sociology
The Front Room: Diaspora Migrant Aesthetics in the Home – review
In The Front Room, Michael McMillan examines the significance of domestic spaces in creating a sense of belonging for Caribbean migrants in the UK. Delving into themes of resistance and creolisation, these sensitively curated essays and images reveal how ordinary objects shape diasporic identities, writes Antara Chakrabarty.
Migration, at its most basic level, means a physical relocation. However, this “mobility” entails a complex, polysemous reality whose consequences reverberate for those who leave one place for another. Michael McMillan’s The Front Room: Diaspora Migrant Aesthetics in the Home presents a poignant personal tale of materiality, memory and diasporic emotions. It connects with readers by presenting the past without falling prey to anachronism, narrating ordinary aspects of our day-to-day lives through pertinent sociological themes and recurring issues like racism, world politics, aspirations, diasporic memory and more. Michael McMillan, a playwright and artist, offers a text that unfolds as a choreopoem to the domestic spaces inhabited by migrants, infused with theatricality and a curatorial sensibility around the images and references shared. The book, originally published in 2009, has been re-released and is divided across several themes and including additional essays, including by eminent cultural anthropologist Stuart Hall.
Caribbean diaspora re-imagined the Victorian parlour, (the front room) through a sense of decolonial resistance, cultural survival and aspirational attempts to adapt to the new culture in which they found themselves.
The book takes us on a journey of discovery as to what spaces meant, looked, smelled and felt like for Caribbean diaspora settled in the UK from the mid-20th century. It describes how the tactile sensations and emotions held in a room amount to so much more than its aesthetics. The text begins with a section on how Caribbean diaspora re-imagined the Victorian parlour, (the front room) through a sense of decolonial resistance, cultural survival and aspirational attempts to adapt to the new culture in which they found themselves. The images used to showcase the different varieties of such front rooms were mostly taken from the response to the exhibition, A front room in 1976 , curated by McMillan at the Museum of the Home in London in 2005-06.
A primary thematic focus is the emergence of a significant cultural process of change often called as creolisation which gives rise to a third culture which is neither Caribbean, nor British, but a diasporic intermingling of the two. This creolisation also occurs as a result of intergenerational change in the wake of World War Two and apartheid. Moreover, it speaks to the changing imagination around what can be called a “home”, reflecting changes in identity in a foreign land. The lucidity of the essays and the various references to sociological and anthropological works on the perception of “self”, vis-à-vis place making like those by Erving Goffman, Emile Durkheim, Stuart Hall gears the book towards students beyond the disciplinary boundaries of Sociology, Anthropology, Arts and Aesthetics, History, Museology and more. Towards the latter part of the book, McMillan also brings in other diasporic communities beyond the Caribbean, such as Moroccan, Surinamese, Antillean and Indonesian migrant communities in the Netherlands.
Front rooms generally resisted change, carrying forward an aesthetic and sensibility as the badge or identifier of a community.
The book presents an important diasporic narrative underpinned by a critical struggle of the diasporic experience: underneath the subject of the ”front room” lies the process of subverted diasporic emotions and anti-assimilation cultural change. The emotional attachments are prioritised over fitting exactly within the typical British space. McMillan presents his readers with ten commodities that were normally seen in the Caribbean households which were also seen in the diasporic “front room” in the UK. These objects wordlessly communicated the Caribbean way of life without. A homogenisation of the objects found in the across the British Caribbean front room happened gradually as people visited one another, trying to emulate the aesthetics of a diasporic migrant culture. As someone from South Asia, I can vouch fora very similar pattern post-colonisation. Some chose to keep religious symbolic items at the forefront whereas the others chose to fit into the moral definition of aesthetics according to the British. A front room could become a Durkheimian quasi-sacred space which had to be seen beyond its mundane nature. McMillan emphasises the changes across generations and how front rooms generally resisted change, carrying forward an aesthetic and sensibility as the badge or identifier of a community. The book makes its readers aware of the significance contained in the spaces not just through imagery, but also literary compositions like songs, poems, and other varieties of literature.
