The article looks at Judith Butler’s 2022 book titled What World is This? A Pandemic Phenomenology: an attempt to analyse the pandemic using the phenomenology of Max Scheler, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, as well as feminist phenomenology. The author of the book considers what the pandemic reveals about our being-in-the-world and what interdependencies it brings to light. She points out the political and ethical implications of thinking based on a common immune problem and the need for change through striving for radical equality.
PL
W recenzji przyglądam się książce Judith Butler z 2022 r. pod tytułem What World is This? A Pandemic Phenomenology, będącej próbą analizy pandemii przez pryzmat fenomenologii Maxa Schelera, Maurice’a Merleau-Ponty’ego, a także fenomenologii feministycznej. Książka rozważa to, co pandemia ukazuje w kwestii naszego bycia w świecie i jakie współzależności unaocznia. Zwraca uwagę na polityczne i etyczne konsekwencje myślenia opartego na wspólnym problemie immunologicznym oraz potrzebę zmian dążących ku radykalnej równości.
This paper argues that the question of the human is a major concern in Judith But-ler’s philosophy. I believe that although this concern is more visible in her relatively recent works on ethics and politics, in her earlier works it is always in the background. I read Butler as a deep thinker on the nature of the human, and argue that her thoughts on ethics and politics should be read as a (non-utopic) yearning for a human condition where a collectively inhabitable world becomes possible. This paper will explore the question of the human as Butler discusses this in its relation to intelligibility, critique, and the opacity of the subject not only to understand the terms of dehumanization but also to offer ways of conceptualizing a more humane world.
Red Square is a symbolic place for the Moscow dissidence protests. Russian artists, writers and dissidents have frequently used the history of the square’s memory as a crucial and fundamental issue within the framework of their strategy. Haunting images associated with Red Square’s past, permanently returning in the history of the Russian activism, always refer both to universal narratives of the politics of protest and to the specific contexts producing entirely new meanings. Each time, through their public actions artists create new meanings for the Red Square’s space – they expose the existing limits of the power apparatus and call for the right to legitimize it, therefore contesting the links between the theatre of legitimacy and the public space. From this perspective, the space of protest becomes a fundamental instrument of political action, and the square - ordinarily used in the established order to manifest the government’s symbolic authority - this time becomes a kind of technique as well as a material body support in the politics of resistance.
This article seeks to propose a preliminary methodology of dance research to explore dance as a historically changing impulse for a physical activity that occurs in respect of the culturally defined forms collectively known as ‘dance’ (or its equivalents in other languages). Referring to Alain Badiou’s concept of event and Judith Butler’s theory of materiality, the author suggests including in historical research what he calls ‘anti-bodies’, i.e. kinetic events that ontologically precede the activity of the body formalised as dancing. If a specific dance is the formalisation of the primeval act of dancing, the body is a result of the ‘anti-body’ materialised. Such ‘anti-bodies’ reveal themselves when the dancer, either consciously or by mistake, transgresses the chosen form. In this context, the author proposes writing a story that will concentrate on the dance emergence process rather than on its form. Practice as research constitutes a vital aspect of this approach whereby a text must establish its theoretical grounds. What results is the politics of counter-hegemony with ‘anti-bodies’ challenging the rigid identities of both individuals and aesthetic forms.
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest analiza jednego z aspektów współczesnej władzy politycznej i administracyjnej. Jako kategorię analityczną autor przyjmuje Foucaultowskie kategorie dyskursu władzy: władzę jako „suwerenność” (przednowoczesny typ zindywidualizowanej władzy, która dąży do samozachowania) i władzę jako „rządomyślność” (governmentality) – współczesny typ zindywidualizowanej władzy, której celem jest kontrola i zarządzanie społeczeństwem. Władza współczesna – władza biurokratyczna opisana m.in. przez M. Webera – wydaje się być drugim z tych typów władzy. Na polu tym pojawia się jednak nowy typ władzy suwerennej legitymizowany przez dyskurs o rządomyślności – zarządzanie i ochrona populacji. Jej przykładem jest analizowane przez G. Agembena i J. Butler bezterminowe uwięzienie w Guantanamo. W artykule autor koncentruje się na symptomach tej nowej suwerenności w codziennych działaniach władzy, tj. na funkcjonowaniu polskiego organu przymusowego zabezpieczenia społecznego – Zakładu Ubezpieczeń Społecznych.
