Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2021.1925568
Patrycja Kaszynska
ABSTRACT The word crisis comes from Ancient Greek κρίσις which can be translated as ‘power of distinguishing’ and is related to modern κρίνω which means ‘to pick out’. This is apt, because the pandemic of 2020 has exposed the limitation of approaches to social governance premised on calculation. The – some would argue false – choice between either saving lives or the economy, is the highest profile example of the necessity to ‘pick’ between different qualitative options. This has brought into relief something suppressed by the calculation approach, namely the need to adjudicate between multiple and competing value orientations in public life. With this, an alternative way of decision making in the public domain is needed, one that does not revert back to mere politics and subjective decisions. This article turns to the writings of John Dewey to look for alternatives. It shows that the model of deliberative inquiry found in Dewey, even though not without its own challenges, presents a viable option to replace metrics-based valuation approaches, without falling back on the whimsy of political judgement. This suggests that Dewey is not just contemporaneous, but that translating his insights into action could not be more urgent.
{"title":"From calculation to deliberation: the contemporaneity of Dewey","authors":"Patrycja Kaszynska","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2021.1925568","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1925568","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The word crisis comes from Ancient Greek κρίσις which can be translated as ‘power of distinguishing’ and is related to modern κρίνω which means ‘to pick out’. This is apt, because the pandemic of 2020 has exposed the limitation of approaches to social governance premised on calculation. The – some would argue false – choice between either saving lives or the economy, is the highest profile example of the necessity to ‘pick’ between different qualitative options. This has brought into relief something suppressed by the calculation approach, namely the need to adjudicate between multiple and competing value orientations in public life. With this, an alternative way of decision making in the public domain is needed, one that does not revert back to mere politics and subjective decisions. This article turns to the writings of John Dewey to look for alternatives. It shows that the model of deliberative inquiry found in Dewey, even though not without its own challenges, presents a viable option to replace metrics-based valuation approaches, without falling back on the whimsy of political judgement. This suggests that Dewey is not just contemporaneous, but that translating his insights into action could not be more urgent.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"26 1","pages":"154 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90600173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-27DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2021.1894960
M. A. Mihatsch, Michael Mulligan
ABSTRACT This article investigates the shifting nature of the concept of extraterritoriality at particular junctures in history from the Italian city states to contemporary visions of floating micro-sovereignties. Extraterritoriality is the exercise of the jurisdiction by one state or non-state actor within the territory of another state. Since extraterritoriality is a challenge to the fundamental principle of sovereignty, it is by definition an exception in relation to sovereignty. As sovereignty evolved and changed over time, so did extraterritoriality – and, in the discussed cases, it changed primarily to be able to fulfil the needs of agents of global capital. The article discusses the privileges granted to the Italian city states by the Byzantines and the Ottoman capitulations, extraterritoriality on the colonial frontier, private investments in the Middle East and the proliferation of ideas of micro-sovereignty by Libertarian politicians and Silicon Valley billionaires. The article makes three distinct arguments: first, extraterritoriality has to be understood in relation to shifting notions of sovereignty. Secondly, extraterritoriality emerged within the context of colonial and imperial inequality and any extraterritorial relations contain the echoes of these structures of inequality. Finally, extraterritoriality is often driven and shaped by the needs of global capital, trying to avoid specific sovereign structures.
