Ventriloquising Objects

What have the chairs been saying as we have sat here sharing words of the possibility that humans will always speak in the place of objects? Like the ventriloquist throws words into the mouth of his dummy, can this be a metaphor for our everyday complacency for doing the same to the objects alongside us?  In the absence of humans, do objects consider themselves separate from each other?

This is a conversation that took place between Emma Cocker, Rose Martin, Amy Davies and Andy Welland. It was started at 5:00pm on 23rd march 2012, and is still going.

View conversation notes

Listen to recorded discussion

Further Reading:

Conversation about urban objects

Leave a Reply

Object abuse asks the question:
who or what is being abused?

Object Abuse has been set up to provide a platform for people to discuss, provoke and question the very nature and orientation of objects. The aim is to readdress the unquestioned drives of our collective pursuits, to turn the tables on the object-subject dynamic.

This investigation’s relevance is reflected in recent developments in philosophy, shifts in our socio-cultural landscape and is finding expression in the visual arts. This questioning of our human-centric perspective is reflected through current ideas found in the works of Bruno Latour, Graham Harman, Quentin Meillassoux, Anselm Franke and others.

The question: what exactly is object abuse is by no means obvious, when you think about it, who is to say the object in question is passive and not active? Also it is worth asking where does the form of abuse originate from? What qualifies abuse, is it quantifiable, can we identify subtler variations? And for that matter; what is an object, or rather can we say what is not an object…with any real certainty?

OA‘s function is to invite a multidisciplinary engagement; to be a forum, a curatorial framework and an archival space.

We welcome expressions of interest and contributions to the ongoing debate.

New ebony movies