Your C.V. is too long to introduce your
property but improvise anyway that

you know it's going to mean gold is
an anthropologist from from the U.K..

And you did classic field
work in Leopard and

like till the eighties yet or later later.

But later.

A classic fieldwork and
slowly you started to bring in philosophy.

A much broader range of of theories
that you're normally encountering

in anthropology.

The list of of published
is books is incredible.

I do you in collaboration or on your own

appropriation of nature named eighty
six tools of language and culture and

she was still interested in language and
cognition in one nine hundred three

slowly bringing in a lot of connection to.

James James Drome Gibson actually
a fantastic researcher in perceptions.

With the notion of a Ford and this.

Made some ground in
an architectural theory and for

usual perception theory architecture and
of course the last two years.

A lot of research much broader and

a beautiful book called lines you should
really bite that this is incredible book.

A bit earlier was the perception of the
environment after lines was being alive

lots of books Ark a collections of essays
but there are normally quite consistent

theme because you have like certain
obsessions you sort of dry for a.

And put in a book.

So the books are like very different
sometimes like lots of pages sometimes

a bit thinner and very interesting books
and the last one making off like last

year on on the notion of making
not just an anthropology but

also in architecture archaeology
an art is something he calls a for a.

Some kind of metal language or
matter a matter of

of different scientists in different
fields of knowledge different different

discipline and sort of trying to invent
a mental discipline for for all these.

Different fields so in that sense.

Tim's work is really interesting for
architects.

I think often it not often is that
it happens so I can find people

that take a deep interest in architecture
like I Decker I mentioned before but

also teeming gold and some connections to
Heidegger but also to French philosophy.

And who who someday become a very
interesting for architects.

That's right said that they don't have an
interest in on a sort of amateur level but

it really sort of hits the heart
of we do it as architects bring

to get a notion of making construction but
also perception and dwelling.

So a lot softer seems that there
are combined in in the work of often in

gold really a political author
who is running to chair.

I think you've been a professor since
the ninety's first in Manchester and

then the chair and head to Dean where
you set up your own department of

social into Paula G. Please help me.

Welcome to mingled.

Is the diet

I will return the compliment in
terms of that the interest and

invigoration that I've got from your work
which has been tremendously exciting

to the extent that my copy
of the sympathy of things.

It's a.

Thing that I can never get hold of anymore
because I have one copy and it spends most

of its time being read by all sorts of
people around in my department never know.

I don't actually know whose whose whose
got it at the moment there is some dispute

earlier today or debate about
what I should actually say here.

I'm down on the programme to deliver a
paper called The text Ilithyia of making.

Actually I don't want to do that because
it was published sometime ago and

if you want to read it you can read it and

so I look and
not going to do that then I was thinking

about a couple of other papers that I
could deliver and then I decided hang it.

I'm not going to deliver a paper at all.

I am going to wing it.

And I shall improvise.

Because I think maybe that will be be more
interesting than simply sitting reading

stuff you know anthropologists to tend to
tend to be on that side of the humanities.

You know there are cultural differences
here there are sides of Humanities

where when people give a talk.

They read a paper.

And apologise tend to be like that.

Personally I I have a kind of
aversion to showing slides.

I did have to go to a course in my
university on how to use Powerpoint and

having attended that course I resolved
never to use Powerpoint in my life and

I have stuck to that resolution
partly because the whole

logic of Power Point is the logic
of projection of a projection

of pure form on surface which
is completely contrary to

everything I've ever wanted to argue about
making and doing and creative practice.

So I feel somehow that there is
a there is an awkward mismatch between

the technology and
what one is trying to say with it and

that's one reason why I
don't want to to use it.

I thought the place I
would actually start.

And I'm I'm thinking on my feet here so
anything might happen but

the place I wanted to start from
is where I usually do start from.

In my thinking about anything and
that's with my cello.

I been playing the cello
since I was twelve and.

Such an integral part of
everything I do that.