The gendered division of aesthetics was apparent in the crochets made by the women in contrast to the glass cabinets and drinks trolleys that showcased men’s tastes.
The book describes the affective power of objects through ten examples including the paraffin heater, which gave a sense of reassurance and reminded migrants of their homes through the scent of paraffin oil. The radiogram (a piece of furniture that combined a radio and record player) played the role of “home” in another new land, a sonic gateway into the past. Several other items also acted in service of what Goffman would call ‘impression management’ to a larger audience. The gendered division of aesthetics was apparent in the crochets made by the women in contrast to the glass cabinets and drinks trolleys that showcased men’s tastes. Notably, the carpets and wallpapers, though quintessentially British in theory, could be reclaimed and subverted through the choice of colourful options rather than plain base colours. The book also captures the effects of technological evolution through the inclusion of televisions, telephones and pictures of revered role models such as politicians and singers on display.
McMillan’s work takes account of the constant search for refuge in the perfectly arranged room as a way of way of asserting one’s identity and materialising an authentic diasporic identity in one’s home.
One may make the mistake of perceiving this text as an over-romanticisation of material objects that convey diasporic identity. However, McMillan avoids this, convincing his readers of the deeply felt significance of the ordinary in connecting diaspora to the places they left behind. He bolsters this through setting ordinary items, spaces and lives in the context of unique epistemological nuances such as apartheid, cultural hybridisation, symbolic capital, taste and more. His work takes account of the constant search for refuge in the perfectly arranged room as a way of way of asserting one’s identity and materialising an authentic diasporic identity in one’s home.
The book is successful in its theatrical and thoughtful presentation and the depth it achieves over only a limited number of essays. Its effect is to fill readers’ minds with questions and to pave the way for similar studies in other postcolonial diasporic communities.
Note: This review gives the views of the author, and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, or of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Image credit: 12matamoros on Pixabay
Reframing the problem of India’s street dogs
India’s millions of stray dogs coexist largely peacefully with humans, however, an increase in dog attacks and the prevalence of rabies cases has sparked calls to introduce stronger policy to reduce their numbers. In this essay, Pupul Dutta Prasad applies insights from Tim Newburn and Andrew Ward‘s book, Orderly Britain: How Britain Has Resolved Everyday Problems, from Dog Fouling to Double Parking, to consider how India could reframe its approach to the street dog issue.
In Orderly Britain, Professor of Criminology and Social Policy at LSE Tim Newburn (whose outstanding contribution to these fields has recently been celebrated) and journalist Andrew Ward succeed in foregrounding the ordinary, the mundane, and the marginal in service of a deeper purpose. The authors turn their gaze on dog fouling, smoking, drinking, queuing, using public toilets, and parking as a means of exploring changing social order in Britain. Rather than review the book (which has been done on this blog and elsewhere), I want to consider how the insights into dealing with everyday issues in Britain can be applied in other contexts, specifically, how Britain’s approach to dog fouling could be drawn upon to develop a better understanding of India’s problem with street dogs and some of the ways being publicly discussed to tackle it.
The authors make two key observations in their analysis which are relevant when looking beyond Britain. First, they assert that meaningful enquiry into everyday social problems should involve taking a step back and looking at genealogy – how certain routines come to be viewed as problems in the first place. A key point the authors underline in this regard is that a thing does not get defined as a social problem without itself undergoing a social process. That process is often a site of contestation between contrasting perspectives or claims advanced by different groups with varying levels of influence.
[The authors] assert that meaningful enquiry into everyday social problems should involve taking a step back and looking at genealogy – how certain routines come to be viewed as problems in the first place.
Second, they take note of measures taken in response to a behaviour – previously tolerated – that begins to be thought of collectively as a social problem. Here, the authors draw our attention to formal mechanisms (laws, regulations, courts, etc.) as well as informal ones (social pressure and expectations). They observe that whereas the two frequently act in concert, in some respects it is often the less formal modes of control that have a greater impact.
