Podcast
Central Problem
Ingold confronts a deeply entrenched assumption in Western thought about making and creativity: the hylomorphic model inherited from Aristotle. According to this model, creation involves the imposition of pre-conceived form (morphe) upon passive, inert matter (hyle) by an agent with a design in mind. This view has dominated discussions of art, technology, and craftsmanship for over two millennia, becoming progressively unbalanced as form was increasingly seen as mentally imposed while matter was rendered wholly passive.
The problem is particularly acute in contemporary discourse where theorists attempt to “rebalance” this model by attributing agency to objects—suggesting that objects can “act back” on persons. Ingold argues this approach remains trapped within the same causal grammar, merely shuttling between subjects and objects, quasi-subjects and quasi-objects, without escaping the fundamental error. The reduction of things to objects, and of life to agency, produces an impoverished understanding of how making actually occurs in practice.
Furthermore, the historical separation of design from making—epitomized by Alberti‘s fifteenth-century architectural writings—elevated abstract geometrical form while debasing the tactile, sensuous knowledge of practitioners. What Ingold calls “textility” (the textilic quality of making) was progressively devalued as “mere craft” while technology was elevated as rational, rule-governed transposition of preconceived form onto inert substance.
Main Thesis
Ingold argues that we must overthrow the hylomorphic model entirely and replace it with an ontology that assigns primacy to processes of formation over final products, and to flows and transformations of materials over states of matter. Drawing on Klee‘s insight that “form is the end, death; form-giving is life,” Ingold contends that skilled practice is not about imposing preconceived forms on inert matter but about intervening in fields of force and currents of material wherein forms are generated.
Materials over Matter: Following Deleuze and Guattari, Ingold insists that the essential relation in a world of life is not between matter and form but between materials and forces. Materials are not passive substances but are always “in movement, in flux, in variation.” The practitioner’s rule of thumb must be “to follow the materials”—to intervene in a world that is continually “on the boil.”
Things over Objects: Objects are rendered lifeless by the analytical gaze; things, by contrast, are “goings on”—gatherings where several becomings become entwined. Heidegger’s enigmatic phrase captures this: the thing presents itself “in its thinging from out of the worlding world.” A kite lying on a table appears as an object; caught in the wind, it reveals itself as a thing, gathering currents of air into its fabric.
Itineration over Iteration: Making is itinerant, not iterative. Practitioners are wayfarers who find the grain of the world’s becoming and follow its course while bending it to their evolving purpose. Every stroke of the saw, like every step of a walk, is a development of what came before and a preparation for what follows—never mere repetition but continuous variation.
Textility of Making: Making is fundamentally a practice of weaving—not the imposition of form on pliant substance but the slicing and binding of fibrous material. The carpenter, etymologically “one who fashions,” was as much a weaver as a maker. His making was itself textilic: following the grain, surrendering to the wood.
Historical Context
Ingold‘s argument emerges from a confluence of late twentieth-century theoretical developments challenging modernist assumptions about subjects, objects, and agency. The “material turn” in anthropology, archaeology, and cultural studies had sought to overcome the passive view of matter, but often by attributing agency to objects—a move Ingold finds inadequate.
The historical pivot point Ingold identifies is Alberti‘s architectural writings of the mid-fifteenth century. Before Alberti, architects like those who built Chartres Cathedral were master-builders working on site, coordinating masons who cut stones following wooden templates and laid blocks along lines marked with string. There was no master plan; the outcome resembled “a patchwork quilt.” Alberti transformed architecture into “a concern of the mind,” projecting whole forms mentally without recourse to material, through abstract “lineaments”—precise specifications conceived independently of construction.
This shift marked the divergence of the technical from the textilic. The former was elevated into “technology”—an ontological claim that things are constituted in rule-governed transposition of preconceived form onto inert substance. The latter was debased as “mere craft,” revealing only residual “feel” in a world engineered by reason.
Ingold also situates his argument within debates about agency sparked by Actor-Network Theory (Latour) and anthropological approaches to art (Gell). While these approaches sought to overcome subject-object dualism, Ingold argues they remained trapped in causal language that conceives action only as effect initiated by agent.
