Stories are a human created object. They pass information from one being to another and with this transfer of knowledge, they aim to broaden the perspectives of the respective recipients to attain a greater knowledge of the artefact they describe.

This notion is the problem I face when, in class, we aim to deemphasise the human and talk about agency in and of itself and how objects can have agency. By talking about it, aren’t we just reducing the agency of that object down to a humanised understanding of it & therefore not truely reflecting the object and all its connections in a true sense?

Bogost & my subsequent reading of Ingold are helping me to better understand the ways in which language is used as the medium and doesn’t influence the object itself – however I am still struggling to fully understand their notions & therefore fully grasping the subject.

I feel that by noticing the relationally of all things and combining these noticings with an Ingoldian/Bogostian understanding, I am slowly coming to understand the subject. slowly. very slowly.