Both the insights are substantiated, and indeed reinforced, by what the authors find to be the case with dog fouling. Their examination shows that in recent decades dog waste transformed from something that was once seen merely as unpleasant into a social problem requiring intervention. The presence of dog waste in public spaces has increasingly become perceived as a civic and moral failure, not just a public health risk. This has ensured that most dog owners in Britain now pick up and dispose of their dog’s faeces because they feel encouraged, via more informal means, to fulfil the social expectation placed on them. Fines and other penalties introduced for those that fail to “do the right thing” have of course played a part too.
At the outset, I ought to clear up that dog waste in public places does not get the attention in India which it does in Britain. This is not to pass any judgments on the comparative standards of public hygiene and individual conduct. Rather, the point of interest to me is that the lack of social concern for dog poo speaks precisely to the deeper sociological roots of problem-creation which Newburn and Ward highlight. Extrapolating that insight from their work, even though sections of the Indian citizenry presumably are troubled by dog fouling, in the collective mind of the society it is yet to be embedded as a problem.
Street dogs have long been an integral part of everyday life in India […] At the same time, they have adversely affected many lives as a source of rabies and other harm.
In contrast, the same is certainly not true of what is typically known as the “menace” or “terror” of street dogs. The term encompasses both those that have strayed from home or been abandoned and homeless, free-ranging dogs that have never had owners. Street dogs have long been an integral part of everyday life in India, with at least a handful of individuals in every community happy to feed them and have them around. At the same time, they have adversely affected many lives as a source of rabies and other harm. A public concern for health and safety and a consequent opposition to street dogs has recently been growing.
There are some notable factors behind the change in social attitudes towards street dogs. First is the sheer number of these dogs. One estimate puts their total population at roughly 59 million. In addition, the general perception is that the numbers are swelling all the time due to an ineffective regime for checking their overpopulation. Second, dog bites and attacks from free-roaming dogs, particularly afflicting children, are thought to be on the rise. With rabies cases and deaths in India being the highest worldwide, the danger such incidents pose to public health and safety has grown. Finally, the public anxiety over street dogs has been exacerbated by horrifying stories and videos on social and other media of children getting bitten and mauled by dogs, at times fatally.
In some instances the dogs involved in attacks are pets – “dangerous breeds” and “status dogs” like Pit Bulls, American Bulldogs, and Rottweilers – not the unsophisticated Indian pariah dogs on the street. Yet, this does not seem to cause as much outrage against the foreign species and their irresponsible, (mostly) rich owners. Implicit in this difference could be a power dynamic, a stronger hostility towards street dogs based on sheer numbers, or both. That said, a distinct social construction of the problem of street dogs in India is noticeable.
The contention is that the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023 (first introduced in 2001) take away the discretionary power local authorities had to remove, euthanise or kill stray dogs for keeping public spaces safe.
A growing demand for stringent measures to curb the menace of stray dogs is now evident. The focus of this demand is primarily on the control of their population. Some argue that the need for decisive action to achieve reduction in their population warrants a new legal option. The contention is that the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023 (first introduced in 2001) take away the discretionary power local authorities had to remove, euthanise or kill stray dogs for keeping public spaces safe. On this view, the ABC rules are effectively preventing the problem from being brought under control. The assumption behind it seems to be that street dog management through methods such as sterilisation and vaccination programmes, dog shelters, and garbage collection are either insufficient or have failed. A legal challenge to the ABC Rules is currently being heard by the Supreme Court of India.
Irrespective of what the judicial outcome is, there are grounds for scepticism that licence to exterminate street dogs will work, or be morally acceptable to the public. Even taking an instrumentalist point of view, experience shows that the existing statutory duty to sterilise and vaccinate street dogs has been neglected for reasons like lack of resources and lower prioritisation. This begs the question of how any new provision could be implemented. Moreover, the unbridled power sought to destroy street dogs raises animal rights and welfare issues including that of cruelty. Another dimension of the formal (lethal) means of addressing the problem is that it risks displacing the less formal (humane) ways, whose importance in shaping behavioural change comes out remarkably well in Newburn and Ward’s analysis.
A key – though often obscured – informal element in the Indian context is that humans and street dogs have become socialised to each other’s presence.