Philosophical Lineage
flowchart TD Aristotle --> Hylomorphism Hylomorphism --> Alberti Klee --> Ingold Heidegger --> Ingold Deleuze --> Ingold Guattari --> Ingold Lefebvre --> Ingold Latour --> Ingold Gell --> Ingold Ingold --> MaterialCulture[Material Culture Studies] Ingold --> MakingStudies[Making Studies] class Aristotle,Hylomorphism,Alberti,Klee,Heidegger,Deleuze,Guattari,Lefebvre,Latour,Gell,Ingold,MaterialCulture,MakingStudies internal-link;
Key Thinkers
| Thinker | Dates | Movement | Main Work | Core Concept |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aristotle | 384-322 BCE | Ancient Greek Philosophy | Metaphysics | Hylomorphism (form/matter) |
| Klee | 1879-1940 | Expressionism | The Thinking Eye | Form-giving is life |
| Heidegger | 1889-1976 | Phenomenology | Poetry, Language, Thought | Thinging of things |
| Deleuze | 1925-1995 | Post-Structuralism | A Thousand Plateaus | Matter-flow, lines of flight |
| Guattari | 1930-1992 | Post-Structuralism | A Thousand Plateaus | Itineration, becoming |
| Alberti | 1404-1472 | Renaissance | On the Art of Building | Lineaments, architectural design |
| Lefebvre | 1901-1991 | Critical Theory | Rhythmanalysis | Rhythm as difference in repetition |
| Gell | 1945-1997 | Anthropology of Art | Art and Agency | Abduction of agency |
| Latour | 1947-2022 | Actor-Network Theory | Pandora’s Hope | Quasi-objects, networks |
Key Concepts
| Concept | Definition | Related to |
|---|---|---|
| Hylomorphism | Aristotelian model: creation as imposition of form (morphe) on matter (hyle) by agent with design | Aristotle, Metaphysics |
| Textility | The textilic quality of making as weaving—binding, slicing, following fibrous materials | Ingold, Craftsmanship |
| Matter-flow | Materials always in movement, flux, variation; must be followed rather than formed | Deleuze, Guattari |
| Itineration | Forward movement of making as wayfaring, unlike backward-tracing iteration | Deleuze, Guattari |
| Thinging | The way things present themselves from out of the worlding world; gatherings of becoming | Heidegger, Phenomenology |
| Lines of flight | Trajectories of becoming that pass between points rather than connecting them | Deleuze, Guattari |
| Abduction of agency | Tracing causal connections from object to agent; reading creativity backwards | Gell, Anthropology |
| Taskscape | The ensemble of tasks interlocking through their relatedness; temporal landscape of activity | Ingold, Phenomenology |
| Lineaments | Abstract geometrical specifications for form, conceived mentally prior to construction | Alberti, Architecture |
| Rhythmicity | Differences within repetition; felt movement requiring continuous correction | Lefebvre, Phenomenology |
Authors Comparison
| Theme | Ingold | Gell |
|---|---|---|
| Central question | How do forms arise in making? | How does art exert agency? |
| View of objects | Things: gatherings of becoming | Objects: indexes of agency |
| Creativity | Forward: improvisation, itineration | Backward: abduction from effect to cause |
| Agency | Dissolved in flows of material | Distributed from primary to secondary agents |
| The maker | Wayfarer following materials | Agent imposing intentions |
| Causation | Orthogonal trajectories in counterpoint | Linear chains from intention to effect |
Influences & Connections
- Predecessors: Ingold ← influenced by ← Heidegger, Deleuze, Guattari, Klee, Lefebvre
- Contemporaries: Ingold ↔ critique of ↔ Gell, Latour, Miller
- Followers: Ingold → influenced → Making Studies, Craft Theory, New Materialism
- Opposing views: Ingold ← critiqued by ← Material Culture Studies (object-focused approaches), Actor-Network Theory (agency distribution)
Summary Formulas
- Aristotle: Creation is the imposition of form (morphe) upon matter (hyle) by an agent with a design in mind.
- Klee: Form is the end, death; form-giving is life. Art does not reproduce the visible but makes visible.
- Deleuze and Guattari: The essential relation is between materials and forces; matter-flow can only be followed; lines of flight pass between points rather than connecting them.
- Ingold: Making is not imposition of preconceived form but intervention in fields of force and currents of material—a practice of weaving where practitioners are itinerant wayfarers who follow the grain of the world’s becoming.
Timeline
| Year | Event |
|---|---|
| c. 350 BCE | Aristotle develops hylomorphic model in Metaphysics |
| 1452 | Alberti publishes De re aedificatoria, separating design from making |
| 1920 | Klee writes Creative Credo: “Art makes visible” |
| 1927 | Heidegger publishes Being and Time |
| 1980 | Deleuze and Guattari publish A Thousand Plateaus |
| 1998 | Gell publishes Art and Agency |
| 2004 | Lefebvre’s Rhythmanalysis published in English |
| 2010 | Ingold publishes “The Textility of Making” |
Notable Quotes
“Form is the end, death. Form-giving is life.” — Klee
“It is a question of surrendering to the wood, and following where it leads.” — Deleuze and Guattari
“The world we inhabit is not made up of subjects and objects, or even of quasi-subjects and quasi-objects. The problem lies not so much in the sub- or the ob-, or in the dichotomy between them, as in the -ject.” — Ingold
Warning
This annotation was normalised using a large language model and may contain inaccuracies. These texts serve as preliminary study resources rather than exhaustive references.