Continuing on from my last post, I’ve been further exploring non-representational theory for the class presentation assignment. I really like the freedom this theory offers, as it distances itself from traditional academic theories and structures. I’m interested in its ideas to influence creative processes, whether that be in film or in writing. I found it useful to think about what representation means which enabled me to wrap my head around Vannini and Thrift’s non-representational ideas. Representation is trustworthy – it relies on repetition of the known (Doel 2010 in Vannini 2015, p. 6). Representation signifies the condensing of ideas and information, the squeezing of as much meaning from the world as possible. For me, representation is safe, and where I feel most comfortable.

Non-representational ideas give me a way to challenge myself, in the creative processes of my making. What am I making? Why? What feelings can I elicit from these makings? Non-representation relates to, “diverse work that seeks to better cope with our self-evidently more-than-human, more-than-textual, multisensual worlds” (Lorimer in Vannini 2015, p. 2-3). To me, this quote is at the same time intimidating and inviting. It elevates the worlds in which we live in a way we don’t usually see them. They are unknowable, but they are entities which cultivate creativity and exploration. I am reminded of Timothy Morton’s work on hyperobjects; “entities that are massively distributed in time and space…we find ourselves inside them, part of them yet not part of them” (2013, p. 39). Hyperobjects such as climate change or microplastics exceed human comprehension. We are affected by them, and they, by us. I’m reminded of this because Morton also highlights the importance of the “innumerable interrelationships among life forms and between life and non-life” (p. 42).

Non-representational theory also reflects this idea. Where Morton talks about intangible objects, Vannini speaks of “relational materialism. Material objects are no mere props for performance but parts and parcel of hybrid assemblages endowed with diffused personhood and relational agency… In this sense, material objects are to be given the same conceptual and empirical weight that is warranted to their human companions” (2015, p. 5). We so often view ourselves as living separately or adjacently to our surrounding environments. Non-representation challenges this idea, emphasising the importance of these intertwining relationships. This is what I chose to explore for my experiment, and is reflected in some of the examples I showed in my presentation.

Jacques Tati’s Playtime for example, uses only long shots throughout the film, encapsulating not only the human bodies that inhabit the screen, but also the settings and props, which are given equal weight to their human counterparts. We constantly see bodies in interaction with the objects around them. The settings become characters in themselves, adding to the whimsical quality of the film, and affecting both the bodies in the film as well as the audience watching. The Hong Kong setting in Wong Kar-wai’s Chungking Express (1994) also becomes a character given equal weight to its human counterparts, injecting a certain liveliness and vibrancy into the film. The colours, chaotic sounds and frantic camera movements emphasise the setting’s ‘aliveness’.

In my presentation, I talked about Hollis Frampton’s short film, nostalgia (1971) and its non-representational-esque mode of story-telling through two formats (film and photography), which are known for being inherently representational modes of communication. I love this example because it plays with our idea of memory – deciphering which words, emotions and meanings resonate with us, while also exploring the interconnectivity between humans and non-human objects. It explores the way we experience photographs, the feelings and memories they evoke, emphasising their power to affect us – and speak to our bodies, “Non-representational theory’s attention to affect and its derivatives—moods, passions, emotions, intensities, and feelings (Anderson, 2006)—transcends the human, focusing on relations amid inanimate objects, living, non-human” (McCormack 2006 in Vannini 2015, p. 5). This is also true for Ingmar Begman’s Persona (1966) which is much more focused on posing questions than giving answers. It leads the audience through an emotional whirlwind. Its often haunting composition leaves the audience feeling unsettled, feeling the same confusion, despair and conflicts as the film’s characters. The film is much more concerned with affect than cognition.

 

My experiment

I chose to focus on the objects around me, our interconnectivity, and the quality of movement. Movement is often associated with things that are alive – it moves therefore it lives. I wanted to show ‘liveliness’ in its sense of vibrancy and animation within the objects around me, as well as the “relational agency” they hold. Vannini expresses, “non-representational theory ought to reject any separation between corporeality, materiality, and sociality” (p. 5). I wanted to film these objects with an equal weight to how I would film human forms – to show off their shapes, lines, contours. I filmed objects at odd angles, relying mainly on close-ups and extreme close-ups, also using found footage in conjunction.  I edited this footage through split-screens, emphasising their movements, the multiplicity of typical household objects, and the potentials of interaction and interconnectivity between these objects, and between us and these objects.

I had a lot of trouble deciding what to do with this experiment, and I’m not sure if I evoked these qualities (relationality and movement). I think I may have benefitted from giving myself a clear prompt. I first attempted finding an image to respond in an audio-visual way (similar to the last activity), but found myself feeling even more overwhelmed and lost. I know that I need structure to get things done, or I feel dropped off the side of a cliff not knowing what to do with all this freedom – not being able to decide what to make or focus on. I get blurry vision without ‘representational’ ideas. But at the same time, learning about relational materialism and the other non-representational tenets has given me so much inspiration. I feel like I see so much more creative potential with non-representational theory and so I would love to adopt some of its principles, at least in small ways, to my future practices. I’m still a bit lost on the ways in which I could do that, but I think this experiment was ultimately a step in the right direction into this new non-representational world that I am not accustomed to at all but really wish to further explore.

 

My PowerPoint slides:

Non-representational theory presentation

References:

Chunking Express 1994, directed by Wong Kar-wai.

Mette Ingvartsen 2013, 69 positions – Soft Choreography, Mette Ingvartsen, viewed 24 July 2020, <https://www.metteingvartsen.net/texts_interviews/soft-choreography/>.

Morton, T 2013, ‘Poisoned ground: art and philosophy in the time of hyper objects’, symploke, vol. 21, no. 1-2, pp. 37-50.

nostalgia 1971, directed by Hollis Frampton.

Persona 1966, directed by Ingmar Bergman.

Playtime 1967, directed by Jacques Tati.

Thrift, N 2008, Non-representational theory: space, politics, affect, Routledge, New York, USA.

Vannini, P 2015, ‘Non-representational research methodologies: an introduction’, in Non-representational methodologies: Re-envisioning research, Routledge, pp. 1-18.