virtual memory by homay king

8/20/2019 Virtual Memory by Homay King

1/24

H O M A Y K I N G

T I M E - B A S E D A R T A N D T H E D R E A M O F D I G I T A L I T Y


2/24

V I R T U A L M E M O R Y


3/24

V I R T U A L M E M O R Y

T I M E - B A S E D A R T A N D T H E D R E A M O F D I G I T A L I T Y

H O M A Y K I N G

DUKE UNIVERSI TY PRESS : : : DURHAM AND LONDON :: : 2015


4/24

© 2015 Duke Universiy Press

All righs reserved

Prined in he Unied Saes of America on

acid-free paper ♾

Designed by Amy Ruh Buchanan

ypese in Chaparral Pro by seng

Informaion Sysems, Inc.

Library of Congress

Caaloging-in-Publicaion Daa

King, Homay, [dae] auhor.

Virual memory : ime-based ar and he dream

of digialiy / Homay King.

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references and index.

978-0-8223-5959-3 (hardcover : alk. paper)

978-0-8223-6002-5 (pbk. : alk. paper)

978-0-8223-7515-9 (e-book)

1. Ar and moion picures. 2. ime and ar.

3. Compuer ar. I. ile.

1995.25.54 2015

791.43′684—dc23 2015014081

Cover ar: Chrisian Marclay, insallaion

view of Te Clock, 2010. Single-channel video

wih sound; weny-four hours. © Chrisian

Marclay. Couresy Paula Cooper Gallery, New

York, and Whie Cube, London. Phoo by

odd-Whie Phoography.


5/24

C O N T E N T S

Acknowledgmens vii

Inroducion 1

1 ::: Keys o uring 18

2 ::: Chrisian Marclay’s wo Clocks 47

3 ::: Mater, ime, and he Digial: Agnès Varda’s Videos 71

4 ::: Beyond Repeiion: Vicor Burgin’s Loops 100

5 ::: Te Powers of he Virual 125

6 ::: Anoher World Is Virual 161

Noes 179

Bibliography 191

Index 199


6/24

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

Tis book began wih a alk on Agnès Varda’s Te Gleaners and I ha I

gave a he Sociey for Cinema and Media Sudies conference in Lon-

don in 2005. Coincidenally ha conference was also where I firs me

Ken Wissoker, who has been a marvelous edior and friend. Te many

years ha i ook o ge from conference paper o book were essenial

o he ideas expressed here, no because hese ideas are necessarily

beter for having aken longer o develop bu because, as Henri Berg-

son pus i, he ime aken up by he invenion is one wih he inven-

ion iself. Te people wih whom I spen his ime—discussing ideas,

collaboraing on projecs, sharing space a lecerns and in prin, or jus

being sociable in person and online—were even more essenial. Tey

have shaped his book’s conens and faciliaed is creaion. Tey in-

clude Farid Azfar, Eric Baudelaire, Leo Bersani, Emma Bianchi, Duncan

Black, Aviva Briefel, Vicor Burgin, Israel Burshain, David Campany,

im Corrigan, Drew Daniel, Julie Davis, David Eng, Jim English, Rodney

Evans, Jonahan Flaley, Saïd Gahia, Johanna Gosse, Guo-Juin Hong,

Sarah Kessler, Maura King, Alex Klein, Simon Leung, Erica Levin, Aaron

Levy, Heaher Love, Mara Mills, José Muñoz, John Muse, Nguyê ̃n ân

Hoàng, Joshua Ramey, Rebbie Raner, Sascha Russel, Marin Schmid,

Behany Schneider, odd Shepard, Henry Sias, Gus Sadler, Jill Sauffer,

Rea ajiri, Kae Tomas, Sharon Ullman, Paricia Whie, Ming Wong,

Eric Zinner, and my fellow Camera Obscura collecive members, Laliha

Gopalan, Lynne Joyrich, ess akahashi, and Sharon Willis. Exra spe-


7/24

viii ::: Acknowledgments

cial hanks go o Rosi Song and Karen ongson for camaraderie and

advenure around he world, and o Kaja Silverman, who always lighs

he way of inelligence and friendship. Finally I hank Elizabeh Aul

for skilled ediorial assisance, and he wo anonymous readers of he

manuscrip for heir remarkably deailed, houghful repors, which

wowed me in every way and moved me wih heir level of inellecual

generosiy and care.

Tis book was suppored by a Universiy of Pennsylvania Humani-

ies Forum Regional Fellowship, a Bryn Mawr College Faculy Research

Gran, and a fellowship from he Mellon Foundaion Disinguished

Achievemen Award held by Keih L. and Kaherine Sachs Professor of

Conemporary Ar Kaja Silverman, Deparmen of Hisory of Ar, Uni-

versiy of Pennsylvania. An excerp of chaper 3 was previously pub-

lished as “Mater, ime, and he Digial: Varda’s Te Gleaners and I ” in

he Quarterly Review of Film and Video 24.5 in Fall 2007. A version of

chaper 4 appeared in Projective: Essays about the Work of Victor Burgin,

ed. David Campany (Geneva: Musée d’Ar Moderne e Conemporain,

2014). A porion of chaper 5 appeared in he essay “Anabasis,” October

142 (Fall 2012). A porion of chaper 6 was previously published under

he ile “Aniphon: Noes on he People’s Microphone,” firs as an ex-

cerp in Machete: Occupy Philadelphia, Marginal Uiliy Gallery (Decem-

ber 2011), hen as an essay in he Journal of Popular Music Studies 24.2

(Summer 2012).


