Impact

Yvetta Zheng, March, 2025

When one entity encounters another, there is always an impact, whether foreseeable or imperceptible, on both parties. The idea of impact typically involves an interaction between at least two entities: one that exerts influence, the "actor" or "agent," and another that is affected by that influence, the "recipient" or "subject". In this sense, impact is inherently relational and sometimes reciprocal but cannot exist in isolation. It is a dynamic force, often taking on a life of its own. The scope, strength, and duration of an impact—who or what is affected, in what way, and for how long—can sometimes be measured, especially in short-term scenarios with clear endpoints. However, in most cases, impact denies measurement, manifesting as chain reactions, butterfly effects, or outcomes that take time to become observable. Thus, not all impacts are measurable; some are intangible, subjective, or too complex to fully quantify, reminding us that the true nature of impact often lies beyond what can be easily seen or understood.

Impact between individuals is a complex, reciprocal process shaped by subjectivity, agency, and the dual potential for construction or destruction. It is not merely a one-way force but a dynamic interaction where both the giver and receiver influence each other, leading to integration, transformation, or resistance. When it comes to individuals, the impact one exerts upon another is sometimes easily susceptible, as one may consciously or subconsciously strive for change, be it through learning, mirroring, or even pretending. The fact that Individuals have varying levels of agency and resources, which shape their responses to impact. Learning involves internalizing new ideas or behaviors, and when persistent, it can drive long-term transformation. Mirroring, on the other hand, is more like a band-aid solution, a temporary fix that mimics change without addressing the root cause. Pretending, however, stems from a desperate need to change but lacking the resources or capacity to do so, often leading to superficial or unsustainable outcomes. Nevertheless, there is a fine line between these responses, and sometimes they can happen interchangeably and simultaneously. For instance, an individual might begin by mirroring a behavior, gradually internalize it through learning, and yet still pretend in certain contexts due to limitations or insecurities.

The impact of witnessing another individual and interacting with them, however, is subjective and depends on how one perceives themselves and the world around them. If impact is a force that carries both destructive and constructive potential, then how well an individual takes it depends on how they allow or defend against the forces coming through. What is allowed and pierces through will inevitably integrate into or change what was already there. But at the same time, just as Newton’s law states, the individual who receives that impact will also exert a counter-impact or opposing force upon the entity that first created it. For instance, when reading a book, listening to music, or experiencing an artwork, the receiver absorbs the story, music, or artwork through their own interpretation, integrating whatever they allow to pass through. This process can change their ideas, perceptions, or even parts of themselves they might not be fully aware of. At the same time, because of their unique interpretation, the work is no longer solely the author’s creation, as it becomes a co-creation between both parties. What the author intended to express and how they strived to convey it can never be received exactly as intended, as every individual is a medium themselves, constantly filtering, mediating, and reshaping the information they absorb to better suit their own understanding and identity. Thus, on an individual level, impact is a dynamic and reciprocal process, which is shaping and being shaped by the interplay of forces between individuals. As one absorbs, interprets, and responds to the world around us, one not only transforms themselves but also exerts a counter-impact, creating a continuous cycle of change.

When two collectives interact, their encounter is shaped by their shared and divergent characteristics, such as values, goals, and power structures. This interaction can lead to a range of outcomes, from collaboration and mutual growth to conflict and resistance. On a community or small group level, impact transitions from individual experiences to socio-economic and cultural dimensions, creating a collective dynamic. This collective dynamic strengthens resistance as well as acceptance to change, as it is rooted in shared identities and structures. When there is a group, a different dynamic emerges, one that is general enough to represent the characteristics of the group as a whole but never accurate enough to fully capture each individual within it. This is how the collective comes into existence, shaped by shared experiences and identities, yet always leaving room for the nuances of individuality. In Mudede's analysis of Djibril Diop Mambéty's Hyènes, the encounter between the African villagers and the global capitalist system is depicted through the villagers’ increasing reliance on money and material wealth. This reliance symbolizes how capitalism commodifies cultural and historical identities, reshaping them to fit economic structures. Mudede’s analysis highlights how this encounter forces the African historical narrative to be reframed through Western perspectives, distorting its original meaning and lineage. Mambéty’s film critiques this process, exposing the tension between cultural preservation and capitalist exploitation. This example illustrates how the encounter between two collectives—postcolonial societies and global capitalism—can lead to socio-economic and cultural changes, ranging from adaptation and commodification to resistance and critique.

