Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
NASCENT
Lets maybe start with something that you’ve
talked about on one of the PlaguePod episodes, this talk of Covid as a stretched event,
which maybe also ties in really nicely with
some of the work that I know you’re working
on at the moment in your upcoming book,
this idea of time waves as the new ‘geometry’
of time.
ANNA
This question about thinking in terms of
events is critical. I take this from Deleuze and
Guattari, Whitehead, and in my book, I also
quote this quantum physicist, Carlo Rovelli,
who writes about time as events. The idea
basically—and this comes from Whitehead
—is that what appears as stable or constant
are actually just slow moving events, and that
singular events can in their way encapsulate
the whole of time. I feel like COVID has certainly made that very clear, right? We’re in
this kind of singular event, and at least our
own personal histories beforehand and afterwards can now only make sense in terms of
this event. This thought is related to this idea
that I’ve been working on, about thinking
about time as waves. As you said, I’m interested in the types of geometries, the forms
66/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
or shapes that time manifests or appears.
The project that I’m working on now is about
time waves and how they work across a whole
bunch of scales. In techno-capitalist history, there are various waves at work. The one
that I’m most interested in is the Kondratiev
Wave, the K-wave, which is this cycle of about
50 years. So that’s one sort of scale—historical time. And then I’m also interested in this
micro-temporal scale, which is the electromagnetic waves that form the abstract transcendental infrastructure for wireless media.
But I’m also interested in certain Chinese
philosophers who I think make a case for a
kind of Cosmo-Ontology of waves, who think
about time as waves in a Cosmo-Ontological
sense.
NASCENT
The question of where these different structures of time operate on is something that
I actually already wanted to ask you about;
going from your PhD thesis, and then also
looking at how, in your book, Shanghai future,
you’re kind of pulling the wool away from
this idea of the smooth progression of capitalist time, and revealing that actually there
are these kind of ruptures that bring about
these different temporal epochs or regimes.
67/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
The ideas that time is produced, and particular types of time are ultimately produced in
a machinic manner, and that they operate on
such different scales is really interesting. In
Shanghai Future you’re talking about architecture and sino-modernity, but then there’s
also the very decision of the May Fourth Movement to essentially try and kind of disavow
the traditional Chinese kind of circularity, or
the circular notion of time, in favour of Western conceptions of time. In your work already, there’s a vast difference in scale, and we
wanted to ask you to expand maybe on the
interconnectedness of these if possible.
On the one hand, there are these different
temporal regimes appearing as these kind
of ruptures from the Outside, but then you
also have the very conscious decision of, at
the time, a group of people deliberately acknowledging a different conceptualization of
time, both of which affect the creation of different futures or different modes of futurity.
Also in the kind of Sino-Modernism that
you’re talking about and that being rooted
in the practical reality of how Shanghai has
been planned and mediated, and the architecture itself. Is there anything in particular that motivated these changes in focus?
68/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
Or is it really just kind of an acknowledgment of the different granularities that all of
these kinds of differing temporal scales
operate on? I suppose, the question here is:
is there a perceived hierarchy there? Or is it
really just evidence of the multifacetedness
of how time is produced, and the different
overlapping scales of it?
ANNA
So I think that starting from the PhD, I have
this task where, for my job, I have to make
some story about my intellectual coherence.
I don’t know to what extent anyone’s intellectually coherent. And certainly, I don’t know
that about myself. But anyway, we can pretend. I think that the interest is in a basic philosophical move, that comes out of Deleuze
and Guattari, which is based on a particular
reading of Kant. Kant describes the modern
notion of time as a transcendental structure,
the conditions of experience, or the conditions under which appearances occur. He
locates the production of those conditions—
the apriori—within the mind of the knowing
subject. For Deleuze and Guattari, Kant is
correct in his analysis of the transcendental—
this is, in fact how time works. But the location of these processes within the interio69/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
rity of a knowing subject is what is questioned. My work argues that those conditions
are produced by techno modernity. So, for
example, modernity is expressed by and
through the then new technologies of the
clock and the calendar and the form of time
that they produce. And I think that you could
read the May Fourth Movement as, in some
way, an acknowledgement of that. The May
Fourth thinkers who wanted to embrace this
particular mode of the Gregorian calendar,
this particular mode of temporality, thought
that this new form of time was the transcendental condition under which China could be
modern. I don’t think they were necessarily
particularly Kantian, but they nevertheless
understood that in some way.
I guess a lot of my work since then has been
to question that, or to try to dig deeper into
that. So for instance, in my current work I
write about the move from the mechanical
clock to the atomic clock, and the way that
the technology of the clock actually works.
In 1967, clock time broke completely with
astronomical time and came to be measured
against the vibrations of the cesium atom as
a more perfect mode of temporality. At that
point time and electromagnetic vibration
70/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
become one. Here too it is a question about
the ways in which time is produced.
NASCENT
Maybe we continue on on this thread, this
idea of the different technologies that essentially regulate the different conceptions
of time, and how they affect the experience
of of time, both on a personal level, but also
on the broader socio-technical level. So the
area that we’ve both been working in, both
conceptually but as software developers in
the last maybe six or seven years, is blockchains and distributed ledger technologies.
