Objectum Sexuals

‘Individuals who identify as Objectum Sexuals experience emotional, romantic and/or sexual feelings towards inanimate objects’68 .

Matt Meher, is an Objectum Sexual, in love with the ‘North Bridge’ in Sydney69 . Erika Labrie (Now Erika Eiffel) is an OS in love with and married to the Eiffel Tower70 Eija-Riita Eklöf-Mauer is an OS in love with and married to the Berlin Wall71

Lars Laumann featured Eija-Riita Eklöf-Mauer’s relationship with the Berlin Wall in his film Berlinmuren 2008 in a sensitive and provocative way. Kathy Noble describes it as typical of Laumann’s ‘ongoing project, exploring people and phenomena that exist on the margins of contemporary society’ She recounts how his non-judgemental approach ‘simultaneously draws you in, whilst the extraordinary stories fuel cynicism.’72

These truly are extraordinary stories. Documentaries on OS are easy to find on YouTube with some viewing figures in the hundreds of thousands for what appears to be a fairly niche attraction. Whether you consider Objectum Sexuality to be a legitimised orientation; a delusional fetish; or an autistic interpretation, I think it is fair to say that, the idea of Objectum Sexuality disturbs the boundaries between the human and more-than-human in an unsettling way. For example, here are some YouTube responses to Matt Maher’s video (see Figure. 6):

‘How can you be cynical about love between humans, while claiming that the bridge loves you????...’ Four question marks!!!!

‘I’m sorry but I can’t help but LMAO.. when he tells the bridge to ‘shhhh’’

‘By your own definition, the bridge does not love you….’73

From what I can see, blurring the boundaries in this way induces Marshall McLuhan’s fear of humans’ role as ‘sex organs for the machine world’74. Or Levy’s example of the football as a ‘quasi-object…which can galvanise an entire stadium of spectators into what Levy

68 Julia Simner, Hughes & Sagiv, Objectum Sexuality: A sexual orientation linked with autism and synaesthesia, <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-56449-0>[accessed 10 June 2020]. 69 Concrete Romance: Objectum-Sexuality on YouTube 9 August 2010 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEDwr8ndvIM> [accessed 10 June 2020]. 70 Woman Rides The Eiffel Tower on YouTube 17 Feb 2010 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POTA5aZxbQA> [accessed 10 June 2020]. 71 Lars Laumann, Berlinmuren (2008) < https://vimeo.com/52427622> [accessed 5 June 2020]. 72 Kathy Noble, ‘Review: Lars Laumann, Maureen Paley, London, UK in Frieze.com, 1 Sept 2009 <https://frieze.com/article/lars-laumann> [accessed June 2020]. 73 Figure.6: Concrete Romance: Objectum-Sexuality on YouTube 9 August 2010 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEDwr8ndvIM> [screen-shot by Emma Marks 1 July 2020]. 74 Marshall McLuhan in, ‘Relations with Concrete Others (or, How We Learned to Stopped Worrying and Love the Berlin Wall)’ in Avoiding the Subject by Clemens and Pettman (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2004), p.49.

(perhaps too hastily) calls collective intelligence’75 . It’s as if there is a palpable fear that we too might tricked, if not by each other, by nonhuman nature. There is an apparent polarisation of humans against everything else. The YouTube responses seem like heckles from a pantomime– “look out behind you!”. And I am in the audience, shifting uncomfortably in my seat, not enjoying this story, but feeling I had to go along for research purposes.

I wonder if I could get ‘Hans Grouper’ or ‘Ryan Vanderwater’76 to attempt to undertake a sensual-encounter with an ordinary thing? To look for a moment of enchantment with the world without becoming enamoured, disenchanted or completely made a fool of?

Figure. 6 YouTube responses to Matt Maher’s video

From what I can see, these reviews demonstrate a response to the suspicion of hidden secrets behind objects. They could be described as representing a disenchantment of feeling

75 Justin Clemens & Dominic Pettman, Relations with concrete others, p.49. 76 see names in Figure. 6.

deceived by ideas of fetish, whether as ‘commodity fetish’ (Marx)77; sexual fetish (Freud); or disproven magical fetish.

As you know, we are hoping for our sensual-encounters to explore more sensitively and more sensually the huge gap of possible human-to-thing relations between the boundaries of function and fetish. To achieve this, we need find ways to embrace the unknown, the secret and the hidden. ‘If we think we already know what is out there, we will almost surely miss most of it’78

Earlier I condoned the idea to embrace anthropomorphism and the fantastical. Let me make this clear: embrace them as Tales of fiction, not as fact. Sensual-encounters with ordinary things are not exercises in animism. Nor are they a sexual activity. However, even though I might suggest that the Berlin Wall makes an inappropriate husband, it’s interesting to think what different relationships we can try out with things through fictional role play. From a subjective viewpoint (fictional or not) it’s easier to accept, at any moment of encounter, that it is impossible to see the whole of everything all at once. We can only open up to sensual-encounters if we are without fear of becoming beguiled or ridiculed by what we do not know. This is an adventure into the unknown.

Sensual-encounters invite you to embrace the allusiveness of truth. Graham Harman refers to this unknowability as ‘the mutual darkness of objects’ in his theory of Object Orientated Ontology79. He offers us the indirect and sensuous theatrics of metaphor to try to access the ‘real object, (RO)’80 What is a metaphor, if not an alter-tale?

Sensual-encounters are not a search for ontological truth, nor an investigation into defining aesthetics. We have discussed them as a heightened embodied experience that can be attuned through practice, perhaps like a craft. However, if allusiveness of truth and storytelling is also a key ingredient, we could consider the word ‘craft’ also in terms of the crafty craft of craft and deceit. Or the craft of theatre. Perhaps, in some situations, it is only nuance that takes us from the beguiling fetish to the enchanting craft of a sensualencounter?

77 ‘A commodity appears, at first sight, a very trivial thing, and easily understood. Its analysis shows that it is, in reality, a very queer thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties.’ Karl Marx, ‘The Fetishism of commodities and the secret thereof’ in Capital. Vol 1 By Marx, Engels, Mandel, Fowkes (London: Penguin, 1990,1976).

78 Jane Bennett, The Enchantment of Modern Life, p.10. 79 Graham Harman, p.12. 80 Ibid, p.84.

In this scenario, a sensual-encounter could be described as ‘the potential for a heightened experience with ordinary things uninhibited by universal ontological approval or YouTube reviews.

Algebra of speculative s’

S + sf = Se

S Sensuality Sf ‘A ubiquitous figure……sf: science fiction, speculative fabulation, string figures, speculative feminism, science fact, so far.’ 81 Se Sensual-encounter

81 Donna Haraway, Staying with the Trouble p.2.