8/24

I N T R O D U C T I O N

THE BLUE MARBLE

Hannah Arend begins Te Human Condition wih a parable abou he

launch of he Sovie Sputnik 1 saellie, he firs man-made objec ever

o break free from Earh’s surface and ener is graviaional orbi. Te

launch occurred on Ocober 4, 1957. Arend wries, “For some ime, he

saellie dwel and moved in he proximiy of he heavenly bodies, as

hough i had been admited enaively o heir sublime company.” I

was a momen of encouner wih he seemingly miraculous, a echno-

logical achievemen on he grandes of scales, and a symbolic reversal

of he Copernican Revoluion. I was also a miliary even modeled on

imperial conques ha heralded he beginning of he cold war space

race. Before his race was under way, hough, Arend noed a collecive

sigh of relief from Earh’s inhabians a he saellie’s dispach: a gen-

eral sense of opimism in he face of his “firs sep oward escape from

men’s imprisonmen o he earh.”

As a saunch advocae for her home plane who argued in favor of ac-

ceping he limiaions ha had hus far defined he human condiion,

Arend found his reacion roubling. Te longing o escape he plane

and he idea ha earh’s inhabians were imprisoned or shackled o

is surface wen hand in hand wih he degradaion of angible, incar-

nae, sensory experience, along wih he kinds of hough, speech, and

acion ha are made possible by embodied percepion. For Arend, he

launch of Sputnik was roubling insofar as i served as a meaphor for


9/24

::: Introduction

he upward gaze of he scienis or idealis philosopher. I allegorized

he vicory of he noion ha knowledge and power require exraerres-

rialiy, or a similar roue o freedom from he web of relaions by which

he living are bound on Earh.

wo years laer, on Augus 14, 1959, a much-anicipaed image began

o circulae: he firs phoograph of earh aken by saellie from ouer

space (figure I.1). Te phoograph was made by he U.S. Explorer IV , whose

fligh was made possible in par by he inegraed circuis developed a

Fairchild Semiconducor, a sar-up company locaed in wha would

laer be known as Silicon Valley. Explorer IV ’s phoograph was heavily ab-

srac. I revealed ha from he saellie’s poin of view, Earh resembled

a curved crescen wihou precise oulines, blurred as if by rapid moion.

I.1. Phoograph of Earh aken by he U.S. Explorer IV ,

Augus 14, 1959, from approximaely seveneen housand

miles, showing he sunli area of he cenral Pacific Ocean

and is cloud cover. Image couresy of .


10/24

Introduction :::

Is face was cas mosly in shadow, having been upsaged by he moon.

A blizzard of similar phoos followed in quick succession. Many of hem

were likewise dim, inchoae, and creaively framed, as if he mechanical

phoographer had no ye learned he concep of figuraion. Such pic-

ures, in spie of he fac ha hey were aken from ouer space, lacked

wha Arend called he “Archimedean sandpoin”: a posiion aspiring o

a “ruly universal viewpoin . . . aken, willfully and explicily, ouside he

earh.” Earh, in a manner of speaking, had no ye had is mirror-sage.

In 1966 Sewar Brand—a wrier, environmenal acivis, and ech-

nology enrepreneur from California—suggesed ha i was high ime

o cross ha developmenal bridge. He made butons bearing he slo-

gan “Why haven’ we seen a phoograph of he whole Earh ye?” Brand

wroe leters posing his quesion o luminaries and digniaries he had

seleced, including Marshall McLuhan, Buckminser Fuller, a few U.S.

senaors, and members of he U.S. and Sovie space programs. Te only

one o reply was Fuller, who wroe, “Dear boy, i’s a charming noion bu

you mus realize you can never see more han half he earh from any

paricular poin in space.”

On November 10, 1967, hough, a phoograph appeared ha made

Brand’s wish come rue—or raher, half-rue, according o Fuller’s flaw-

less logic. Made by he U.S. -III saellie, he image showed he

earh as a nearly perfecly round disc, in color, surrounded by a black

void. Te plane was now visible from is good side, is face an evenly

illuminaed, vivacious circle, beauifully cenered in frame. Earh had

finally assumed wha Jacques Lacan, in reference o he baby in fron

of he mirror, called he “orhopedic form of is oaliy.” Brand eagerly

adoped his image for he cover of he fall 1968 issue of he Whole Earth

Catalog , for which he served as edior (figure I.2). Tis caalogue offered

“access o ools,” a collecion of produc reviews and shor exs, and

is audience was he communiy of ech-savvy, ecologically minded,

vaguely Liberarian, counerculural enhusiass ha was beginning o

form in he mid-1960s in norhern California. Locaed in and around

he San Francisco Bay Area, his communiy of proo-hackers brough

ogeher he curious paradoxes of he “Californian ideology”: a fusion of

“hippie culure and cyberneics, naure romanics and echnology wor-

shippers, psychedelia and compuer culure,” as i has been described.

