Thematic Section

Images Like Me: Material Engagement, Operative Images, Imagin-Actions

Author(s)
Keywords
  • Interactivity
  • Imagination
  • Agency
  • Operativity
  • Imagin-action
Abstract

The intention of this article is to analyse some of the different ways in which the interactivity of inanimate objects has been discussed, with particular reference to images. In this context, it will be also proposed to consider a type of images, here called imagin-actions, which have specific characteristics different from those already considered in the debate. There is an extensive literary tradition according to which agency has since time immemorial been attributed to inanimate objects. Indeed, thanks to the imagination, human beings naturally relate to objects, and this would in fact constitute one of the fundamental elements for the development of the human mind. Now, with the advent of digital technologies, the actions of objects and images have acquired an operational quality, since they are capable of acting directly and concretely on the living world, and also of determining specific imaginative processes that entail the responsivity of things. However, in addition to having their own agency and operativity, imagin-actions do something more: they keep users in constant motion. By responding to a series of requests, they ask for something in return, intensifying the level of interactive exchange between people and things and inevitably reconfiguring human creative processes.

References
  1. Agamben, G., Stanze: La parola e il fantasma nella cultura occidentale (1977) (Turin: Einaudi, 2011).
  2. Bredekamp, H., Image Acts: A Systematic Approach to Visual Agency (2010) (Berlin-Boston: De Gruyter, 2018).
  3. Cappelletto, C., “Brain Image Making and Cyborg Visuality,” Reti, saperi, linguaggi 11, no. 21 (2022): 87-104, https://doi.org/10.12832/104542.
  4. Carbone, M., Philosophy-Screens: From Cinema to the Digital Revolution (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2016).
  5. Cimatti, F., Maiello, A., Quasi viventi: Il mondo digitale dalla A alla Z (Turin: Codice, 2024).
  6. Cross, A., “Upcoming Our Lady Peace Tour Plans to Take In-concert Holograms to the Next Level,” Global News, (May 8, 2022), https://globalnews.ca/news/8812347/our-lady-peace-hologram-concert/, accessed September 25, 2024.
  7. Cross, A., “Upcoming Our Lady Peace Tour Plans to Take In-concert Holograms to the Next Level,” Global News, (May 8, 2022), https://globalnews.ca/news/8812347/our-lady-peace-hologram-concert/, accessed September 25, 2024.
  8. Dooley, B., Ueno, H., “This Man Married a Fictional Character. He’d Like You to Hear Him Out,” The New York Times (April 24, 2022), https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/24/business/akihiko-kondo-fictional-character-relationships.html, accessed September 25, 2024.
  9. Eder, J., Klonk, C., eds., Image Operations: Visual Media and Political Conflict (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016).
  10. Elkins, J., The Domain of Images (1995) (Ithaca-London: Cornell University Press, 1999).
  11. Elsaesser, T., Alberro, A., “Farocki: A Frame for the No Longer Visible. Thomas Elsaesser in Conversation with Alexander Alberro,” e-flux, no. 59, (2014), http://e-flux.com/journal/59/61111/farocki-a-frame-forthe-no-longer-visible-thomas-elsaesser-in-conversation-with-alexanderalberro/, accessed September 25 2024.
  12. Farocki, H., “Phantom Images,” Public, no. 29 (2004), https://public.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/public/article/view/30354, accessed September 25 2024.
  13. Ferraris, M., L’immaginazione (Bologna: il Mulino, 1996).
  14. Flusser, V., Into the Universe of Technical Images (1985) (Minneapolis-London: University of Minnesota Press, 2011).
  15. Freedberg, D., The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1989).
  16. Gallagher, S., Enactivist Interventions: Rethinking the Mind (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017).
  17. Gallese, V., “A Bodily Take on Aesthetics: Performativity and Embodied Simulation,” in Pennisi, A., Falzone, A., eds., The Extended Theory of Cognitive Creativity (Cham: Springer, 2020).
  18. Garroni, E., Estetica ed epistemologia: Riflessioni sulla “Critica del Giudizio” (Rome: Bulzoni, 1976).
  19. Gell, A., Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998).
  20. Grespi, B., Malavasi, L., Dalla parte delle immagini: Temi di cultura visuale (Milan: McGraw Hill, 2022).
  21. Griffero, T., Immagini attive: Breve storia dell’immaginazione transitiva (Milan: Mondadori, 2003).
  22. Heidegger, M., Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, enlarged (1929) (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997).
  23. Hoel, A.S.A., “Operative Images. Inroads to a New Paradigm of Media Theory,” in Feiersinger, L., Friedrich, K., Queisner, M., eds., Image – Action – Space: Situating the Screen in Visual Practice (Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2018).
  24. Ingold, T., Imagining for Real: Essays on Creation, Attention and Correspondence (London, New York: Routledge, 2022).
  25. Koukouti, M.D., Malafouris, L., “Material Imagination: An Anthropological Perspective,” in Abraham, A., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of the Imagination (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020).
  26. Latour, B., We Have Never Been Modern (1991) (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993).
  27. Malafouris, L., How Things Shape the Mind: A Theory of Material Engagement (2013) (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2016).
  28. Manovich, L., The Language of New Media (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2001).
  29. Merleau-Ponty, M., The Visible and the Invisible (1964) (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1968).
  30. Mitchell, W.J.T., What Do Pictures Want? The Lives and Loves of Images (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2005).
  31. Montani, P., Tre forme di creatività: Tecnica, arte, politica (Napoli: Cronopio, 2017).
  32. Paglen, T., “Operational Images,” e-flux, no. 59, (2014), http://e-flux.com/journal/59/61130/operational-images/, accessed September 25 2024.
  33. Parikka, J., Operational Images: From the Visual to the Invisual (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2023).
  34. Pinotti, A., “Self-Negating Images: Towards An-Iconology,” Proceedings 1, no. 856 (2017): 1-9, https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings1090856.
  35. Pinotti, A., “The Avatarization of the (Self)Portrait: Notes Towards a Theological Genealogy of the Virtual Self,” in Geil, A., Jirsa, T., eds., Reconfiguring the Portrait (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2023): 190-204.
  36. Purgar, K., “What Is Not an Image (Anymore)? Iconic Difference, Immersion and Iconic Simultaneity in the Age of Screens,” Phainomena XXIV (2015): 145-170, https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839441350-004.
  37. Royakkers, L., et al., “Societal and Ethical Issues of Digitization,” Ethics and Information Technology 20 (2018): 127-142, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9452-x. 2018.
  38. Sontag, S., On Photography (1973) (New York: Rosetta Books).
  39. Van Est, R., Intimate Technology: The Battle for Our Body and Behaviour (The Hague: Rathenau Instituut, 2014).