18445148 that thing materiality in the age of the

Page 1/16 by Katharina Weinstock, January 2016 We all know what the Internet looks like. Seen from the outside, it comes down to rows and rows of servers in a windowless air-conditioned space, bathed in grey light and the soft and continuous humming of ventilation ¹ However, our imagination has a hard time establishing a meaningful connection between this deadpan non-space and the Internet. The artist Yuri Pattison provides a remedy from this representational dilemma. His “Colocation, Time Displacement” (2014) is a video portrait of a datacentre in Stockholm: ‘Pionen’ – a former civil defence centre built in the 1970s deep beneath thirty meters of granite in order to protect essential government functions from nuclear strike – is a subterranean Garden Eden.

Amongst bare walls of rock, servers and tubes pass into bamboo groves, greenhouses and fish tanks. Page 2/2 Admittedly, the Internet may not always look as strikingly post-apocalyptic as Pionen. Let‘s consider, instead, the evidence of our irst-hand experience: What does the Internet feel like? Does it feel like that ominous transparent screen, which has been haunting the sci-i movie genre since “Minority Report”2 and still informs our idea what augmented reality is supposed to look like? Is the Internet a public space? Or is it a headspace, in which random scraps of conversation and the incessant loops of GIFS get stuck like earworms?

Or, is the Internet rather the epitome of an encyclopaedia: A derivation of Niklas Luhmann’s ‘Zettelkasten’ (a tagged paper ile card system, which, as he claims, wrote all of his books for him). Is the Internet the ultimate tool of man’s release from self-incurred unknowing, or does its virtuality – au contraire – re-establish an imaginary sphere reigned by outlandish creatures and obscure desires? Jon Rafman’s “Mainsqueeze” (2014) is a disturbing video montage of found footage from the Internet, mustering a pandemonium of creatures such as women in heavy makeup, sadistically scrunching crabs (because they can); ‘Furry Fetish’ frogs wrapped in bondage ropes, writhing on suburban kitchen loors, and self-destructive washing machines, performing a raging thantotic spin circle dance...

he Internet – a sticky daydream that, when we get lost in its reverie, gives us sore limbs? Whichever story your personal search history may tell, the Internet has become a dimension of everyday life in its own right. – Our experience of reality is 1 As a YouTube video that went viral in 2014 taught us, it also is an undersea network of cables, occasionally attacked by sharks. URL: v=1ex7uTQf4bQ 2 Steven Spielberg “Minority Report” (2002). quintessentially informed by it. In the past four years this paradigm shit has been addressed by so called ‘Post-Internet Art’: Zeitgeisty Internet inspired art, relecting upon today‘s novel Internet state of mind.

However, as we surf the smooth waves of the World Wide Web, slide from website to website with practiced hands and indulge in its shiny surfaces, there is a lurking apprehension that this new state of mind comes at a price. How about the recalcitrant tangible object, which used to give the human mind something to rub against (like LeCorbusier’s collection of seashells), or to stumble over (like Marcel Duchamp’s coat 3 If the Internet’s mouth-watering, desire-fuelling visuality establishes the tacit codex ‘What You See is What You get’, is there any way we will ever actually get/grasp what we see?

“Physical, palpable material reality is disappearing”, archaeologist Colin Renfrew writes, “leaving nothing but the smile on the face of the Cheshire 4 Page 1/2 3 In the 1940s LeCorbusier spent increasing amounts of time at the shore, collecting stones, shells, and other jetsam, and studying the works of the philosopher and ardent shell collector Paul Valéry. It was here that the architect developed a revolutionary new theory of design. Niklas Maak: Le Corbusier. he Architect on the Beach. Munich 2011. “Trap (Trébuchet)” (1917) is a coatrack, which Duchamp, ater having tripped over it repeatedly, nailed to the loor of his messy studio.