Raher han sell merchandise direcly, he Whole Earth Catalog offered a


11/24

::: Introduction

curaed direcory of produc endorsemens, poining users o vendors

who could supply ools and maerials for projecs by mail order

alongside essays by Brand, Fuller, and ohers. As such, i was in some

ways a precursor o he crowd-sourced reviews and linking pracices

found some fory years laer on he Inerne.

For Brand, he color phoograph capured he plane’s fragiliy. Earh

had finally appeared in he form ha would earn i he nickname “he

Blue Marble,” as i was affecionaely called in capions of similar pic-

ures aken from space. Tis phoo, in Brand’s view, had he poenial

o solici an atiude of care and concern for Earh: o promoe worldly

sewardship, environmenalis pracices, invesmen in local planeary

resources and infrasrucure, and harmony across differences ha, from

an inraplaneary perspecive, now seemed exraordinarily minor. I ex-

pressed no mankind’s jubilan conques of ouer space, nor a rium-

phan escape from Earh’s shackles, bu raher he world’s smallness and

delicaeness relaive o he cosmos as a whole. In an inerview Brand

described how he earh appeared o him in hese images as a “litle

blue, whie, green, and brown jewel-like icon amongs a quie feaureless

I.2. Cover of he Whole Earth

Catalog , Fall 1968, feauring

a phoograph of Earh aken

by he U.S. -III saellie.


12/24

Introduction :::

black vacuum.” In Brand’s view, his image conveyed he precariousness

of he plane and is occupans. I looked like an island, wih all he ac-

companying associaions of deser island prudence. “Islands know abou

limiaions,” he remarked; neverheless “people sill hink he earh is

fla. . . . Tey ac as if is resources are infinie. Bu ha phoograph

showed oherwise. Unless and unil we find oher flourishing planes,

his is all we’ve go and we’ve go o make i work. Tere’s no backup.”

Te fall 1969 issue of he Whole Earth Catalog bears a similar “whole

earh” phoograph on is cover (figure I.3). In his image he plane ap-

pears smaller and more marble-like. Te moon sis o is righ, provid-

ing a reference poin of size and disance. Whereas he 1968 cover’s com-

posiion and framing sugges a porrai—he world as a familiar face

in close-up—he 1969 cover adoped a decidedly Archimedean poin of

view. Here Earh and is companion saellie appear as lone figures in a

vas, inhospiable landscape. Te picure offers an inriguingly conra-

dicory se of opions for he viewer. On he one hand, if we idenify

wih he small world represened by he blue do, he image migh invie

he kind of careaking atiude ha Brand and his cohors espoused. On

I.3. Cover of he Whole

Earth Catalog , Fall 1969.


13/24

::: Introduction

he oher hand, if we idenify wih he eye of he camera and he per-

specival poin from which he image was aken, we find ourselves a a

grea disance from he plane: exiled and painfully alone perhaps, or,

alernaively, larger han life, a deiy who could crush he litle plane

wih jus a humb and forefinger.

Te remoe perspecive is radiionally associaed wih a quasi-

heological capaciy o appraise, possess, and conrol. As Arend wries

in Te Human Condition, “Te greaer he disance beween [man] and

his surroundings, world or earh, he more he will be able o survey

and o measure and he less will worldly, earh-bound space be lef o

him.” Tis perspecive is also associaed wih disembodimen. Te spa-

ial disance becomes a meaphor for disconnecion and indifference.

Te poin of view in which he world appears as a disinc, independen

eniy is like ha of he mirror sage, insofar as his viewing posiion,

while joyful and saisfying o occupy, also enails an alienaion or sepa-

raion. As Arend pus i, he fligh from he plane insered “a decisive

disance beween man and earh, alienaing man from his immediae

earhly surroundings.”

Te space race has now come o an end, more or less, o he disap -

poinmen of many youh of ha era. Bu he longing o escape Earh

did no vanish when he race was over. I wen elsewhere. I was chan-

neled ino digial fuures, do-com bubbles, and he informaion super-

highway, whose nescapes would be navigaed, explored, safaried, and

homepaged no by asronaus bu by new armchair Magellans who ook

heir legacy from Brand and his peers. Digial media universes seemed

o promise an alernae place of refuge from he weigh and resricions

of Earh-bound exisence. I was a virual refuge, which would like-

wise require grea feas of echnical engineering, he assisance of he

miliary-indusrial complex, and he consumpion of vas naural re-

sources, bu i would pu he dream of disincarnaion vicariously wihin

reach of more han jus he asronaus.