{"title":"The longue durée of extraterritoriality and global capital","authors":"M. A. Mihatsch, Michael Mulligan","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2021.1894960","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1894960","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article investigates the shifting nature of the concept of extraterritoriality at particular junctures in history from the Italian city states to contemporary visions of floating micro-sovereignties. Extraterritoriality is the exercise of the jurisdiction by one state or non-state actor within the territory of another state. Since extraterritoriality is a challenge to the fundamental principle of sovereignty, it is by definition an exception in relation to sovereignty. As sovereignty evolved and changed over time, so did extraterritoriality – and, in the discussed cases, it changed primarily to be able to fulfil the needs of agents of global capital. The article discusses the privileges granted to the Italian city states by the Byzantines and the Ottoman capitulations, extraterritoriality on the colonial frontier, private investments in the Middle East and the proliferation of ideas of micro-sovereignty by Libertarian politicians and Silicon Valley billionaires. The article makes three distinct arguments: first, extraterritoriality has to be understood in relation to shifting notions of sovereignty. Secondly, extraterritoriality emerged within the context of colonial and imperial inequality and any extraterritorial relations contain the echoes of these structures of inequality. Finally, extraterritoriality is often driven and shaped by the needs of global capital, trying to avoid specific sovereign structures.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"52 1","pages":"7 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74935102","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2020.1856701
E. Illas
ABSTRACT In this paper, I argue that the Covid-19 pandemic has made it more evident that the question of survival plays a structural role in the politics of globalisation. Like a virus that feeds off living cells without producing new ones, globalisation builds on blurring the previously differentiated spaces of the state, the market, war, and nature. The pandemic has exacerbated the instability that results from this blurring of the political spaces of modernity. Amidst this instability, survival has become a prevailing and yet liminal condition for the appearance of politics itself. Rather than interpreting this condition as a biopolitical reduction of political life to mere life, as Giorgio Agamben or Roberto Esposito have done, my theorisation claims that global survival has produced a hyperpoliticization of all events and acts of social life. I illustrate these logics with the political centrality of life in the Black Lives Matter movement.
{"title":"Survival gone viral","authors":"E. Illas","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2020.1856701","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2020.1856701","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, I argue that the Covid-19 pandemic has made it more evident that the question of survival plays a structural role in the politics of globalisation. Like a virus that feeds off living cells without producing new ones, globalisation builds on blurring the previously differentiated spaces of the state, the market, war, and nature. The pandemic has exacerbated the instability that results from this blurring of the political spaces of modernity. Amidst this instability, survival has become a prevailing and yet liminal condition for the appearance of politics itself. Rather than interpreting this condition as a biopolitical reduction of political life to mere life, as Giorgio Agamben or Roberto Esposito have done, my theorisation claims that global survival has produced a hyperpoliticization of all events and acts of social life. I illustrate these logics with the political centrality of life in the Black Lives Matter movement.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"4 1","pages":"457 - 465"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82471234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2020.1857810
S. Krupar, Nadine Ehlers
ABSTRACT How are we to understand and navigate the ways that biomedicine extends beyond the formal institutions of the clinic, the hospital, and lab, and is incorporated into broader social practices, from intimate embodied knowledges of the self to biosecurity rationales? We propose a return to Lennard Davis’s call (2006. ‘Life, Death, and Biocultural Literacy’. The Chronicle of Higher Education 52:18, B9) for biocultural studies, but with sharpened focus on the way biomedical logics circulate in everyday life under late liberalism. In this essay, we lay out the arena of biocultural studies as particular terrains where health and life are biopolitically governed through the lens of biomedicine and public health. We consider how this governance is inextricable from neoliberal rationalities and imperatives that demand, produce, and affirm only certain forms of subjectivity and life. Additionally, drawing on concrete illustrations from our recent work, we explore the methodology of biocultural studies that involves intertextual analysis of various kinds of cultural products, knowledges and practices; advances collaborative cross-disciplinary approaches that attend to the stratified and mundane layers of biomedical governance; promotes scalar thinking about health policies and practices, from the individual to population-level administration; and, finally, scrutinises the structural violence of biomedicine and deadly inequities produced through life-making practices.
