This paper poses questions on the possibility of styles of working besides "affirmationism." The paper begins by defining negativity as a force or status of disunification, and traces how it remains closely associated with dialectics within Geography. The paper goes on to explore how the renunciation of dialectics has meant that negativity more generally has been rendered outside thought, with a concomitant uptake of an affirmationist ethos. Despite the promise of such work, there remains disquiet. What is omitted or elided in the uptake of affirmationism?Critiques, largely from outside the discipline, highlight how affirmationism privileges the lively and Life, novelty and experimentation, and the generous and generative in conjunction with a suspicion of negativity. We home in on and reflect on three ostensible limits of affirmationism: affirmationist vitalism, affirmationist politics, and affirmationist critique. We argue that renouncing dialectics does not entail, necessarily so, a concomitant abandonment of negativity. Indeed, we need to embrace attempts to think and act that elude, or dispense with, the propensity to affirm, making space for affects that are far from hopeful, for those becomings-otherwise that do not increase capacities to act, or for modes of critique that refuse; in other words, for that which is besides affirmationism or simply "unaffirmable." Crucially, however, we point towards the dangers of a simple (re)turn to negativity, preferring a steadfast refusal to settle these tensions.
General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms AbstractMicropolitical investments and minor theoretical energies are of growing concern to geographers, yet conceptual ambiguity has inhibited broader discussion and deployment of these terms; even if they are the pivots of what we understand as, or take to be, the 'political'. In an effort to reinvigorate a dialogue about these crucial but underplayed concepts, and in an effort to push a micropolitical ethos in and of itself, we introduce a forum composed of six short interventions by geographers engaged in matters of the minor and micropolitical. Following these interventions, and leaning on a landmark article published in this journal twenty-one years ago, Cindi Katz revisits and reflects upon a vibrant conceptual assemblage that perhaps matters more now than ever, not least in questions of hope, discipline, ethics, existence, and politics itself. Key wordsMicropolitics; minor theory; ethics; hope; discipline Twenty-one years ago this journal published 'Towards a Minor Theory' by Cindi Katz (1996). i Despite the scale of the conceptual challenge laid down by Katz, specifically in unpicking the 'mastery' at work in much of critical geography, the article garnered little attention, in citation at least. It was something of a slowburner, a sleeper-hit lurking in the annals of contemporary geography. Harnessing, therefore, what seems to be a recent growing interest in the micropolitical and the minor in geography and the social sciences, the aim of this forum -itself composed of minor interventions by several geographers -is to re-invigorate these enigmatic concepts. These interventions return to the intellectual forum that gave rise to such concerns, but in a time when these provocations matter still further. This highlighting begins with a moment of critique. Specifically, that questions concerning the what, why and where of micropolitics and minor theory are missing, even from scholarship in which they act as anchoring concepts, not least in our own research
The relation between geography and art has attracted considerable interest over the past decade. This interview with the contemporary artist Olafur Eliasson responds to the calls for cross-disciplinary dialogue, which is nevertheless attentive to space and spatial imaginaries. The interview explores the relations between art and geography, with excursions into questions of theory, pedagogy and experiments.The relation between geography and art has attracted considerable interest over the past decade. Variously figured as 'art-geography', 'creative geographies' or 'experimental geography', the affinities between geographers and artists have been tracked in scholarly reviews, 1 reflected on by those engaged in collaborative ventures, 2 and discussed in a plethora of conference sessions. 3 Taken together, these have tended to emphasize creative practices and how these can animate and inflect geographical methods. Far less seems to have been written about what sensitivity to space, and spatial imaginaries, could enable in these collaborations.Taking its cue from Hawkins' 4 call for dialogues and doings, this interview with the artist Olafur Eliasson looks to examine the way in which a spatially-imbued vocabulary can feature in a more-than-disciplinary conversation. Eliasson, a contemporary artist currently working in Berlin, established Studio Olafur Eliasson in 1995 and has in the intervening years become internationally-renowned, particularly for large installations. Having met Eliasson at a gathering of geographers in late 2008 5 and been intrigued by his plans for an experimental school, I made a number of visits to his studio during 2010 and 2011. This school, known as the the Institut für Raumexperimente [Institute for Spatial Experiments], explores the relationship between space and experiment, and is very much an extension of Eliasson's own art works, or projects, which 'revolve around our experience of spaces'. 6 As a guest at this school, over the course of a semester I was able to participate in
In Part 1 of 'Encountering Berlant', we encounter the promise and provocation of Lauren Berlant's work. In 1000-word contributions, geographers and others stay with what Berlant's thought offers contemporary human geography. They amplify an encounter with their work, demonstrating how a concept, idea, or style disrupts something, opens up a new possibility, or simply invites thinking otherwise. The encounters range across the incredible body of work Berlant left
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.