EN
The subject of the article is the analysis of a specific feature of contemporary political and administrative power. As analytic categories the author uses Foucaultian concepts of power discourses: sovereignty: the type of individualized power which strives for self-conservation (pre-modern type of power) and governmentality – the type of non-individualized power the aims of which are control and management of the population (modern type of power). Contemporary power – the bureaucratic power described by M. Weber etc. – seems to be the type of governmentality. But in this field emerges a new type of sovereign power legitimized by the discourse of governmentality – management and protection of the population. Its examples are analysed by G. Agemben i J. Butler indefinite detention in Guantanamo. In this articles, the author focuses on symptoms of the new type of sovereignty in day-to day government action – the practice of the polish organ of compulsory social insurance – Social Insurance Institution (Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych).
Te theme of gender identity is one of the most current topics in anthropology. Nowadays there are two terms concerning this human reality: sex (biological phenomenon) and gender (social construct). Judith Butler in her theory identifed sex and gender. She showed that human body is a subject of cultural and political interpretation. Tus there isn’t something like fact of body. Because of hetero normative paradigm the society believes that there are only two genders: male and female. Two philosophical assumptions cause this impoverishment: substantialism and performativity of language. Butler’s theory seems to be sex antirealism. Tomistic metaphysics is the opposite view to such kind of idea. According to Tomism human is substation which manifests itself in variable features. Human gender belongs to its being properties. Tese properties are invariable features of substance. Tomism claims that gender is one of such invariable modifcators. Tus each human being in accordance with its nature is consistently human-man or human-woman. Tere is no change of gender regardless of outside signs of sex changing. Te gender depends on metaphysical dimension of human. Butler’s theory is a consequence of rejecting the argument about substantial character of human existence and its unity and identity.
PL
Temat ludzkiej płciowości prawdopodobnie nie był w historii tak szeroko omawiany, jak to ma miejsce we współczesnej debacie. Fakt bycia mężczyzną czy kobietą raczej nie był też kontesto¬wany na taką skalę. Kwestia tożsamości człowieka pojawia się zatem jako szczególnie aktualny problem antropologiczny. Tożsamość płciowa jest drugą tożsamością odkrywaną w życiu ludz¬kim, której identyfikacja następuje już po odkryciu tożsamości siebie jako człowieka. Współcze¬sny człowiek otrzymuje obecnie wiele informacji na temat płciowości. Informacje te są jednak tylko pewnymi hipotezami, które on uważa często za bezsporne. Niniejszy artykuł wpisuje się w tę współczesną refleksję nad problemem tożsamości płciowej istoty ludzkiej. Przedstawia on z jednej strony poglądy Judith Butler, jednej z najważniejszych postaci we współczesnej dyskusji dotyczącej płci. Z drugiej strony prezentuje tomistyczną myśl na ten temat. Może się wydawać, że tomizm nie ma wiele wspólnego ze współczesnymi teoriami na temat płciowości. Zważywszy jednak, że myśl filozoficzna, oparta na dorobku św. Tomasza z Akwinu, dąży do wyjaśnienia całej rzeczywistości, może stanowić ona podstawę dla adekwatnej koncepcji tożsamości płciowej. Wydaje się to o tyle zasadne, że upowszechniana dziś tzw. teoria gender powinna być skonfrontowana z alternatywnym rozwiązaniem, nawiązującym do realistycznej perspektywy, charakterystycznej dla klasycznej filozofii człowieka.