{"title":"Biocultures: a critical approach to mundane biomedical governance","authors":"S. Krupar, Nadine Ehlers","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2020.1857810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2020.1857810","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How are we to understand and navigate the ways that biomedicine extends beyond the formal institutions of the clinic, the hospital, and lab, and is incorporated into broader social practices, from intimate embodied knowledges of the self to biosecurity rationales? We propose a return to Lennard Davis’s call (2006. ‘Life, Death, and Biocultural Literacy’. The Chronicle of Higher Education 52:18, B9) for biocultural studies, but with sharpened focus on the way biomedical logics circulate in everyday life under late liberalism. In this essay, we lay out the arena of biocultural studies as particular terrains where health and life are biopolitically governed through the lens of biomedicine and public health. We consider how this governance is inextricable from neoliberal rationalities and imperatives that demand, produce, and affirm only certain forms of subjectivity and life. Additionally, drawing on concrete illustrations from our recent work, we explore the methodology of biocultural studies that involves intertextual analysis of various kinds of cultural products, knowledges and practices; advances collaborative cross-disciplinary approaches that attend to the stratified and mundane layers of biomedical governance; promotes scalar thinking about health policies and practices, from the individual to population-level administration; and, finally, scrutinises the structural violence of biomedicine and deadly inequities produced through life-making practices.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"81 1","pages":"440 - 456"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83876623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2021.1914124
Francis Russell, A. Mcguire
ABSTRACT This interview was conducted via email in late 2020 in preparation for Lockdown: Mental Illness, Wellness, and COVID-19, a three-day online conference organised by myself, Madison Magladry (Curtin University), Debra Shaw (University of East London), and Jeremy Gilbert (University of East London). Anne McGuire had agreed to speak as a keynote, but time differences between Western Australia and Canada made even a Zoom call keynote impractical (the difficulties of syncing Zoom sessions and time zones became one of the many new problems of academic life in 2020). Accordingly, McGuire very kindly agreed to respond to my questions via email, the results of which were subsequently published in the conference catalogue, and served as a platform for a panel discussion on the final day, which included Will Davies (Goldsmiths), Stephanie Alice Baker (City, University of London), and Jeremy Gilbert. I had become aware of McGuire’s work through my own research on neoliberal mental healthcare and the newly emerging logics of spectrality that could be detected in institutional psychiatry’s interest in dimensions of health, illness, and comorbidity, and in the popular discourses around the ‘mental health spectrum’. As an academic working in disability studies, McGuire’s work on ‘mental illness’ (or madness, as many would prefer) is thought provoking and productive in its capacity to reassess contemporary institutional and discursive reformulations of health, sanity, and normality—and, furthermore, how these reformulations are irreducibly linked to the disempowerment and exploitation of the mad. McGuire’s work took on a new significance for me in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent global lockdowns, and with the emerging global discussion of the necessity of a more positive stance on tele-health and digital platforms for ‘sufferers’ of ‘mental illnesses’. Her capacity to show how supposedly novel and progressive forms of psychopathology and care—such as the notion of the mental health spectrum, which purportedly moves us beyond stigmatising notions of abnormality—reproduce hierarchies and social injustice, was incredibly helpful for negotiating the rhetoric of ‘the new normal’ that pervaded 2020. It was in the attempt to locate the meaning of the ‘new normal’ for those circumscribed within the institutions and discourses of ‘mental illness’—i.e., the reinvention of existing norms, inequalities, and injustices both in response to, and in some instances by way of the COVID-19 pandemic—that I turned to, and continue to turn to, McGuire’s work.
本次采访是在2020年底通过电子邮件进行的，目的是为“禁闭:精神疾病、健康和COVID-19”做准备。这是一个为期三天的在线会议，由我、麦迪逊·马格拉德里(科廷大学)、黛布拉·肖(东伦敦大学)和杰里米·吉尔伯特(东伦敦大学)共同组织。安妮·麦圭尔(Anne McGuire)同意作为主题演讲，但西澳大利亚州和加拿大的时差使Zoom call主题演讲变得不切实际(同步Zoom会议和时区的困难成为2020年学术生活的许多新问题之一)。因此，McGuire非常友好地同意通过电子邮件回复我的问题，其结果随后发表在会议目录中，并在最后一天作为小组讨论的平台，包括Will Davies (Goldsmiths)， Stephanie Alice Baker (City, University of London)和Jeremy Gilbert。我通过自己对新自由主义精神卫生保健的研究，以及在机构精神病学对健康、疾病和共病维度的兴趣以及围绕“精神健康谱”的流行论述中，可以发现新出现的频谱性逻辑，从而意识到McGuire的工作。作为一名从事残疾研究的学者，McGuire关于“精神疾病”(或疯狂，正如许多人所喜欢的那样)的研究发人深省，富有成效，因为它重新评估了当代对健康、理智和正常的制度性和话语性重新表述，而且，这些重新表述是如何与对疯子的剥夺和剥削不可避免地联系在一起的。在2019冠状病毒病大流行和随后的全球封锁之后，随着全球正在讨论对“精神疾病”“患者”的远程医疗和数字平台采取更积极立场的必要性，McGuire的工作对我来说具有新的意义。她展示了所谓的新颖和进步的精神病理学和护理形式——比如精神健康谱系的概念，据称它使我们超越了对异常的污名化概念——是如何再现等级制度和社会不公正的，这对讨论2020年普遍存在的“新常态”的修辞非常有帮助。它试图为那些被限制在“精神疾病”的制度和话语中的人定位“新常态”的意义。在应对COVID-19大流行的过程中，以及在某些情况下通过COVID-19大流行对现有规范、不平等和不公正的重新创造，这是我转向并将继续转向麦圭尔的作品的原因。
