{"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":60,"pdf_page":73,"physical_index":73,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"ffa468fcd29cf16f1177e4a57e3e1fd8f64b25ba307d40a81eac3af273277c25"},"chapter":"bodies in code","content":"In his commentary on Bick, Anzieu brings out the fundamental differentiation-—the presence of a primordial sensory écart-that informs Bick's conception of the passive integrating function of the skin:\n\nBut this internal function of containing the parts of the Self is dependent initially on the introjection of an external object capable of fulfilling the function. This containing object is usually constituted in the process of feeding [in its dual aspect of nipple in mouth and touching of skin].... The containing object is experienced concretely as skin. If the containing function is introjected, the baby may acquire the concept of a “space within the self” and accede to a splitting of Self and object, each being contained in its respective skin.¹7\n\nIf we substitute “skin\" for “containing object\" here, we encounter, in an only apparent tautology, the most fundamental form of the écart constitutive of the being of the sensible: \"the skin [= introjected containing object] is experienced concretely as skin.\" In the mode of primary passivity, the infant thus experiences the skin from the “inside\" (the feeling of having “a space within the self\") and from the \"outside\" (though via the introjection of the skin as boundary), as “agent\" and as “patient.\" This happens without support from—and thus prior to—the series of differentiations (self-other, inside-outside, psychic space-objective space, etc.) that such experience would seem to require but will in effect performatively produce.\n\nBecause of this fundamental, preobjective, prespatial duality or reversibility, the skin constitutes the locus and support for a primordial materialization of the sensible, for the most basic form of the écart of the sensible. Recalling our earlier comments on primary narcissism, it is important to emphasize once again (with Merleau-Ponty) that this basic form of écart—the skin as the locus and support for primary narcissism—is always already differentiated, but differentiated amodally, prior to sensory differentiation (at a more basic level than the separation of the distinct senses).\n\nAs this primordial differentiation of the skin, the sensory écart is essentially technical. Viewed from the perspective of the human being of today (the normal adult as it has evolved, genetically and culturally, up to the present), this essential technicity can (perhaps only) be understood through the trajectory of exteriorization it makes possible and which constitutes the “epiphylogenetic” evolution of the human.xxix It can (perhaps only) be understood, that is, as the sensible-transcendental ground for exteriorization as such.\n\nBODIES IN CODE\n\n60","previous_page":59,"next_page":61}