4 Renfrew cited by Brown 2010, p. 51. Page 4/16 Today, as touch screens seem to assuage an unruly desire to poke our index inger through the surface of the screen, and as the majority of the things on display in IKEA catalogues has tacitly been replaced by 3D renderings without us even noticing it,5 we may ask ourselves how the Internet has informed our relation to the world of objects. – Or (since, ater all, it has always been up to us to deine what an ‘object’ is), how it will eventually change our notion of objecthood as such.

In the past ten years, presumably not least as a response to the digitalization of our world, the question of the object gained much attention within humanistic scholarship. In the context of a new materialist turn, a fair amount of research has been dedicated to reconsidering the object as something embedded in social practices and narratives that surround it – rather then understanding it as a detached ontological 6 Seen from this angle, things turn out to be multistable, luid, shape-shiting. How can we think the thing on the Internet (jawbreaker intended)? First of all, the Internet is the domain of the image.

As to the matter of the web, the object on the Internet can’t be anything but one delated into the bits and bytes of a digital image. If we want to resolve this categorical inconsistency (image ≠ object), we have to break the deadlock of reductive deinitions. To state the obvious: he object on the Internet is – necessarily – a mediated one. Here, W. J. T. Mitchell’s research into the transitions and interlockings between the domains of the image and objecthood comes in handy. Within the context of his “pursuit of the animated image-object”7 he has traced how our relation to objects is negotiated by means of representations.

Bill Brown, on the other hand, exponent of so called ‘hing heory’ since the turn of the millennium, goes so far as to assign these image-object-borderline cases with a term of their own. For Brown objects, the mere materiality of which is exceeded by an imag(in)ary dimension, are no objects but: 8 Second of all, the Internet is a terrain structured by operations of searching. he navigation system through which we browse the Web is a search engine: We google! he Internet, thus, promotes a culture of inding and 9 5 As Timur Si-Qin points out, in 2014 up to 75% of the objects on display in Ikea catalogues were 3D renderings.

Cf. Si-Qin 2015. 6 Consider the massive impact of Actor-Network heory (ANT) on recent accounts of social theory and material culture studies. 7 Mitchell 2007, p. 168. “What I am interested in [...] is the moment when such objects are deliberately placed before us verbally or visually, represented or mediated in some way. his is the moment when objectionable (or inofensive) objects are transigured by depiction, reproduction, and inscription, by being raised up, staged, framed for “ Mitchell 2007, p. 225. 8 “You could imagine things […] as what is excessive in objects, as what exceeds their mere materialization as objects or their mere utilization as objects – their force as a sensuous presence or as a metaphysical presence, the magic by which objects become values, fetishes, idols, and

“ Brown 2001, p. 5. hese are, as it seems, the two major prerequisites, which to be considered in order to come to grips with the ‘thing’ on the Internet. Both of them make it seem closely related to a historical object concept originally conceived by Surrealism: he found object – the trouvaille – the objet trouvé. he most prominent example in this matter is a carved wooden spoon, which André Breton found on a lea market in the outskirts of Paris in 1934. Being photographically documented in his autobiographical book “Mad Love” (1937), this spoon, too, turns out to be peculiarly slippery in terms of its materiality and mediatedness.

he objet trouvé is neither ish nor fowl: It is an actual object (an item that became part of Breton’s immense private collection), but it just as much is a photograph and an autobiographical account. In contrast to Duchamp’s detached, decontextualized ready-made objects, the found object essentially relies on these mediating structures, which built up a network of references around it. Within the scope of this asymptotic essay in grasping the Internet thing, we can’t but touch upon the surrealist concept of the found object en passant. So we leave it here for now, put Breton’s spoon back into that dusty bookshelf in his Paris apartment, and lip open our laptops again.

To stick with 21st century everyday experience, the most evident way to verify the existence of an object beyond its pictorial representation on the screen is, quite simply, by purchasing it. It is in the Internet’s new market places that the border traic of objects, their circulation between virtual and real space, becomes the most evident. In 2005 – eBay hadn’t yet quite made its major breakthrough – the Museum of Modern Art in Frankfurt dedicated an idiosyncratic exhibition to the new phenomenon of the online bazaar. “Spinnwebzeit”10 made eBay the source of inspiration for a playful curatorial experiment.