{"title":"How risk is shared: an interview with Anne McGuire","authors":"Francis Russell, A. Mcguire","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2021.1914124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1914124","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This interview was conducted via email in late 2020 in preparation for Lockdown: Mental Illness, Wellness, and COVID-19, a three-day online conference organised by myself, Madison Magladry (Curtin University), Debra Shaw (University of East London), and Jeremy Gilbert (University of East London). Anne McGuire had agreed to speak as a keynote, but time differences between Western Australia and Canada made even a Zoom call keynote impractical (the difficulties of syncing Zoom sessions and time zones became one of the many new problems of academic life in 2020). Accordingly, McGuire very kindly agreed to respond to my questions via email, the results of which were subsequently published in the conference catalogue, and served as a platform for a panel discussion on the final day, which included Will Davies (Goldsmiths), Stephanie Alice Baker (City, University of London), and Jeremy Gilbert. I had become aware of McGuire’s work through my own research on neoliberal mental healthcare and the newly emerging logics of spectrality that could be detected in institutional psychiatry’s interest in dimensions of health, illness, and comorbidity, and in the popular discourses around the ‘mental health spectrum’. As an academic working in disability studies, McGuire’s work on ‘mental illness’ (or madness, as many would prefer) is thought provoking and productive in its capacity to reassess contemporary institutional and discursive reformulations of health, sanity, and normality—and, furthermore, how these reformulations are irreducibly linked to the disempowerment and exploitation of the mad. McGuire’s work took on a new significance for me in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent global lockdowns, and with the emerging global discussion of the necessity of a more positive stance on tele-health and digital platforms for ‘sufferers’ of ‘mental illnesses’. Her capacity to show how supposedly novel and progressive forms of psychopathology and care—such as the notion of the mental health spectrum, which purportedly moves us beyond stigmatising notions of abnormality—reproduce hierarchies and social injustice, was incredibly helpful for negotiating the rhetoric of ‘the new normal’ that pervaded 2020. It was in the attempt to locate the meaning of the ‘new normal’ for those circumscribed within the institutions and discourses of ‘mental illness’—i.e., the reinvention of existing norms, inequalities, and injustices both in response to, and in some instances by way of the COVID-19 pandemic—that I turned to, and continue to turn to, McGuire’s work.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"1 1","pages":"481 - 494"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89889744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2021.1894961
Thomas Hodgson
ABSTRACT This paper examines the lived experiences and ethical dilemmas of investors and staff in London’s digital music startup culture. Startups often rely on what I term ‘imagined metrics’ to attract investment and to measure the efficacy of their technologies. However, this stands in stark contrast to the qualitative ways music is understood within these organisations and subsequently experienced via the technologies they build. Drawing on ethnographic observations alongside interview data, I suggest that these metrics have few true believers. Instead, critiques of imagined metrics and their susceptibility to exaggeration and misrepresentation are ubiquitous. This culture of scepticism is not incidental: it is a crucial pathway through which otherwise volatile startup culture is normalised. Investors, founders and staff often publicly acknowledge the unreliability of the numbers with which they work, even as metrics continue to underpin the decision-making process. Metrics thus do not require true belief to secure their effects. Yet, against this backdrop, processes of quantification increasingly shape digital music consumption. Resisting the classic equation of quantification with Weberian rationalisation, this study instead shows that metrics are imbued with emotions and interpretive narratives that extend well beyond the older trust in numbers (Porter [1995]. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
