dear nettimers,

A slightly edited and hyperlinked version of this text has recently appeared on 
the excellent Open! online platform for art, culture, and the public domain. 
You can access and freely download the edited text here: 
http://www.onlineopen.org/re-designing-affect-space 
<http://www.onlineopen.org/re-designing-affect-space> 

The text is part of a series of commissioned essays for Open! that result from 
the public research trajectory Technology / Affect / Space, which we undertook 
mostly in 2016. The entry point to that essay series can be found here: 
http://www.onlineopen.org/technology-affect-space 
<http://www.onlineopen.org/technology-affect-space> 

This is a medium long-read (± 7000 words) and follows up on the long-read essay 
“Affect Space: Witnessing the Movement(s) of the Squares” (11.243 words), 
published by Open! in 2015, which can be found here: 
http://www.onlineopen.org/affect-space <http://www.onlineopen.org/affect-space> 

The main aim of this new text is to develop the conceptual model of Affect 
Space further, beyond the massive protest gatherings post-2011 that revealed 
this emergent ‘techno-sensuous spatial order’, as I call it, so clearly. Be 
aware though that while the model is still partly speculative, the emerging 
order of Affect Space is already in full operation and constitutes an intensely 
contentious political space.

best wishes,
Eric

———————

(re-)Designing Affect Space
Preliminary elements for a conceptual model of Affect Space 

This text draws together a set of characteristics that can be used as building 
blocks for a conceptual model of Affect Space. I have previously described 
Affect Space as an emerging techno-sensuous spatial order. Here I build upon 
these earlier investigations and the outcomes of the Technology / Affect / 
Space (T / A / S) public research trajectory conducted in 2016, which included 
public seminars in Amsterdam, Cambridge, MA and Rotterdam. The investigations 
continue in a series of commissioned essays on Open! [1], of which this text is 
one. These essays can help to articulate new design strategies for this quickly 
evolving context, where the spatial design disciplines are curiously absent 
from the debate. 

Re: The ‘Movement(s) of the Squares’

It is not that the so-called ‘movement(s) of the squares’ [2] invented a new 
dynamic of mobilisation of crowds and activation of public space. Much rather 
they revealed an emerging spatial order, which had implicitly been building 
with the advent of distributed electronic communication networks and the 
proliferation of wireless and mobile media in extremely ‘densified’ urban 
spaces. This emerging spatial order produced paradoxical spectacles that seemed 
at once strangely familiar and curiously novel, massive as well as evanescent.

Since 2011 we all (as a global predominantly online media audience) have been 
witness to the recurrent spectacle of these massive gatherings in dissent in 
public space. Originating in networked exchanges, spilling over into the 
streets and squares, effortlessly switching between geographic, cultural and 
socio-political contexts. Only this time, we witnessed not via mainstream 
mass-media channels, but near real-time through live streams, social media 
feeds, blogs and activist sites, and buzzing smart phones.

While revolving around a variety of heterogeneous issues (things), these 
gatherings remained remarkably constant in their pattern of mobilisation / 
activation: Not just that of online mobilisation followed by embodied 
gatherings in public space, but crucially using these public spaces themselves 
as connective platforms creating synchronous and asynchronous feedback loops 
into the electronic networks, drawing ever more subjects into an ‘attractive 
field’, iteratively generating further feedback loops between networked and 
embodied presences that dissolve and fade out as easily as they expand 
exponentially.

Beyond the non-linear and highly unpredictable dynamics at work here, these 
events seemed particularly impenetrable when the pattern started to replicate 
itself in self-similar manifestations where any substantive political, 
ideological, or material issue / thing was explicitly absent. [3] No longer was 
the issue the ‘thing that brings us together because it divides us most’ 
(Latour, 2005), but in the absence of an issue the gatherings seemed almost 
‘blind’, autonomous, self-organising, pertaining only to some inscrutable 
internal logic as yet to be unveiled. And crucially: void of any particular 
content. Thus leaving wide open the question how to account for them?

The Constitution of Affect Space

The concept of Affect Space was first proposed in a long-read essay for the 
Open! platform written and published in 2015 (Kluitenberg, 2015). In this essay 
the contours of a model were suggested that builds on three constitutive 
elements: 

A technological component: Internet, but in particular the massive use of 
mobile and wireless media perform a crucial function to mobilise large groups 
of people around ever changing ‘issues at stake’. 

An affective component: The affective intensity generated and exchanged in 
these processes of activation and mobilisation instantiated in the body of the 
physical actors in the streets and squares. This affective component indicates 
an insistent ‘somatic turn’ away from the symbolic towards a physically 
registered, felt intensity that resonates with other bodies and objects.

A spatial component: The affective intensities generated in the activation 
process cannot be shared effectively in disembodied online interactions at the 
screen. This lack stimulates the desire for physical encounter, which can only 
happen in a physical spatial context, paradigmatically in (urban) public space.

The current text expands on this proposed model. It provides the preliminary 
elements of a conceptual model of Affect Space. While some aspects of this 
conceptual model may seem speculative, it is important to realise that the 
emerging techno-sensuous spatial order of Affect Space is already in full 
operation. It operates in the new forms of public assembly and their often 
contradictory dynamics. It operates in new forms of distributed policing and 
control in and of public space. It is also part of a highly evolved system of 
technologically enabled ‘persuasion design’ [4], deeply embedded in the 
structure of corporate technology giants, including some of most highly valued 
transnational companies in existence on the planet today.

Therefore this conceptual model does not deal with a purely speculative object. 
Instead it speculates about the general characteristics and traits of an 
emerging order that holds important cultural and political implications. The 
emerging order of Affect Space conflates the functions of the most advanced 
media systems, the activation of public spaces, and the individual subjective 
experiences engendered by their mingling — what Félix Guattari would refer to 
as the ‘subjective universes of reference’ (Guattari, 1989). All of these 
different ‘registers’ are of crucial importance to the functioning of 
contemporary democracies, and they need to be considered carefully in relation 
to each other.

To disentangle the network of associations that evolves here the following 
elements should at the very least be considered:

Affect Space is Synaesthetic

Affect Space is intensely synaesthetic. It involves all the senses, all of the 
sensuous registers, in incongruous concert. Sensation(s) in Affect Space is 
(are) not unified. This is an important part of their activating potential. 
There is little argument needed to maintain that seeing an event unfold in 
public space via a screen (at home, in the work-place, in transit on a mobile 
media device, through a live-stream or social media feed) is remarkably 
different from actually being part of that event physically in public space (in 
a park, on a square, a street).