Based on a vaguely deined search pattern curator Udo Kittelmann and his team trawled eBay for its hidden treasures. Besides books, photographs, postcards, and 16 mm ilm footage, the exhibition brought together curiosities such as anatomical models and antique dolls, merchandise igures and religious devotional objects, glass vials containing water form the Niagara falls, 9 Let’s just for a second rest our mental eye on the unfathomable masses of collections of jpegs, gifs and movs, gathered and shared on a daily basis by Instagram, Tumbler, and YouTube bloggers world wide. Marisa Olson, who in the past years gained much attention for coining the term ‘Post Internet’, dedicated an article to the ways in which digital visual culture has continued and transformed the art historical lines of traditions of found photography (Appropriation Art) and found footage ilm.

Cf. Olson 2008. 10 “Spinnwebzeit” (MMK Frankfurt, Sept. 24, 2005 – Jan. 29, 2006). he selected items were supposed to have some relation to the museum’s permanent art collection – be it thematic, formal, or entirely associative. 11 he “Surrealist Exhibition of Objects”, curated by André Breton, was originally held in gallery Charles Ratton, Paris, in 1936. With regard to the show‘s highly experimental approach, it can be understood as installation art avant la lettre. Page 5/16 Page 2/2 a speciic hair tonic mentioned in Carroll’s “Alice in Wonderland”, as well as an entire collection of boldly adorned walking sticks, evoking the bourgeois lâneur of the in de siècle.

he show ended with an auction event, in which the acquired commodities were sold out again, and hence re-introduced into the eternal cycles of economical exchange. As bold as Kittelmann’s curatorial endeavour was, there was, however, something old-fashioned about “Spinnwebzeit”. By repatriating the Internet’s bric-a-brac within oline reality, Kittelman’s quirky cabinet of curiosities failed to take into account the previous ‘online life’ of his found objects. If “Spinnwebzeit” set out to be an object lesson on eBay economy, its law lied in its sheer ignorance of the fundamental changes platforms like eBay introduce to traditional forms of person-to-person trading.

As opposed to lea markets (the predestined terrain of the Surrealist found object), eBay embeds its jetsam within a structural framework that accredits every object with an index, or tag. his indexation has a major impact on our grip on the object world. Take, for example, the case of héo Mercier. In 2013 the Centre Georges Pompidou presented “Surrealism and the Object”, a comprehensive exhibition, which reunited the chief creations of surrealist sculpture and strived to reveal its heirs in contemporary art. Alongside the reconstruction of an exhibition curated by Breton in 1936,11 the Pompidou showcased an installation by contemporary artist héo Mercier.

Both of these installations featured collections. Page 1/2 he display cabinets of Breton’s reconstructed installation juxtaposed Surrealist sculpture with of non-art things such as cult objects from Africa and Oceania, mathematical models (borrowed from the Institute Poincaré), animal and mineral specimens, as well as lea market curiosities. If, in the face of this irritating mix of eccentric objects, anything came to the fore with unique evidence, then it is the speciic material culture of early 20th century Paris: Its thriving market of ‘primitive art’, its natural history museums and dusty research institutes, and – last but not least – the demise of an old economical model epitomized by the Parisian Arcades, which at the time were making way to modern department stores à la Galéries Lafayette.

héo Mercier by contrast, a child of 21st century Paris, presents us with an array of almost 200 variations of the same thing: “To own the World isn’t my Priority” (2013) is a collection of aquarium stones of every shape and colour, arranged on shelves like precious mineral specimens. In showing Breton and Mercier side by side, the Pompidou highlighted not only an unabated ‘impulse to collect’ in contemporary art, but also the subliminal shits within that very same practice: To ind hundreds of diferent interpretations of one type of thing – this has only become possible since the implementation of the Internet’s Page 7/16

