Abstract
I would like to consider here the rather paradoxical nature of the immaterial: that in order to conceive the immaterial, one must always try to understand it in material terms. I want to suggest that this is not so much a paradox but an artifact of our particular terms of analysis and in fact an ideological effect of the productive dualisms that structure social life (Miller 2005). We need this apparent paradox in order to gird the dualisms that make our social categories possible. What exactly is the relationship between the material and immaterial? I propose to cast this question in different terms; in relation to the notion of propinquity as an alternative way of seeing this relationship, and also as a way of understanding in a different manner what Michael Rowlands has observed regarding the multiplicities of materiality and relative degrees of materiality and immateriality at play in social and historical life (Rowlands 2005). I want to argue that our understandings of the relationship of the material and the immaterial and the issue of multiple materialities might be more profitably understood when considered in terms of propinquity. I will examine this issue in relation to different understandings of the prototype, one derived from the notion of the prototype and its technologies in early Christian life, focusing on Christ as the divine prototype, and the other, a more recent technology of the prototype, namely rapid prototyping, and in particular rapid manufacturing. I want to see how examining both technologies of the prototype, their conceptualizations and implementations might help us gain a better understanding of multiple materialities and of how the relationship between prevailing notions of the material and the immaterial and its apparently paradoxical nature might be more profitably engaged.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Barad, K. 1998. Getting Real: Technoscientific Practices and the Materialization of Reality. Differences 10(2), 87-128.
Barber, C. 2002. Figure and Likeness: On the Limits of Representation in Byzantine Iconoclasm. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Buchli, V and G. Lucas, eds.. 2001. Archaeologies of the Contemporary Past. London: Routledge.
Claassen, C. 1993. Worlds of sense: exploring the senses in history and across cultures. London: Routledge.
Claassen, C. and D. Howes. 2006. The museum as sensescape: Western sensibilities and indigenous artifacts. In Sensible Objects: Colonialism, Museums and Material Culture, eds. E. Edwards, C. Gosden, and R. Phillips, 199-222, Oxford: Berg.
Cummings, B. 2002. Iconoclasm and bibliophobia in the English Reformations, 1521-1558. In Images, Idolatry, and Iconoclasm in Late Medieval England, eds. Dimmick, J.; Simpson, J.; Zeeman, N., 185-206. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Durkheim, E. 2001. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Eck, D.L. 1998. Darśan: Seeing the Divine Image in India. New York: Columbia University Press.
Engelke, M. 2005. Sticky Subjects and Sticky Objects. In Materiality, ed. D. Miller, 118-139. Durham: Duke University Press.
Frank, G. 2000. The Memory of the Eyes: Pilgrims to Living Saints in Christian Late Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gillespie, S. 2000. Maya Nested Houses: The Ritual Construction of Place. In Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Production in House Societies, eds. Joyce, R. and S. Gillespie, 135-160. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Ginzburg, C. 2002. Wooden Eyes: Nine Reflections on Distance. London: Verso.
Hague, R.J.M., Hopkinson, N. and Dickens, P.M., eds. 2005. Rapid Manufacturing and Industrial Revolution for the Digital Age. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
Henare, A, M. Holbraad, and S. Wastell, eds. (2007) Thinking Through Things: Theorising Artefacts Ethnographically, London: Routledge.
Howes, D., ed. 2005. Empire of the Senses: The Sensual Culture Reader. Oxford: Berg.
Keane, W. 2005. Signs are not the garb of meaning: on the social analysis of material things. In Materiality, ed. D. Miller, 182-205. Durham N.C.: Duke University Press.
Michalski, S. 1993. The Reformation and the Visual Arts: the Protestant Image Question in Western and Eastern Europe. London: Routledge.
Miller, D. 2005. Materiality: an introduction. In Materiality, ed. D. Miller, 1-50. Durham N.C.: Duke University Press.
Ong, W. 1967. The presence of the word: some prologemena for cultural and religious history. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Pietz, W. 1985. ‘The Problem of the Fetish, part I’. Res 9, 5-17.
Pietz, W. 1987. The Problem of the Fetish, part 2: The Origin of the Fetish. Res 13, 23-45.
Pietz, W. 1988. The Problem of the Fetish, part 3: Bosman’s Guinea and the Enlightenment Theory of Fetishism. Res 16, 105-123.
Pinney, C. 2002. Visual Culture. In The Material Culture Reader, ed. V. Buchli, 81-86. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
Povinelli, E. 2001. Radical Worlds: The Anthropology of Incommensurability and Inconceivability. Annual Review of Anthropology 30, 319-34.
Rorty, R. 1970. Incorrigibility as the Mark of the Mental. Journal of Philosophy LXVII, pp 399-424.
Rose, N. 1998. Inventing our Selves: Psychology, Power and Personhood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rouse, J. 2002. How scientific practices matter: reclaiming philosophical naturalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rowlands, M. 2005. A materialist approach to materiality. In Materiality, ed. D. Miller, 72-87. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.
Sassen, S. 2007. Territory, Authority, Rights: from medieval to global assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Thalberg I. 1983. Immateriality, Mind XCII(365), 105-113.
Vilaça, A. 2005. Chronically Unstable Bodies: Reflections on Amazonian Corporalities. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 11(3), 445-464.
Whitehead, A.N. 2000. The Concept of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Buchli, V. (2010). Presencing the Im-Material. In: Bille, M., Hastrup, F., Soerensen, T. (eds) An Anthropology of Absence. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5529-6_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5529-6_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5528-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-5529-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)