“The vector of prehension moves from the world to the subject, from the prehended datum to the prehending one (a ‘superject’); thus the data of a prehension are public elements, while the subject is the intimate or private element that expresses immediacy, individuality, and novelty. But the prehended, the datum, is itself a preexisting or coexisting prehension such that all prehension is a prehension of prehension, and the event is thus a ‘nexus of prehensions.'” — Gilles Deleuze, The Fold, page 88.

(Yes, this is where Massumi gets his writing style from. haha)

I have a question: Is this vector of prehension the same vector that Virilio (and later, McKenzie Wark) dicusses in terms of ‘media events’?

The notion of a ‘vector’ introduces a duration that would otherwise not be obvious in Deleuze’s description of Whitehead’s conception of the ‘event’. It means that the ‘screen’ has a durability that lasts as long as the duration of a ‘vector’. Whoa. I just realised that this means that if the vectors of prehension involve technologically mediated transmission (ala Virilio) there can be several iterations of dissonace effects as events are ‘ghosted’ into the materiality, like a burnt-in tv image (or now plasma screen). This residual produces an emergent complex of potentiality in the socio-technical bureaucracy of what Massumi would call ‘event transmission’. Is not the media as the social infrastructure of a scene (or ‘world’ for the anthropologists) the collective prehension (and force) of these evental dissonance effects?!?!?! ahah! aha! aha!