Page 8/16 word-based search engines. Now, algorithmic search engines score the most hits if your search request hits the vein of a mass cultural phenomenon. hese mass cultural phenomena may relate to a certain kind of object that is considered ‘cultural heritage’ and therefore has been excessively reproduced, appropriated and reconigured (google “Michelangelo’s). Or they may just as well be copies without an original: Spawns of mass culture itself – cheap, anonymous, frivolous ‘object ideas’ that happen to satisfy a burning mass desire in a way no one could possibly have anticipated (google “boob

). he reproduction compulsion of mass culture seems to work as a catalyst for these kinds of forms, which have a latent potential to become clichés:12 To multiply limitlessly – and thus become ‘eternal’ in terms of persistence in time and ubiquity in space. Judging by mere quantity, the anthropologists of the post-apocalyptic future are more likely to unearth a boob mug than some unique Picasso sculpture. If Mercier in his assemblages crosses replicas of antique sculptures, African masks, Easter Island heads and obscene drinking vessels, he suggests an essential ainity between these objects. hey have proven proliic in terms of processes of cultural adaption and reproduction.

herefore there must be something about them that resonates with the desires that drive our culture: he boob mug succeeds the primitive fertility goddess as a new-model fetish. he side efect of found objects is, that they expose economical structures, which we usually take for granted. Surrealism (the irst art movement to conceptualize a consistent aesthetics of inding) suggests that, in order to make a ind, you have to explore the peripheries of the economical system. Ater all, it is only a certain kind of objects that requires ‘inding’ as a mode of attentiveness prone to discover that, which normally remains overlooked.

For Breton, lea markets served as a privileged inding place for discarded commodities that had fallen trough the cracks of consumer 13 However, as opposed to urban topographies, the Internet has no fringes. What it does have, though, according Mark Leckey, to is a tail. In his lecture performance “In the Long Tail” (2009) Leckey invokes a term coined by entrepreneur Chris 14 By means of a curve diagram Anderson points out that e-commerce creates new market conditions, in which niche products sold in low quantities can nowadays collectively build a larger market 12 Etymologically the word ‘cliché’ harks back to a printmaking.

he printing plate used to be called ‘cliché’. hus, the potential of an object to become ‘cliché’ implies nothing else than its likeliness to generate copies. 13 In his novel “Nadja” Breton says about the ‘Marché aux Puces’, a lea market located in the Parisian suburb Saint-Ouen: “I go there oten, looking for those objects not to be found anywhere else, out of fashion, in bits and pieces, useless, almost ” Breton, Nadja 1999, pp. 49-50. 14 Chris Anderson: he Long Tail. Why the future of business is selling less of more. New York 2006.

Page 1/2 Page 9/16 share (the ‘tail’) than popular mainstream products sold in high quantities (the ‘head’). In other words: Today, there is a market for every taste. On the Internet, possibly anything can be found. Somewhere in the convolutions of the World Wide Web Leckey’s Minotaur is pawing the ground. Today, ten years ater “Spinnwebzeit” an art project from Japan is taking a similar line. he so-called “Internet Yami-Ichi”16, a bazaar for Internet-related goods, endeavours to challenge the dominant e-commerce trend by setting up a IRL counter-market. he project is driven by the double desire to have the Internet descend into the physical world, and to shed light on the new, idiosyncratic things lourishing in the Internet: Just what is it that makes up a quintessential ‘Internet-esque’ thing?

It is a project by Tomoya Watanabe that most pointedly hit the nerve of the Yami-Ichi’s call to reinforce the tie between online and oline realities. Watanabe sold stones. Each of these stones was accompanied by a CD-ROM, which contained its 3D scan data as an IP address. In a video documentary, Watanabe says that if we assigned an IP addresses to every stone on earth, we could actually “ill the Internet with things that exist in the real 17 If “Spinnwebzeit” was about materializing the elusive Internet thing in the actual space of the museum, Watanabe’s project takes the opposite angle, by suggesting that every thing on earth may have a virtual dimension.

Watanabe’s claim isn’t a far cry from the utopian idea of the one-to-one scale map – a thought experiment that has been haunting literature since the in de siècle (promoted by authors such as Lewis Carroll, Jorge Luis Borges, Umberto Eco, and others). Considering how a little more than one hundred years later Google Street View has pretty much implemented this concept within our everyday reality, we might refrain from drawing the line between utopia and reality too rigidly any more. »Within each personal computer there is a miniature labyrinth - the enclave of partitions, hidden pathways that wind through the transistors of the surface of a microprocessor.

Deep within these passages lurks that most monstrous of all transformative creatures, the Minotaur, revered by the «15 15 Leckey 2013, p. 3. 16 he “Internet Yami-Ichi” is a joint venture of the Japanese art collectives IDPW and Exonemo. he market was founded in Tokyo in 2012. Page 10/16 And yet, if we take the Internet as a mere wraithlike doppelganger of the real world – aren‘t we missing out on something? A ‘shadow world’ notion of the Internet stops short of acknowledging that rampant surplus, which, ater all, makes the Internet such a fascinating cultural phenomenon.

Given that within the past twenty years the Internet has grown into an dimension of reality in its own right, Watanabe’s impulse to ill the Internet with actual stones seems to be symptomatic for an all too human longing for comprehensibility and tangibleness. Which object could serve this purpose better than a stone – raw matter in its default form? One doesn’t have to like the Yami-Ichi’s Dada-style approach of taking Internet goods at face value (‘cookie’ pastries, ‘cloud’ candy loss) to acknowledge the widening gap between the two realities we inhabit. 17 See interview with Tomoya Watanabe (aka Tomorrow Shark) in “Back Streets of the Internet” (2013) – a video documentary produced by W+K LAB.

Watanabe’s stone project was initially inspired by a debate whether the Internet might one day use up the entire pool of available IP addresses. Eventually, the debate was resolved by the insight that even if you assigned one IP address to every single pebble on earth, you still wouldn’t run out. Watanabe took this metaphor literally. Page 1/2 his takes us to the question of ‘virtual 18 Oscillating somewhere between object, screen bound image (as implied by the technical term ‘CGI’), and code (the STL ile format used for 3D printing), the status of these things is all but clear.

Although they may be mirages – artfully crated trompe l’oeils – these objects exceed the limitations of an image. At least since the 2013 case of the 3D printed gun their borderline-quality can’t be dismissed that easily any 19 he Internet, which loves to make its things circulate, seems to liquefy medium speciic distinctions that once seemed to be set in stone. If Artie Vierkant, in his 2010 essay “he Image Object Post-Internet”, declares an erosion of ‘representational ixity’, he does so in light of the contagious travelling and feverish morphing of forms engendered by the paradigm of the source code.

One of the most idiosyncratic answers to the question of the ‘Internet hing’ has been given by Mark Leckey. “he Universal Addressability of Dumb hings” (2013) and the subsequent, compressed edition of it “UniAddDumhs”, (2014- 2015) are both artist-curated exhibitions and ‘total artworks’ in 20 When Mark Leckey irst was presented with the invitation to curate a show for “Hayward Touring”, the task to – as Lecky puts it – ‘move things around in a room’, struck him as utterly anachronistic: “It’s not what I do. Or, in a sense it’s not what we do any more.

We move images around, we circulate images, we aggregate images from 21 18 3D modelling is the process of developing a mathematical representation of the surface of any three-dimensional object by means of 3D computer graphics. he product is called a ‘3D model’. It can be displayed as an image (‘3D rendering’), as an interactive animation (computer simulations, video games) or as a non-interactive animation (video). By means of 3D printing devices, a 3D model can also be translated into of screen reality. 19 Victor Buchli has done seminal research on the paradigm shits 3D printed objects introduce into material culture.

Cf. Buchli 2010. Page 12/16 How to make an exhibition that is relective of today’s hegemony of the digital? Leckey answerd his own question with a gesture of striking simplicity: He decided to base the show on the contents of his hard drive. Faced with a plethora of images Leckey had collected over years and years of Internet searches, the exhibition organizers collaborating with the artist were to locate, borrow, or acquire the things depicted in these images – whatever and wherever they were. Eventually, the exhibition juxtaposed ancient, modern, and contemporary works of art, as well as perfectly ordinary and unbelievably extraordinary things.

