Architecture without Nature in an elevator, they shuffle around all over the place.

Now
physicists are wondering whether coherence and nonlocality
1

Timothy Morton are not confined to the very small, since quantum coherence
has now been observed in a tiny tuning fork visible to the
naked eye – thirty microns long, very very long indeed from
the point of view of an electron. And nonlocality has been
observed in fullerenes, buckyball shaped carbon molecules.
This is all bad news for mechanistic theories of causation,
which rely on point particles staying put in a pregiven space
and time.
If the very fabric of spacetime is an emergent property
of beings such as planets, coffee cups, and rubber ducks,
it’s a good bet that more complex phenomena such as web
of life and Nature are also not deep structures that underlie
I n an age of ecological emergency, it is imperative not to
be hidebound by a concept that developed during the
very period that created the crisis. This concept, Nature, is
than another one because it is more fundamental in some
sense. The first possibility, that the web of life is only a
(human) mental construct that gives meaning to beings such
lifeforms, but rather are emergent properties of them. This
in turn is congruent with the neo-Darwinist idea of the
indeed partially responsible for the current situation. Even as butterflies and algae, is what Harman calls overmining. A extended phenotype, the idea that genomic expression does
substitute concepts such as lifeworld and environment risk thing is said to be overmined (rather than undermined) when not stop at the ends of, say, a beaver’s whiskers, but extends
Fig. 1 R&Sie, Dusty Relief, 2002
only being “new and improved” versions of Nature. Building, it is “reduced upwards” to an affect of some other being, all the way to the end of a beaver’s dam. In this sense, the
which automatically addresses scales of time and space such as a human mind. vast majority of the soil we walk on, the places we visit, the reducible upwards into a function of (human) categorization
beyond habitual human comprehension, also automatically In both cases, the concretion of Nature and web of mountains we climb, let alone the air we breathe, are simply (this is what the Linnaean concept of species boils down to),
addresses nonhuman beings in the broadest sense: lifeforms, life overwhelm other things. A mouse is only real because distributed expressions of DNA. A chalky cliff is the tale of an ecological view of reality must be irreductionist, that is,
geological strata, the biosphere, atmospheric gases, sunlight. of the network in which she finds herself, according to an millions of years of shells deposited by mollusks. Oxygen is it must cleave to unique beings. Unique here does not mean
What is required is a view that recognizes nonhumans as argument of Deep Green philosopher Arne Naess. Yet we the toxic outgassing of bacteria in the ancient Archaean era individual. There is a difference between the utter uniqueness
partners on “this” side of social space, no longer conceived can easily imagine firing the mouse into space: she would be of earth. A spider’s web, a subway station, a beehive – surely of this specific lifeform, and the idea of an individual, which
as exclusively human. What is also required is a view that a dead mouse, but still a mouse. The mouse is not reducible human architecture is in this sense an extended phenotype, requires a set of which it is a member. By way of analogy,
refuses to reduce one entity to another – both reductionism to the web of life. pace Marx’s distinction between “the worst of architects” think of the generic American front lawn: they are individual
and holism are problematic. In sum, we need to transition Rather than this game of overwhelming one thing with and “the best of bees.” Which is not to say that building
2
insofar as they embody the private property of an individual.
from the time of nature to the time of coexistence. For another thing, I suggest instead that we think relations is predictable by DNA. There is no “gene for” anything, let But they are far from unique. In fact, in many jurisdictions
this, it is necessary to turn to the emerging object-oriented (Nature, web, network) as ontologically secondary to things. alone a gene for an architrave or pilaster. Since there is no attempts to make the front lawn unique are banned. The
ontology movement, spearheaded by Graham Harman. Rather than providing the foundations of things, relations “gene for” anything, DNA expressions (phenotypes) are just lawn must conform to a certain standard: it must be plain,
The concept Nature and its “new and improved” float “in front of” things. Such a view is at least congruent as real as the genome (genotypes). Beavers are as real as shaved smooth like a “jarhead” Marine with a crew cut,
upgrades such as environment, web of life, and lifeworld are with the last century of physics, from relativity theory to their DNA. watered to maintain its even greenness, and so on.
