This is the story of Echo1. Her curse is to repeat what she hears. Echo is the sonic flux, constantly sampled.
This is the story of Echo. Repetition and difference. Repetition as difference.
This is the story of Echo.
Echo repeats.
Individuation of the sonic flux through her body. A body alienated, disrupted by mankind.
Echo either diminished, reduced to what’s to be apprehended, mastered, co-opted or Echo ignored, separated, reduced to the unattainable other.
Pan’s Echo or Narcissus’ Echo. In both cases, possessed and dispossessed. Displaced. Echo loses her body, becomes the milieu. However, both Narcissus and Pan are wrong. Echo does not lose her body, she becomes with the milieu.
The forest, the lake, the thunder.
Adopted by Gaïa2, Echo becomes transindividual. Escaping alienation, regaining importance.
Thinking-with sounds is thinking with Echo.
This rendering is loosely inspired by the mythical figure of the nymph Echo depicted in Ovid’s Metamorphoses and in Longus Daphnis and Chloe. Although very different, both versions have in common their representation of Echo as a personification of the acoustic phenomenon of the same name, which is mainly presented as a curse of the Gods. Moreover, also in both stories, she is another symbl, of something far more disturbing, namely the psychological and physical violence towards women (Briand, 2018). ↩︎
At least the way Latour (2017) thinks with her since 2015. ↩︎