Among them: A Minotaur head, a Cyberman Helmet from “Doctor Who”, a car engine encrusted with glittering blue crystals, sketches for visionary machines, “Low Res Shoe” by fashion brand United Nude (a black rubber high heel, looking like a low resolution 3D model), a thirteenth-century silver reliquary in the shape of a hand, and the “i-Limb Ultra”, the most technologically advanced prosthetic hand on the market. As the driving impulse behind his show Leckey identiies a desire to touch that which lies residing behind the thin glass layer of the screen: “When things are on screen then I kinda want to get my ingers on them – in this kinda impossible

”22 However, the exhibition wasn’t to exhaust his fetishist longing. Already during the run of “he Universal Addressability of Dumb hings”, Leckey began to record the exhibited objects with a 3D scanner, thus reverting the actual objects back into their previous status as immaterial, digital images. “UniAddDumhs” resulted – an exhibition entirely comprised of 3D printed copies, 2D cardboard standees, photographic reproductions, and other forms of replicas of the original objects initially shown in “he Universal Addressability of Dumb hings”. With this two-step metamorphosis of the very same objects, Leckey’s research into the ontological liminality of digitally represented things turns full circle: From digital iles on the artist’s hard drive, to original artefacts, and back again to the second-hand reality of 3D printed replicas.

By making the object’s travelling between the realms of the digital and the physical the operational principle of his show Leckey creates a striking allegory for the transformative spell at the core of the ‘Internet hing’. 20 “he Universal Addressability of Dumb hings” was curated by Mark Leckey and organized by Roger Malbert and Chelsea Pettitt as a Hayward Touring exhibition. It travelled in 2013 to the Bluecoat, Liverpool; Nottingham Contemporary; and De La Warr Pavilion, Bexhill-on- sea, England. “UniAddDumhs” (2014/ 2015). he irst iteration of “UniAddDumhs” opened as part of „Lending Enchantment to Vulgar Materials“, organized by WIELS, Brussels, 2014.

“UniAddDumbhs”, alone, was presented at Kunsthalle Basel in 2015. 21 Mark Leckey live lecture at Nottingham Trent University, May 2nd, 2013. URL: https://www. v=g5v1ChRJT0. See 02:02 min. 22 URL: v=g5v1ChRJT0. See 19:20 min. If you google Lecky’s exhibition project you will come across a youTube video, in which he outlined the concept of his show in order to pitch it to eligible exhibition venues. In it, Leckey relates his endeavour to the ideas of André Breton: he exhibition sharing the same thrust as Breton’s appeal to iniltrate the real world with that alien breed of objects that hitherto only appear to us in

23 In order to substantiate his claim Lecky hyperlink- leaps from Breton’s ‘Objets Fantômes’ to a late 21st century descendent: he “Second Life” deinition of a ‘phantom object’ is something that exists in one region, but hangs over into another one. “Accordingly”, Leckey concludes suggestively, “I’ve been searching for these phantom objects that hang over between the material world and what the US military calls the 5th Domain – […] the immaterial arena of ”24 Trying to capture this ethereal quality, Leckey makes his objects commute to and fro between the spheres of the virtual and the real.

In a lecture at Nottingham Trent University Leckey provides insight into a peculiar series of short video clips, in which the artist tentatively explores the possibilities that the 3D scans of his exhibits have in store. In one of these ‘tests’ (that attest to Leckey’s tireless eforts to achieve the desired proximity to his seemingly ever- elusive Trouvailles) we re-encounter the voluptuous trunk of a zoomorphic igurine, an archaic African fetish: A “Boli” from Mali. And there it is, Mark Leckey’s hand, doing the impossible: reaching into the virtual space of the rendering, gently stroking the iridescent grey surface of the digital rendering of the Boli’s virtual