SILICON DREAMS

Te erm virtual reality firs appeared in prin in a 1987 issue of he

Whole Earth Review, a companion journal spun off from he Whole Earth

Catalog . I was he ile of a shor essay abou uopian depicions of


14/24

Introduction :::

echnology in adverising imagery. Te auhor was Yaakov Garb, a doc-

oral suden in mahemaics and science educaion a he Universiy

of California a Berkeley. Garb was no wriing abou virual realiy in

he sense of an elecronically simulaed, compuer-based environmen.

Raher he used he erm o describe compuer inerfaces and end-user

operaing sysems in general; he called hem “masks” ha layer on

op of hardware. “Te source of much of he myh which [compuers]

weave,” Garb wroe, “is achieved hrough muliple maskings, he cre-

aion of ‘virual realiies.’ One on op of anoher, levels of symbols are

buil . . . each level furher simplifying he maerial inricacies which

underlie and suppor i.” For Garb, “virual realiy” was he resul of an

absracion away from and occlusion of he machine’s complex maerial

hardware in favor of is friendly exual and skeuomorphic graphical

inerfaces. Te magazine adverisemens added anoher layer o his

virual realiy, and hey apped ino a se of fanasies ha had begun

o crysallize around he image of he personal compuer. Garb called

hese fanasies “he dreams our culure has inscribed in silicon.” Above

all, and o Garb’s dismay, he dream involved “an uninhibied celebra-

ion of he separaion and ranscendence of mind over body.”

Some of he images Garb analyzes in his essay feaure gridded land-

scapes reminiscen of early Aari video games or he original Disney

version of he movie ron (1982). Te images are srikingly dysopic

by weny-firs-cenury sandards: oday echnology indusry adver-

ising ends o adop a more pasoral, agrarian aesheic, in which he

compuer user has lef he Kubrickian clean room and has gone o he

beach wih her able compuer, or perhaps she smiles amid a harves of

fair-rade, organic coffee beans. In he 1980s adverisemens, hough,

anonymous hands manipulae conrols a personal compuing base sa-

ions, gian heads generae reams of ex and geomerical forms, and

invesors use dial-up modems o manage invisible soybean farms by re-

moe conrol (figure I.4). Garb’s commenary on hem is prescien. He

quoes Descares describing himself as a hinking eniy “whose being

requires no place and depends on no maerial hing.” In answer o his

fanasy, Garb asks, “Who plans he soybeans, Genleman Farmer? . . .

And where does he irrigaion waer come from?” He issued an early

reminder ha someone, somewhere, is always “scurrying o suppor

our virual realiy. . . . Our machines are fed a remendous amoun of


15/24

::: Introduction

Life so ha hey may whisk symbols around.” Among he hings ha

suppor his virual realiy, he lised “he labor of aiwanese women in

microchip facories, he oxins flushed ino our rivers, he dams, mines,

and facories,” all of which churn invisibly o power “our prisine alpha-

numerics.”

In he image of he compuer user as a giganic flying eye or head, we

are invied o assume he iconography and perspecive of a deiy. Te

1960s-era phoographs of Earh seen from ouer space spli our con-

sciousness in wo: we are his god-like, exraerresrial eye, bu we are

also unimaginably small specks on he blue marble in he disance. In

he graphical images ha Garb analyzes, hough, here is no longer a

blue marble o idenify wih—and no sories or accompanying infor-

maion reminding us ha here was once a phoographic lens here or

an uninerruped coninuum of space beween ha place and he world

ha we currenly occupy. Te Caresian silicon dream would have i ha

digial media, he Inerne, and virual worlds free us from he con-

srains of physical, sensory, and space-bound realiy. Tey allow us o

become someone else or o overcome geographical divides, all a seem-

I.4. “Te Power Is wihin

Your Reach.” Adverisemen,

imex Corporaion, 1982.


16/24

Introduction :::

ingly litle cos o, and perhaps even o he benefi of, he environmen,

worldly acion and concerns, and he fabric of social relaions.

Tis dream, as Garb and ohers have claimed, is a myh, similar

o hose ha have accrued o he purporedly unchared froniers of

earhly and ouer space. Howard Rheingold, a former edior of he

Whole Earth Review and Millennium Whole Earth Catalog , says as much

wih he ile of his book Te Virtual Community: Homesteading on the

Electronic Frontier . Te myh of digial media as immaerial, absrac,

and unworldly allows us o paper over he realiy of embodied, lived ex-

perience (including experiences of gender, race, sexualiy, disabiliy, and

economic hardship), as well as he realiy of Earh-bound, ime-bound,

limi-bound exisence in general. Te myh emerges in andem wih he

increasing associaion of knowledge wih daa and informaion and of

hinking wih heir processing. Tis associaion is in urn predicaed on

he idea ha compuaional, quaniaive ways of hinking—ways of

hinking ha can be expressed by a mahemaical noaion sysem and

rendered in wha Alan uring called “compuable numbers”—are he

bes or he only ruly accurae ways of hinking.