{"title":"Quantifying music: imagined metrics in digital startup culture","authors":"Thomas Hodgson","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2021.1894961","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1894961","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper examines the lived experiences and ethical dilemmas of investors and staff in London’s digital music startup culture. Startups often rely on what I term ‘imagined metrics’ to attract investment and to measure the efficacy of their technologies. However, this stands in stark contrast to the qualitative ways music is understood within these organisations and subsequently experienced via the technologies they build. Drawing on ethnographic observations alongside interview data, I suggest that these metrics have few true believers. Instead, critiques of imagined metrics and their susceptibility to exaggeration and misrepresentation are ubiquitous. This culture of scepticism is not incidental: it is a crucial pathway through which otherwise volatile startup culture is normalised. Investors, founders and staff often publicly acknowledge the unreliability of the numbers with which they work, even as metrics continue to underpin the decision-making process. Metrics thus do not require true belief to secure their effects. Yet, against this backdrop, processes of quantification increasingly shape digital music consumption. Resisting the classic equation of quantification with Weberian rationalisation, this study instead shows that metrics are imbued with emotions and interpretive narratives that extend well beyond the older trust in numbers (Porter [1995]. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"52 1","pages":"424 - 439"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84556232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2021.1912621
Efrat Hildesheim
ABSTRACT The article conceptualises the notion of the landscape syncope: a political landscape performance generated by desire, which affects landscape perception. The syncopal mode involves a core of absence that pertains to a topographical gap mediated by suspension, movement and revelation. The article explores three case studies that address designed and seemingly natural landscapes – the ‘ha-ha’ in the English landscape garden, the Baroque gardens of Vaux-le-Vicomte, and the landscape of Israel’s eastern border. These case studies point to the scope of the landscape syncope, which operates as a counterpoint in the landscape. The analysis builds on an interdisciplinary inquiry that addresses the critical discourse on landscape, garden and art history, as well as critical psychoanalysis and cultural discourse. The discussion links the Lacanian notion of objet (petit) a and the structure of (partially satisfied) desire with the ambiguity and elusiveness of landscape, and its ontology of lack and absence. The article suggests the syncopal mode as an interpretation of landscape, as a manifestation of power and a political performance of desire.
{"title":"Landscape syncope: desire, power and the presence–absence of landscape","authors":"Efrat Hildesheim","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2021.1912621","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1912621","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article conceptualises the notion of the landscape syncope: a political landscape performance generated by desire, which affects landscape perception. The syncopal mode involves a core of absence that pertains to a topographical gap mediated by suspension, movement and revelation. The article explores three case studies that address designed and seemingly natural landscapes – the ‘ha-ha’ in the English landscape garden, the Baroque gardens of Vaux-le-Vicomte, and the landscape of Israel’s eastern border. These case studies point to the scope of the landscape syncope, which operates as a counterpoint in the landscape. The analysis builds on an interdisciplinary inquiry that addresses the critical discourse on landscape, garden and art history, as well as critical psychoanalysis and cultural discourse. The discussion links the Lacanian notion of objet (petit) a and the structure of (partially satisfied) desire with the ambiguity and elusiveness of landscape, and its ontology of lack and absence. The article suggests the syncopal mode as an interpretation of landscape, as a manifestation of power and a political performance of desire.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"72 1","pages":"404 - 423"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87989213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2021.1916399
Maxwell Hyett
ABSTRACT Near the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi published three short meditations on the possible, not probable, outcome of the pandemic. Due to the sudden imposition of isolation and concrete needs, Berardi suggests that death has re-entered contemporary discourse. As a consequence, he speculates that the capitalist postponement of joy may be replaced by time as enjoyment. This text critically accompanies Berardi in imagining the possible outcome of the pandemic by suggesting that it is not death but mortality that offers a pivotal use of time and enjoyment. Mortality, as Hannah Arendt defines it, extends beyond the temporality of survivalist labour and into durable works that contribute to the construction of a human world. Here it is argued that this world and its work is held together by love, in a robust philosophical sense, that is embodied by amateur practice, primarily developed in relation to the work of Bernard Stiegler. Through the work of Stiegler, Donna Haraway and Byung-Chul Han, this paper argues that, masked by professionalism and marketing, amateurism lurks in the possible ruins of pre-COVID life, ready to emerge in the key areas identified by Berardi’s texts.