No matter how significant the impact is between collectives or among human beings, it is undeniable that we, as a species, have collectively created far more severe and far-reaching impacts on the planet, impacts that extend even beyond our comprehension. Chakrabarty's The Planet: An Emergent Humanist Category challenges how globalization distorts history to fit capitalism, reducing historical developments into simplified narratives. His distinction between the "global," shaped by human actions and economic systems, and the "planetary," which exists on a much larger ecological scale, emphasizes the limits of human-central historical frameworks. The planetary history resists being turned into a commodity as human beings only consist of a tiny segment of the planet's history. The fact that human history and planetary history exist positions us human beings as a minute creature within a more significant and broader universe and world that we have not fathomed yet, leaving the economic struggles and capitalistic agendas trivial and ridiculous. Without taking into account the planetary environment, time, and space into consideration, the “global" history is just a fragmented 2D demonstration of reality, while the planetary history elevated the narrative into a more grandiose, explicable, and objective scale.

This shift from global to planetary thinking aligns with the concept of the Anthropocene, where humans, despite their insignificance in planetary terms, have become a dominant force shaping Earth’s bio-geophysical systems. Donna Haraway further explores this tension in her work Tentacular Thinking: Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Chthulucene, urging us to reconsider our relationship with the planet and envision new ways of coexisting within its fragile ecosystems. In the context of the Anthropocene, the idea of impact is relational. Humans, as the primary actors, have impacted the Earth, the recipient, through activities like industrialization, deforestation, and pollution. For example, industrialization has led to massive carbon emissions, which in turn drive climate change, altering weather patterns, sea levels, and ecosystems worldwide. Similarly, deforestation disrupts biodiversity and carbon cycles, while pollution contaminates air, water, and soil, affecting both human and non-human life. Even when considering humanity as a single entity, the impact remains relational because it involves humanity’s interaction with the environment, ecosystems, and geological systems. For instance, the extraction of fossil fuels not only powers human societies but also contributes to global warming, which triggers feedback loops like melting ice caps and rising sea levels. These changes, in turn, impact human communities through extreme weather events, displacement, and resource scarcity. This relational dynamic underscores that humans are not separate from nature but deeply embedded within it, constantly shaping and being shaped by the planet’s processes.

In conclusion, impact is inherently relational and unpredictable, operating across interpersonal, social, and planetary levels. Between individuals, it is a dynamic interplay of influence, resistance, and transformation, shaped by subjectivity and agency. Collectives, in turn, interact through shared identities and power structures, leading to outcomes ranging from collaboration to conflict, as seen in the tension between cultural preservation and external forces like global capitalism. On a planetary scale, humanity’s actions, though small in the context of Earth’s history, have triggered profound ecological and geological changes, highlighting our interconnectedness with the planet’s systems. Impact defies simple measurement or control, manifesting as chain reactions and emergent phenomena that transcend individual intentions or collective agendas. Its relational nature reminds us of our responsibility to navigate its complexities with humility and awareness, fostering sustainable coexistence at every level. Whether between individuals, societies, or humanity and the planet, impact underscores the interconnected and unpredictable essence of our existence.

Work cited

Mudede, Charles Tonderai, and Charles Tonderai Mudede is a Zimbabwean-born cultural critic.

“Neoliberalism and the New Afro-Pessimism: Djibril Diop Mambéty’s Hyènes - Journal #67.” E, www.e-flux.com/journal/67/60719/neoliberalism-and-the-new-afro-pessimism-djibril-diop-mambety-s-hyenes/. Accessed 14 Mar. 2025.

Chakrabarty, Dipesh. “The planet: An emergent humanist category.” Critical Inquiry, vol. 46, no.

1, Sept. 2019, pp. 1–31, https://doi.org/10.1086/705298.

Haraway, Donna, and Donna J. Haraway is Distinguished Professor Emerita in the History of

Consciousness Department at the University of California. “Tentacular Thinking: Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Chthulucene - Journal #75.” E, www.e-flux.com/journal/75/67125/tentacular-thinking-anthropocene-capitalocene-chthulucene/. Accessed 14 Mar. 2025.