Mediating the elemental: an immaterialist ethics for ecomaterialist media theory

Up until the 19th century, the notion ‘medium’ described the natural elements–e.g. earth, water, fire, and air. John Durham Peters’ media philosophy (2015) demonstrates how contemporary technical media rely on this forgotten elemental dimension; as cultural techniques, media can reveal the elemental’s environmental sense. Against its broader philosophical background, I extend Peters’ account into a ‘trans-materialist’ film-philosophy: I claim that the notion of the elemental stands, and mediates, ‘between’ the materialist tradition–currently operative in ecomaterial media theory (e.g. Cubitt; Ivakhiv; Parikka; Parks; Starosielski; Vaughan)–as well as the ethico-existential, immaterial dimension that belongs to the elemental. Two philosophical readings support this mediating aspect of the trans-material philosophy: Levinas’ immaterialist ethics ([1961] 1969) and Bachelard’s ‘material imagination’. Levinas’ ethics underscore that existence is defined in relation to alterity; the enveloping elemental environment enables developing a relational sense of self. Additionally, Bachelard’s materialism invites us to reimagine our cosmic connection to the material world–and I argue it is the medium of film that expresses this potential most dynamically. As moving audiovisual image, cinema’s technical form fosters, for the immersed spectator, a renewed sense for our elemental environment.