2018
DOI: 10.1177/1368431018799256
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The limits of Anthropocene narratives

Abstract: The rapidly growing transdisciplinary enthusiasm about developing new kinds of Anthropocene stories is based on the shared assumption that the Anthropocene predicament is best made sense of by narrative means. Against this assumption, this article argues that the challenge we are facing today does not merely lie in telling either scientific, socio-political, or entangled Anthropocene narratives to come to terms with our current condition. Instead, the challenge lies in coming to grips with how the stories we c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
15
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…He notes how the genuinely new challenges posed by the Anthropocene tend to be domesticated by existing ways of thinking: [O]n the one hand, we tend to think of the Anthropocene as the radical event, rupture, and unprecedented change that rewrites disciplinary codes as we know them and demands new arrangements of knowledge we are yet to establish; on the other, we still think about our radically new predicament in terms of our more familiar arrangements of knowledge. (Simon 2018, p. 11)…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…He notes how the genuinely new challenges posed by the Anthropocene tend to be domesticated by existing ways of thinking: [O]n the one hand, we tend to think of the Anthropocene as the radical event, rupture, and unprecedented change that rewrites disciplinary codes as we know them and demands new arrangements of knowledge we are yet to establish; on the other, we still think about our radically new predicament in terms of our more familiar arrangements of knowledge. (Simon 2018, p. 11)…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, there is a growing interest in exploring the Anthropocene from new perspectives related to communication and media studies. For instance, research on information infrastructure (Dedeoglu and Ekmekcioglu 2020), social media and the Anthropocene (Gärdebo et al 2017), projects on children's media use (Livingstone and Blum-Ross 2020) and their relationship with technology in the context of the Anthropocene (Kraftl et al 2020) or, more broadly, studying the narrative frames as key for the construction of possible representations of the Anthropocene (Lidskog and Waterton 2018;Simon 2020), be them dystopian or-maybe more desirably-hopeful and utopian (Arias-Maldonado 2019). These future research initiatives, together with the rest of the efforts outlined in this article, acknowledge the importance of communication science and media studies in the challenge of not only making sense, but also making meaning of the Anthropocene.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Simon describes the Anthropocene as an unprecedented event, a rupture between previous experience and expectations for the future, and, as such, it cannot be narrated. He explains that we can construct a continuous story about how it happened but cannot grasp the Anthropocene itself and its consequences, because it is a radically new phenomenon (see Simon 2015Simon , 2017Simon , 2020. I assume that the main consequence of such historical sensitivity is the impossibility of closing the story, which therefore provides neither the full meaning of the representation of the past nor a lesson from the past for the reader.…”
Section: A Response By a Theory Of Historymentioning
confidence: 99%