Medium (Un)specificity as Material Agency—The Productive Indeterminacy of Matter/Material

References

• Adorno, W. T. 1984. Aesthetic Theory. Edited by G. Adorno and R. Tiedemann. Translated by C. Lenhardt. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Adorno, W. T. 2003. “Art and the Arts.” In Theodor W Adorno, Can One Live After Auschwitz? A Philosophical Reader, edited by R. Tiedman, 368–388. Translated by R. Livingstone. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Adorno, W. T. 2007. Negative Dialectics. Translated by E. B. Ashton. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, E., and B. Bolt, eds. 2013. Carnal Knowledge: Towards a ‘New Materialism’ Through the Arts. London: I. B. Tauris.
   Google Scholar
• Barthes, R. 2005. The Neutral: Lecture Course at the Collège De France, 1977–1978. Translated by R E. Krauss and D. Hollier. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Batchelor, D. 2014. The Luminous and the Grey. London: Reaktion Books.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, W. 1998. The Origin of German Tragic Drama. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, J. M. 1992. The Fate of Art: Aesthetic Alienation from Kant to Derrida and Adorno. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bishop, C. 2005. Installation Art: A Critical History. London: Tate.
   Google Scholar
• Braidotti, R. 1994. Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, B. 2004. Things. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno, G. 2014. Surface: Matters of Aesthetics, Materiality, and Media. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226114835.001.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Clough, P. T., and J. Halley, eds. 2007. The Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clough, P. T. 2010. “The Affective Turn, Political Economy, Biomedia, and Bodies.” In The Affect Theory Reader, edited by M. Gregg and G. J. Seigworth, 206–226. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coole, D. 2005. “Rethinking Agency: A Phenomenological Approach to Embodiment and Agentic Capacities.” Political Studies 53 (1): 124–142. Accessed 19 March 2015. http://www.open.ac.uk/ccig/files/ccig/Coole_2005_Rethinking_Agency.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Coole, D., and S. Frost, eds. 2010. New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dolphijn, R., and I. van der Tuin, eds. 2012. New Materialism: Interviews and Cartographies. Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 1988. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Translated by B. Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drucker, J. 2005. Sweet Dreams, Contemporary Art and Complicity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elkins, J., and H. Montgomery, eds. 2013. Beyond The Aesthetic and the Anti-Aesthetic. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fer, B. 2004. The Infinite Line: Remaking Art after Modernism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, E. 2009. “Material Intelligence.” Kettle’s Yard. Accessed 25 February 2011. http://www.kettlesyard.co.uk/exhibitions/mi_catalogue/essay_fisher.html
   Google Scholar
• Fried, M. 1998. Art and Objecthood Essays and Reviews. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gebauer, G., and C. Wulf. 1992. Mimesis, Culture, Art, Society. Translated by D. Reneau. Berkley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brian, J. ed. 1993. Clement Greenberg, The Collected Essays and Criticism, Volume 4: Modernism with a Vengeance, (1957–1969). Chicago, IL: The Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gregg, M., and G. J. Seigworth, eds. 2010. The Affect Theory Reader. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, J. 2015. “Art_Textiles: An extra/ordinary medium.” In Art_Textiles, edited by J. Harris, 8–16. Manchester, NH: The Whitworth Gallery.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis, S. 1998. Adorno a Critical Introduction. Cambridge, Malden: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jay, M. 1984. Adorno. London: Fontana.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, N. 2006. Camouflage. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Massumi, B. 2002. Parables for the Virtual; Movement, Affect, Sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. doi:10.1215/9780822383574.
   Google Scholar
• Mussell, S. 2011. Constellations of Adornian Theory and Film: Readings of Adorno with Tarkovsky and Haneke. PhD diss. University of Sussex.
   Google Scholar
• Noland, C. 2013. “Adorno and Affect.” In Beyond the Aesthetic and the Anti-Aesthetic, edited by J. Elkins and H. Montgomery, 179–184. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Connor, B. 2013. Adorno. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• O’Sullivan, S. 2006. Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought Beyond Representation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230512436.
   Google Scholar
• Pickering, A. 2010. “Material Culture and the Dance of Agency.” In The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies, edited by D. Hicks and M. C. Beaudry, 191–208. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rebentisch, J. 2009. Aesthetics of Installation Art. Translated by D. Hendrickson and G. Jackson. Berlin: Sternberg Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risatti, H. 2007. A Theory of Craft. Function and Aesthetic Expression. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina.
   Google Scholar
• Spinoza, B. 1982. The Ethics and Selected Letters. Translated by S. Shirley. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, A. 2008. “Adorno and Logic.” In Theodor Adorno Key Concepts, edited by D. Cook, 47–62. Stocksfield: Acumen.
   Google Scholar
• Weber Nicholsen, S. 1997. “Aesthetic Theory’s Mimesis of Walter Benjamin.” In The Semblance of Subjectivity, Essays In Adorno’s Aesthetic Theory, edited by T. Huhn and L. Zuidervaart, 55–92. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar