In the reading there is an entire section on the “quasi-object” or “hybrid.” Latour, a nonmondernist, stands by the theory that adding “quasi-” “removes any lingering hint of solid natural objects approached through a colorful diversity of equally valid cultural standpoints.” He offers a few examples of “hybrids” such as “frozen embryos, expert systems, digital machines…” etc. What do you think Bennet’s views on the hybrid or quasi-object are based on what we have read so far in Vibrant Matter? Could Bennet be considered a nonmodernist? Or does her theory reject the classification of object/ non-object/ quasi-object completely?
ENGL 365 | Medieval Object Ecologies
Dr. Myra Seaman | Fall 2014
Well, he states that there’s a problem with the label “hybrid” because it makes it sound as if there’s a duality of ‘pure’ somethings coming together to form something new, when in reality there are no separate places where these things come from. Bennet views objects as having their own agency, and that humans and non humans interact in a way that transcends being human or not. Bennet would agree with the blurring of lines between human/non humans because it seems she rejects that duality in favor of a larger ecosystem that all things take part in. Furthermore, I feel like the idea of quasi objects, to Bennet, may be rejected and in place of that she’d view each object as an individual with their own agency, just happening to be working together to form this idea of a quasi or hybrid object. So, no, I don’t think Bennet is a nonmodernist, but I think there’s some shared ideas between them, even if it’s not all the way there.