The recent arrivals of refugees from the Middle East fleeing war and persecution, and forced migrants escaping poverty, mostly from Asia and Africa, have fundamentally challenged European states’ commitment to solidarity with these vulnerable populations seeking protection. Researchers have identified a range of social and individual factors that may facilitate or impede societies’ willingness to receive refugees and migrants. However, less attention has been devoted to how their reception may be linked with diminished provision of public services for citizens and declining welfare states in many countries in Europe. This article considers how the ascendance of the neoliberal ideology and its’ key shifts in public policy contributed to a growing sense of insecurity and precarity in industrialized countries over recent decades and has affected people’s willingness to assist and accept them. It brings together insights from a variety of disciplines to better understand social policy developments and its relation to refugee and forced migration. It concludes that a feminist psychosocial conception of relationality provides a basis for rethinking our approaches to these important issues by politicizing the ethical obligation to protect the lives of unknown others.
Problematyka gender, rozważana w różnych pracach, ma swoich zwolenników i przeciwników. Celem tego studium jest ukazanie kilku kluczowych stereotypów, powtarzanych przez większość krytyków, a także próba radykalnej separacji płci i gatunku. Od strony filozoficznej krytyka ta wychodzi z różnych koncepcji społecznego konstruktywizmu, jak też z poststrukturalistycznch teorii. Okazją do częstej krytyki staje się twórczość Judyty Butler. Pragniemy ukazać, do jakiego stopnia czytanie prac J. Butler może być nieporozumieniem. A przyczyną takiej lektury jest przede wszystkim nieznajomość hermeneutycznych założeń, co prowadzi do niezrozumienia jej twórczości.
EN
The issue of gender and gender studies is a topic that has its own admirers but also vehement critics. The aim of the paper is to outline a number of key stereotypes often repeated by the critics of “gender ideology“ which is above all an attempt to radically separate sex and gender. This “ideology“ is based on various conceptions of social constructivism, but also on poststructuralist theories. One of the most frequent targets of the above mentioned criticism is American philosopher Judith Butler. Many critics are irritated by her philosophical conception and political activity. The ambition of the text is to show that the conventional reading of Judith Butler is very often just a misunderstanding. The reason of this misconception is primarily the ignorance of her hermeneutical points of departure, which leads to the misinterpretation of her work.
The article is an attempt at capturing the relationship between the lives and creative attitudes of Rahel Varnhagen, Hannah Arendt and Judith Butler. Starting with Varnhagen’s biography written by Arendt, the essay’s author wonders about the philosopher’s writing strategy. Instead of a classic reconstruction of life, the biographer offers a collage of excerpts from Rahel’s letters with extensive commentary. This form encourages one to read Rahel Varnhagen as a narration about the author and her own struggle with Jewish and female identity. The second relationship analysed in the essay is the impact of Hannah Arendt’s texts on Judith Butler’s writings. Despite the criticism of the philosopher’s writings, Arendt remains an unquestionable inspiration to Butler. The article also emphasises the differencebetween the theoreticians: Arendt uses the strategy of mimicry (writing about identity in the form of a German Jew’s biography), while Butler writes a politically-engaged text, exposing herself and her identity.
Drawing from interviews and ethnographic research, evidence is provided to suggest a sense of "anxiety" and "regret" amongst state social workers and case managers working on the "front-line" within local authority social service departments. There have been a number of theoretical approaches that have attempted to ground the concept of "power" to understand organizational practice though Foucauldian insights have been most captivating in illuminating power relations and subject positioning. In order to theoretically interrogate the relationship between social theory and professional power, we draw from the neo-Foucauldian work of American Social Philosopher Judith Butler-especially regarding Butler's (1990, 1993 and 1998) powerful work on "performativity" and its relationship to social work. We also attempt to examine the "distances" between the social work role and social workers narratives through an examination of notions of "anxiety" and "regret" in the face of the professionalisation of state social work.
The essay outlines a “critical genealogy” of the notion of resemblance which structures the hierarchical relationship between the impeccable Original (Man, the source text) and its ultimately imperfect, failed copy (woman, translation). I examine the analogy between translation and the female that has prevailed in modern scholarship, and reveal its other, subversive side. The displacement of meanings in this repetitive analogy clarifies the relationship between the source and the target text in the light of the Butlerian notion of “critical mimesis”: a subversive play of meanings that takes place in the performative continuum of cultural translation.