:: :: ::

Tese shor parables abou he Blue Marble and he silicon dreams ha

followed, alernaely cherished and criiqued by pioneers of he infor-

maion age, are here o se he sage for an inquiry ino he relaion-

ship beween digial media and alienaion from Earh-bound and ime-

bound experience, percepion, and hough. Like he early adopers of

compuing echnology, many of whom expressed skepicism abou he

effecs of widespread digializaion a he same ime ha hey cele-

braed is poenials, in his book I approach digial culure in an exra-

moral sense, offering neiher a purely uopian nor sricly dysopian

accoun of i. On he one hand, I elaborae a criique of digialiy, spe-

cifically of he noion ha everyhing can be rendered in numeric, en-

coded, and compuable form; on he oher, I claim ha conemporary

ariss and praciioners who use digial media have ofen rejeced his

dream, in many cases acively subvering i, and ha i is in no way en-

demic o he mater ha suppors hese works’ coninued exisence.

My primary inerlocuors for esablishing he firs poin are he Briish

mahemaician and compuer pioneer Alan uring and he French phi-


17/24

::: Introduction

losopher Henri Bergson, bes known for his heories of mater, percep-

ion, and duraion and for his crypic ye susained elaboraion of he

concep of he virual. Te digial media makers hrough whose work I

develop he second poin are diverse in kind: hey include Agnès Varda,

grande dame of he French New Wave, as well as lesser known figures

like he aris Erin Shirreff, he elecronic music duo Mamos, and he

largely anonymous paricipans of he Occupy Wall Sree movemen.

Tese figures do no form a coheren se in erms of heir geographical

origins or curren whereabous nor in erms of heir modes of pracice

or he exen o which hey are expressly idenified wih compuing,

new media ar, or digial culure. Wha unies he praciioners in his

group is ha hey are denizens of he weny-firs cenury who have all

atemped o grapple wih he relaionship beween analog and digial

echnology and who make works of digial media ha canno be under-

sood wihou recourse o earhly, ime-bound mater and concerns.

In addiion o hese figures who form he book’s subsanive ar-

chive, here are a number of conemporary scholars whose work has

been inspiraional for his sudy. N. Kaherine Hayles esablished for

he emerging field of new media sudies an idea similar o ha of Garb’s

“silicon dream”: ha “he grea dream and promise of informaion is

ha i can be free from he maerial consrains ha govern he moral

world” and “achieve effecive immoraliy.” In Reading the Figural, or,

Philosophy after the New Media, D. N. Rodowick observed ha he digi-

al ars are “he mos radical insance ye of an old Caresian dream:

[ha] he bes represenaions are he mos immaerial ones, because

hey seem o free he mind from he body and he world of subsance.”

Tese scholars provided my iniial access poin o he noion of a digial

Caresian dream, widespread as a sympom in popular media and cul-

ure, an idea ha Rodowick also ouches upon in Te Virtual Life of Film.

In her book Carnal Toughts, Vivian Sobchack cauions agains digial

media’s promise o liberae is users from “he pull of wha migh be

ermed moral and physical gravity”; she also describes how elecronic

echnologies invie he viewer ino a “spaially decenered, weakly em-

poralized and quasi-disembodied (or diffusely embodied) sae.” Wha

is los, Sobchack asks, when digial media promise o liberae users

from he limiaions of space and ime, or indeed when spaioempo-

ral finiude is undersood as a form of imprisonmen raher han as he


18/24

Introduction :::

very precondiion for percepion, hough, and acion? For Sobchack, as

for Arend, he overcoming of graviy risks devaluing “grounded inves-

men in he human body and enworlded acion.”

Some of he mos relevan curren scholarship on Bergson comes

from film heory and gender sudies. Bliss Lim’s ranslating ime:

Cinema, the Fantastic, and emporal Critique juxaposes Bergson’s “cor-

recive heory of ime” wih poscolonial scholarship o argue ha

Newonian ime, largely a Wesern consruc, occludes he more deraci-

naed, plural, crisscrossing forms of emporaliy ha are on display in

non-Wesern science ficion and fanasy film. I join Lim in reading Berg-

son’s criique of he cinemaograph no as a rejecion of he medium as

such bu as an arrow direced a schools of hough ha “regard ime as

a measurable quaniy . . . he scienific and mahemaical view of ho-

mogenous ime . . . [from] he legacy of Newon’s clockwork universe.”

