Taxonomies, Cabinets, Encapsulation, and Disruption: from Space to Non-Space and the Relationship Between Knowledge, Environment, Spatial Organization and Movement
How do human
agents filter knowledge and information of
abstract spaces and material devices
or objects? What is
the process by which agents move between abstract schemas and everyday
tools? How do 3D modeling and animation reproduce knowledge
relations? To understand contemporary and historical knowledge filtering,
it is necessary to discuss relations between taxonomies (classification, or
data based upon a grid or table), anthropological
cabinets (storehouses [sometimes whole rooms] for museum specimens),
encapsulation (a technical abstraction process),
and disruption (a consideration of what is outside of a system
or schema).
Taxonomies
Michel Foucault
has shown that once knowledge of an era is shown to be structured in
a certain way, its institutions, practices,
devices, and objects all signify similarly. On the
windowed
image that appears on a computer screen when software is launched, the splash screen
of Universe Animator (a 3D modeling and animation
program), there is a rendered 3d model of an unfamiliar, futuristic machine
that appears to be made with the software and could stand for
the software itself, although this software produces a range
of
different
images and models. This illustration is an example of the use
of an image to signify many examples of knowledge at once.
Different
eras organize knowledge differently, into an "episteme", (from the more
familiar, "epistemology").
In the 17th century, the episteme might be understood as a table,
a grid into which all categories could be mapped
on one axis, a second layer of organization on the axis perpendicular to the first, and specific
examples inside both axes. Theoretically, the tabular episteme could
produce a "total" knowledge by extending the axes indefinitely, although "man" was actually one category
excluded from the episteme (at least until 1800).
In the 19th
century, after the renvoi or cross-reference of the Enlightenment Encyclopedia provided a
basis for network knowledge, Gustave
Flaubert revisited
the notion of taxonomy in a satire. In Bouvard and Pechuchet,
Flaubert uses the title characters to mediate between the two types of knowledge,
taxonomic and networked.
Bouvard and Pecuchet's activities are framed by inchoate social networks without the intensification of
21st Century social networks. As comic actors, they nevertheless
symbolically transpose a grid onto themselves, offering a critique of
massive compendiums of received knowledge. Their critique becomes
important to disruption, as we will see.

Cabinets
Flaubert's
Bouvard and Pecuchet is principally narrative, and the table is a ghostly inscription
of perpendicular lines which sift in encyclopedic knowlege for its contents. The cabinet, on the other
hand, in the early history of the museum, is not an abstract
product of either explicit, linguistic, symbolic processing, nor an
abstract schema. The cabinet is to the tabular and networked
episteme what visual, cultural artifacts are to our episteme:
concrete, historical intelligences.
Still, cabinets come to
parallel the abstract schema of a table or grid. As scribes
place a word standing for an object into a "cubbyhole" of the
table, an anthropologist or curator places an object with a
history of cultural and linguistic connotations
onto shelves within a room of specimens. In a sense, we have
taxonomic texts and their reifications as objects. A reification
is the making of an abstract concept into a concrete object.
When objects of cultural significance are placed within actual
material spaces, it is increasingly difficult -- because of the
procedures of reification -- to say where the linguistic term
and the object
are mutually exclusive or totally distinct.
The virtual
nature of linguistic terms aggregates ideas
as if they were objects in a collection, a cabinet. Thus, accumulation
says something about the economic underpinnings of knowledge
spaces.
The cabinet is directly connected to amassing wealth, and connected to
the concept of ownership, raising the question of original ownership.
Collecting is a way of dominating the people and culture associated with a
collection of objects, but it is also a way of marking out imaginative, conceptual, and
aesthetic territory.
The cabinet
also has a contemporary cinematic aesthetics: if we look at
the ways in which 3d modeling and animation is used to produce
digital extras or crowds or fantastic armies of machines, how is this different from an animated Joseph Cornell work with divided boxes
marking out various regions for heterogeneous, seemingly found objects? A Cornell exploded into cinematic
animation demonstrates collecting, classification and categorization practices as
artistic practices as well.
Encapsulation
Because the
tabular episteme is an abstraction, it can be applied to a variety
of situations and model different phenomena. At the same time, it
is a destination for convergent signs. Let us now return, from the cabinet, to this space of
abstraction -- with encapsulation, an often naturally occuring organizational form.
If representations of the content of the tabular
episteme are primarily textual, encapsulation (although created through code) describes the incorporation
of function into reusable parts. How do we build a computer?
It is possible to build one using parts from 20 different companies
because these parts are all compatible and interchangeable, thanks first to the
industrial revolution. In the days of Eli
Whitney, militia rifles were produced through standardizing parts,
by asking what does each part do, and abstracting
function so that each part could be reproduced within a margin of error
that would allow it to it work with many rifles, from different manufacturers.
Encapsulation
also applies to technology and biology. Cells comprising
tissues and tissues making up organs, enable the living body. Delueze and
Guattari argue that it is possible to refer
to the body without organs, a human as an agent of meaning
creation, where social behaviours emerge from a generalized "life" without
needing an explication of physiology. The body becomes an abstract tool which may enclose
organs actually, but only interacts with the social on the level of the body, where body is
produced by a label or name, and can be performatively designated.
Both computers and biological organisms possess functions
incorporated into linguistic labels that we use to describe wholes. These
wholes "emerge" from interacting parts. To build intelligences according to
biology, one may use a bottoms-up approach. The whole emerges
from the part, but the part, after all, is limited by the domain
of its material.
Disruption
Because of
these limits and wholes emerging from parts as a product of organization,
different levels act as critics of their peers, and act upon them, affecting
them by disrupting the normal working order of the
computerized or biological part. Parts have limits, and
an outside. The outside can be thought of as a whole that is beyond many different
boundaries of organized matter. Jacques Derrida's deference presents signs refering to other signs
indefinitely (though not infinitely), even if they go in the direction of an unbounded
outside back to an earthly environment or microscopic portion of matter. Returning to the finite, they still
infinitely combine with and refer to other things.
A Deconstructionist insight of Derrida is that signification
can produce meaningfulness, but signifieds are always other signifiers.
The Saussurean signifier is a word, picture, or text; the signified
is the object to which these representations refer. Signifiers are linked in an
enchainment which sews in humans and humanisms, pre and post.
Given this enchainment of recurring signification,
Foucault's Order of Things argues for a new politics of disruption, a rupturing of the 17th
century table which, folded over, provides the metaphor of cloth, which may superimpose one region of knowledge
onto another. Disruption as a method of politics can also be thought of as
shifting registers of resolution, to which we travel via disruption, as well as do levels in
an organized system, allowing new functionality to emerge.
3D Animation
and Modeling
The taxonomy,
the cabinet, encapsulation and disruption have an "extreme" presence today. The
differences between our era and these forms of epistemological organization
can be found in the level of intensity and the convergence of knowlege types
into the computer workstation, as they have not only become generalized schemas
for symbolic processing tasks, but they have recycled old media into new media.
The computer
as a symbol-processing machine, then, is a visual and linguistic
tool for logical, aesthetic, scientific, political, economic,
and social statements about the world, all organized epistemologically. 3D modeling
and animation works to allow properties to emerge from conditions of the open digital system and to build upon
the historical organization of knowledge.