共同的亲密:封闭、团结和资本主义下批判宣传的可能性

IF 1.1 2区 文学 Q3 COMMUNICATION Rhetoric Society Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-05-24 DOI:10.1080/02773945.2023.2200697
Matthew W. Bost, Joshua S. Hanan
{"title":"共同的亲密:封闭、团结和资本主义下批判宣传的可能性","authors":"Matthew W. Bost, Joshua S. Hanan","doi":"10.1080/02773945.2023.2200697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay places rhetorical theories of publicity and the common in conversation around the concept of intimacy. Defined as a felt sense of proximity or closeness, intimacy is a form of affective relation that underlies both private and public worldmaking practices, and that produces investments in certain forms of life and community. Considering the relationship between publicity and the common in terms of intimacy makes clear that dominant forms of contemporary publicity are predicated on racialized and gendered enclosures of intimacy that have dispossessed noncapitalist relationships to land and community and instead fostered intimacies conducive to capital accumulation. Our argument suggests that critical scholars who are concerned with contemporary capitalism’s subjection of life to the market have a common interest in attending to the ways these histories of enclosure shape the horizons of modern publicity. Our argument also suggests further attention be directed to forms of counterintimacy aimed at producing anticapitalist coalition.","PeriodicalId":45453,"journal":{"name":"Rhetoric Society Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intimacies of the Common: Enclosure, Solidarity, and the Possibilities of Critical Publicity under Capitalism\",\"authors\":\"Matthew W. Bost, Joshua S. Hanan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02773945.2023.2200697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This essay places rhetorical theories of publicity and the common in conversation around the concept of intimacy. Defined as a felt sense of proximity or closeness, intimacy is a form of affective relation that underlies both private and public worldmaking practices, and that produces investments in certain forms of life and community. Considering the relationship between publicity and the common in terms of intimacy makes clear that dominant forms of contemporary publicity are predicated on racialized and gendered enclosures of intimacy that have dispossessed noncapitalist relationships to land and community and instead fostered intimacies conducive to capital accumulation. Our argument suggests that critical scholars who are concerned with contemporary capitalism’s subjection of life to the market have a common interest in attending to the ways these histories of enclosure shape the horizons of modern publicity. Our argument also suggests further attention be directed to forms of counterintimacy aimed at producing anticapitalist coalition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rhetoric Society Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rhetoric Society Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02773945.2023.2200697\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rhetoric Society Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02773945.2023.2200697","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文围绕亲密关系这一概念,探讨了公共性修辞理论和对话共性修辞理论。亲密关系被定义为一种亲近感或亲密感,是一种情感关系的形式,是私人和公共世界创造实践的基础,并在某些形式的生活和社区中产生投资。从亲密关系的角度来考虑公共性和共性之间的关系,可以清楚地看出,当代公共性的主要形式是建立在种族化和性别化的亲密关系的基础上的,这种亲密关系剥夺了与土地和社区的非资本主义关系,反而培养了有利于资本积累的亲密关系。我们的论点表明,关注当代资本主义生活对市场的屈从的批判性学者,在关注这些圈地历史塑造现代公共性视野的方式方面,有着共同的兴趣。我们的论点还建议进一步关注旨在产生反资本主义联盟的反亲密形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Intimacies of the Common: Enclosure, Solidarity, and the Possibilities of Critical Publicity under Capitalism
ABSTRACT This essay places rhetorical theories of publicity and the common in conversation around the concept of intimacy. Defined as a felt sense of proximity or closeness, intimacy is a form of affective relation that underlies both private and public worldmaking practices, and that produces investments in certain forms of life and community. Considering the relationship between publicity and the common in terms of intimacy makes clear that dominant forms of contemporary publicity are predicated on racialized and gendered enclosures of intimacy that have dispossessed noncapitalist relationships to land and community and instead fostered intimacies conducive to capital accumulation. Our argument suggests that critical scholars who are concerned with contemporary capitalism’s subjection of life to the market have a common interest in attending to the ways these histories of enclosure shape the horizons of modern publicity. Our argument also suggests further attention be directed to forms of counterintimacy aimed at producing anticapitalist coalition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
What Can a Body Do?: How We Meet the Built World Nestwork: New Material Rhetorics for Precarious Species Ambient Engineering: Hyper-Nudging, Hyper-Relevance, and Rhetorics of Nearness and Farness in a Post-AI Algorithmic World Conspiracy Theater of the Absurd: “Birds Aren’t Real” as Parodic Hypermimesis Rhetoric of/with AI: An Introduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1