In the beginning, objects must evince features signaling humanness—faces, mouths, voices—to be looked at animate; in objectophilia, the thing is sexy properly since it is perhaps not peoples, maybe not soft and packed with fluids, but instead difficult, difficult, hard—though also a bit porous.
But both situations are about things arriving at a new lease of life in reference to their counterparties—subjects, individuals, wetware. Nevertheless, both are about topics engaging with things, whoever status that is new merely attributed to them by the previous. The new charm of things is rooted in their being seen as things, which begins when they are no longer objects for subjects in Jane Bennett’s view, by contrast. 4 They then become available not just for animist animation and sexual interest, but in addition for a 3rd connection: as things of recognition, as avenues toward what exactly is fundamentally a de-animation, a type of de-subjectivation or critical problem of subjectivation. Continue reading One may think about my nephew and Ms. Riitta-Berliner-Mauer as opposing situations.?