all reifications. On the one hand, they are too abstract – quantum theory, even if it makes problems for mechanistic Indeed, Darwinism forces upon us the conclusion I bring up the lawn for another reason: it is a horizontal,
when I look for Nature what I find are pine trees, pollen, biological theories, which are somewhat prevalent. For that there are no species and that they have no origin. If privatized version of the concept Nature. In suburban
polar bears and porcupines. In fact, I don’t even find these, if causes and effects – the way things relate – hovers emoticons had existed in Victorian Britain, Darwin could space, the lawn symbolizes the noli me tangere of Nature,
because according to Darwinian science, even the concept ontologically “in front of” things, then we must dispense have saved us a lot of bother by putting a ‘; )’ at the end of the performance and preservation of a rigid boundary
species is too abstract a term to account for the multiplicity with causality as a series of mechanisms that underlie things. his title The Origin of Species. Darwin’s line of reasoning is between the human and nonhuman realms: Keep Off the
of mutant lifeforms. Darwinism, as a matter of fact, accords This view turns out to be a kind of ontological this: if a species is only an abstract generalization, it is also Grass. Visiting Geneva, Lenin was amazed by the pristine
far more with the notion that every lifeform is in some sense illusion caused by human familiarity with a certain region impossible rigorously to distinguish between a species and lawns, symbols of republican equality, and their “Keep Off”
completely unique, not the expression of some abstract of beings such as watches, watermills, steam engines and a variant. Likewise, and this is an even deeper problem, it signs. The lawn is a horizontal Barnett Newman painting,
species, since there is no thin, rigid dividing line between air pumps. Victorian scientists began to guess differently is impossible to distinguish rigidly between a variant and a an abstract painting that embodies privacy in public, a
species and variant, or between variant and monstrosity. when they discovered that the front of an electromagnetic monstrosity. Thus what we confront is only ever this specific decent distance between one’s neighbors, an open and free
Such dividing lines are necessarily retroactive conceptual wave is shorter than it should be – it was this anomaly that being we now call polar bear, nematode worm, rhinovirus. exchange between property owners. Nature, in the form of
impositions. prompted Einstein to formulate special and general relativity, Strangely then, Darwinism gives us a non-totalizable national parks, is simply a larger, often more vertical, version
On the other hand, Nature, environment, web of life, establishing that time and space are emissions of objects, not plenitude of unique beings, not a generic sludge. of the same thing. More abstractly, Nature is an abstract
and lifeworld are too concrete. They are objectified “things” some neutral container in which objects sit. Furthermore, Since a lifeform is not reducible to its genome, nor space over yonder that I can never quite reach, so “Keep Off
that exist in some “over yonder.” Either this concretion is at the level of the very small and the very cold, objects 1 This is the example given by Aaron O’Connell in “Making Sense of a Visible the Grass” embodies it well, like a hysterical symptom.
Quantum Object,” TED Talk, March 2011, http://www.ted.com/talks/aaron_o_connell_ This lawn, this actual lawn, is not really generic at all
purely mental – the web of life exists in the (human) mind seemed to occupy more than one place at once (quantum making_sense_of_a_visible_quantum_object.html, accessed March 7, 2012. The
– or it is physical and subtends, and is thus more real than, coherence and nonlocality). At this level, to measure means phenomenon O’Connell describes is available in O’ Connell, Aaron D., M. Hofheinz, – it is its own miniature ecosystem teeming with insects
M. Ansmann, Radoslaw C. Bialczak, M. Lenander, Erik Lucero, M. Neeley, D. Sank, H. and worms, fungi and bacteria. It is a being in its own right,
the beings that find themselves in it or emerging out of it. to deflect (with another quantum such as a photon). At this Wang, M. Weides, J. Wenner, John M. Martinis and A. N. Cleland, “Quantum Ground
This latter possibility is what philosopher Graham Harman level, it is evident that things don’t stay put waiting to be State and Single Phonon Control of a Mechanic al Ground Resonator,” Nature 464 consisting of a plenitude of other beings –­ like Leibniz’s
March 17, 2010, 697–703. monads, the view I am beginning to advocate here implies
calls undermining: the positing of some entity as more real seen by some observer. Like people left to their own devices 2 Karl Marx, Capital, tr. Ben Fowkes, 3 vols. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1990, 1.284.