Both types of experience may be charged with intensity, but the mediated 
experience is necessarily characterised by delimitation, by a lack of physical 
cues, a lack of proximity, an absence of participation in full. The more 
dramatic the witnessed action, the more anaemic the mediated experience will 
feel. It is this tension between a charged event witnessed from afar and its 
intensity unfolding in the immediacy of embodied space that fuels the desire 
for physical encounter.

Still, the mediated experience in itself is also entirely synaesthetic, but 
here the felt tension is between that what is witnessed / mediated on the 
screen and in sound from afar, and the body embedded in a strictly local 
environment, cued to that locality rather than the mediated action. This 
tension necessarily remains unresolved. The felt dissonance between these two 
simultaneous and interlacing experiences charges the witnessing subject with a 
potential as yet undirected energy.  

Variable Densities

Conceptually Affect Space builds on and extends the concept of Hybrid Space. 
First proposed by architects Frans Vogelaar and Elisabeth Sikiaridi (Vogelaar & 
Sikiaridi, 1988) [5], Hybrid Space designates a single unified concept of space 
that is characterised by the simultaneous presence (co-presence) of different, 
heterogeneous, and at times contradictory (operational) spatial logics. The 
concept proceeds from the assumption that different spatial logics are 
superimposed in any ‘lived’ space. Physical structures, whether natural or 
constructed, are superimposed with processual flows that operate according to a 
different and mostly incommensurable spatial logic. Such flows can be flows of 
communication, trade, goods and service provision, transportation, data flows, 
and even face-to-face exchanges and public gatherings of different kinds. While 
the concept of Hybrid Space is thus not necessarily defined by the 
superimposition of technological infrastructures onto the ‘natural’ or built 
environment, the density and heterogeneity of space is greatly increased by 
electronic communication media, especially by the increasing presence of 
electronic signals, carrier waves and wireless communication and data networks 
in lived environments.

In their essay “idensifying™ translocalities” (Vogelaar & Sikiaridi, 1999), 
Vogelaar and Sikiaridi include a citation from Vilém Flusser’s essay ‘The City 
as Wave-Trough in the Image-Flood’ that provides a remarkably prophetic image 
of the variable densities of contemporary hybridised urban spaces, permeated by 
wireless media and information flows, and the ‘webs of interhuman relations‘ 
that unfold in them:

“The new image of humanity looks roughly like this: we have to imagine a 
network of interhuman relations, a 'field of intersubjective relations'. The 
threads of this web must be conceived as channels through which information 
(ideas, feelings, intentions and knowledges etc.) flows. These threads get 
temporarily knotted and form what we call 'human subjects'. The totality of the 
threads constitutes the concrete lifeworld and the knots are abstract 
extrapolations. […] The density of the webs of interhuman relations differs 
from place to place within the network. The greater the density the more 
'concrete' the relations. These dense points form wave troughs in the field […] 
The wave-troughs exert an 'attractive' force on the surrounding field (pulling 
it into their gravitational field) so that more and more interhuman relations 
are drawn in from the periphery. […] These wave troughs shall be called 
'cities'.”  
(Flusser, 1988)

The knotting of dense webs of interhuman relations identified by Flusser, is 
intensified exponentially by the proliferation of networked and mobile wireless 
media. Adrian Mackenzie for instance, in his book Wirelessness (Mackenzie, 
2010, p. 213), speaks of  ‘overflows’ (spatial, thing, body, private-public) 
redrawing boundaries and reorganising spaces of action. Crucially, though, 
Flusser recognises these dense webs of interhuman relationships as constituting 
the concrete lifeworld of contemporary urban subjects, implying that both urban 
space and subjective experience are transformed simultaneously by these 
‘densifications’.

This constellation should be regarded as inherently unstable. The density of 
Hybrid Space varies not only from place to place, but also from moment to 
moment. Carrier signals appear and disappear, sometimes because of economic 
boom or collapse, sometimes because of government intervention (regulation), 
sometimes because of purely physical interference (overlapping signals can 
cause network failure). Connection speeds and capacities vary continuously. 
Thus the ‘knotted webs of interhuman relationships’ continuously tighten and 
loosen up.

The Affective Threshold

When the networked linkages become increasingly tight, interhuman relationships 
tend to shift from a deliberative to an affective level. Information overload, 
viral visual, auditory and textual messages, continuous demands for responses, 
haptic feedback mechanisms (buzzing phones, thumbing wearables) induce this 
shift from deliberation to the play of affective registers. When observing from 
a distance, at the screen, the ever tighter linkages between the physical 
domain and the electronic networks intensify the felt dissonance between the 
mediated and the embodied experience enormously. The ‘screen’ can stir but not 
fulfil these elicited physical desires.

As observed earlier, the lack of an immediate embodied relation is what drives 
the quotidian media subject ‘beyond the screen’ into the streets and squares to 
find an unmediated connection. The resulting proximity of bodies, masses of 
bodies, in urban public space, cued to an as yet unarticulated intensity, 
galvanises the flow of affect, further intensifying the webs of interhuman 
relations. What we have witnessed in the repeated spectacles of massive 
gatherings in dissent since 2011 (and prototypical before) is the passing of an 
affective threshold. Mobile and wireless media perform a crucial function in 
this, because they ensure that the unmediated action / connection is 
immediately fed back into the integrated network, synchronous (in near 
real-time from the streets and squares), and asynchronously via uploads in 
higher bandwidth zones (offices, homes, internet-cafés, public wifi networks), 
thus drawing in ‘more interhuman relations from the periphery’ (Flusser). 

One could imagine expressing this affective threshold in mathematical terms, as 
a measure of overlapping networked and embodied density. A critical bifurcation 
that causes a social singularity to emerge. The passing of the affective 
threshold initiates an exponential autocatalytic and nonlinear intensification 
of interhuman relations. The conditions for passing the affective threshold are 
strongest where the knotted webs are most dense / tight. Typically we find 
these ‘dense webs’ in large urban concentration zones where a diversity of 
(communication) technologies and peoples overlap.