I can't really say where does the cello
playing and in the anthropology and

the rest of it begins and there's
a there's a puzzle which which always

strikes me whenever I see I start to play
and which I still have not resolved but

which somehow seems to be rather
central to the issues that

are being talked about about here.

And that is.

There in my in one of
the rooms of my house.

You go into the house and
you'll see in the corner.

There is a green case.

And you open the case it has lots of
clips and you will find in there.

My cello.

It's sitting there strapped in.

There's also a bow and you look at it and

you say that surely is
an object a material object.

It's a very beautiful object.

It was produced by
consummate Crossman ship.

Over one hundred fifty years ago but

is that it is definitely an object and
it is sitting there and

you pointed it and you say that yes that
is a cello and not only is that a cello.

But it is lost.

We're talking about earlier
it is one of a type.

That is you can recognise
a cello when you see it and

you can see that it's the same kind of
instruments that other cellists play and

if you go to work go to
a concert there will be rows and

rows of them and you say you get such
a low that's a cello that's a cello and

they all share certain formal features.

Despite the fact that every single one of
them was probably produced by different

craftsman in a different workshop
at a different point in time so.

So in that sense it looks
as though the cello is

a classic fireball material object and
one of a kind.

Then I take my cello out.

I take out the bow.

I rub the bow on some stuff called
Rosin which is sticky stuff.

That comes from SAP.

And then I sit down to play and
the moment that I sit down

to play that cello ceases in any
meaningful sense to be an object.

So what the problem that I'm still
wrestling with is what actually

happens to this object at
the moment when I sit down to play.

It's not as though you know in
Heidegger's famous formulation.

It kind of disappears and we keep
hearing about Heidegger and his hammer.

And it or breaking his hammer.

And when he's hammering his nails and
the hammer is going fine and

he's not hitting his fingers.

It seems as though the hammer
has just disappeared.

It's ready to hand and it's out of
the field and this to me is nonsensical.

When I say even if I was hammering
with how it doesn't disappear.

It and when I start to play the cello
the cello doesn't disappear exactly but

it isn't an object any more.

Something happens and
the problem is what what is it.

Or one way of putting it would
be to go back to Heidegger and

say well actually it changes from
being an object to becoming a thing.

At that very very moment
the cello becomes a thing.

So what is the difference in an object
in the thing last is already

explained in Heidegger's terms
an object is over against you.

It's a finished fait accompli.

That is there and it confronts you
face to face all these are three or

over against which is
the phrase that Heidegger uses

where us with the thing
the thing is itself singing.

It's undergoing a process of formation
that process is a gathering of lives and

materials that is always
being pulled in and

when you confront something as
a thing then you are joining

It's saying to you you can join
in in this process of formation.

Actually I would like to digress about
that just for a moment to talk about

the the indissoluble relation
historically between thing and landscape.

Because the word landscape just as
we know that the the word thing

comes from ancient early medieval roots or

the thing with the assembly of people
which is not just as the slitter

would have it an assembly of matters of
concern or bits and pieces of an object.

It was an assembly of lives that in the
thing lives that were lived on the land

in agrarian communities came together
at a place to resolve their affairs.

According to an written
customary rules and and

these were lives that were lived in
the land on the land in a indefinitely

not clearly bounded area of land
surrounding the thing place.

So there was always a connection between

this thing as this nothing together
this coming together of lives.

And the landscape as the surrounding
land that those lives.

Those people were cultivating.

So the landscape itself.

Is.

It is filmed from the compounded
from two roots land obviously and

the other scape comes from Old English or
Old different variants in those languages.

SCAPIN.

Meaning to shape.

So landscape meant land shaped but
the shaping of the land for

those medieval agrarian
communities was nothing to do

with projecting foam on a blank
substance it was nothing to

do with the Skopec regime's
subsequent art historians have

to have talked about shaping the land
when going out with your power.

And making Pharo.

In the earth turning the soil with
the axe cutting the trees and

burning them in systems the shifting
cultivation of whatever was being being

being employed show shaping was was
the direct visceral bodily muscular

engagement of human bodies
with resistance oil with trees

serving the land in that
process of of work.