1 2
 design must deal with shunting flows around depends upon keep on producing more of itself in order to continue to be doing, however, it substituted one heck of a giant myth of its
a more or less reactionary idea of Nature, the away to which itself. This strange paradox is fundamentally, structurally own: Nature. Nature is precisely the lump that pre-exists the
things are flushed. If instead there is no cosmic background, imbalanced. Let’s consider the unit of capitalism: the capitalist labor process. Martin Heidegger has the best term
no world or Nature into which human badness can flow, turning of raw materials into products. Now for a capitalist, for it: standing reserve, bestand. Bestand means “stuff,” as
the idea that good quality means speeding up the flow of the raw materials are not strictly natural. They simply pre- in the old ad from the 1990s, “Drink Pepsi: Get Stuff.” There
shunting dirt around becomes obsolete. exist whatever labor process the capitalist is going to exert is an ontology implicit in capitalist production, then, which
A recent project by R&Sie, Dusty Relief (2002), suggests on them. Surely here we see the problem. Whatever pre- is strictly materialism as defined by Aristotle. This specific
another approach altogether. The project is a building exists the specific labor process is a kind of lump that only form of materialism is not fascinated with material objects in
in Bangkok that will be electrostatic (Figure 1 and 2). 3
achieves definition as a valuable product once the labor has all their manifold specificity. It’s just stuff. This viewpoint is
Eventually the building would be covered with a gigantic fur been exerted on it. the basis of Aristotle’s problem with materialism. Have you
coat of dirt. It would attract dirt rather than distributing it,
4
What capitalism makes is some kind of stuff called ever seen or handled matter? Have you ever held a piece of
since away has lost its luster, why not? Instead of trying to capital. The very definition of “raw materials” in economic “stuff?” To be sure one has seen plenty of objects: Santa Claus
constantly tweak an illusion, thinking and art and political theory is also “stuff that comes in through the factory door.” in a department store, snowflakes, photographs of atoms.
practice should simply relate directly to nonhumans. We will Again, it doesn’t matter what it is. It could be sharks or But have I ever seen matter or stuff as such? Aristotle says
never “get it right” completely, but trying to come up with steel bolts. At either end of the process we have featureless it’s a bit like searching through a zoo to find the “animal”
the best kind of world is just inhibiting ecological progress. chunks of stuff – one of those featureless chunks being rather than the various species such as monkeys and mynah
Art and architecture in the time of hyperobjects must as human labor. The point is to convert the stuff that comes in birds. Marx says exactly the same thing regarding capital.
8 9

automatically directly include hyperobjects, even when they to money. Industrial capitalism is philosophy incarnate in As Nature goes, so goes matter. The two most progressive
try to ignore them. For instance, consider the contemporary stocks, girders, and human sweat. What kind of philosophy? physical theories of our age, ecology and quantum theory,
urge to maximize throughput: to get dirty air flowing, for If you want a “realism of the remainder,” just look around need have nothing to do with it.
instance, with air conditioners. Air conditioning is now the you. “Realism of the remainder” means that yes, for sure, What is Bestand? Bestand is stockpiling. Row upon
benchmark of comfort; young Singaporeans are starting to there is something real outside of our (human) access to it – row of big box houses waiting to be inhabited. Terabyte
sweat out of doors, habituated to the homogeneous thermal but we can only classify it as a kind of inert resistance to our after terabyte of memory waiting to be filled. Stockpiling
Fig. 2 R&Sie, Dusty Relief, 2002 comfort of modern buildings. Such architecture and design
5
probing, a grey goo, to adapt a term suggested by thinking is the art of the zeugma – the yoking of things you hear in
is predicated on the notion of “away.” But there is no “away” about nanotechnology – tiny machines eating everything phrases such as “wave upon wave” or “bumper to bumper.”
that a thing contains a plenum of other things, like fish
after the end of the world. It would make more sense to until reality becomes said goo. Stockpiling is the dominant mode of social existence. Giant
ponds within fish ponds, perhaps ad infinitum. To exist is
design in a dark ecological way, admitting our coexistence It’s no wonder that industrial capitalism has turned the parking lots empty of cars, huge tables in restaurants across
to be a unit, to be unique, yet to contain more on one’s
with toxic substances we have created and exploited. earth into a dangerous desert. It doesn’t really care what which you can’t hold hands, vast empty lawns. Nature is
inside than exists on one’s outside. Each entity is like that,
New ideas such as Dusty Relief are counterintuitive from comes through the factory door, just as long as it generates stockpiling. Range upon range of mountains, receding into
which is simply another way of expressing our insight
the point of view of regular post-1970s environmentalism. more capital. Do we want to sustain a world based on a the distance. Rocky Flats nuclear bomb trigger factory was
about the irreducibility of things. The view I am advocating
Process relationism has been the presiding deity of this philosophy of grey goo? sited precisely to evoke this kind of mountainous stockpile.
