Welcome to Etherbox!

This pad text is synchronized as you type, so that everyone viewing this page sees the same text. Add __NOPUBLISH__ to prevent this pad from being archived.
Training Trees damage
an attempt to concretely apply the Queering Damages methodology


1. putting words on the problem by following the questionnary

- What is going on here? 

• trees in gardens are "trained" by humans ( gardener , forest manager, ...) to be profiled or shaped to fit with specific taste or function .

- Which are the agents implied (alive or not, human or not, powerful or powerless)?

• human gardeners, botanists and trees.

- Wheres (spatiality / situatedness / displacements / distribution)?

• gardens , roads borders , city, human pseudo-nature shaped environement, natural parcs, arboreteums, ...

- Whens (temporality / durability / existing / extinct / repeated)?

• ongoing, practise is known since 500/600 years, but echoes all human domestication of wilderness, echoes also the bio-engineering and the recent development of technologies that grows (trees into house, cf ted talk)

- Semiotic-materialities: what signs and matters are at work in this ensemble? 

• trees with non natural form by human constraint in the growing process

- Your entanglement with the scene 

• spectator
• empathy with the trees
• known appartenance to human club

- Can a pattern be identified here? To what extent is this damage structural, or singular? 

• systemic, symptomatic of the relation between human and non human, superiority of human over nature, 
• a "living example" of the modern ist paradigm of the separation culture/nature - 
• but not  only, ex ample:  
• root-bridge in north-east India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nongriat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_root_bridges

2. experimenting the formula

1. Define your field of interest. Cut apart and together an area of urgency. Set the scene, through naming the fields: 

ᘒ  ፨ ᚼ ⚘  ◊  ᗶ 

here we selected ᘒ (On the experience and process of damage and pain, partial reparation, loss/disposession), ᚼ( On contesting anthronormativities), ⚘ (On bioeconomies, lively capital, accumulation),  
◊ (On computation, analytics, bioinfotech), and ᗶ (On political fictions, poethics, figurations &/or wild fantasies, opportunities) , ፨ (propagation by mimetism).

training trees appears to be a case of dispossesion of the trees with their relation to humans, an exemplar case of anthronormativy, linked to economic, aesthetic accumuative bioeconomy (nature as a ressource to exploit/shape), a clear political fiction (nature/culture) and linked to technique.

ᘒ  ᚼ ⚘  ◊  ᗶ 

2. Declare your AE, Entangled Agents (myth, technology, ...). Æ = pH+pNH+pIH+pF

• ^ + Æ (DAMAGE)

here we choose to focus on the relationship N/NH (for human/non human), a volontary and arbitrary cut, to explore this specific relation.

3. Divide by the axioms of αe (ethics) and αK (Kapital)

• αe
• [formula]
• αK

4. Where/when: Define the spacetime conditioning: (ephemeral, eternal, cyclic, linear, continuous, eventual, historical present, memory, extincted, dreamed, extended, distributed, dissoluted, dispersed, concentrated, catalized, centrifugal, centripetal, located, situated, regional, local, global, reachable, micro, meso, macro...) 

• ʃT

here we selected a historical present and located / situated, annotated in the formula as hp,l,s

5. Talking about relations. Analyze and notate the Æ through a consideration of its Variable Relations (Ω repair, Δ damage, a affects, E effects, © creative force, ≠ difference)

• ∫ = ^ + ∬ / (xΩ , xΔ, xa, x∃, x©, x≠)

here we selected only those we thought representatvie, and decided to add operators to each symbol selected as an attempt to express the dynamic at work. Operators were selected within the generative operations catalog.

6. Apply at least one Generative Operation for your analysis, to see what it would do. Queering operations. 
These are tricky, they require you to take responsibility. Define their scale:

• >> + i + * + # + " + ♥ + ↺ + ♙ + ♞ + ↺ + ✵ + ⚕

here we decided to apply only one operation, the flip. as a simple experiment

7. declare your QÆ = qH+qNH+qIH+qF+qd, declare the reconfigured entanglement: 

• (tΩ , tΔ, ta, t∃, t©, t≠)

here we apply the operation and see what the changes appear in the dynamic. several variable relations appear, change or disappear. the changes of dynamic are expressed by the association of operators, as in 5.

8. Divide by the axioms of αe (ethics) and αK (Kapital)

• αe
• [the rest of the formula goes here]
• αK

9. Name the other end of the equation

• QÆ (QUEERING DAMAGE OR N)

• Notes : 

• Both 3,8 and 9 were taken as granted, and part of the notation, even if they open perspectives on a new set of relations. 

• This assumption and the reductionism of the final formula is the consequence of the limited time to both define the boundaries of the problem while both learning the language and trying to use the method toward a concrete result.