Activation of Public Space and Affective Attractors

The conditions that enable the passing of the affective threshold outlined 
above, turn public space into a ‘performance space’. To some extent public 
space has always been ‘performative’. However the now massified practices of 
self-mediation, particularly with the advent of smartphones, play a crucial 
role in this. ‘Self-mediation’ refers to the constitution of mediated presence 
by non-professional media producers. Researcher Lilie Chouliaraki has observed 
that self-mediation is characterised by a ‘performative publicness’ 
(Chouliaraki, 2012/10). What the mobile media enable is a self-enactment 
simultaneously in public space and in the media network, especially when live 
streams are involved, in near real-time. I have previously referred to this 
double self-enactment as the constitution of a double presence in Hybrid Space 
(Kluitenberg, 2015). The primary aim of self-mediation is the establishment of 
affective relationships, not the communication of information. Self-mediation 
shifts the emphasis from a specific content to the processual in mediated 
expressions. Affect Space is hence both performative and processual. 

It would be a mistake to argue from this that Affect Space has no content at 
all. Quite the opposite, it is filled with potential and differential content 
that can manifest itself at any time and in any place, often quite 
unexpectedly. The activation of Affect Space, however, does not happen 
primarily around issues, but around performative presences that can produce 
strong affective intensities.

It is necessary to understand these ‘performative presences’ more precisely. 
They can manifest themselves in public space at any scale in and through the 
bodies of multiplied singular actors (the protestor(s) in the case of the 
‘movement(s) of the squares’). They can also manifest independent from this 
particular actor’s physical body. In this case images, sounds, objects, 
symbols, textual messages, videos, collective chants act as resonance objects 
that carry not a particular or specific meaning, but rather a limitless 
potential for producing meaning / sensation / intensity. I call these resonance 
objects ‘Affective Attractors’. An Affective Attractor is the instantiation of 
a ‘potential for interaction’ (Massumi, 2002, 35), which can vary in strength 
and can appear across the full range of sensory stimuli as well as across any 
mediating structure. 

Different types of affective attractors can be identified that operate each in 
their own specific way as resonance objects. The measure of their strength 
depends on whether they produce a strong or weak resonance with the affective 
state of the participant in the action / event.

Visual attractors

The classic iconography of protest is the protest sign held up by the 
protestor, usually in front of the chest. This image, immortalised by Bob Dylan 
and D. E. Penebaker’s iconic 1965 music video avant la lettre Subterranean 
Homesick Blues [6], derives its power not from its visual sophistication, but 
exactly from the absence thereof. The held up signs appear ‘amateurish’, 
improvised: cheap materials, bad hand drawn lettering. A sign with visual 
sophistication will soon be looked upon with distrust or even disdain. What 
Jean Baudrillard so beautifully described as ‘the uncanny charm of the 
simulacrum’s authenticity-effect’ (Baudrillard, 1983 / 81), inscribes itself in 
the ragged edges of the cardboard signs and the messy lettering.

The eternal return of this same visual cliche reveals its ‘true’ nature as a 
mediatised self-replicating meme. Not an expression of an ‘authentic’ desire, 
but a pure sign, operating in the mode of simulation, a copy without original, 
a simulacrum, and as Baudrillard states at the outset of his famous Precession 
of Simulacra essay; ‘the simulacrum is true’, paraphrasing Ecclesiastes. 
(Baudrillard, 1983) The affective charge of the sign derives here not so much 
from its actual content, usually generic phrases, but much more from its 
instant recognition as a protest-sign.

There is however a ‘second order’ of visual attractors that projects a much 
more powerful incipient connective force. This visual sign depends on a rupture 
of the semantic field, which was identified most precisely by Roland Barthes in 
his brilliant Camera Lucida as the ‘punctum ‘(Barthes, 1982). In my long-read 
essay Affect Space (Kluitenberg, 2015) I have analysed this mechanism in depth 
in relation to the iconic Lady in Red image that became an immensely powerful 
affective attractor during the Gezi Park protests in Turkey in 2013.

Here the visual sign relies not on the instant recognition of a visual cliche 
that has become vernacular, but instead on the production of a visual 
incongruity that disrupts interpretation altogether and opens up an 
interpretative and experiential void. It is the confrontation with this void, 
the impossibility of interpretation, that opens up an infinite space of 
potential in which affect can flow freely and unbound. The connective force of 
these second order visual attractors derives exactly from this impossibility of 
interpretation, which makes it possible to ‘connect that which is usually 
indexed as separate’ (Massumi, 2002, 24). Visual signs, such as the Lady in 
Red, that belong to this second order category of visual attractors can become 
particularly powerful affective resonance objects.

Linguistic attractors

Brian Massumi suggests that affect, understood as a non-conscious and never to 
be conscious bodily intensity, is not in opposition to language. Much rather 
language has a differential relation to affect. This differential relation 
between affect and language expresses itself as resonance. Some forms of 
language have a particularly strong resonance with affect, while other forms of 
language have a particularly weak resonance with affect. The first type can 
tremendously amplify a felt, but as yet not (fully) articulated intensity, 
while the second type can dampen this felt intensity.

Conscious articulating of such a felt intensity is a form of capture and 
closure of affect, and Massumi states that ‘emotion’ (as a conscious state) is 
the most intense  / contracted expression of that capture (Massumi, 2002, 35). 
In other words language / articulation that designates itself to a particular 
conscious state (emotion) or a definite concept (deliberation) will typically 
dampen affect. Conversely, language that is most void of semantic content can 
serve to amplify affect, particularly when its purely syntactical and 
rhythmical structure enhances the free play of the cognitive faculties without 
a designation to a particular concept. The ‘semantically open’ structure of 
such language objects resonates strongly with the semantic openness of affect, 
exactly because of the absence of a particular content that would inhibit the 
free flow of affect / intensity. 

Aphoristic slogans, chants, short sentences (that create a vague but insistent 
sense of connection turn out to be particularly powerful affective attractors 
(“We are the 99%” / “Je suis Charlie”), precisely because of their absence of a 
particular content. Again, it would be a mis-conception (Massumi would 
gracefully say a ‘missed conception’ - Massumi, 2015) to derive from this that 
affect has no content. On the contrary affect is filled with an overabundance 
of potential content, a ‘too much’ that forces its way to some expression / 
manifestation, and builds up as long as it escapes capture. This potential 
already predicts the future event, we just do not know as yet where / when it 
will arrive because it can still connect that what is usually indexed and 
treated as separate. This is what determines its inherent unpredictability.