here is that of Graham Harman, pioneer of object-oriented
thinking, insofar as it thinks flows are better than solids. But Nature is the featureless remainder at either end of the The eerie strangeness of this fact confronts us with the ways
ontology (OOO). I believe that OOO gives us a way to think
thinking this way on a planetary scale just becomes absurd. process of production. Either it’s exploitable stuff, or value- in which we still believe that Nature is “over there” – that it
of architecture without Nature, because it allows us to think
Why is it better to stir the shit around inside the toilet bowl added stuff. Whatever: it’s basically featureless, abstract, exists apart from technology, apart from history. Far from it.
of beings as irreducible and unique, yet composed of a host
faster and faster rather than just leaving it there? Monitoring, grey. It has nothing to do with nematode worms and Nature is the stockpile of stockpiles.
of others: a crowded universe, teeming with multitudes.
regulating, controlling flows: is ecological ethics and politics orangutans, organic chemicals in comets or rock strata. You So again, I ask, what exactly are we sustaining when
What counts in such a teeming universe is the quality
just this? Regulating flows and sending them where you think can scour the earth from mountaintop to Marianas Trench. we talk about sustainability? An intrinsically out of control
and quantity of affiliations between beings. Since there is
they need to go is not relating to nonhumans. Regulation of You will never find Nature. It’s an empty category looking for system that sucks in grey goo at one end and pushes out grey
no Nature to which one must cleave, what matters is not
flows is just a contemporary mode of window dressing of something to fill it. Grey goo. value at the other. It’s Natural goo, Natural value. Result?
an anesthetized experience of feeling part of something
the substances of ontotheological nihilism, the becomings Rather than only evaporating everything into sublime Mountain ranges of inertia, piling higher every year, while
bigger, but establishing bonds of intimacy between beings.
and processes with which Nietzsche wanted to undermine ether (Marx via Macbeth: “all that is solid melts into air”), humans boil away in the agony of uncertainty. Just take a
Architecture without Nature, then, must concern itself with
philosophy. capitalism also requires and keeps firm long-term inertial look at Manufactured Landscapes: the ocean of telephone
establishing these affiliations. The more affiliations there
The common name for managing and regulating flows structures such as families, as Fernand Braudel explored. 7
dials, dials as far as the eye can see, somewhere in China. 10

are, the more fragile the network, since to allow a thing

is sustainability. But what exactly is being sustained? The Koch Brothers and GE would be two contemporary A real ocean – it lies there at this very moment. Or consider
to exist is to allow it to be inconsistent, to allow it to be
“Sustainable capitalism” might be one of those contradictions examples. One part of capital, itself a hyperobject, is its the gigantic billowing waves of plastic cups created by Tara
irreducible upwards or downwards.
along the lines of “military intelligence.” Capital must 6
relentless revolutionizing of its mode of production. But Donovan in Untitled (Plastic Cups) (2006; Figure 3). In 11

Thus to take a rather practical example, why should

the other part is tremendous inertia. And the tremendous massive piles, the cups reveal properties hidden from the
buildings concern themselves with shunting flows of air 3 R&Sie, Dusty Relief, http://www.new-territories.com/roche2002bis.htm, accessed
December 20, 2011. inertia happens to be on the side of the modern. That is, the view of a person who uses a single cup at a time, a viscous
and dirt from one place to another? For about a century 4 David Gissen, Subnature: Architecture’s Other Environments. New York: Princeton
political ontology in which there is an “away.” But there is
vectors have been the rulers of architectural design space, as Architectural Press, 2009, p. 79; “Reflux: From Environmental Flows to Environmental
Objects,” paper at Materials: Objects: Environments, NIEA, Sydney, May 19, 2011. no “away” in the time of hyperobjects. 8 Aristotle, Metaphysics, 213, 217.
buildings have striven to distribute or eliminate heat and dirt 5 Stephen Healey, “Air Conditioning,” paper at Materials: Objects: Environments, 9 Marx, Capital 1.620.
