{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53","title":"Bodies in code  interfaces with digital media","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"0415970164","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53","id":"4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53","uuid":"4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53","title":"Bodies in code  interfaces with digital media","normalized_title":"bodiesincodeinterfaceswithdigitalmedia","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"0415970164","isbns":["0415970164","0415970156","9780415970167","9780415970150"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":348,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Bodies%20in%20code%20%20interfaces%20with%20digital%20media","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/4f7053d9-6508-49c8-9dd8-ec4dc5dadd53/search"},"page":{"printed_page":58,"pdf_page":71,"physical_index":71,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"161c690f74e66b3c367c2d97033a955962b83cd193550e79b90679aa62259af9"},"chapter":"bodies in code","content":"The commonality of the body schema, in short, produces a form of being-with that is indifferent to its trigger, indifferent to whether it concerns one's mirror image or the image of the other. That this comprises a fundamental, ontological form of being-with is assured by the fact that it precedes the distinction of self and other. It thereby correlates with an account of primary narcissism that, unlike Freud's highly fraught notion,xx corresponds to the installation of the schism, the écart, at the heart of bodily life, prior to its differentiation from an object world.\n\nOne crucial consequence of this fundamental domain of being-with is the dedifferentiation of the mirror-image and the image of the other and an ensuing generalization of specularization not simply beyond the visual, but as the very originary basis of all embodied experience. Indeed, this generalized specularity underlies the isomorphism of access to the mirror-image and image of the other in Merleau-Ponty's account of the so-called mirror stage. In both cases, the body schema forms a medium through which the feeling body opens out—exfoliates itself, to recall Gil's term—into the space between it and the image.\n\nThis self-exfoliation, this bodily occupation of the distance opened by the visible, brings the image back to the feeling body and, accordingly, makes it more than a mere surface reflection, makes it a true specular image, a true double of the self, and even more generally, an occasion for the specular doubling of the body's primary sensibility.xxvi In this sense, the child's experience of his or her mirror-image simply exemplifies a broader experience of specularity, and the integrality or unity of experience that persists across the mirror-stage characterizes embodied life in general, insofar as this is fundamentally split between the tactile and the visual:\n\nIn the case of the specular image, instead of a second body which the child would have and which would be located elsewhere than in his tactile body, there is a kind of identity at a distance, a ubiquity of the body; the body is at once present in the mirror and present at the point of where I feel it tactually. But if this is the case, the two aspects that are to be co-ordinated are not really separated in the child and are in no way separated in the sense in which all objects in space are separated in adult perception.... The reduction to unity is not a cataclysm, if it is true that there is no veritable duplicity or duality between the visual body and the interoceptive body in spite of the phenomenon of distance that separates the image in the mirror from the felt body. (139–140)\n\nIf the distance introduced by visual experience does not cleave embodied being in two, that is because the latter's \"possession\" of the visible through the body schema itself emerges out of an “originary\" installation of schism, of écart, at the very heart of being.xxvi\n\nBODIES IN CODE\n\n58","previous_page":57,"next_page":59}