Auditory attractors

Anchor: “Mike Check!”
Crowd: “Mike Check!!!”
(repeats three times)

The human mike procedure to amplify a single speaker to a crowd of any size 
without the need for electrical amplification —  practised in countless protest 
gatherings and immortalised in the #occupy gatherings on Wall Street and 
elsewhere in the United States and beyond — is a prime example of an auditory 
affective attractor. The procedure requires a speaker to speak in preferably 
short phrases, which are then repeated by the crowd (chorus) collectively. The 
triple ‘mike check’ is performed before each speech to temporarily synchronise 
the voices in the crowd.

Experience has shown that short and rhythmically well constructed phrases work 
best in this setting, while speeches filled with elaborate argumentation tend 
to dissipate. The true affective power of this auditory attractor lies not in 
the phrase itself (its syntactical or rhythmic construction), and certainly not 
in its content (semantics), but in the process of collective reproduction of 
the original phrase: The humming of voices in the distance, the enthusiasm or 
dissipating energies of proximate members in the crowd / chorus, shared and 
differing intonations, the resonance of chorus voices, the synchronicity of the 
collective speech act and its simultaneously imperfect timing, its repetitive 
structure, interspersed with stalling voices and broken temporality while 
retaining its fixed (conventional) format.

The human mike procedure is particularly inapt at initiating a process of deep 
and sophisticated (subtle) deliberation, yet it creates an enormously powerful 
sense of connectedness across the crowd / chorus of participants. This 
connection is established not through what is specifically said (content / 
semantics), but primarily in the uttering of this collective speech act (the 
active participation in the collective action  / event). In this sense the 
conventions of the human mike procedure seem close in character to the 
collective chanting in religious ceremony, where what is uttered is already 
known in advance of the act of uttering, focussing attention almost entirely on 
the collective process that unfolds and its implied ritual meanings.

Corporeal attractors

The proximity of bodies in the crowd generates the prerequisites for an 
accelerated flow of affect / intensity.  Affect is contained here in the 
recognised vitality of the body. It is not just that the proximity of other 
bodies resonates with one’s own pre-existing state of affectedness (a state 
existing in advance of entering the crowd). When asked in an interview in 2016 
what comes before affect, Massumi replied “participation” [7]. The 
participation in the crowd can in itself lead to a state of being affected by 
the intensities contained in other’s bodies, irrespective of one’s affective 
state before participation in the event: smell, hormonal exchanges, body 
temperature, moist-levels, gesticulation, facial expression, bodily postures 
and movements, murmur, conversation, cheers, the bellow of the crowd / chorus, 
they all facilitate the capacity of affecting and being affected.

Through this recognised vitality of the body, the particular body starts to act 
as a corporeal resonance object, a corporeal attractor that galvanises the flow 
and amplification of affect in the crowd. Also here, an increased density 
(proximity and scale) of bodies (in a crowd) can facilitate the passing of the 
affective threshold and enable an exponential amplification of intensity / 
affect.

A fatal split between content and effect, or: Against Issue / Thing Politics

Through what Massumi has so famously described as ‘the missing half second’ he 
argues that affect moves at roughly twice the speed of conscious action 
(Massumi, 2002, 29). Impulses ‘impinging’ on the body produce (measurable) 
changes in bodily states well before any conscious cognitive processing of 
these impulses can take place. Because of this difference in speed between 
affect and cognition the field of affect remains inherently semantically 
unstructured. This principle introduces an inevitable split between content 
(consciously articulated issues) and effect (changes in bodily states). They 
operate on parallel tracks and with incongruous speeds, where affect always 
precedes and supersedes cognition. [8]

The erroneous conclusion too often drawn from this is that affect has no 
content. As observed earlier, we should rather regard affect as overfull with 
potential content and action. Massumi states that “the half second lapse 
between the beginning of a bodily event and its completion in an outward 
directed, active expression - this half second is overfull - in excess of its 
actually performed action and ascribed meaning. Will and consciousness are 
subtractive - limitative, derived functions that reduce complexity too rich to 
be functionally expressed.” (Massumi, 2002, 29). In the process of mobilisation 
of crowds and activation of public spaces this holds a crucial implication: 
Under conditions where the passing of the affective threshold precipitates the 
primacy affect over deliberation / conscious articulation, what acts as the 
connective tissue bringing together masses of previously unrelated actors is 
not so much a shared issue, but rather a shared affective resonance.

The passing of the affective threshold induced by the intense densification of 
Hybrid Space dislocates traditional conceptions of social action and social 
movements. Shared ‘collective action resources’ are no longer the primary 
source of activation of public space and large scale social / political 
formations. The shift from collective action to connective action proposed by 
Lance Bennett and Alexandra Segerberg (Bennett & Segerberg, 2012) also does not 
fully capture this new condition. Bennett and Segerberg argue that the 
communication structures take the place of traditional organisational 
structures (unions, political parties, NGOs, action committees) and the 
‘collective action resources’ that social movement theory attributes to these 
strategic actors. The communication structures themselves become the 
organisational structure, they argue, mobilised by connective action around a 
shared socio-political issue.

What their view fails to take into account, however, is the primacy of the 
connective force of affect under conditions of intense densification and its 
inherent semantic openness. The shared affect under such conditions can 
accommodate a theoretically unlimited range of personal and  / or collective 
issues, while the strength of its connective force is strongest when a 
designation to any particular issue remains absent, or is only vaguely 
indicated (“We are the 99%!”).

This new understanding of recent forms of collective gatherings in dissent and 
the activation of densified public spaces stands in stark contrast to the 
recent propositions of ‘thing-politics’ by Bruno Latour and the foundational 
work done by sociologist Noortje Marres on Issue Politics that Latour builds 
upon (Latour, 2005 / Marres, 2005). Latour’s general hypothesis is that “we 
might be more  connected to each other by our worries, our matters of concern, 
the issues we care for, than by any other set of values, opinions, attitudes or 
principles.” And he considers this seemingly ‘trivial’ observation part of a 
process of becoming a “realist’ in politics. (Latour, 2005, 4) 

It is then in this view the ‘Issue’ (Marres), or ‘Thing’ (Latour) that brings a 
public into being. In her analysis Marres defers to the Lippmann-Dewey debate 
of the 1920s to discuss the wider displacement of politics outside of 
conventional democratic arrangements, particular transnational institutions and 
global networks of Non-Governmental Organisations, where singular issues become 
the activating units for engendering a constantly moving political formation. 
In Latour’s terms, ever shifting modes of assembly. The title of Marres’ PHD 
thesis makes the centrality of this mechanism immediately clear: ‘No Issue, No 
Public’ (Marres, 2005).