Capitalism did away with feudal and pre-feudal myths
from their vicinity. But if there is no yonder, if we know that NIEA, Sydney, May 19, 2011. 10 Edward Burtynsky, Manufactured Landscapes: The Photographs of Edward
6 Neil A. Manson, “The Concept of Irreversibility: Its Use in the Sustainable such as the divine hierarchy between classes of people. In so Burtynsky. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003; Jennifer Baichwal, dir.,
when we flush the toilet the waste goes somewhere, there is Development and Precautionary Principle Literatures,” Electronic Journal of Manufactured Landscapes. Foundry Films, National Film Board of Canada, 2006.
no away to which to send anything. The idea that ecological Sustainable Development 1.1 (2007), http://www.ejsd.org/public/journal_article/2, 7 Fernand Braudel, Civilization and Capitalism, 15th–18th Century, tr. S. Reynolds, 3 11 Slavoj Zizek, Enjoy Your Symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out. New York:
accessed January 8, 2012. vols. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982–1984. Routledge, 2001, P. 209.
3 4
 The deep reason for why sustainability fails as a Far more than the first object in the series, because all
concept, then, has to do with how we are not living in a the relations between the objects and within them also count
world. It is thus time to question the very term ecology, since as objects. It’s what Lacanians call a not-all set. Objects in
ecology is the thinking of home, and hence world (oikos plus this sense are fundamentally not subject to phallogocentric
logos). In a reality without a home, without world, what this rule. What we encounter in OOO is a Badiou-like set theory
study calls objects constitutes reality. I here use object in in which any number of affiliations between objects can be
the special sense reserved for it by OOO. Objects are unique. drawn. Strictly the contents of these sorts of sets are bigger
Objects can’t be reduced to smaller objects or dissolved than the container.
upwards into larger ones. Objects are withdrawn from one Sometimes deep ontological issues are solved by
another and from themselves. Objects are uncanny. Objects studying children’s books, so perhaps this is a good time to
comprise an untotalizable non-whole, not-all set that defies consider one. A children’s story called A House is a House
holism and reductionism. There is thus no top object that for Me tells us something about ecology, since oikos, the
gives all objects value and meaning, and no bottom object to root of eco-, means home. The text is a wonderful jumbly
which they can be reduced. If there is no top object and no plethora of objects:
bottom object, it means that we have a very strange situation
in which there are more parts than there are wholes! This Cartons are houses for crackers.
is what Levi Bryant calls the strange mereology of objects. 14
Castles are houses for kings.
Objects are like Doctor Who’s Tardis: bigger on the “inside” The more that I think about houses,
than they are on the “outside.” This makes holism of any The more things are houses for things.
kind totally impossible.
Fig. 3 Tara Donovan, Untitled (Plastic Cups) 2006
Even if you bracket off a vast amount of reality, you Home, oikos, is unstable. Who knows where it stops and
malleability. In Donovan’s title, the cups are in parenthesis, Meanwhile, despite Nature, despite grey goo, real will find that there is no top and bottom object in the small starts? The poem presents us with an increasingly dizzying
the “untitled” outside parenthesis, as if to highlight the things writhe and smack into one another. Some leap out section you’ve demarcated. Even if you select only a sector array of objects. They can act as homes for other objects.
way the cups are “saying” something beyond their human because industry malfunctions, or functions only too well. of reality to study somewhere in the middle, like they do And of course, in turn, these homes can find themselves on
use: something unspeakable or hard to speak, for a human. Oil bursts out of its ancient sinkhole and floods the Gulf of in ecological science (the mesocosm), you will also find no the inside of other “homes.”
The title of no-title places the work both inside and outside Mexico. Gamma rays shoot out of plutonium for twenty-four top or bottom object, even as pertains to that sector alone. “Home” then is purely “sensual:” it has to do with how
human social and philosophical space, like a garbage dump, thousand years. Hurricanes congeal out of massive storm There are not even quasi-top and quasi-bottom objects, then! an object finds itself inevitably on the inside of some other
which the gigantic pile surely evokes. systems, fed by the heat from the burning of fossil fuels. The It’s a bit like a magnet. If you cut it, the two halves still have object. The instability of oikos, and thus of ecology itself,
Societies embody philosophies. Actually, what we have ocean of telephone dials mounts ever higher. Paradoxically, a north and a south pole. There is no such thing as “half” a has to do with this feature of objects. A “house” is the way
in modernity is considerably worse than just instrumentality. capitalism has unleashed myriad objects upon us, in their magnet versus a “whole” one. an object experiences the entity on whose interior it finds
Here we must depart from Heidegger. What’s worse is the manifold horror and sparkling splendor. Two hundred So why is holism such a bad idea? Surely there could be itself. So then these sorts of things are also houses:
location of essence in some beyond, away from any specific years of idealism, two hundred years of seeing humans at other possible holisms that adopt some version of “both-and”
existence. To this extent, capitalism is itself Heideggerian! the center of existence, and now the objects take revenge, thinking so that neither the parts nor the whole – whatever A mirror’s a house for reflections...