In ime ravels: Feminism, Nature, Power , Elizabeh Grosz offers an ob-

servaion ha I ake as anoher embarkaion poin for his sudy: ha

he noion of he virual, one of Bergson’s signaure if slippery conceps,

is far richer and more complex han oday’s vocabulary suggess: i “has

been wih us a remarkably long ime. I is a coheren and funcional

idea already in Plao’s wriings, where boh Ideas and simulacra exis in

some sae of virualiy.” Jean Baudrillard suggess somehing similar

when he complains ha in is conemporary sense “he virual sands

opposed o he real. . . . We no longer have he good old philosophical

sense of he erm, where he virual was wha was desined o become

acual, or where a dialecic was esablished beween he wo.”

oday he virual has become pracically synonymous wih digial

and compuer-based echnology and media. Bu his sense of he word,

as we see in Garb’s essay, emerged relaively lae in he wenieh cen-

ury. Te 1960 ediion of Roget’s Tesaurus perhaps unwitingly capures

he good old philosophical dialecic ha Baudrillard refers o, and his

plain abou is cleaving. In ha volume he word virtual is indexed

under he enry for “Nonexisence,” along wih he following synonyms:

“unreal, poenial, unsubsanial, chimerical, fabulous, ideal.” Bu vir-

tual is also indexed under anoher heading, “Inrinsicaliy.” In his

compeing enry, synonyms include “immanen, inheren, incarnae,

indwelling, indigenous, insincive, naural.” Tese clashing enries

sugges ha virualiy, a he dawn of he informaion era, was an an-


19/24

::: Introduction

ilogy or a conranym: i simulaneously invoked exisence and non-

exisence, realiy and unrealiy, fac and fable. Fify years laer, hough,

he immanen, incarnae, and indwelling have been submerged in favor

of he ideal and he unsubsanial, which, in a Neo-Plaonic urn, have

likewise become synonyms for one anoher.

Meanings for he word virtual ha have nohing o do wih he simu-

lacral or immaerial firs appear in he English language in 1398. Te

word is descended from he medieval Lain virtuālis; is oldes defini-

ion is ha which is “possessed of cerain physical virues or capaciies;

effecive in respec of inheren naural qualiies or powers; capable of

exering influence by means of such qualiies.” Tis ancien virualiy

was no opposed o he acual. I was deeply rooed in he presen world,

conducive o earhly acions and concerns, and infused wih embodied,

sensorial, ime-bound experience. I has he whiff of wha is conveyed

by he sill exan expression “I am virually here.” Tis phrase does no

mean “I’m no here” nor “I appear o be here by simulaed proxy, bu

in acualiy I am somewhere else,” bu raher “I am nearly here, almos

here, close enough o be pracically indisinguishable from being here.”

Scholars such as Gilles Deleuze, Pierre Lévy, Brian Massumi, Quenin

Meillassoux, and Rob Shields have worked closely wih his more

grizzled sense of virualiy; heir commenaries appear from ime o

ime hroughou his book. In Te Virtual, Shields criiques he noion

ha he virual is no “real” and oulines some of he dangers of he

fanasy of pure absracion. Like Deleuze, Grosz, and ohers, he invokes

Prous, who wroe ha memories are virual in he sense ha hey

are “real wihou being acual, ideal wihou being absrac.” In his

Prousian formulaion, he virual is no a parallel, unreal world, sepa-

raed by a chasm from he presen world, bu an inersice ha connecs

he wo and is he sie of becoming or being-in-process. Lévy offers he

following relaed formula: “Te virual . . . has litle relaionship o ha

which is false, illusory, or imaginary. [I] is by no means he opposie of

he real. On he conrary, i is a fecund and powerful mode of being ha

expands he process of creaion.” Massumi defines he virual as “ha

which is maximally absrac ye real, whose realiy is ha of poenial—

pure relaionaliy, he inerval of change, he in-iself of ransforma-

ion.” Hayles, in urn, calls for he recovery of “a sense of he virual


20/24

Introduction :::

ha fully recognizes he imporance of he embodied processes consi-

uing he lifeworld of human beings.”

Tese wriers sugges ha a virual virualiy, more enabling and ca-

pacious han is successor, lies nascen wihin i, and ha we migh even

seek o recover i in works of digial media. Tis is in par he under-

aking of his book. Te ask does no require ha we choose beween

he wo erms in Baudrillard’s dialecic, nor ha we adop he sance

of an analog, maerialis puris o recover wha is los, nor even ha

we privilege and isolae he sublimaed momen of digial-analog syn-

hesis. Raher i undersands he virual from anoher angle: as a new

realiy on he cusp of exisence ha emerges in an inerval of presen

ime ha is rich wih pas and fuure images. Te virual, in his view,

is a poenial reasure ches full of images ha perform and elici mem-

ory, inuiion, and speculaion, all while reaining an underlying coni-

nuiy wih wha is here in he presen momen. Te figures in his book

deny he digial is divorce from he angible and ime-bound, implicily

criiquing he Caresian dream of immaerialiy and counering ran-

scendence wih immanence. A he same ime hey reveal oher, more

genuinely progressive poenials ha lie dorman in digial forms, in

large par by he way hey work wih ime and change.