25 In an article from 2010, Bill Brown draws a picture of how we might have to recast our notion of materiality in order to keep it in touch with our everyday experience. His proposition reads like an answer to the irritating scenario outlined above: “It might inally prove useful to avoid the discrepancy between the phenomenal and the material – to describe instead the phenomenon of materiality, or the materiality-efect, the end result of the process whereby you’re convinced of the materiality of something (be it the stone on which you stubbed your toe of the handle you’re about to grab within an immersive VR

”26 23 “Prop4aShw” (2013). URL: v=v5XCscECpAo&feature=youtu. be. Breton’s notion of the ‘Objet Fantôme’ is discussed in his “Introduction to the Discourse on the Paucity of Reality,” a source text Leckey also quotes in his introduction in the exhibition catalogue “he Universal Addressability of Dumb hings”, p. 5. 24 URL: v=g5v1ChRJT0. See 06:10-06:40 min. 25 URL: v=g5v1ChRJT0. See 18:29 min. A video clip from 2015 seems directly derived from these early ‘tests’. “Degradations” (2015) is a 3D animation based on a scan of a Louise Bourgeois sculpture. In a series of ‘experiments’ the lesh-coloured object is subjected to changing material properties and gravitational ields – thus stretching, deforming and joggling its rubbery body in various voluptuous ways.

26 Brown 2010, pp. 51-52. Page jpeg) That will bring about the Transition of these jpeg) And turn them into Real-World Things. Literature Breton, André: Mad Love. Nebraska 1988. Brown, Bill: “hing heory”, in: Critical Inquiry, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Autumn, 2001), pp. 1-22. Brown, Bill: “Materiality”, in: T. Mitchell: Critical terms for Media Studies. Chicago 2010, pp. 49-63. Buchli, Victor: “he prototype: Presencing the immaterial”, in: Visual Communication, No. 9, 2010, pp. 273-287. Filipovic, Elena: “Mark Leckey, UniAddDumhs (2014–15)“, in: Mousse, No. 49 (June 2015), pp. 19-33. Leckey, Mark: he Universal Addressability of Dumb hings.

London 2013. Mitchell,: What do Pictures want. he Lives and Loves of Images. Chicago 2007. Olson, Marisa: Lost Not Found. he Circulation of Images in Digital Visual Culture. URL: http:// pdf Olson, Marisa: “Postinternet. Art ater the Internet“, in: Foam Magazine, No. 29 (Winter 2011/2012), pp. 59-63. Si-Qin, Timur: “True Lies”, in: Texte zur Kunst (No. 99, September 2015) pp. 92-100. Vierkant, Artie: he Image Object Post-Internet. URL: org/artie/pdf/he_Image_ pdf Videos Hill, Lauren: Doo Wop (hat hing), URL: v=16cT94toCSE Leckey, Mark: In the Long Tail. URL: v=Oi4NLXHWtHI Leckey, Mark: Prop4aShw. URL: v=v5XCscECpAo&feature=y be Leckey, Mark: Live lecture at Nottingham Trent University (May 2nd, 2013).

URL: https://www. v=g5v1ChRJT0 Leckey, Mark: Bourgeois Degradations Rushes, URL: com/154297555 Images Cover: Mark Leckey “Degradations” (2015) – ilm stills. p. 2: Jon Rafman “Mainsqueeze” (2014) – ilm still. p. 3: Walt Disney “Alice in Wonderland” (1951) – ilm still. p. 6: “André Breton. 42, rue Fontaine”. Auction catalogue. Paris 2003 – scan of pp. 84-85. p. 7: héo Mercier “Idole Nourrissière” (2013) – objekt. p. 10: “St. Ouen Le Marché aux Puces” (ca. 1960) – scan of postcard. p. 11: W+K LAB “Back Streets of the Internet” (2013) – ilm still. p. 14: Mark Leckey “Prop4aShw” (2010) – ilm stills.

p. 16: Mark Leckey “Degradations” (2015) – ilm stills. Page 15/16 Today, digitalization and the Internet as an altogether new domain of our lived- in world challenge traditional notions of objecthood. Or, to put it positively: New objects in the world produce new concepts of jpeg)