Conductive Matter Through Material Methods

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46516/inmaterial.v10.238

Keywords:

conductive art, tactile interaction, embodiment, neurophilosophy, practice-led research

Abstract

This paper presents Inert Matter (2022), an experimental art exhibition investigating technological tactile and affective dimensions. The project is centred around the reactivation of discarded touchscreens to transform e-waste into interactive artworks using conductive threads, diodes and the embodied participation of audiences. Through a practice-led research methodology, the work challenges the assumed obsolescence of broken digital surfaces and repositions them as sites of sensory engagement and speculative intimacy.

Drawing on new materialist philosophy and interaction theory, the project reframes touch as both a material encounter and a political gesture – one that resists the habitual flattening of sensory experience in digital culture. By foregrounding the electric vitality of both human and non-human matter, Inert Matter proposes alternative ways of sensing, interacting with and rethinking technological intimacy in the age of disposability. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Marika Grasso, Lab4Living, Sheffield Hallam University (Sheffield, United Kingdom)

I am an artist and PhD candidate at Sheffield Hallam University in Lab4Living, whose work interweaves touch, material fragilities, and social ecology, blending research, artistic practice, and teaching. My background in textiles and fashion informs my exploration of digital materiality and sensory experiences within a more-than-human world using neurobiological and feminist frameworks. My practice highlights mundane tactile sensibilities and how these interact with ecological and digital environments, aiming to foster sensory awareness and connectivity within our shared ecosystems. Drawing on New Materialist theory, I work with textile and material methods to explore the entanglement of human and non-human agents, resonating with oculocentric approaches to art. In 2023, I held a Junior Fellowship at IWM, focusing on Digital Humanism and Care, and later co-facilitated a SOMAGRID workshop with neuroscientist Erika Mondria for Ars Electronica, exploring touch as a collaborative, sensory bridge between humans and technology.

My recent exhibition, Handy! at Yorkshire Art Space, examined touch and embodied interaction, encouraging viewers to consider technology part of a living ecosystem of sensory exchanges. I teach Fashion Design, focusing on speculative and caring practices and advocating for sustainable, community-centred approaches to materials and production. 

References

Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831. https://doi.org/10.1086/345321

Barad, K. (2022). Re-membering time for the time being.

Barad, K. M. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.

Barrett, E. (2019). Materiality, affect, and the aesthetic image. In Carnal knowledge (Chap. 4). https://doi.org/10.5040/9780755603435.ch-004

Barrett, E., & Bolt, B. (Eds.). (2013). Carnal knowledge: Towards a ‘new materialism’ through the arts (1st ed.). I.B. Tauris. https://doi.org/10.5040/9780755603435

Barrett, E., Chare, N., De Bruyn, D., Hongisto, I., Keane, J., Kontturi, K., Kurikka, K., Martin, B., McCosh, L., Negrin, L., Parikka, J., Tiainen, M., Vasseleu, C., Watkins, L., & Woodcock, R. (2013). Carnal knowledge: Towards a ‘new materialism’ through the arts. Bloomsbury.

Braidotti, R. (2006). Affirming the affirmative: On nomadic affectivity.

Braidotti, R. (1994). Nomadic subjects: Embodiment and sexual difference in contemporary feminist theory. Columbia University Press.

Choudhury, S., Nagel, S. K., & Slaby, J. (2009). Critical neuroscience: Linking neuroscience and society through critical practice. BioSocieties, 4(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1745855209006437

Classen, C. (2012). Sensations of a new age. In The deepest sense: A cultural history of touch (p. 167). University of Illinois Press. https://doi.org/10.5406/illinois/9780252034930.003.0008

Damasio, A. (2020, November 10). DISCUSSION #2: Functional and structural neuroimaging – Human Brainhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbKePH8Gu64 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbKePH8Gu64

Damasio, A. R., San, N. Y., & Londoll, D. (2014). Does your “feeling of what happens” definition of consciousness extend to dreaming? If so, how do you conceptualise internally generated FWHs? In Dream consciousness (Chap. 10). Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07296-8_10

Dormor, C. (2020). Textile as shimmering surface. In A philosophy of textile. Bloomsbury Visual Arts. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474263238.0007

Dunne, A. (2005). Hertzian tales: Electronic products, aesthetic experience, and critical design (2005th ed.). MIT Press.

Felipe Cortés Salinas. (2023). Artistic research: Between transformative material and cognitive dynamics. JAR: Journal for Artistic Researchhttps://doi.org/10.22501/jarnet.0065. https://doi.org/10.22501/jarnet.0065

Finlay, L. (2002). Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Research, 2(2), 209–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879410200200205

Flaxman, G. (Ed.). (2000). The brain is the screen: Deleuze and the philosophy of cinema. University of Minnesota Press.

Heinzel, T., & Hinestroza, J. P. (2020). Revolutionary textiles: A philosophical inquiry on electronic and reactive textiles.https://doi.org/ Design Issues, 36(4). https://doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00574

Herrnstein, R. J. (1982). Stimuli and the texture of experience. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 6(1), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7634(82)90012-4

Huyghe, P. (2019). UUmwelt [Exhibition]. Serpentine Gallery, London.

Jewitt, C., & Price, S. (2024). Digital touch. Polity Press.

Malafouris, L., & Koukouti, M. (2022). Where the touching is touched: The role of haptic attentive unity in the dialogue between maker and material. Multimodality & Society, 2

https://doi.org/10.1177/26349795221109231

Mason, P. (2016). Understanding the brain: The neurobiology of everyday life [Online course]. Coursera.https://www.coursera.org/learn/neurobiology https://www.coursera.org/learn/neurobiology

Neidich, W. (n.d.). Activism neuroaesthetics in cognitive capitalism. Saas-Fee Summer Institute of Art. Retrieved April 24, 2025, from

https://sfsia.art/2021-online/ https://sfsia.art/2021-online/

Neidich, W. (2022). The brain without organs: An aporia of care.

Pink, S. (2015). Approaching media through the senses: Between experience and representation. Media International Australia, 154(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1515400103

Posch, I. & Kaltenbrunner, E. (2016). The embroidered computer. Austrian Science Fund.

Sciolla, A. (2002). Review of The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness, by A. R. Damasio. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 77(1), 103–104. https://doi.org/10.1086/343683

Skukauskaite, A., Yilmazli Trout, I., & Robinson, K. A. (2022). Deepening reflexivity through art in learning qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 22(3), 403–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120985676

White, M. (2022). Touch screen theory: Digital devices and feelings (1st ed.). MIT Press.

Woodward, S. (2020). Material methods: Researching and thinking with things. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Downloads

Published

2025-06-29

How to Cite

[1]
Grasso, M. 2025. Conductive Matter Through Material Methods . INMATERIAL. Diseño, Arte y Sociedad. 10, 19 (Jun. 2025), 54–75 p. DOI:https://doi.org/10.46516/inmaterial.v10.238.