In my view, a key – though often obscured – informal element in the Indian context is that humans and street dogs have become socialised to each other’s presence. Both groups seem to have learned to go about their lives unperturbed by the other, making for proportionally low human-dog conflict, given the numbers in question. (See the pictures below of Shimla, the town where I live and work.)
Dogs and humans coexisting in Shimla. Credit: Dr Pupul Dutta Prasad.
In fact, one could make a valid argument for nurturing and consolidating this social bond between the two by explaining to people, especially school children, how to behave with street dogs. As environmentalist Ranjit Lal asserts, how a dog behaves depends a lot on how it has been treated. Others have also argued in favour of managing human conflicts with dogs by “putting double the effort in[to] educating the local community” about acting responsibly while feeding street dogs. Applying sociological insights from Newburn and Ward’s work enables a deeper and more nuanced understanding of India’s street dog problem. Clearly, there is a lot more to it than treating street dogs themselves as the problem and calling for a radical solution like culling.
Note: This essay gives the views of the author, and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, or of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Image Credit: Pupul Dutta Prasad.
It’s Good Work—If You Can Get It
As the world of work sagged and collapsed, University of North Carolina sociologist and W-2 worker Alexandrea Ravenelle decided to document this economic shock in real time....
Navigating the “Self” in the Age of AI: A Journey into Generative Horizons
In an earlier post, I discussed some of my recent thinking on the topic of “What do people do better than computers?” Keep in mind that these thoughts will change over time, as the only constant we have in our work is change. In response to this post, Matthias Melcher shared this great post on what humans can do better than AI. Melcher’s emphasis on the importance of subjectivity and individuality in human thought really inspired me.
This post will unpack some of my thoughts about the self, individuality, and subjectivity as we think about the impact of generative AI in society.
Be warned, I get into the weeds a bit down below. I’ve been thinking a lot about consciousness and “what makes us human.” I’m also deep into the development of a GenEd course for my students, and I’ve been parsing out the differences between the humanities and social sciences.
Before the Advent of Generative AI
A range of theoretical stances influenced the definitions and conversations around self, individuality, and subjectivity in philosophy, the humanities, and the social sciences prior to the development of artificial intelligence. The examination of these concepts has a long history in these disciplines, and interpretations have changed over time. The following summarizes the general approach to these terms:
- Self:
- Philosophy: Traditionally, philosophical discussions about the self focused on questions of identity, consciousness, and personal experience. Philosophers such as René Descartes explored the nature of the self as a thinking, conscious entity (“I think, therefore I am”). Other philosophical traditions, like Eastern philosophies, approach the self as an interconnected part of a larger whole, emphasizing unity with the universe.
- Humanities: Stories and representations of individual experiences are frequently used in literature and the arts to examine the self. Artists and writers aimed to convey the intricacy of personal identity, feelings, and existential concerns. Social, historical, and cultural contexts all had an impact on this investigation.
- Social Sciences: Psychology and sociology study the self in relation to society and personal growth. Social scientists looked at how personal experiences, cultural norms, and environmental factors influenced people’s identities and social interactions.
- Individuality:
- Philosophy: Individuality in philosophy is often discussed in relation to the uniqueness and distinctiveness of each person. Existentialists such as Jean-Paul Sartre stressed the importance of personal autonomy and accountability in determining one’s true nature.
- Humanities: Literature and the arts celebrated individuality through portrayals of unique characters and personal journeys. The Romantic era, for example, placed a strong emphasis on the individual’s emotions, imagination, and subjective experience.
- Social Sciences: Psychology investigated individuality through the study of personality characteristics, thought processes, and the formation of a distinct self. Sociology examined how people navigated their identities in relation to societal institutions.
- Subjectivity:
- Philosophy: Subjectivity refers to the interior, personal experience of individuals. Phenomenologists such as Edmund Husserl studied the subjectivity of perception and the structures of consciousness. Phenomenology is the study of “phenomena”: the appearances of things, or things as they appear in our experience, or the ways we experience things, thus the meanings things have in our experience.
- Humanities: Subjectivity involves the expression of individual viewpoints and feelings in literature and the arts. A common goal for artists was to share their distinct perspectives and understandings of the world.
