosophy, and corresponding attempts to belittle the intellectual skills of my readers in those fields." --Graham Harman

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Cole doesn't even seem to realize that OOO is just one of the different Speculative Realisms, and he makes that mistake at like the beginning of the article. I don't know why I read beyond that; it doesn't get better. Gosh, is this what passes for high intellectual discourse? A bunch of trolls criticizing things they haven't read? And I thought social media was bad.