Napokon. Arheologija koja nije zaokupljena čovjekom nego širim poljem materijalnih odnosa u kojem nastaju različiti objekti. Čovjek nije subjekt, nego objekt.
Normarkov stari blog Posthumanocentric Archaeology
Normarkov novi blog Archaeological Haecceities
Tu su i njegove knjige koje se mogu čitati/daunlodati
"This is a website created by the archaeologist Johan Normark. The website is dedicated to an archaeological perspective that downplays the importance of the human. It is posthumanocentric, or prehuman in a sense since it focuses on processes that forms materialities, humans and other entities. Like posthumanist theorists, I have questioned what a human is. I claim that there is nothing essential in the human from where we can define the human. According to this reasoning, the human needs to be decentralized from the archaeological record in the initial phase of research. She cannot be used as an a-priori starting point. I take the consequence of this argument one step further away from what I call an essentialist humanocentrism in archaeology. Humanocentrism works from a static and generalized view of human and culture. I am preparing several articles and four books on what I call posthumanocentric or polyagentive archaeology.
I am currently working on four projects (each aimed to be published as a book): (1) Continuing the development of the posthumanocentric archaeology through readings of the philosophers Deleuze, DeLanda, Bergson, Nietzsche and Spinoza. (2) Climate changes in southern Mexico and how they relate to settlement changes around caves. (3) Study the face in Maya iconography and ceramics in order to point out the non-human components of an emerging subjectivity. (4) Investigating the meshing of temporalities in various material media. These four projects intersect with each others since the emerging subjectivity and settlement changes will be analyzed from a posthumanocentric perspective where different temporalities mesh with materialities."
"I am guilty of proposing an alternative form of ”material agency” called polyagency which, in my dissertation thesis (2006:156), is defined as a “collective term for intensive processes between actualized entities whose virtualities generate a multitude of transformations. Polyagency consists of four interrelated concepts that describe inseparable phases of becoming: the in-between, individuation, stratification and the time-shelter. These intensive processes also occur in the formation of actual entities where there is no human relation. Polyagency is used to explain how matter and materiality changes in encounters”.
This was clearly influenced by Deleuze and Bergson. However, the very term agency does not come from them. It comes from the anthropologist Alfred Gell and the sociologist Anthony Giddens which were great inspirations in my earlier licentiate thesis. In my subsequently published articles on causeway assemblages I ditched polyagency and polyagents as terms since some people confused it with Latour’s actants (although Latour emphasizes a completely actualized perspective where processes of emergence are lacking).