- Social Sciences: Sociology and anthropology consider subjectivity in the context of cultural practices and norms. People understood subjectivity as a lens through which they viewed and understood the social environments in which they lived.
With the Advent of Generative AI
Through the lens of AI, we have an opportunity to navigate through these complex landscapes of self, individuality, and subjectivity.
The study of self asks us to consider what makes us special, like a special blend made of our friends, family, and the knowledge we pick up. We not only discover the richness of our individuality but also question traditional notions of the untouched self, setting the stage for a transformative dialogue about our authenticity and uniqueness. Meanwhile, the concept of “subjectivity” unfolds as a dynamic interplay of roles, akin to donning various superhero costumes.
AI has the potential to serve as a creative companion, narrating stories that unveil the special qualities within each of us and showcasing the ever-changing nature of our roles. It also challenges us to reevaluate these ideas and rework how we conceptualize personal identity in new and novel contexts. Here are some possible future directions.
Rethinking Uniqueness in the Era of Generative AI
The possibilities of generative AI are upending the conventional wisdom regarding the “self” as an unexplored, singular entity. We are compelled to recognize the complex ways that culture molds our identities as we engage with artificial intelligence-generated content. The multiplicity of viewpoints generated by AI forces us to reconsider what it means to be truly original and authentic.
Subjectivity as a Fluid Concept
Because generative AI can replicate a wide range of subject positions, the idea that certain roles are inherently associated with specific individuals is called into question. As AI algorithms create content from multiple perspectives, the placeholder “subject” becomes a dynamic and fluid concept that emphasizes the malleability of subjectivity and blurs the lines between predefined roles.
Unveiling Social attributes in AI Outputs
Although AI has great promise, it also reproduces and reflects social prejudices. Analysis of AI results exposes the intrinsic prejudices in the technology, igniting debates concerning algorithmic justice and the moral ramifications of using AI in decision-making. Generative AI turns into a mirror, reflecting the prejudices ingrained in our societal systems.
AI-Driven Identity Formation: A Tapestry of Possibilities
Generative AI presents fresh accounts and viewpoints on the construction of identity. We are exposed to new perspectives on ourselves and the world around us through stories, artwork, and expressions created by AI. This rich tapestry of options upends established conventions and has the potential to promote a more flexible and inclusive understanding of personal identity.
Ethical Considerations in AI-Driven Social Construction
A growing number of ethical concerns are raised by AI’s involvement in social construction. What legal rights and obligations should be assigned, and who is responsible for content created by AI? The legal “subject” assumes novel forms in the AI context, compelling society to consider the moral ramifications of incorporating AI into our everyday existence.
Facilitating Critical Reflection on Cultural Phenomena
Generative AI turns into an effective instrument for provoking thought about cultural phenomena. AI challenges us to consider the societal norms that influence our identities by producing thought-provoking content. Engaging with AI-generated narratives forces us to consider the underlying presumptions and biases that shape our perceptions of subjectivity and the self.
The Journey Awaits
In conclusion, the integration of generative AI into society marks a transformative moment in our exploration of self, individuality, and subjectivity. As we navigate this evolving landscape, we must embrace the complexities and possibilities that AI brings to our understanding of individual identity within a broader societal context. The intersection of philosophy, technology, and culture invites us to embark on a journey into generative horizons, where these boundaries are continually redefined.
If you’d like to stay on top of areas like this, you should be reading my weekly newsletter. You can follow here.
Photo by Randy Jacob on Unsplash
The post Navigating the “Self” in the Age of AI: A Journey into Generative Horizons first appeared on Dr. Ian O'Byrne.
Care Without Pathology: How Trans- Health Activists Are Changing Medicine – review
In Care Without Pathology: How Trans- Health Activists Are Changing Medicine, Christoph Hanssmann explores the evolution of trans therapeutics and health activism through ethnographic fieldwork conducted in New York City and Buenos Aires. Demonstrating how grassroots movements are disrupting social and biomedical power structures, the book is an essential contribution to research on depathologisation efforts in trans care, writes Robin Skyer.
Care Without Pathology: How Trans- Health Activists Are Changing Medicine. Christoph Hanssmann. University of Minnesota Press. 2023.