In the text we deal with the Judith Butler‘s concept of performativity (reiterative power of discourse to produce and perform a type of constructed identity) in relation to contemporary polish women‘s literature. Also thanks to Judith Butler traditional boundaries between masculinity and femininity are shifting. In the 90‘s many female authors were using e.g. provocative motifs associated with female corporeality (e.g. Izabela Filipiak). Nowadays a lot of female authors are not only reinterpreting the traditional (male) canon of literature (Bo¿ena Umiñska-Keff), but also describing and questioning the mechanisms of marginalization or the processs of creating our gender identity (Sylwia Chutnik, Julia Fiedorczuk).
This article aims to explore Judith Butler’s concept of precarity in Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Lowland. The questions this study seeks to find answers to are: What are the various manifestations of Butler’s notion of precarity in The Lowland? And to what extent does the Butlerian sense of agency allow the main characters of The Lowland the possi- bility of overcoming precarity? This research shows how enforced dispossession, which is a product of globally-imposed precarity, incites violence and leads to the involuntary migration of the subjects. In addition, it is revealed that precarity plays a segregative role in escalating religious and tribal conflicts in the post-Partition India. More importantly, in the final analysis, this study suggests that Butler’s reiterative sense of agency fails to account for the normative dynamics of precarity which is at work in the diasporic context of The Lowland.
Organology, the study of musical instruments, has traditionally concentrated on the documentation of instruments: their history, roles in culture, and classification. However, as post-modern, feminist, and post-colonial perspectives have questioned some of the assumptions inherent in historiographical, ethnographic, and positivist endeavours because of their part in reproducing hegemonic ideologies, re-thinking organology and thus developing a richer account of musical instruments has become an urgent task. With this regard a queer perspective in organology, in particular informed by Judith Butler’s theories of “gender trouble,” is crucial in agitating normative beliefs, values, and attitudes that underpin notions of instrumental identity, interaction, and meaning. A queer organology becomes especially significant in the critical engagement with musical instruments like those invented by the British composer, performer, and inventor Hugh Davies (1943-2005), and in particular his entirely found, amplified, new musical instruments. This is because the challenges to traditional instrumental ontologies, the “instrumental trouble” that these instruments pose: reveal the boundaries of conventional organological approaches and methodologies, which are unsuitable in capturing their full significance. Deploying Butler’s concepts of recognition, performativity, and subversion in their study can thus represent an effective strategy in the development of a coherent critique of Davies’s instruments, but also in offering an opportunity to further the understanding of the fundamental importance that musical instruments play in the articulations of music, as part of what may be called an “instrumental turn.”
Autor artykułu analizuje powieść Heinza Strunka Der goldene Handschuh [Złota rękawiczka] w oparciu o rozważania Judith Butler Excitable Speech (Walczące słowa. Mowa nienawiści i polityka performatywu). Ukazane zostaje nie tylko zagadnienie przemocy poprzez język, lecz także język jako forma przemocy. Pierwszą płaszczyznę rozważań stanowi analiza wypowiedzi postaci oraz wewnętrzna fokalizacja postaci Fritza Honki. Na drugiej płaszczyźnie autor artykułu bada intersubiektywną strukturę zależności jako wzajemne odziaływanie różnych postaci. Na zakończenie krytycznej analizie poddana zostaje sama narracja jako mowa przedstawiona. Rozważaniom towarzyszy teza, iż asynchroniczny język postaci pozostaje na płaszczyźnie tekstu niejasny i wzmacnia tym samym opisaną w artykule zasadę języka przemocy.Motyw przemocy poprzez język na płaszczyźnie postaci znajduje odzwierciedlenie na poziomie samej narracji jako język przemocy. Zamierzeniem niniejszego artykułu jest stworzenie krytyczno-refleksyjnych ram dla omawianego tekstu uwrażliwiających czytelnika na zagadnienie języka przemocy.