In Latour’s analysis the ‘Issue’ is expanded into the ‘Thing’, which is not 
just an object of controversy, but also a place of gathering (sometimes even a 
physical place). Latour introduces a highly elegant formula for understanding 
the connective force of the Thing: “(..) long before designating an object 
thrown out of the political sphere and standing there objectively and 
independently, the Ding or Thing has for many centuries meant the issue that 
brings people together because it divides them.” (Latour, 2005,13) 

Both analyses share the common approach that after the displacement of politics 
outside of conventional democratic arrangements it is the controversies over 
Issues / Things that drive the new types of political formation, and indeed 
bring ‘the public’ into being. However, when considering the affect-driven 
types of political formation scrutinised here we can no longer assume this 
singular Issue / Thing as the activating unit of events given the lack of 
semantic ordering, the semantic openness, of affect. The relationship of affect 
to Issues / Things is not singular but differential. Affect can attach itself 
to any and every particular Issue / Thing, and connect ‘that what is normally 
indexed as separate’. (Massumi, 2002, 24)

As a result in events operating under the primacy of affect, Massumi argues in 
his recent Politics of Affect (Massumi, 2015), there is no sameness of affect, 
there is only affective difference in the same event, a process he labels as 
‘collective individuation’:

Say there are a number of bodies indexed to the same cut, primed to the same 
cue, shocked in concert. What happens is a collective event. It’s distributed 
across those bodies. Since each body will carry a different set of tendencies 
and capacities, there is no guarantee that they will act in unison even if they 
are cued in concert. However different their eventual actions, all will have 
unfolded from the same suspense. They will have been attuned—differentially—to 
the same interruptive commotion. “Affective attunement”—a concept from Daniel 
Stern—is a crucial piece of the affective puzzle. It is a way of approaching 
affective politics that is much more supple than notions more present in the 
literature of what’s being called the “affective turn,” like imitation or 
contagion, because it finds difference in unison, and concertation in 
difference. Because of that, it can better reflect the complexity of collective 
situations, as well as the variability that can eventuate from what might be 
considered the “same” affect. There is no sameness of affect. There is 
affective difference in the same event—a collective individuation.” 
(Massumi 2015, 109-110)

In events operating under the primacy of affect then, there is no immediate 
relation to a singular connective issue, but a differential relation to a 
multitude of possible, potential, implicit and explicit issues. The connective 
force of this type of affective gathering dissipates when the Issues / Things 
at stake become singular. We should raise the question here if it is still 
legitimate to call these social formations ‘publics’? And if there is no 
public, only differential affective ties, what does this mean for the 
democratic arrangements already displaced by Issue / Thing politics?

Intensive temporality

The temporality of the primacy of affect under conditions of intensive 
densification needs to be examined a bit further. The missing half second that 
Massumi has identified marks a field of absence, a space of disappearance, 
where consciousness is absent, has disappeared in a duration too short to be 
accessed by cognition. The speed of affect creates a temporality of events 
registered by the body (as felt intensity), where consciousness not so much has 
difficulty of keeping up, but physically cannot operate because of the extended 
duration required for cognitive processing.

This intensive temporality of Massumi’s missing half second bears more than a 
passing resemblance to the aesthetics of disappearance described by the French 
architect and theorist Paul Virilio. The connection may be not entirely 
surprising, given that Massumi has translated and edited several seminal works 
of Virilio in English.

In the book The Vision Machine (Virilio, 1988), Virilio observes that under 
pressure of continued strategic acceleration, time itself becomes the object of 
technological research and development. Processes formerly handled by human 
operators are accelerated to a point where human consciousness and cognition no 
longer gain access because of their pure speed. This ‘fatal strategy’ is most 
clearly recognisable in military conduct, where increased speed constitutes a 
strategic advantage over the adversary, or at least the prevention of a 
strategic disadvantage. The same trend can also be observed in the civil 
domain, for instance in automated screen trading, which has intensified 
exponentially both in speed and volume (the one being an expression of the 
other) since Virilio wrote his acid critique of these systems.

This trend at technological acceleration / intensification beyond the human 
limit of access, leads to a split into two disparate time forms. The human 
time, the time of conscious perception and articulation Virilio calls 
‘Extensive Time’, a time form where past, present and future are still 
available to consciousness. The threshold of this extensive time-form is 
defined by the duration required for an image to be formed, the time it takes 
for a visual impression to be fixed by the retina, of impulses travelling and 
their processing by the visual cortex, the time also for an auditory signal to 
be registered by the biological hearing apparatus and its neurological 
filtering. 

Any process operating beneath this critical threshold, too short in duration to 
be consciously registered and processed, simply disappears from conscious 
perception. Such processes and events accelerated to an ever shrinking 
ultrashort duration below the threshold of conscious perception give rise to a 
new technologically constructed time-form. Virilio calls this new time-form the 
‘Intensive Time’. Here we see the true meaning of the word simulation he 
argues: Simulation does not aim to represent anything, instead it substitutes 
that what it simulates - in this case human perception. And these artificial 
perception systems (perceptrons) do so under a strategic operative, where the 
continuous drive for acceleration is guided by strategic (military / economic) 
necessity.

As humans we no longer have access to these processes. We can only imagine 
their operations, similar to how we can imagine the inaccessible 
electrochemical exchanges in our brains that precede cognition. These 
accelerated processes thereby disappear into the time/space of the ultrashort 
duration. They only become apparent and intelligible to us when there is a 
breakdown, an accident, a catastrophe, at which point they become visible to us 
as the fall-out of a fatal strategy gone wrong.   

Virilio’s image also suggests the active presence of a multitude and ever 
growing number of non-human agents in public spaces. Network nodes, signal 
transmitters, routers, software agents, portable media clients and their 
continuously active communication protocols, surveillance systems, smart 
objects, location aware devices, automated traffic control systems, and many 
other systems that ‘operate’ public spaces. Performing their actions in the 
ultra-short duration of the Intensive Time they remain invisible to us ‘mere’ 
humans, disappearing from perception into the new technologically constructed 
time-forms. Affect and the new technological processes thus share the Intensive 
Time form of the ultra-short duration. 