And it's in that sense that there's
a there's an early etymological

connection between landscape and
thing and somehow it seems a big leap.

If you go back to my cello.

When I sit down to play.

I'm also shaping in that kind of sense
there's a direct muscular disarray role

in Gage Mint which which you feel
is exhausting it's hard work

you don't just you might look at somebody
playing and you think that's easy.

It's actually quite quite as athletic.

So again get back to the question
what actually happens to my cello

at the moment when I sit
down to play it seems is

in my perception to be anything
like a bounded object.

You no longer think of of the thing

as a sort of composition of the chamber
in the stink of boredom the rest of it.

It seems to become something like
we could call it a bundle of affix

that it's a place where Rosin.

And metal and wood and
resonant air and fingers and

muscles all seem to get
bundled up together.

So so that it's this kind
of bundle of ethics and

it becomes a place out of sight.

Which muscular movement and Sensibility

is being turned into something else and
what is being turned into of course.

Is is sound melodic sound.

So I began to think of maybe that
we should understand the cello.

Not as an object that we interact with.

But something that I've
called it a transducer.

A transducer meaning something that

takes one kind of movement that's
going on in one register and

turns it into another movement that
is going on in in another register.

And that me is the player I'm standing
at that point of transduction so

that as the music proceeds the cello is
kind of sliding along the line of music

continually Tran's juicing my
bodily gesture into into the sound.

So in that sense

it's something rather similar
perhaps to a well even to a pen.

I mean suppose that you're writing with
a pen and and here I am writing my name.

So this pen.

It's still the same pen
before I started writing

the same pen after I started writing
with a slight tiny bit less ink in it.

But but a certain movement that is deeply.

Part of my own being my own
identity has has in that

in that little little tiny quick
movement turn from a movement of

my body into this linear movement
that is now on the page and

the pen has served as
a transducer simply from one.

Movement.

The one in my in my body to
the movement that on the pencil and

the reason why that seems to me important.

Is that we need to think about
the relationship between me and the.

Lower me in the pen.

Not as an interactive one.

But as an animate one and I want to to.

The point is that if you
ask where is the music.

It is not in a relationship between me and
the cello.

Or if you're a violinist you thought
in relation to new on the violin.

You can't look at the relationship between
me and the cello and say well there's the.

There's me here.

And the cello there.

You could not meaningfully
say that the music.

Is between me and the cello.

It has to be that if it's
here's the here's me.

And here's the cello The music is
actually going in that direction.

This is the point that they listen
Qatari made very clearly and

in a thousand plateaus they take it.

Talking about about
the the line of flight.

That is a line that is continually
escaping continually growing and

continually developing at the same
time the line of flight does not go

between A and B..

It doesn't go between
the player in the instrument.

Any more than the water of a flowing
river flows from one bank to the other.

The water actually flows along in
between the two banks in a direction

orthogonal to the relation the interactive
relation between one bank and

another in exactly the same way when I
sit down to play the music is not cannot

be understood as something that lies
in the interaction between myself and

the instrument and the instrument is not
actually something that I'm interacting

with the instrument is a transducer
again in terms that is converting.

One line of movement which is
the management of my own body and my own.

Sensibility with another line of movement
which is the movement of sound and

the cello is somehow coupling those
two and as the movement precedes

the cello slides along in
that in that way since

the last mention that I I have am a sort
of tragically trained anthropologist and

like all anthropologists I had to do field
work and field work I did with radio

heard this in northern Finland way back
and one of the things I had to learn to

to do pretty unsuccessfully
was to throw a listen to.

Capt unsuccessful in that I could just
about throw it but I the chances of

catching the right animal in the round
up fence for virtually impossible but

the Listen to this is something that only
takes form so loop the flying noose in

the moment of throwing it otherwise it's
simply a limp line of rope but the key.

The key operative element in
a listen to is the toggle.