:: :: ::

Te chapers ha follow elaborae hese ideas primarily hrough Berg-

son’s philosophical wriings on ime and he virual, as hey illuminae

and are illuminaed by conemporary, ime-based works of ar, film,

and video. However, chaper 1, “Keys o uring,” provides a backsory o

his argumen, dialing back he clock o he life and work of Alan ur-

ing. uring is perhaps bes known for his World War II miliary inelli-

gence achievemens a Blechley Park in England, where he cracked he

infamous German Enigma cipher. As par of his work, he designed a

series of machines ha served as prooypes for he modern compuer.

uring was also a brillian mahemaician who conduced pioneering re-

search in arificial inelligence. In he 1950s, hough, he was arresed on

gross indecency charges and, as an alernaive o prison, was subjeced

o chemical casraion reamens ha may have driven him o suicide.

Te cause of deah was ingesion of a poisoned apple, a possible refer-


21/24

::: Introduction

ence o Disney’s Snow White, which was uring’s favorie film and one

from which he frequenly quoed. According o an unproven rumor, he

Apple Compuer logo pays ribue o uring.

uring’s life and work represen a queer drive in he developmen

of he compuer. Proceeding hrough close analysis of uring’s biogra-

phy, wriings, and exs ha inspired him, I argue ha his sexualiy—

or, more specifically, he way he endured he oppressive social burdens

of homosexualiy in his ime—was no incidenal o his menal genius

and no simply a side noe o his mahemaical achievemens. Raher

his deep immersion in logic and machines can be read as par of a search

for a ransparen form of communicaion, one ha would be free of

he enigmas and opaciy of everyday human ineracion. Compuer lan-

guage offered a refuge, albei one wih is own limiaions, from he

kinds of crypic channels hrough which gay men in World War II–era

England were obliged o inerac wih one anoher. Te ques for his

refuge shaped and drove his research, unil he reached a remarkable

urning poin and came o define inelligence iself as he abiliy o

engage in casual, sociable, even illogical conversaion: o simulae, in

oher words, he analog aspecs of face-o-face ineracion.

In chaper 2, “Chrisian Marclay’s wo Clocks,” I elaborae definiions

of he analog, he digial, and he virual in large par hrough Berg-

son’s colleced wriings. Te chaper begins wih a mediaion on Berg-

son’s infamous criique of he cinemaograph: his perplexing claim ha

he cinema is no a genuinely ime-based medium and his use of i as

a meaphor for saic, synchronic ways of seeing and hinking ha fail

o apprehend life as movemen and change. Gilles Deleuze, perhaps he

mos well-known heir o Bergson’s hough, found his claim so peculiar

ha he devoed wo whole books o is refuaion—a leas his would

be one way o undersand he impeus behind Cinema 1: Te Movement-

Image andCinema 2: Te ime- Image. By juxaposing he cinemaograph

wih a suie of oher meaphors found hroughou Bergson’s wriings,

I atemp o accoun for his rejecion of he cinema in greaer deail.

I sor hrough hese new ways o undersand he digial, he ana-

log, and he virual hrough a work of visual ar, Chrisian Marclay’s

Te Clock (2010). Tis weny-four-hour digial video is made enirely

ou of sampled found fooage of images of clocks large and small, and

i funcions as an accurae imepiece. My reading of he video insalla-


22/24

Introduction :::

ion begins wih a simple quesion: Is his a digial or an analog clock?

Te atemp o answer i unsolders hese wo erms from heir medium-

specific connoaions and reveals hem o be less fully opposed o one

anoher han one migh hink.

Chaper 3, “Mater, ime, and he Digial: Agnès Varda’s Videos,” ex-

plores he connecions beween organic and inorganic mater and digi-

al video aesheics in Varda’s documenaries Te Gleaners and I (2000)

and Te Beaches of Agnès (2008), which use digial video as a way o de-

pic earhly, embodied, and, imporanly, moral concerns. Tese films

are expressly abou aging, memory, and he urge o foresall as well as

he aspiraion o le go of passing ime. Te Gleaners and I is a film abou

salvaging and demonsraes a relaively early use of consumer-grade

digial equipmen o creae cinema ha is maerialis, feminis, phe-

nomenological, and poliical. Te Beaches of Agnès is a film abou mem-

ory ha, conrary o he digial dream of permanence, oal recall, and

infinie sorage, is underwriten by forgeting and displacemen. Varda

imagines a form of virual memory ha is involunary, indirec, and

noninsananeous—a digial memory ha is no modeled on he prin-

ciples of compuer sorage and he daabase. Tese lae films of Varda’s

are exquisiely atuned o he new and progressive in equal measure

wih decay and dissoluion and o saes of evoluion and change ha

are inseparable from he visible signs of enropy oward which her cam-

era ofen graviaes. My readings of he feaure- lengh films are sup-

plemened by observaions abou her video insallaion Te Widows of

Noirmoutier (2006), a work ha is in dialogue wih boh of hese films.