Find this book: 
“The moves that would help the most transgender people the most? None of them are transgender specific”. Paisley Currah, praised political scientist and co-founder of the leading journal in trans* studies TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly, stated what seems to be a fairly obvious point at a seminar in 2020. Yet, considering the ways in which dominant political and media discourses speak about trans* therapeutics (the term that the author of Care Without Pathology, Christoph Hanssmann, uses to describe the wide variety of gender-affirming care), trans* health, and hence trans* lives, are still considered to be an exception.
(Following Marquis Bey, in this article I use “trans*” – with an asterisk – as a disruptive term that perturbs ontological states. Most often, in Anglophone contexts, “trans” is used as an umbrella term to describe individuals whose gender identities expand beyond, subsume, or deny a binary structure. The use of the asterisk frees “trans*-ness” from its corporeal, nominalist ties. Instead, “trans*” becomes a function or expression; one that is neither predetermined nor limited in its scope.)
Hanssmann traces the shifting definition of trans* therapeutics, from 20th century transsexual medicine to contemporary crip, trans*-feminist informed healthcare infrastructures.
In Care Without Pathology, Hanssmann traces the shifting definition of trans* therapeutics, from 20th century transsexual medicine to contemporary crip, trans*-feminist informed healthcare infrastructures. In contrast to gay and lesbian depathologisation, Hanssmann notes, trans* activists and advocates have not looked for a divorce from medicine (as the tools for therapeutic care were, and continue to be, controlled by the state), but for a transformation of biomedical care structures. This is not to say that the movement seeks assimilation with, or inclusion within, current systems, but instead asks: what would it be like to receive the care we ask for, in the way that we need?
Care without pathology […] resists the damaging effects of legal, state, bureaucratic, and financial systems upon pathologised groups
Hanssmann emphasises how issues such as medical gatekeeping and self-determination in care settings are the result of hegemonic power relations; issues that many (multiply-)marginalised groups face in their interaction with biomedical practice. Care without pathology, he argues, calls not only upon a broader change of healthcare infrastructures, but resists the damaging effects of legal, state, bureaucratic, and financial systems upon pathologised groups. As such, trans* health activism has more in common with disability and feminist movements, as they contest hierarchies of power and systemic harm within the constraints of the present.
As an ethnographic study, Care Without Pathology is founded upon eight years of research in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and New York City, USA. Hanssmann argues that by choosing locations in both the Global South and the Global North, he was able to engage in “transhemispheric discursive inquiry” (17), an approach that leans away from a standard comparative study by acknowledging the interactions and relations between research sites. Although I would contest Hanssmann’s use of this oversimplified dichotomy, his choice of locations enables us to explore different contexts in which major changes in the regulation of trans* therapeutics were taking place between 2012 and 2018.
In Argentina, 2012 saw the passing of the Gender Identity Law, which removed the requirement of a diagnosis for trans* therapeutics. In 2013, the publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5) by the American Psychiatric Association removed “Gender Identity Disorder” from their guidelines and included a new diagnostic classification: ‘Gender Dysphoria’, which advocates saw as a positive step toward depathologisation. Hence, Care Without Pathology spans a period of significant transformation, the effects of which are continuing to unfurl. Moreover, Hanssmann draws upon ethnographic observations and interviews, ensuring that the voices of social workers, community members, activists and advocates resonate throughout the book.
Hanssmann draws upon ethnographic observations and interviews, ensuring that the voices of social workers, community members, activists and advocates resonate throughout the book.
Hanssmann describes vivid examples of grassroots activism and its volatile association with political compromise. Chapter Three, for example, focuses upon the use of epidemiological biographies by community-based researchers in Buenos Aires. This involved the combining of biographical data with statistics, creating visuals and information about the effects of violence and discrimination upon the health and lives of travesti and trans* people. Through this method, organisers were able to leverage political focus upon Argentinian state responsibilities for premature deaths, as well as institutionalised neglect and violence with regards to employment, healthcare, and housing. However, as Hanssmann highlights, this use of statistical collectivisation, and the concept of “population”, are closely associated with state power, structural violence, and trans* necropolitics.