The total slides along the rope along
the noose as it gradually tightens So

it's sliding along in just
the same kind of way as your

bodily movement is being turned into
the sin us form of of the listen to and

in many ways the same US form of a rope
flying through the air is very similar to

the seen us form of music that
that is being being sounded.

So I began to think then
of those the cello as.

As a as a transducer that as a place
where rest in the air would.

And and and bodily movement are all coming
together with the result that there is

a construction to New
an ongoing transduction

of of the part of the movement
into into the movement of sound.

Now thinking about that.

Also.

Led me to think about
the relationship between.

The music and the playing of it.

And it's something like this and it was
related actually to similar issues that I

was concerned with about
about what exactly is

the relationship between making things and
and growing things.

You see there's a.

There's a commonly
understood idea it's linked

to the high level of isn't that we've
already heard quite a lot about today.

This is a commonly understood idea
that when you make something.

You have an idea in your mind.

You have a piece of raw material and
gradually you transfer.

The idea.

So that is gradually transferred out of
your mind in the into the material so

it's like you kind of
slides out of your mind and

onto the material rather like
a brother like a transfer and.

And so you start with the whole
idea in your head and

you end up with the whole
idea on the material

in between the beginning in the end point
you might say the work is in progress.

The form is growing you're working on it
and if you transfer that idea to music.

You might say that.

Well the piece is already being
composed you're going to play it.

You're in the middle of playing it.

It's still kind of unfolding.

But then when you come
to the end that's it.

And there it is music all complete so
the growing the playing

happens in between this initial point and.

And the end point.

Which is a very strange idea.

Indeed when you when you
come to think of it and.

This idea that the growing
is something that is.

Is in compassed within making.

I've called it in other
terms the way of thinking

the the My how you've grown syndrome.

The My how you grown syndrome
is the one that your tribute to

visiting relatives who as you
were when you were young.

Would make.

Fortunately.

Fortunately rare appearances
in your household and and

every time this aren't or
whoever it might be would appear.

Every every year or two whatever it might
be the first thing she would say to you

was would be my how you've grown and
that's because she's comparing

her memory of how she saw you last
with with how you are now and

thinking of growth as something that
happens in between this point when she

last visited and this point here
is that growth is not something

that you yourself perceive because
your life is just carrying on.

Through from one day to the decks and
yet if you were to recount

the history of your life you might
point to particular moments of key

transitions the moments you say that
this was this was a critical moment for

me and that was a critical moment for
me and so on.

So that.

And when you're thinking
biographically in that kind of way.

It's just so rather than thinking
this way and actually there's a.

This diagram is very similar to one
that last put out just a moment ago and

it might be similar.

It might be the same thing he was talking
about convergence and divergence.

But the one way of thinking
about making and growing.

This is a standard way is to say that
growing happens inside making So

you you you start you start here.

You're making something.

It grows and you went there.

But what would happen if you
put this the other way round.

Actually said that what
happens in making is that

there's a period of growth which
somehow converges to a point.

And another period a sort of
Second Life that opens up afterwards.

And the maker is not somebody who who
stands over and above the whole process.

But stands in between in amongst
everything that is going on along

with all the tools and tackle of the trade
and basically eases the transition

as lives the materials from one life.

This one.

Into another one there.

So that the artist the maker the musician.

Is is standing at the threshold with
this instrument serving as a transducer.

Pulling together.

Processes of material flow of life

of the stuff that's going on pulling
it together at a particular point.

And then opening them up again.

So that so that the work of
art doesn't close things down.

It actually opens things up.

It moves materials and
lives across a threshold.

From one particular moment so to another
that moment is not a closing down.

It's it's it's a point of transition

in anthropological terms
it's very similar to.

To a rite of passage and the rite of
passage is one that moves a person for

example in the life from one status to
another like from a boy to a use or

an American girls were to a to a married
woman and classically a rite of passage is

always said to have three stages
to it is the stage of of removal

of the near fight for more than the real
life a stage of seclusion where

they're held apart and then the stages
of reintroduction and in men.

The process is of making you can
identify those stages very clearly and

take particular materials are harvested.

