Raiding the inarticulate since 2010

accelerated academy acceleration agency AI Algorithmic Authoritarianism and Digital Repression archer Archive Archiving artificial intelligence automation Becoming Who We Are Between Post-Capitalism and Techno-Fascism big data blogging capitalism ChatGPT claude Cognitive Triage: Practice, Culture and Strategies Communicative Escalation and Cultural Abundance: How Do We Cope? Corporate Culture, Elites and Their Self-Understandings craft creativity critical realism data science Defensive Elites Digital Capitalism and Digital Social Science Digital Distraction, Personal Agency and The Reflexive Imperative Digital Elections, Party Politics and Diplomacy digital elites Digital Inequalities Digital Social Science Digital Sociology digital sociology Digital Universities elites Fragile Movements and Their Politics Cultures generative AI higher education Interested labour Lacan Listening LLMs margaret archer Organising personal morphogenesis Philosophy of Technology platform capitalism platforms populism Post-Democracy, Depoliticisation and Technocracy post-truth psychoanalysis public engagement public sociology publishing Reading realism reflexivity scholarship sexuality Shadow Mobilization, Astroturfing and Manipulation Social Media Social Media for Academics social media for academics social ontology social theory sociology technology The Content Ecosystem The Intensification of Work The Political Economy of Digital Capitalism The Technological History of Digital Capitalism Thinking trump twitter Uncategorized work writing zizek

Can we visually represent theory?

Is it possible to visually represent theory? This is the core question addressed by a potential project which I began discussing with a couple of people today. My starting point for the question is this video:

The video takes something unitary (a song produced through live looping) and visually deconstructs it, with each of the Beardyman fragments constituting one component of the overall product. But what I really like about this video is that it doesn’t stop there. It illustrates the production of these components (by Beardyman himself), their arrangement through his productive activity and the manner in which the ensuing relations constitute the piece itself.

It shows how something whole acquires its character through the specific interrelation of its parts over time. In this sense I think it visually represents theory. But it represents theory at its most atomistic. It represents an answer to the question “what is X?”. So how do we go further than this? The video artist and Beardyman describe this video as “visually explaining” how live looping works. Can we visually explain how other things work?

, ,