Affective control space

As mentioned before Affect Space is not a speculative object. This becomes most 
clear when examining the emergence of an ‘affective control space’ in which new 
forms of affective policing are deployed. The important shift in emphasis is 
that such new control regimes not only take indicators of physical events and 
real-time biometric data collection (such as facial recognition systems) into 
account, but also indicators for mood changes, particularly in crowded urban 
areas (shopping and leisure districts, and large scale public manifestations). 
Such indicators can be sudden behavioural changes, changes in the volume of 
sound-production in public space, as well as sentiment indicators in social 
media traffic and content. 

A good example of this new ‘affective’ approach to policing is the CityPulse 
pilot project, that was started in 2015 by the City of Eindhoven in 
co-operation with digital services company Atos and the Dutch Institute for 
Technology Safety and Security (DITTS). The CityPulse pilot is focused on 
Stratumseind, a popular drinking area in the city, regularly welcoming up to 
20,000 visitors over a weekend. This area will typically see a large number of 
public order disturbances over a ‘regular’ weekend. The CityPulse project is 
intended to deploy police capacities more effectively to deal with these 
disturbances, and react earlier to potential disturbances based on a set of 
indicators that can help to predict the onset of sudden ‘mood-changes’.

As project-leads Paul Moore and Albert Seubers explain in a short article for 
the Atos / Ascent Magazine (Moore & Seubers, 2015), that the CityPulse project 
is focused on 5 key methodologies for analysing data from the streets in near 
real-time; social listening; real-time alerts; sentiment analysis; sound 
monitoring; and movement tracking. To generate data about behaviour and mood in 
the streets an elaborate system of sensors, movement trackers, automated and 
integrated video surveillance analysis is deployed across multiple camera’s in 
the district (with the aim of eliminating blind spots), but also constant and 
real-time social media analysis focussed on indicators of mood-shifts is used - 
these will pertain both to the intensity of traffic in the area (through mobile 
media used by the public on site), as well as social media postings relating to 
the area.

Since any of these sources of data are too unreliable on their own, the cross 
linking of such data sources in real-time should deliver more reliable 
indicators of actual or potential public order disturbances. In a sense what 
this vision of ‘predictive policing’ strives for is to generate increasingly 
reliable behavioural (affective) profiles of regular behaviour in public space 
to be able to detect anomalies as early as possible and direct police 
intervention before the disturbance is able to (affectively) spill and spread. 
Affective profiling and behavioural codification in automated public space 
surveillance systems thus become key instruments of affective policing.

‘Objective’ versus ‘subjective’ space

The final distinction that I want to introduce at this point is that between 
the objective versus the subjective character of Affect Space. There is an 
obvious tension between the subjective experience of a felt bodily intensity 
described by Massumi and others as affect, and its objectification in 
measurable physical units and flows. It makes little difference whether this 
happens in the cognitive psychologists’  and neuroscientists’ laboratories, or 
in datafied surveilled urban spaces.

The tendency here is towards a quasi-objectification of subjective experience 
by registering bodily cues (galvanic skin resistance, heart-rate, breathing 
patterns, respiration, blood pressure) and behavioural indicators. 
Increasingly, sensor technologies are built into wearable apparatuses (fitness 
trackers, smart watches and associated phones and connected software platforms) 
that can detect these cues and indicators continuously in a fully automated 
process. Behavioural patterns can be determined this way and singularly 
tailored lifestyle-change suggestions offered. Most of these wearable 
applications come with dedicated software and online platforms where data are 
registered, complete with ‘dashboards’ giving access to the different types of 
bodily data captured, and graphs and visualisations of cumulative data over 
time.

This tendency towards the objectification of affective markers also brings with 
it its own specific type of quasi-objective visual language. The visualisations 
are most impressive when these affective markers are linked to the body’s 
movements in space (a.o. through position tracking in location aware devices), 
or to the movements of masses of bodies in (public) space. A good example of 
this type of visual representation is the visual analysis by the 
interdisciplinary research laboratory AOS (Art is Open Source) of the activity 
on the social networks Twitter, Facebook, and Foursquare, during the protests 
of October 15th 2011 in Rome [9], in response to the global protest call issued 
by activists involved in #Occupy Wall Street. 

The visualisations and explanation of the utilised technological methods of 
data capture suggest a quasi-scientific view of an affectively highly charged 
event, where the cumulative physical indicators (movements of bodies in space, 
network traffic, the amount of traceable participants in the event) suggest 
that the affective charge of this type of event can be captured by ‘objective’ 
methods. There is an obvious gap between the anaemic visualisations and the 
intensity of the embodied events. Although the visualisations were meant to 
contest the exclusive focus in media and police reports on the protests turning 
violent, and challenge the dominant narrative of ‘power structures’ 
discrediting the protests, they instead seem to point mostly towards a complete 
pacification of the affective intensity of these events.

But also in less intense and entirely non-violent situations the gap between 
subjective experience and objective capture of affective intensity persists. 
The artist / researcher Christian Nold realised this predicament in his early 
and highly original and innovative project series in bio- and emotion mapping, 
and ‘emotional cartography’. He too used quasi objective data visualisation 
methods in his early explorations, linking affective markers to time-based 
cartographic explorations. Gradually he started to realise that he needed a 
different visual language, which would allow him to ‘map’ different 
perspectives on the situations he investigated, data driven perspectives next 
to individual recollections of subjective experiences gained by participants in 
the process of mapping the affective dimensions of the local terrains explored.

In the Stockport Emotion map, produced in 2007 with approximately 200 people 
involved in re-mapping their local area, Nold contrasts the way in which 
conventional maps show static architecture while excluding humans, and instead 
aimed to “present a picture of Stockport that represents the emotions, 
opinions, and desires of local people”. [10] The map combines sensor data 
collected during the public Emotion Mapping process (measuring emotional 
arousal) with Drawing Provocations, where participants are asked to describe in 
their own words and in small drawings the significance that the places visited 
during the mapping process hold for them. 

This resulted in a more diversified representation of the subjective experience 
of the terrain explored and the data-capture of arousal indicators. One of the 
interesting finds was that heightened arousal levels and subjective 
recollections of ‘remarkable’ places often did not coincide with each other.