From from the land say wood is harvested
from the land it goes into the work shop.

It is worked on turned into
something else which then open

goes goes out into
the into the world again.

So you might have this.

Timber in the workshop the timber is
turned into furniture the furniture then

goes into a home where it becomes part
of another living environment and

in that way in a sense the trees
the timber get a second life

a new life as furniture where before there
been trees growing in the ground and

you could you could argue in just the same
way about most other kinds of making

processes pottery garment making and
so forth.

So the maker is is one who stands
at that point of transition and

I began to think that in playing music.

It is rather the same thing
because the thing about music.

Is that it is always going on.

So as a cellist.

Like every cellist I've ever come across.

I'm obsessed with the six weeks for
unaccompanied cello of your hand.

Sebastian Bach and I play them over and
over and over again in the fall on

attempt to get them right and
you never will because perfection is not

something that any any mortal can achieve
that you can you can work on it and

it's very satisfying to gradually to find
that you can do things that you couldn't

do before and as you do it you discover
always new things about the music.

So the music is always
carrying on in that way.

It's not a story at the moment
when Bach wrote those pieces and

laid down his pen that was it.

That's the music that's
the music finished.

And then the earl
the performers have to do is to

kind of run off copies
from the original work.

So a musical performance was like
a Xerox copy from a thing or

the same as playing a CD which is simply
a mechanical reproduction effect is that.

That every time you sit down to play.

Although you're a cop although you're
performing the same piece over and

over again every performance is
a regional movement that cannot be

gone over again in calligraphy it's very
much the same the calligrapher might

keep wanting to copy masterworks but
you can never go over the same line twice.

You can you can you can reproduce a piece.

But you can't replicate it
because every production is

an original movement and therefore.

Music itself is never finished
in that way it is always

flowing it's always coming into being
Whitehead used this term concrete sense

to talk about the way in which lives and
things are always continually surpassing

themselves and music is calm crescent or
Crescent in that sense is not created.

It's always Crescent always
coming into being and

it comes into being in and through
the totality of all its performances and

as long as people keep on performing the
piece the music will continue to flow and

that means that that when you sit
down to play and get back to this

scenario I've got my cello out of my
in my case I put the rosin on the bow.

I sit down music's in front of me I
begin to play at that particular moment.

I it's.

I'm entering that as a flowing tyrant.

That is the music.

It's like pushing one's
boat out into a stream.

That every time.

You know if you're if you're boatman and

you're you're crossing the river
on the boat you push the boat out

into a stream that has been flowing and
will continue.

Before you put it out and
will continue to flow after it and

you're pushing the boat to some
extent into the into the unknown.

It's a say that it's
good to begin to play.

In music and I think the same thing
would happen would apply to any kind of

making process and it kind of craft
to embark upon the performance.

Is to put yourself in
a position of existential risk.

Is to say.

We don't know what's going to happen here.

One can never be totally prepared and
indeed the to some extent

the most skilled person is at the craft or
playing the instrument or

whatever it is the more they recognise
that at the moment they start to play.

They are there at the mercy

of what might transpire that at
the moment when you push the boat out.

You're also to some extent
submitting yourself to the music.

They're saying OK I'm giving myself up
to the music now take me where it will.

I don't know exactly what's
going to to happen to it.

Now I've thought about to try and

think about what happens when
you sit down to play and

again I say I think it would would apply
just as much to any kind of craft activity

of making with wood or clay or
whatever material you want to work with.

The what happens is that you
enter into what I've called

a correspondence with the material
in the music it's sound but

in pottery it would be clear you carpentry
it would be wood and by correspondence.

I don't mean a sort of one
to one matching with things.

I mean an answer a continually
a process in which you

are continually answering to and
answering the.

The material with which are engaged in
the knowledge you gain is a musical

analogy would be with musical
counterpoint if you imagine melodic lines

in counterpoint that are carrying
along together each as.

Those melodic lines in counterpoint
is continually responding

to each of the others.

And so it carries on in a kind of police.

