NatureCulture has repeatedly considered the theme of multiplicity since its first issue in 2012. Contributors have orbited notions of postpluralism, perspectivism, multinaturalism, and ontologies in order to think beyond unitary visions of culture and society, naive forms of cultural relativism, and what John Law calls a "one-world world" metaphysics (2011). This essay draws inspiration from Christopher Gad's discussion of Cindy Sherman's work in "A Postplural Attitude" to present multiplicity as something that takes place both in and between the artefacts collected here.
[there was] a levelling of former distinctions between what was thought to be primary and secondary in the experience of space. It can be seen as a breakdown of absolute distinctions between the plenum of matter and the void of space in physics, between subject and background in painting, between figure and ground in perception, between the sacred and the profane space of religion. Although the nature of these changes differed in each case, this striking thematic similarity among them suggests that they add up to a transformation of the metaphysical foundations of life and thought. (Kern 1983, 152-3 quoted in Heonik Kwon, "Perspectivism in Social Anthropology," 60-61).
approached social structure in a unitary perspective and as consisting of a singular organizing principle such as the rule of descent. [But,] for Edmund Leach, social structure meant a dynamic interaction between contrasting principles of relationship rather than a unitary system of rules, and he identified ritual action as the principal arena in which the transforming structural patterns of a society are expressed.” (Heonik Kwon, "Perspectivism...," 62)
has produced a certain void because the ability to regard things as wholes and articulate a foundation has vanished. (Christopher Gad, "A Postplural Attitude," 76)
Are we simply saying that white people believe one thing, and Aboriginal people believe something different? Or is something different going on? The new post-colonial response is that the differences are not simply matters of belief. They are also a matter of reals. What the world is, is also at stake. (John Law, "What's Wrong with a One-World World," 1–2)
(resulting in a singular sum or whole) or subtraction. The practice of anthropology, however, does not grow simply through the accretion or dissolution of different interests. As we have seen, interests are developed in relation to one another and thereby create multiple, that is, divisible, forms of knowledge. When academics get into arguments over positivist and interpretivist paradigms, the components are relations rather than units. In life, growth does not mean more of the same; indeed, we should be on guard when it appears to.” (Marilyn Strathern, "Being One, Being Multiple," 133)
In combination, the photos of Churchill provide for the idea of the autonomous, constant, modern Cartesian subject and romantic ideas about inner ‘depths’ and ‘layers’. Let us then contrast this presentation with Sherman’s photography... The subjects in the pictures are fragmented, and as a consequence, the ‘perspective’ of the observer also becomes fragmented. (Gad, "A Postplural Attitude," 69)
alongside their surroundings and the food they ate. Any particular being was caught up in the life of others; the caterpillar’s leafy support was more than just background. ‘Multiplicity’ is the overview an artist might have of each form within its context, divisible manifestations of growth, as one context changes into another. (Marilyn Strathern, "Being One, Being Multiple," 33)
or what it shares according to management—rights, life courses, genes or food. Nor do I submit that humanity shares a lot—rights, life courses, genes, and food. Discourses in action are quite unlike perspectives on reality. They are practices that do reality—orchestrate, perform, enact it. In each of the discourses presented here, ‘humanity’ shares something different. Along with that, it is something different. This is not a matter of a plurality of meanings, but of a multiplicity of entities. An entity like ‘humanity’ may go by a single name, but in different institutions, languages, techniques, discourses, this ‘humanity’ is configured differently.” (Annemarie Mol, "What Humanity Shares," 33)
Studies of practical ontology can only move forward on the hypothesis that there are many worlds. Rather than making a choice between ‘multiculture’ and ‘multinature’, such studies thrive on the exploration of never-finally-closed naturecultures; the crystallization of specific ontological formations out of infinitely varied elements. Aiming to describe and conceptualize such formations, the ethnographer also, invariably, participates in their reinvention. (Gad et al., "Practical Ontology," 73)
"The distinction to be made is not between exterior and interior, which are always relative, changing and reversible but between different types of multiplicities that coexist, interpenetrate, and change places—machines, cogs, motors and elements that are set in motion at a given moment, forming an assemblage of productive statements: “I love you” (or whatever)." (36)
Deleuze, Gilles and Felix Guattari. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.
Gad, Christopher. 2013. “A Postplural Attitude: Reflections on Subjectivity and Ontology.” NatureCulture 2: 50–79. https://www.natcult.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/PDF-natureculture-02-...
Gad, Christopher, Casper Bruun Jensen, and Brit Ross Winthereik. 2015. “Practical Ontology: Worlds in STS and Anthropology.” NatureCulture 3: 67–86. https://www.natcult.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/PDF-natureculture-03-...
Kwon, Heonik. 2012. “Perspectivism in Social Anthropology.” NatureCulture 1: 59–68. https://www.natcult.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/PDF-natureculture-01-...
Mol, Annemarie. 2012. “What Humanity Shares.” NatureCulture 1: 25–39. https://www.natcult.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/PDF-natureculture-01-...
Strathern, Marilyn, Atsuro Morita, and Hugh Raffles. 2015. “BEING ONE, BEING MULTIPLE: A Future for Anthropological Relations.” NatureCulture 3: 122–57. https://www.natcult.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/PDF-natureculture-03-...