Engagements

The question to be asked at the end should be, what is a conceptual model of 
the emergent techno-sensuous order of Affect Space good for? We cannot be 
content with merely stating how this emergent order functions. The ethical and 
political sensitivity of this topic requires a more engaged involvement. Such 
an engagement can address at the very least three distinct approaches:   

The first is a practical engagement: The aim of this conceptual model is to 
offer conceptual tools that can help to expand the design agenda for Affect 
Space. The emergence of this new techno-sensuous spatial order is not a 
speculative matter - it is already in full operation. It is neither an 
accidental circumstance nor an unintended by-product of technological 
development trends. The mobilisation and scrutiny of ‘feelings’ (both affect 
and emotion)  in the intensified densities of contemporary hybrid spaces serves 
a variety of strategic agendas (economic and political objectives, surveillance 
and control structures, and even strategic forms of disruption). However, while 
manipulation of this emergent order is rife, because of the nonlinear dynamics 
of Affect Space outlined here, no single actor is in full control of the 
outcomes of these processes.

Understanding the dynamics at work in Affect Space can help to develop more 
responsible design approaches to the key elements driving these dynamics. The 
prospect of all-inclusive control structures invading our most subjective 
experiences, with their obvious potential for consumerist and political 
manipulation, is highly undesirable. Such forms of advanced affective policing 
and persuasion compromise both our ‘mental ecology’ and the public sphere. This 
clearly calls for a more responsible design agenda for Affect Space.  

The second is a political engagement: The so-called ‘movement(s) of the 
squares’ have demonstrated the connective force of affect-driven forms of 
mobilisation of crowds and activation of public spaces. Yet, despite the 
success in ‘mobilisation / activation’, virtually all of these ‘movements’ have 
been hampered by a dramatic lack of political efficacy. This conundrum presents 
itself as a paradox - how to account for the simultaneous success in 
mobilisation and lack of any substantive progressive political outcomes?

One reason certainly lies in the semantic openness of affect. I have argued 
already that the connective force of these affect-driven formations primarily 
relies on the degree of affective resonance produced by the ‘affective 
attractors’ deployed by these ‘movements’. Furthermore, I have argued that 
exactly the most semantically void resonance objects create the strongest 
affective resonance. But this absence of a semantic structure designated to 
specific concepts (demands, Issues, Things) is deeply problematic for creating 
effective new political formations. In the very moment a connection is 
established to an articulated political issue (Thing) the connective tissue of 
the shared affective resonance breaks apart, at which point the primarily 
affect-driven social formation dissolves. 

This principle has rendered these ‘movements’ deeply ineffective when 
confronted with adversarial strategic political actors. The success of the 
affect-driven forms of mobilisation starts to become a trap for the activists 
staging the ‘choreography’ of protest, a liability rather than a possibility. 
It turns out that when affective resonance is used tactically (through the 
invention and deployment of forceful affective attractors), it becomes very 
difficult to bend it to a strategic purpose.  

The other reason is less obvious at first, but might be even more crucial to 
resolving the apparent paradox of success in mobilisation and lack of political 
efficacy. Perhaps what we have witnessed are not so much processes of 
‘mobilisation of a crowd’, as that they are modes of ‘activation of public 
space’. The ‘crowd’ then is a by-product of the reconfiguration of public space 
under conditions of intense densification of hybrid space and the primacy of 
affect over deliberation after the passing of the affective threshold. In this 
view the process of activation is essentially blind - it can accommodate 
virtually any and every issue or ‘matter of concern’ (Latour), and connect 
issues that are normally indexed as separate (or even opposite).

It is seductive to continue on the path of affect-driven forms of activation / 
mobilisation, given their surprising short-term success in bringing together 
previously unrelated actors. However, this runs the risk of simply creating 
further instances of ‘political’ formation that are ineffective by design. 
Instead, it seems necessary to develop forms of political mobilisation and 
organisation that avoid, by-pass, or transcend the modes of affective 
activation of densely hybridised public spaces. In effect what is required are 
public modes of engagement that foreground deliberation over affect. I would 
describe this act as engaging in deliberative forms of political design. 

The most notable exception to the general rule of lacking political efficacy in 
the ‘movement(s) of the squares’ is ‘laboratory’ Spain. The prolonged social 
crisis in the country, with staggering levels of youth unemployment, a virtual 
war of generations in the labour and social system, the deeply entrenched 
anti-foreclosure movement, and the coming together of a variety of other 
issue-driven social groupings have created a fertile climate for political 
experimentation. A variety of different ‘political designs’ are deployed here 
to invade and take over political systems, enforce radical democratic changes, 
and even to incarcerate the most prominent representatives of the financialist’ 
elite, who bear direct responsibility for the Spanish chapter of the financial 
and economic crisis of 2008. [11]  

The third, finally, would be an experiential engagement: Here I mostly look 
towards the role that art can perform within the emerging constellation of 
Affect Space. Art can play an enormously powerful role in experientially 
revealing the (hidden) play of / on the affective registers employed by a 
variety of strategic actors, which mostly remains implicit within the structure 
of Affect Space.

The classic urban driftwork procedure established by Guy Debord in his ‘Theory 
of the Dérive’ (Debord, 1958), already served to reveal how the built 
environment is influencing its inhabitants on a non-conscious affective level. 
With the advent of location aware mobile media this work can be taken much 
further. The emotion and bio-mapping procedures developed by Christian Nold are 
a good example of such artistic practices that reveal the implicit affective 
pre-ordering of the environment. The recent work on sound cartography by Esther 
Polak and Ivar van Bekkum is another example, but there are many other 
approaches that can intensify this process.

By breaking open the black box of the vast array of tracking and persuasion 
technologies that accompany our everyday movements in public and private space 
(ranging from CCTV, to mobile media, to the pervasive concept of the Internet 
of Things), artistic experiments can help to reveal, experientially, for a 
non-expert audience, the presence and role of these non-human agencies in 
everyday life, whose operations normally remain covert.  

If we redefine ‘design’ as ‘any deliberate form of intervention’, then we can 
see all of these different approaches to the exploration and reconstitution of 
Affect Space as part of the larger project of (re-)Designing Affect Space. The 
crucial question at stake in this process of (re-)designing Affect Space is: 
Who has agency in this emerging order, and what type of designed interventions 
are required to distribute agency more equitable across the different actors 
operating in this space (citizens, corporations, public agencies, civic 
organisations, local, national, and transnational authorities)?

This collective enterprise can be considered part of the ‘progressive 
composition of the good common world’ (Latour, 2004).

Eric Kluitenberg
Amsterdam, September 2017.


Notes:

[1] This short editorial text can serve as the entry point to that series of 
commissioned essays:
http://www.onlineopen.org/technology-affect-space [accessed: May 18, 2017] 
 [2] This naming used by a variety of commentators, activists and researchers 
refers broadly to the self-similar occupations of public urban spaces that 
started in 2011 with the iconic occupations of Tahrir Square in Cairo and 
Puerta del Sol in Madrid. Despite its manifold interlinkages it remains a 
question if these gatherings can be rightfully interpreted as ‘movement(s)’ or 
rather a different type of formation with different(ial) functional and 
political characteristics. One of the aims of the Technology / Affect / Space 
public research trajectory is to answer this question.
[3] The massive mobilisation for the Project X Party in Haren (NL, September 
2012) referenced in the introduction to the T / A / S essay series is perhaps 
the most telling case in point, where any kind of socio-economic or political 
issue at stake was entirely absent, yet the pattern exactly replicates that of 
the iconic public space occupations of the ‘movement(s) of the squares’. 
[4] See also: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19684708 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEmQ3W5-xLI    
[5] Both hardware and software, interfaces and apps of the most widely used and 
popular mobile media, wearables, and cross-platform apps are deliberately 
designed as addictive objects - perpetuating the incessant drive for continuous 
and repetitive intoxication ‘by design’ (excessive e-mail / timeline checking, 
messaging, somatic metrication). This includes haptic feedback mechanisms 
impinging on our bodies most intimate regions. 
 In response to the essay ‘Affect Space: Witnessing the ‘Movement(s) of the 
Squares’ (Kluitenberg, 2015), Vogelaar and Sikiaridi provide a more precise 
genealogy of how they developed the concept of Hybrid Space from 1988 onwards.
See: http://hybridspacelab.net/affect-space/   [accessed: May 5, 2017]
[6] See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subterranean_Homesick_Blues
Video available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGxjIBEZvx0 
[7] Massumi in conversation with WTF Affect: 
http://wtfaffect.com/brian-massumi/ Article published August 18, 2016. 
[accessed May 18, 2017]
 [8] The point here is that affect is always before cognition, but it is also 
‘beyond’ - by the time cognitive processing has taken place, a felt intensity 
has already escaped and moved elsewhere.
[9] 
http://www.artisopensource.net/2011/10/16/versus-rome-october-15th-the-riots-on-social-networks/
[10] http://stockport.emotionmap.net/
[11] This article for Open Democracy, June 9 2015 by Simona Levi for instance 
gives a good impression of the diversity of experimentation with ‘political 
designs’ in the larger metropolitan area of Barcelona::
https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/simona-levi/24m-it-was-not-victory-for-podemos-but-for-15m-movement
 [accessed May 30, 2017]
[12] See for instance the work “250 miles crossing Philadelphia (2015): 
http://www.250miles.net/ [accessed May 18 2017]


References:

Barthes, Roland (1982), Camera Lucida - Reflections on Photography, Hill and 
Wang, New York.

Baudrillard, Jean (1983): The Precession of Simulacra, in: Simulations, 
Semiotext(e), New York, p. 1–80.

Bennett, W. Lance & Segerberg, Alexandra (2012): The Logic of Connective 
Action, Information, Communication & Society, 15:5, 739-768

Chouliaraki, Lilie (2012): Self-Mediation - New Media, Citizenship and Civil 
Selves, Routledge, Abingdon  / New York. Reproduction of Critical Discourse 
Studies, volume , issue 4 (2010).

Debord, Guy (1958): “Théorie de la dérive”, in: Internationale Situationniste 
#2, Paris, December 1958.

Flusser, Vilém, “The City as Wave-Trough in the Image-Flood” (1988 / 2005), 
translated by Phil Gochenour, Critical Inquiry 31 (Winter 2005): p. 320–328. 
www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/430963 

Guattari, Felix (1989) The Three Ecologies, Éditions de Galilée, Paris (English 
translation: Athlone Press, London, 2000). 

Kluitenberg, Eric & Seijdel, Jorinde (eds.) (2006): Hybrid Space: How Wireless 
Media Mobilize Public Space, OPEN #21, Journal for Art and the Public Domain, 
Amsterdam: SKOR / NAi Publishers.

Kluitenberg, Eric (2015): Affect Space - Witnessing the ‘Movement(s) of the 
Squares’, published March 10, 2015 by Open! Online Platform for Art, Culture, 
and the Public Domain:
http://www.onlineopen.org/affect-space

Latour, Bruno (2005), From Realpolitik to Dingpolitik or How to Make Things 
Public, in: Bruno Latour & Peter Weibel eds., Making Things Public, ZKM Center 
for Art and Media / MIT Press, Karlsruhe / New York.  

Latour, Bruno (2004): The Politics of Nature, Harvard University Press, 
Cambridge (MA).

Mackenzie, Adrian (2010), Wirelessness: Radical Empiricism in Network Cultures, 
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Marres, Noortje (2005), No issue, no public: democratic deficits after the 
displacement of politics, PHD thesis, University of Amsterdam (defence: 
November 8, 2005).
Available at: 
http://www.academia.edu/1047949/No_issue_no_public_democratic_deficits_after_the_displacement_of_politics_2005_
 [accessed May 15, 2017]

Massumi, Brian (2002), The Autonomy of Affect, in: Parables for the Virtual: 
Movement, Affect, Sensation, Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, p. 
23–45.

Massumi, Brian (2015) The Politics of Affect, Polity Press, Cambridge.

Paul Moore & Albert Seubers (2016), Securing the cities of the future, Ascent 
Magazine 2016.
https://ascent.atos.net/securing-the-cities-of-the-future/ 

Vogelaar, Frans and Sikiaridi, Elisabeth (1999), idensifying™ translocalities, 
in: Logbook NRW.NL (catalogue), De Balie, Amsterdam.

Vogelaar, Frans and Sikiaridi, Elisabeth (1988), Genealogy of the concept 
Hybrid Space, Hybrid Space Lab Berlin (1988 - 1998).
http://hybridspacelab.net/affect-space/ 

Virilio, Paul (1988 / 1994), The Vision Machine, British Film Institute / 
Indiana University Press, Bloomington (IN).


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Reply via email to