Polyphonic.

Movement.

So I mean correspondence in that
sense that to to enter into

the creative process is to enter into
a correspondence with the material with

which with which you're working and in
arguing for that kind of correspondence.

Of thinking of making not as
an interaction between the maker and

material like that but
rather thinking of both the maker

as carrying along and the material is
carrying along but those two getting.

Trying to act together like melodic lines.

I'm I'm I'm criticizing or wanting
to criticize those who want to argue

that those including
a lot of network actor

network theorists who still want to
talk about the relationship between.

An actor and the various other bits and

pieces that they're engaging with as
an interactive one The trouble with

the notion of interaction is lies in
the interval it intervenes between.

And the Pertwee n'est there
is not an in between this

the pit between this is between this and
that is because when to listen to Tara

talking about the river going between
the banks the they don't mean between this

they mean in between us which
is a quite different thing.

The water of the river.

Is in between the two banks is
not going between one bank and

the other and that distinction is really
really very very very very critical.

So I'm arguing against those who who who

are talking about the relationship between
the maker and the material in impurely.

Interactive terms.

In anthropology much of this goes
back to a very influential work.

Was written by an anthropologist called
Alfred gel I don't know whether you've

come across this book called art and

agency written in one thousand nine
hundred eight had had an enormous impact.

And in that book.

Jell argues that every work of art indexes

the creativity the creative agency
of its maker the artist and

it indexes it in the sense that
if you see the work of art.

You can which is it in
itself extraordinary.

It's not an ordinary things extraordinary
thing you can you can work back from that

work of art to an intention in the mind
of the artist who created it so that the.

The artwork becomes a secondary
agency a kind of reflection

of the artist's original
agency in this working back

from index to agent's agency so that so
that working back gel used the term.

Abduction in the term abduction comes from
the semiotics of child soldiers purse.

And if you go to person.

Try and
figure out what he meant by abduction.

Nobody can understand exactly it's
virtually in comprehensible but

that it least impresses formulation but
roughly speaking I think

what he meant by abduction was
the procedure that would be adopted by.

A Sherlock Holmes.

Or any kind of Sleuth
a criminal investigator.

Who is faced with the outcome of
an extraordinary event such as a murder or

burglary robbery something or something
out or something untoward has happened.

And and the.

The sleuths if you're Sherlock Holmes
you look around for clues.

Which would indicate what went on how this
happened so a footprint in the in the.

In the lawn or something like that
shows the murderers in a hurry.

And you work back and and you
eventually derive some sort of a hunch.

About what the motive of the criminal was
such that once you know what that was

everything else follows as a matter
of ordinary inevitability.

So the the murder itself
was an extraordinary event.

You think back to through
a chain of causation

to the intent in the murderous mind.

And when you've got that then
you can read forward again

from what that intent to
what actually happened.

Well of course if you're running in
a hurry across a wet lawn they'll be that

footprint there's nothing
in the least extraordinary.

Once you've got back so
that the process of that direction.

Is this one of moving back
from the indexical signs

of an activity that has already happened.

Back to an intention that
supposedly motivated it and

it seems to me that there's a way
of understanding what goes on

in a creative process of making
this is absolutely wrong.

Because in such a creative process.

The artist does not know as in
the faintest idea what the outcome

is going to be or when you have when you
are going to reach that point at which you

can say we've got an outcome that
itself is always somewhat arbitrary and

sometimes the dictated by the demands
of the art market that there has to be.

There has to be a work that
has to be an output and

so you have to break it off
at a pretty particular point.

What is actually happening in
the creative process is is a is a moving

forward in which the artist
is joining his or hers.

It's ability will see
the movement of the material so

you get a kind of consciousness of
materials that is in which these the in

which the sensibility and
the keenest easier to set the awareness

of one's own movement is coupled to
the movement of the material and

that's precisely what I've been calling
correspondence and and in our experience

it usually entails a process of improvise
ation Let's say we have to we have to kind

of find our way through without knowing
exactly where it's all it's all heading.