And there’s a really, there’s an interesting
shift between ‘the time’, the time of the clock,
the digital time of what you’ve previously referred to as cyberspace time, which is this
counting of this counting of seconds passing,
the increasingly refined or specific measurements of the passing of time based on atomic clocks. And then blockchains present
almost an interesting sidestep to this in that
the architecture of this software doesn’t rely
on centralised timekeeping services. Whereas atomic clocks are, obviously, politically
also very centralised, it’s only governments
and research institutions who have access to
these, right. Within these kinds of decentra71/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
lised networks, time is actually almost more
of a product of having to have consensus
amongst equally permissioned nodes in the
network. So time is machinically produced
in a wildly different way., and also measured
in, a far more ordinal kind of manner than
even blocks of atomic time. Here, it’s simply
blocks of events that happen, if we’re measuring it against, you know, the ticking of a
clock at variable speeds, but that is increasingly kind of separated from it, or doesn’t
even really, necessarily play into it.
ANNA
I think that’s exactly right. So I think that
blockchain is another example of a transcendental technology of time. And it produces
exactly, as you say, a particular mode of temporality within which experience takes place.
This raises this question about the outside
in a quite strictly Kantian sense. The blockchain is an example of a technology that
doesn’t happen in time, it happens to time.
So, as you said, you can measure the time it
takes for a transaction on the blockchain to
happen, but that isn’t getting at what is important about the blockchain event, right?
You’re sort of missing it, if you will. You can
measure that it took however many seconds
72/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
for each transaction for example, but in that
measurement you don’t ever get at what this
thing is actually doing, what realities it makes
manifest. And so it seems to me that this kind
of temporal production happens through a
kind of machinic connection with an outside.
NASCENT
Another thing we’d like to hear your thoughts
on regarding this is that blockchains and
distributed ledgers are able to sidestep the
73/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
necessity for the single measure of time that
globalisation kind of needed. Globalisation
necessitated the increasing hyper-specificity of digital time, which was obviously, via
the imposition of Greenwich Mean Time, so
historically rooted and, Unix time—digital
time—is counting upwards from the first of
January 1970. To a certain extent, these are
both still kind of human-scale, or remnants
of this very human, mechanical clock time.
Not only do blockchains kind of sidestep
these aspects, but the fact that there are an
increasing number of these networks that do
or don’t actually interplay with each other is
interesting. Do you think it’s fair to say that
this could be an instance of, in a way, time
fragmenting?
ANNA
So in the media history that I tell in the book
that I’m working on, I focus on the telegraph
as the technology of simultaneity. The telegraph enables a kind of instantaneous communication and that is what creates a certain
kind of globality that we never had before,
through the speed and the seeming instantaneousness of messages that traverse across
space. But at the same time, this is also the
moment that Einstein is working. And it’s his
74/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
wrestling with the problem of simultaneity
that leads to notions of relativity, the notion
that time is relative, that there is a multiplicity of time or multiplicity to time.
Wireless time, or a time of electromagnetic
waves, requires relativity to be built in. So most
famously, the satellites of the GPS signals
have to factor that in, otherwise everything
goes off kilter. The historian of physics Peter
Galisonhas has a line about theory having
‘become a machine’, talking about how these
satellites had to actually build Einsteinian
relativity into the machinic fabric of global techno-modernity. This is an example, a
pretty concrete example, it seems to me of
this thing that you’re getting at with Blockchains. Although we now live with Covid
putting it all under a sort of threat,we still
live in a global techno-modern world. I do
agree with what you’re saying, that there’s
a fragmentation that has occurred, and that
there’s all these kinds of multiple types of
time that have been and are being produced.
NASCENT
One of the really interesting differences here
between the satellite GPS time that has to
factor in physical constants, the speed of
75/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
light and your location in space, and blockchain time is that that calculation is still built
into the fabric of how these machines communicate the time amongst themselves with
timeservers and satellites, but with blockchains you have time being produced from
consensus as these blocks of events, that
someone wins a particular game, they get to
set essentially, what has just happened in history. And this becomes kind of deeper and
deeper, more and more kind of set in stone,
from the machinic perspective of this particular network, as it kind of moves further
back. Blockchains, in doing this, actually
kind of negate the notion of spaciality itself,
because you no longer even need to have to
factor in stuff such as the speed of light, and
network lag, and all of that. It seems to negate
globalisation, because it kind of refuses the
idea of spatial dispersion or distribution
actually being a factor in the production of
time itself. So in a way, it almost seems like
the first instance of properly machine to machine time …
It includes other factors as well. Consensus
mechanisms run in such a way that they raise
the question of capital allocation in a sense,
which pretty much determines how certain
76/99
Temporal Secessionism
VIII. Interview with Anna Greenspan
blocks are essentially appearing right; the
ordering mechanism itself is also more bound
to a more pure form of techno-capitalism …
ANNA
That’s the general point, I guess, that there
are mechanisms through which the machinery of techno-capitalism has the capacity
to create the form of time itself, rather than
just operate within time. And that’s its most
abstract power. Again taking Kant’s point
that experience, or appearances happen
within time, in the sense that time is the form
of inner sense. And if you have the capacity,
the abstract capacity to create a form of time
at this abstract level, then there’s a realm of
experience or appearance or manifestation
that happens inside that. That’s the ultimate
abstract power of techno-modernity or techno-capitalist-modernity.
77/99