Superspective
what it is & how you already do it everyday
an essay by
Coy Noir.
To have a superspective is to judge the content by its context.
Superspective is the awareness of any extraneous structural information of an object not readily available by direct perception.
To think about potassium in a banana, or who a tree is in memoriam of, or to be aware of the date a song was recorded, is an act of supercession. Information about the object that supercedes the object; the history of the objects creation; outer knowledge about the innerworkings of the object we perceive.
Get Rooves’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
We see this everyday at the grocery store: they’re called Nutrition Facts.
We do not eat solely for pleasure & taste any longer, because in the information age we are aware of that which is not immediately visible by the naked-eye, such as the vitamin, caloric, nutrient intake of any given food. So in leiu of the naked-eye perspective of ‘this food looks good i wonder if it tastes good’ we instead have superspectival knowledge of the microscopic inner qualities of any given food item, & it is from this superspective which a large portion of the people choose their food intake on a global scale.
Superspective can also apply metaphorically to media consumption, which is knowing or focusing on an artists’ contextual biographies rather than engaging with their work as it is, as content without the context of its creation as a narrative separate from the work.
This, however, in contrast to the consumption of food, leads to all sorts of ethical quandaries in the arts. In some ways, the superspective both helps & hinders peoples ability to attain & maintain media literacy.
A hypothetical ethical question:
Imagine a person, whose name is unknown, murdered their neighbors. Temporary insanity. This person went to prison. Began doing art therapy. Became after many years of hard work, patience & growth, became a not only competent but impressive painter.
Now, this prisoner painter has made a large scale work which any one who sees it, agrees is beautiful beyond belief. A museum selects it for its opening. People protest, knowing it is by a murderer.
So. Which side are you on? The superspective, judgemental group? Who demand the painting be taken down, burned even. Or the group who seeks to appreciate it as it is. As a beautiful creation of color & form, not ignoring but accepting that it was in fact made by a person who once lost their mind to great consequence, but has since healed after years of therapy. Do you pay to get into the museum to see the painting? Or do you protest outside? Where do you stand? Inside or outside?
And, what if i then told you, for those who do go inside… it turns out, the plaque under the painting which says Anonymous, albeit with a full biography of the painter prisoner, is a complete fiction. That a well-known artist had instead been making the painting for many years, & in that time came up with the concept of the painter prisoner, & as an act of defiance against the superspective fetishization of the art world, invented a fake news story about an imaginary murderer, to see how people would react, & if the painting would be shown or taken down. What then? How do you care? What do you learn about yourself? Where do you stand? Inside or out.
Thank you for reading.
