表面、主观性和自我否定

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 CULTURAL STUDIES Cultural Critique Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1353/cul.2022.0021
Amber Jamilla Musser
{"title":"表面、主观性和自我否定","authors":"Amber Jamilla Musser","doi":"10.1353/cul.2022.0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"None Like Us begins with a story of familial cleavage. Though he does not explicitly delve into its contours, Stephen Best describes a graduation dinner that reveals (to him) a distance between him and his father. Another attendee describes this separation (on the part of father) as having been born from a conflict between pride and disgust— the father is proud of his son’s success, but it also announces an unassimilable difference between the two. Best likens this to an injunction to community within Black studies, which he describes as not only uncomfortable but problematic: “the feeling that I am being invited to long for the return of a sociality that I never had, one from which I suspect (had I ever shown up) I might have been excluded” (1). This narrative is meant to explain Best’s project, which is to decouple Black studies’ relationship between the archive and community. However, this is not just any archive but that of the transatlantic slave trade, which has traditionally undergirded the idea of a Black diaspora, a term that itself has been understood to refer not only to a shared history but to common cultural, aesthetic, and religious practices. Best bristles not only at the mandate to think with slavery when thinking about Blackness but also the assumption that this history provides a useful form of commonality. Ultimately, Best aims to uncover and work with a productive version of negation: “This coveted alienation would entail a gesture best parsed as a kind of doubled movement: away from the ‘clenched little","PeriodicalId":46410,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Critique","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surfaces, Subjectivity, and Self-Denial\",\"authors\":\"Amber Jamilla Musser\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/cul.2022.0021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"None Like Us begins with a story of familial cleavage. Though he does not explicitly delve into its contours, Stephen Best describes a graduation dinner that reveals (to him) a distance between him and his father. Another attendee describes this separation (on the part of father) as having been born from a conflict between pride and disgust— the father is proud of his son’s success, but it also announces an unassimilable difference between the two. Best likens this to an injunction to community within Black studies, which he describes as not only uncomfortable but problematic: “the feeling that I am being invited to long for the return of a sociality that I never had, one from which I suspect (had I ever shown up) I might have been excluded” (1). This narrative is meant to explain Best’s project, which is to decouple Black studies’ relationship between the archive and community. However, this is not just any archive but that of the transatlantic slave trade, which has traditionally undergirded the idea of a Black diaspora, a term that itself has been understood to refer not only to a shared history but to common cultural, aesthetic, and religious practices. Best bristles not only at the mandate to think with slavery when thinking about Blackness but also the assumption that this history provides a useful form of commonality. Ultimately, Best aims to uncover and work with a productive version of negation: “This coveted alienation would entail a gesture best parsed as a kind of doubled movement: away from the ‘clenched little\",\"PeriodicalId\":46410,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cultural Critique\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cultural Critique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/cul.2022.0021\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cultural Critique","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cul.2022.0021","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《无人像我们》从一个家庭分裂的故事开始。斯蒂芬·贝斯特(Stephen Best)虽然没有明确地深入研究它的轮廓,但他描述了一次毕业晚宴,(向他)揭示了他和父亲之间的距离。另一位与会者将这种分离(父亲方面)描述为骄傲与厌恶之间的冲突——父亲为儿子的成功感到骄傲,但这也宣告了两者之间不可同化的差异。贝斯特把这比作黑人研究中对社区的禁令,他认为这不仅令人不舒服,而且有问题:“我被邀请去渴望一个我从未有过的社会的回归,一个我怀疑(如果我曾经出现过)我可能被排除在外的社会”(1)。这种叙述旨在解释贝斯特的项目,即将黑人研究档案和社区之间的关系分离开来。然而,这不仅仅是一个档案,而是跨大西洋奴隶贸易的档案,它传统上巩固了黑人散居的概念,这个术语本身被理解为不仅指共同的历史,还指共同的文化,美学和宗教习俗。贝斯特不仅对在思考黑人问题时与奴隶制一起思考的命令感到愤怒,而且对这段历史提供了一种有用的共性形式的假设也感到愤怒。最终,贝斯特的目标是揭示并研究一种富有成效的否定:“这种令人垂涎的异化将需要一种姿态,最好被解析为一种双重运动:远离‘紧握的小东西’。
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
Surfaces, Subjectivity, and Self-Denial
None Like Us begins with a story of familial cleavage. Though he does not explicitly delve into its contours, Stephen Best describes a graduation dinner that reveals (to him) a distance between him and his father. Another attendee describes this separation (on the part of father) as having been born from a conflict between pride and disgust— the father is proud of his son’s success, but it also announces an unassimilable difference between the two. Best likens this to an injunction to community within Black studies, which he describes as not only uncomfortable but problematic: “the feeling that I am being invited to long for the return of a sociality that I never had, one from which I suspect (had I ever shown up) I might have been excluded” (1). This narrative is meant to explain Best’s project, which is to decouple Black studies’ relationship between the archive and community. However, this is not just any archive but that of the transatlantic slave trade, which has traditionally undergirded the idea of a Black diaspora, a term that itself has been understood to refer not only to a shared history but to common cultural, aesthetic, and religious practices. Best bristles not only at the mandate to think with slavery when thinking about Blackness but also the assumption that this history provides a useful form of commonality. Ultimately, Best aims to uncover and work with a productive version of negation: “This coveted alienation would entail a gesture best parsed as a kind of doubled movement: away from the ‘clenched little
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
Cultural Critique
Cultural Critique Multiple-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Cultural Critique provides a forum for international and interdisciplinary explorations of intellectual controversies, trends, and issues in culture, theory, and politics. Emphasizing critique rather than criticism, the journal draws on the diverse and conflictual approaches of Marxism, feminism, psychoanalysis, semiotics, political economy, and hermeneutics to offer readings in society and its transformation.
期刊最新文献
Bataille at the Limit of Rapture and Rigor The City as an Archive of Doing and Undoing: The Case of Istanbul's Atatürk Cultural Center The Things of Order: Affect, Material Culture, Dispositif Ambivalent Attachments: Queer and Trans Histories of Lesbian Feminism The Aesthetics of Social Reproduction: Silences in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and Octavia Butler's Parable of the Sower
×
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