Whether we call it scientism, deconstruction, relationism, or terrifyingly huge, ancient, long-lived, threateningly minute, the whole might be – are greater. Perhaps the parts are not A throat is a house for a hum...
just good old fashioned Platonic forms, there is no essence invading every cell in our body. When we flush the toilet, necessarily lesser than the whole but exist in some both/ …
in what exists. Either the beyond is itself nonexistent we imagine that the U-bend takes the waste away into some and synergistic fashion; you could have – simultaneously – A book is a house for a story.
(deconstruction, nihilism), or it’s some kind of real away ontologically alien realm. Ecology is now beginning to tell
12
“withdrawn” objects and something else ( just to satisfy our A rose is a house for a smell.
from “here.” The problem, then, is not essentialism but this us of something very different: a flattened world without modern need for things that aren’t static, let’s say an open My head is a house for a secret,
very notion of a beyond. This beyond is what Tara Donovan’s ontological U-bends. A world in which there is no “away.” - ended, perhaps always-expanding something else). A secret I never will tell.
work destroys. Marx was partly wrong, then, when in The Communist First, we must walk through some semi-related points A flower’s at home in a garden.
Think of what Tony Hayward said, the CEO of BP whose Manifesto he claimed that in capitalism all that is solid melts about this line of questioning. It sounds like good value to A donkey’s at home in a stall.
callousness made international headlines. Hayward said that into air. He didn’t see how a kind of hypersolidity oozes back have “both–and” rather than “either–or,” to our somewhat Each creature that’s known has a house of its own
the Gulf of Mexico was a huge ocean, and that the spill was in to the emptied-out space of capitalism. This oozing real consumerist minds (buy one get one free). But I’m afraid this And the earth is a house for us all. 15

tiny by comparison. Nature would absorb the industrial comes back and can no longer be ignored, so that even when is a case of either–or: holism or not. As for the “open-ended”
accident. I don’t want to quibble about the relative size of the spill is supposedly “gone and forgotten,” there, look! “something else,” for OOO this is just another object. Or The time of hyperobjects is the time during which we
ocean and spill, as if an even larger spill would somehow There it is, mile upon mile of strands of oil just below the it doesn’t exist except as an appearance-for another object. discover ourselves on the inside of some big objects (bigger
have gotten it into Hayward’s thick head that it was bad surface, square mile upon square mile of ooze floating at the Let me explain. But first, in another sense the part–“whole” than us, that is): earth, global warming, evolution, and so
news. I simply want to point out the metaphysics involved bottom of the ocean. The cosmic U-bend is no more. It can’t
13
model OOO deals with is indeed a kind of “both–and.” on. Again, that’s what the eco in ecology originally means:
in Hayward’s assertion, which we could call capitalist be gone and forgotten – even ABC News knows that now. This is the sense in which the parts are not replaceable oikos, home. The last two lines of A House is a House for Me
essentialism. The essence of reality is capital and Nature. When I hear the word “sustainability” I reach for my components of the whole. The more we open up the Russian makes this very clear. n
Both exist in an ethereal beyond. Over here, where we live, is sunscreen. doll of an object, the more objects we find inside.
an oil spill. But don’t worry. The beyond will take care of it. 12 http://abcnews.go.com/WN/oil-bp-spill-found-bottom-gulf/story?id=11618039.
13 Levi Bryant, The Democracy of Objects. Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press, 2011, 14 Mary Ann Hoberman, A House Is a House for Me. New York: Puffin Books, 2007, 15 Mary Ann Hoberman, A House Is a House for Me. New York: Puffin Books, 2007,
pp. 208–227. p. 27. pp. 27, 34, 42-48.

5 6