Chaper 4, “Beyond Repeiion: Vicor Burgin’s Loops,” focuses on

wo video insallaion pieces by he aris and wrier Vicor Burgin, Te

Little House (2005), which explores Rudolph Schindler’s King’s Road

House in Los Angeles, and A Place to Read (2010), which includes a digi-

al reconsrucion of Sedad Hakkı Eldem’s aslik Khave coffeehouse in

Isanbul. Boh of hese works are srucured as loops. aking inspira-

ion from his form, I idenify and describe modes of repeiion ha do

no operae according o he logic of he deah drive, of he Freudian

repeiion compulsion, nor of eernal reurn wihou difference. Bur-

gin’s video loops repea, bu hey do so in a Bergsonian way, as four-

dimensional spirals or cones ha acivae connecions across muliple

viewings, linking pas images back o he presen and vice versa, as well


23/24

::: Introduction

as opening ou oward he fuure. Te repeiions are more properly

reprises, refrains, or rereadings, a disincion ha I develop hrough

Deleuze as well as hrough Bergson’s wriings on he phenomenon of

déjà vu. Tey repea boh in heir looped srucure in he gallery in-

sallaion seting and in erms of he way hey engage wih he diverse

combinaions of exs, hisories, and visual maerials ha have inspired

hem. Tese disparae poins are conneced no as a linear chronology,

nor simply by juxaposing hem in opposiion o one anoher, bu raher

hrough a slow, digially crafed looping, panning, and scrolling move-

men, a rope ha canno help bu emphasize coninuiy over discon-

necion. In Deleuze’s beauiful phrase, Burgin’s videos supply “a sory

[histoire] ha no longer has a place . . . for places ha no longer have a

hisory [histoire].” In A Place to Read , his place is a digial reconsruc-

ion of a desroyed urkish coffeehouse, which Burgin creaed using 3-

modeling sofware.

Chaper 5, “Te Powers of he Virual,” akes up Deleuze’s concep

of he powers of he false, a noion ha has, direcly and indirecly, in-

spired a group of conemporary works of ar, film, and video ha fuse

fac and imaginaion as well as documenary and ficional modes of

soryelling. Tis power, I claim, is perhaps beter undersood as he

power of he virual. In Cinema 2, Deleuze makes clear ha he powers of

he false have less o do wih he propagaion of ourigh lies han wih

he capaciy o forge or fabricae: no necessarily wih he aim of decep-

ion bu in he more general sense of making or invening somehing

new ou of maerial ha already exiss. Te four ariss in his chaper

engage in a chiasmaic gesure: hey virualize analog media, reveal-

ing is hidden poenials, and hey unvirualize digial media, reinser-

ing i ino worldly setings and relaionships. Each of he four works

I discuss remakes, reuses, or resages an “old,” analog form of media

in a new work ha relies a leas in par on digial echnology. Tese

works are Eric Baudelaire’s Te Makes (2009), a forged documenary

video abou Michelangelo Anonioni’s supposed Japanese period; Ming

Wong’s Persona Performa (2011), a mixed-media insallaion resaging

Ingmar Bergman’s film and relocaing i o Queens, New York; Erin Shir-

reff’s Roden Crater (2009), a video abou he asronomical earhwork

by James urrell creaed from a single phoo grabbed from an online

image search; and Mamos’s recombinan elecronic music album For


24/24

Introduction :::

Alan uring (2006), made in par from sampled, digiized sounds of a

World War II–era Enigma machine. Tese new creaions are no simply

false copies of heir analog source maerials, nor do hey aspire o re-

place or render hem obsolee. Raher all four ariss exercise he power

of invenion o creae a virual Anonioni film, a virual earhwork, and

so on, each of which is acual and subsanive in is own righ.

Te book concludes wih chaper 6, “Anoher World Is Virual.” I

begin his chaper by invoking he familiar poliical slogan “Anoher

world is possible,” which expresses a hrilling senimen. If we wan o

be absoluely precise, hough, he oher world invoked by is incana-

ion is no “possible”; i is virual. Te chaper begins wih a discussion

of poenialiy, juxaposing Giorgio Agamben’s accoun hereof wih

hose of Bergson and Deleuze. Agamben’s primary inerlocuor is Aris-

ole, whereas Bergson and Deleuze follow Spinoza. Bu hey share a

philosophical goal, which is o separae he idea of he poenial, which

is radically open-ended, from he possible, which relaes o a closed se

of opions ha can be calculaed and assigned a probabiliy. Te possible

assumes ha he fuure is already writen, as a complee menu ree of

more and less likely opions if no as an absoluely cerain oucome. I

hus leaves no room for he exercise of radical free will or for he devel-

opmen of somehing uterly new, unpredicable, and oher. I pu hese

ideas ino conversaion wih a final audio “medium” ha is boh old and

radically new: he people’s microphone, employed by he Occupy Wall

Sree movemen in he auumn and winer of 2011. Te people’s micro-

phone, in my accoun, is a special kind of speech-ac, an acualizaion

of he principles of collecive democraic process in viva voce. I is ruly

poenial, boh a dramaizaion of poliical change and he means of is

enacmen. I is also ruly virual, a medium ha is no mere simulaion

since i brings ino being he change ha i imagines.

virtual memory by homay king

Documents