And thinking about that then.

And going back to.

To this diagram here.

You can see how see the making
process is something that is always

in this in this correspondence always
sliding along between these the.

The the process the the the the growth or
the development of

of consciousness here and
of the materials on the other side.

Some are moving moving in between.

And.

You'll see from all that why
it is that I have very deep

reservations about the concept of agency
which I think has been unhelpfully

over used in some of the discussion
about active materials.

I prefer much prefer the concept of
animosity and I've been surprised to

the extent to which somehow the more
work that theorists talk about agency.

The more they have to say about agency the
less they seem to have to say about life

and is it to be the life of
materials is really what matters.

And of course as last pointed out there.

Materials comes from the term martyr
mother which is a is a kind of giving us

of life to things it's really the life of
materials the vitality of materials that

we're talking about and vitality and
life and agency seem to be that be.

Not the same things.

It's rather

strange that I remember one discussion.

By.

Not by Le Tour actually in this case but
by an archaeologist called by call to call

not it very very very good
archaeologist was talking about this

question of of agency and making the point
that it is that it is necessary.

For practical purposes to
distinguish between agency and

intentionality and
he said that for example.

It doesn't really make
much sense to attribute

intentionality to cat flaps your cat flaps
are these you have them in America that

if you can't be bothered to you
if you if you keep a cat and

you can't be bothered all the time to be
getting up and down to open the door.

Every time this cat wants to go in or

come out you install a little slap in the
bottom of the door that the cat can open

by using its nose and get it out
without you having to bother about it.

So you you install a cat flap.

And and so says not that well I
don't really think the cat flaps

which is just a hinge bit of metal.

I don't really think the cat
flaps have intentionality.

But maybe they have agency they were you

think what sense does it make to say
to say that a cat flap has agency.

While the cuts.

You might say does have a certain
effect it has the fact that it is

there has consequences.

One consequence is that the cat
can get in and out of the door.

And then you find in much of
the literature that people are saying that

well things have a gentle
effect of a thing is there.

It hasn't.

Hecht.

And since all effects must be the result
of some cause then the agency is the cause

of which the things effect this is this
is entirely circular reasoning and

it reminds me of the sort of reasoning
that used to be used to be used

in the bad old days of of functionalism
where at least enough apology.

Everything was always
supposed to be a B.P.

functionally adapted to things
that something was there.

It was because they had a function.

And you had to show what its function was.

And then critics quite rightly pointed
out that this was a bit circular because

if you didn't have a function
it wouldn't be there and

therefore all the anything
that existed must if you

assume a world in which everything
is adapted to something is there.

They must have a function.

Otherwise it wouldn't be there and

I must say I find exactly the same
circularity in a lot of agencies speak

coming out of celebrity philosophers
that if something is there.

It must have an effect because
if it didn't have any effect.

It wouldn't be there simply therefore to
deduce that because he has an effect.

It must be an agent seems to
me to be a kind of pointless.

Pointless deduction there is no need
to attribute agency to things but

there is a need to put those things
back in process is of life and

those processes of life including the.

The animate flows the material flows
that make those things part of a world

that is continually unfolding
along with along with us.

So that's really where it
comes to the heart of my.

My rather basic disagreement I think with.

With network theory and
with with with Latour because the network

theorists are still talking
about patterns of interaction.

There are lines the lines of the network.

Are lines between A and.

Even though they might say that
you can't define the real latter

independent of the relationships
they're still talking about interactive

networks they still talking
about lines to join up

points that their lines are still
point to point connectors.

Whereas the lines of movement
that I've been trying to draw and

that I think happen when I'm sitting
down to play the cello the lines of my

the lines that are traced by my body
by my fingers as I move them a lot.

The scene U.S.

lines of the melody those lines are not
going from one point to another they're

always passing in between but they're
they're wrapping around one another.

They're getting tied in knots they go off
in all sorts of different directions and

that tangle.

Of interwoven corespondent lungs.