EN
The paper analyses the novel by Heinz Strunk Der Goldene Handschuh [The Golden Glove] against Judith Butler’s comments on Excitable Speech. Alongside the presentation of violence through language, language as a form of violence is brought into focus. The first level of analysis is constructed around the investigation of utterances and internal focalization of the character of Fritz Honka. The second level encompasses the intersubjective structure of description as a dialogic interdependence between various characters. Finally, the narration itself as a form of reported speech is critically investigated. The following hypothesis is being explored: the asynchronous speech of the characters remains inexplicit on the textual level, which evokes the described principle of hurtful speech. The expression of violence at the level of the characters is transformed into the language of violence at the narrative level. The aim of the contribution is therefore to present the narration within a critical framework allowing for evoking of the awareness of the interrelationships between language and violence.
DE
Dieser Beitrag untersucht Heinz Strunks Roman Der goldene Handschuh auf Grundlage von Judith Butlers Ausführungen zur Excitable Speech. Neben der Darstellung von Gewalt durch Sprache wird die Sprache als Form der Gewalt in den Fokus gerückt. Die erste Ebene der Analyse bilden die wörtliche Rede und die interne Fokalisierung der Figur ›Fritz Honka‹. Auf der zweiten Ebene wird die intersubjektive Beziehungsstruktur als dialogische Wechselwirkung zwischen verschiedenen Figuren betrachtet. Abschließend wird das Erzählen selbst als vorgetragene Rede kritisch hinterfragt. Folgende These wird untersucht: Die asynchrone Sprache der Figuren bleibt auf der Textebene unvermittelt und verstärkt dadurch das beschriebene Prinzip des verletzenden Sprechens. Die Darstellung der Gewalt durch die Sprache auf der Ebene der Figuren wird durch den Erzähltext selbst als Sprache der Gewalt reproduziert. Ziel des Beitrags ist es deshalb, die Erzählung kritisch zu erschließen, um dadurch eine grundsätzliche Sensibilisierung für die Reflexion der Zusammenhänge von Sprache und Gewalt zu erreichen.
Recent years have seen several attempts by writers and critics to understand the changed sensibility in post-9/11 fiction through a variety of new -isms. This essay explores this cultural shift in a different way, finding a ‘turn to precarity’ in twenty-first century fiction characterised by a renewal of interest in the flow and foreclosure of affect, the resurgence of questions about vulnerability and our relationships to the other, and a heightened awareness of the social dynamics of seeing. The essay draws these tendencies together via the work of Judith Butler in Frames of War, in an analysis of Trezza Azzopardi’s quasi-biographical study of precarious life, Remember Me.
The aim of this article is to think through the relation between the structure of play and the constitution of sociality, particularly in the light of the work of the key theoretician of play, Johan Huizinga, but also with reference to other authors such as D. W. Winnicott, T. S. Henricks and J. Butler. In view of the extensive field covered by the study of the conduct of play and of the heterogeneity of the phenomenon of play, this study confines itself to an inquiry into the complex character of the ambivalent relation between rationality and irrationality; goal-directedness and the internality of goals; playfulness and responsibility; the individual and the society in the context of play. The study argues that play is a space of ambivalence which enables the cultivation of the creative negotiation of the relations of power, including subversive acts and transformation, the ability to combine the attitude of dependence with authority, the sacred with the everyday, the abilities of communication with otherness. Out of this space there is also born sociality.
FR
Le but du présent article est de penser le rapport entre la structure du jeu et la constitution de la socialité en utilisant essentiellement l’oeuvre du théoricien clé du jeu Johan Huizinga, mais en se référant aussi à d’autres auteurs comme D. W. Winnicott, T. S. Henricks et J. Butler. Etant données l’étendue de la sphère thématique que couvrent les études du comportement ludique et la diversité des approches selon lesquelles on peut déterminer le phénomène du jeu, notre étude se limite à l’investigation de la nature complexe du rapport d’ambivalence entre rationalité et irrationalité, finalité et autotélisme, frivolité et responsabilité, individu et société, dans le cadre du jeu. Nous défendons la thèse selon laquelle le jeu est un espace de l’ambivalence, qui permet la cultivation d’une négociation créatrice des rapports de pouvoir, dont les actes subversifs et la transformation, de la capacité de combiner l’attitude la dépendance et de la souveraineté, du sacré et du quotidien, de la capacité de communiquer avec l’altérité. C’est également dans cet espace que naît la socialité.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.