{"title":"Amateur mortality","authors":"Maxwell Hyett","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2021.1916399","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1916399","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Near the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi published three short meditations on the possible, not probable, outcome of the pandemic. Due to the sudden imposition of isolation and concrete needs, Berardi suggests that death has re-entered contemporary discourse. As a consequence, he speculates that the capitalist postponement of joy may be replaced by time as enjoyment. This text critically accompanies Berardi in imagining the possible outcome of the pandemic by suggesting that it is not death but mortality that offers a pivotal use of time and enjoyment. Mortality, as Hannah Arendt defines it, extends beyond the temporality of survivalist labour and into durable works that contribute to the construction of a human world. Here it is argued that this world and its work is held together by love, in a robust philosophical sense, that is embodied by amateur practice, primarily developed in relation to the work of Bernard Stiegler. Through the work of Stiegler, Donna Haraway and Byung-Chul Han, this paper argues that, masked by professionalism and marketing, amateurism lurks in the possible ruins of pre-COVID life, ready to emerge in the key areas identified by Berardi’s texts.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"38 1","pages":"466 - 480"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73805383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-30DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2020.1802611
S. Tabatabaei
ABSTRACT During a year-long project in 2010–2011, Wafaa Bilal, an Iraqi-American artist, grafted a camera at the back of his head that captured one image per minute and transmitted it to the website www.3rdi.me. The project attracted public attention that consolidated a critical discourse around this project. Bilal’s project was perceived as a participation in the configuration of selfhood and embodiment, locating the project within digitised networks of surveillance. This article studies the 3rdi project at the cross-section of the prevalent use of wearable technologies, racialisation of surveillance, and surveillance art in order to account for the ways in which with this project Bilal has intervened within the representation of diasporic identity construction of the Middle Easterners in the post-9/11 era and how the project portended the yet to come presidential executive order 13769, commonly known as the Travel Ban, issued by President Donald Trump in 2017.
{"title":"Performing the post-panopticon condition: on the 3rdi project by Wafaa Bilal (2010–2011)","authors":"S. Tabatabaei","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2020.1802611","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2020.1802611","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT During a year-long project in 2010–2011, Wafaa Bilal, an Iraqi-American artist, grafted a camera at the back of his head that captured one image per minute and transmitted it to the website www.3rdi.me. The project attracted public attention that consolidated a critical discourse around this project. Bilal’s project was perceived as a participation in the configuration of selfhood and embodiment, locating the project within digitised networks of surveillance. This article studies the 3rdi project at the cross-section of the prevalent use of wearable technologies, racialisation of surveillance, and surveillance art in order to account for the ways in which with this project Bilal has intervened within the representation of diasporic identity construction of the Middle Easterners in the post-9/11 era and how the project portended the yet to come presidential executive order 13769, commonly known as the Travel Ban, issued by President Donald Trump in 2017.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"1 1","pages":"359 - 373"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87016667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-26DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2020.1808801
Benjamin P. Davis, Jason Walsh
ABSTRACT This essay works at the intersection of two trends, one longstanding and one relatively more recent. First, it takes place against the background of the overwhelming influence that the category of ‘identity’ exercises on both contemporary knowledge production and political practice. Second, it responds to what has been called the ‘decolonial turn’ in theory. We compare the work of Gayatri Spivak, Aijaz Ahmad, and Walter Mignolo in terms of the following question: What kind of reflexive method do they deploy in response to their recognition of the politics of knowledge production, that is, the existence of a relationship between social position and epistemic position? We then develop a novel distinction between post-colonial, anti-colonial, and de-colonial perspectives, one based not on backward-looking intellectual genealogies but on forward-looking political practices.
{"title":"The politics of positionality: the difference between post-, anti-, and de-colonial methods","authors":"Benjamin P. Davis, Jason Walsh","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2020.1808801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2020.1808801","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay works at the intersection of two trends, one longstanding and one relatively more recent. First, it takes place against the background of the overwhelming influence that the category of ‘identity’ exercises on both contemporary knowledge production and political practice. Second, it responds to what has been called the ‘decolonial turn’ in theory. We compare the work of Gayatri Spivak, Aijaz Ahmad, and Walter Mignolo in terms of the following question: What kind of reflexive method do they deploy in response to their recognition of the politics of knowledge production, that is, the existence of a relationship between social position and epistemic position? We then develop a novel distinction between post-colonial, anti-colonial, and de-colonial perspectives, one based not on backward-looking intellectual genealogies but on forward-looking political practices.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"22 1","pages":"374 - 388"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2020-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84174129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：