As for example in the polyphonic piece
of music is what I've called the mesh

work and that's why I want to make a quite
clear distinction between the mesh work

and the network the mesh work is
what you see if for example you

you take in your garden or you look at the
bank of a river which has been undercut

because of a bend in the water and
you can see all the time the live roots.

Underground that are normally
hidden beneath the surface and

all these roots are all tangled
up with one another but

nothing is connecting anything to
anything else that is to me the meshwork.

And and for that reason I have

opposed active network theory or
entity and.

To my preferred acronym.

Which is spider.

Spider is.

Spencer skill practice involves
developmentally important responsiveness.

So that's that's where I stand and
I'm the spider and the tour and.

And the others are the ants and I think

although the two it doesn't wriggle
around a lot because he's anything but.

But consistent on these matters.

I think there really is a real difference
that has to be to be sorted out.

Even when in the slide that we heard
about earlier in the tourist work from.

When he takes up hiding his notion of the
thing turns it into matters of concern and

then reject.

Completely in following up on his
notion of of matters of concern

his matters of concern are devoid of
life or energy or movement or force.

They're simply consecrations of bits and
pieces of complications of matter.

They're not entanglements of movement and
life.

With any and
an energy that that from my mind is why

the tour is political ecology really
doesn't work as ecology might work.

This might work as politics and

so then I just want to finish with.

With one further issue.

I'm sort of this is a bit incoherent but

I'm working this out as I go along and
this is about imagining things.

Because the real puzzle and something that
I'm still working trying to sort out.

Is is where do we put
that without worrying

about the question of whether imagination
is something unique to humans or

whether other animals have it and
so on but but but

if we're talking about creative process is
about correspondence is about the way in

which our own lives get in tangled
with the lives of my vital materials.

Where in all of that do we put what
we customarily call the imagination.

Clearly we cannot if we accept
the kind of reasoning I put forward.

We can't think of the imagination
as a power of men.

Well representation or some kind of
capacity that humans have to set up

a model or plan for
what is to be made or achieved or

to be played in advance
of the playing of it.

And if we go back to
the point I made earlier

that when you embark on playing a piece
of music or in any process of making.

You are taking the next instinctual
risk you're pushing the boat out

into the world with no certainty
of what is going to transpire.

Then it seems as though.

What we're calling imagination
is that that that movement

the the propensity of of the maker
to want to move ahead of things.

Was at the same time the part of
the engagement with materials which

involves tension involves
friction lags behind.

So it seems to me that human existence.

Is is somehow temporarily stretched so
out in front.

Is an imagination that is always
kind of running ahead of ourselves.

Always wanting to go go somewhere
without knowing where exactly.

And a material in Gage went with
stuff that because of the heaviness

in the friction of materials is always
to be holding is holding us back.

So that in some sense whenever we embark
on anything as skilled practitioners.

However skilled we are we are both
completely prepared and totally unprepared

for what is to come we can be completely
supposed where we are we are musicians.

OK we're completely prepared because we've
done loads and loads of practice and

we said we can sit down.

We can perform this piece
yes we know how to do it.

And yet

at the moment when you start to play you
are the same time completely unprepared.

Because you're pushing the boat out and

you have to submit to the music
you are you are not in control.

So in the process of creative imagining.

The it is actually
submission that leads and

mastery that follows and
not the other way around.

And this is to turn around the standard
cognitively store intentionally making

in which in which you are a master you
are an architect you have formed a plan.

You know exactly what to do and
then you are telling your body or

the rest of the world or your workers
to do what it is you've got to do so

that you you lead is the master and
everyone else follows what I think I want

to say is that to understand
the creative imaginative process of life

we have to turn that upside down and
say that it's actually the submission

that leads where you actually are you
expose yourself lay yourself open

to things and the mastery the skills
mastery that comes from all that practice.

That's what follows on behind.

And in that sense.

We can talk about.

I'm making that takes place within
growing rather than the other way.

The other way round.

I don't know how long I spoken for.

But.

I say that with.

I mean is that long enough.

Because if I think I've exhausted.

What I.