[The] use of statistical collectivisation, and the concept of “population”, are closely associated with state power, structural violence, and trans* necropolitics
This is particularly salient for travesti, for whom the subsuming of their livelihoods, identities, and culture under a wider trans* umbrella is colonial oppression. (I urge readers to review the work of Malú Machuca Rose, who writes about travesti and resistance to colonial usage of the word; as well as the works of Giuseppe Campuzano and Miguel A. López.) It is through the discussion of these conflicting ideas that Care Without Pathology deftly illustrates the complexity of struggles for change.
Another example is outlined in Chapter Four, where Hanssmann describes the “narrow passageways of action” (149) used to contest Medicaid exclusion. Activists and advocates pressed for access to trans* therapeutics by using the language of state authorities that spoke predominantly of economic risk. They highlighted the negative effects of austerity measures and reframed the narrative around trans* therapeutics as a public good. Nevertheless, as Hanssmann explains, by utilising a method that draws upon human capital and the politics of investment, one may ask whether more harm may be caused (or left to fester), through an adherence to these neoliberal conceptions. It seems antithetical to use economic value as a measure for the “worthiness” of lives, when coalitional social change is what you are striving for.
What happens when trans* people seek to distance themselves from biomedical and state institutions, and find self-supporting solutions?
Hanssmann acknowledges that there has been a narrative shift from trans* health to trans* wellness, a change that reflects depathologisation efforts. He also mentions the work of scholars such as Cameron Awkward-Rich, Hil Malatino, and Andrea Long Chu, who highlight the constitutive pain and negativity of trans*-ness as a counter to “curative” discourse surrounding trans* therapeutics. Yet what could expand upon Hanssmann’s work is an exploration of self-procurement and therapeutic experimentation. What happens when trans* people seek to distance themselves from biomedical and state institutions, and find self-supporting solutions? Consequently, we may ask whether the term “trans* therapeutics” is appropriate to describe trans* care practices. It is in this area that my own PhD research is situated. My current research approaches the topic of trans* care through qualitative, participatory techniques and looks to complement Hanssmann’s analysis.
Where Care Without Pathology succeeds is through the presentation of trans* activisms that have acknowledged the epistemological ties between groups and individuals that are labelled as “an exception”. By demonstrating how the politics of difference creates harm through biomedical structures and other systems of power, Hanssmann highlights the need for coalitional activism in the struggle for social change, and as resistance to neocolonialism. It is an excellent addition to the reading lists of scholars, activists, and indeed, anyone interested in social movements, queer studies and the sociology of care.
This post gives the views of the author, and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, or of the London School of Economics and Political Science. The LSE RB blog may receive a small commission if you choose to make a purchase through the above Amazon affiliate link. This is entirely independent of the coverage of the book on LSE Review of Books.
Image Credit: Ross Burgess on Wikimedia Commons.
Making Endless War: The Vietnam and Arab-Israeli Conflicts in the History of International Law – review
In Making Endless War: The Vietnam and Arab-Israeli Conflicts in the History of International Law, Brian Cuddy and Victor Kattan bring together essays exploring attempts to develop legal rationales for the continued waging of war since 1945, despite the general ban on war decreed through the United Nations Charter. Linked through a nuanced comparative framework, the essays in this timely collection show how these different conflicts have shaped the international laws of war over the past eight decades, writes Eric Loefflad.
Making Endless War: The Vietnam and Arab-Israeli Conflicts in the History of International Law. Brian Cuddy and Victor Kattan. University of Michigan Press. 2023.
Find this book:
For Jeff Halper, an American-Israeli anthropologist, co-founder of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, and proponent of a single democratic state in historic Palestine, the decision to become an Israeli in the first place had a great deal to do with the Vietnam War. True to the counter-culture protests that arose in response to the War, the activist Halper, like so many young, idealistic American Jews of his era, viewed Israel as a more direct conduit to his heritage than a homogenising suburban upbringing could ever allow for. This search for meaning was coupled with a widespread difference in how the Vietnam War and Israel’s wars were broadly characterised in Halper’s contexts of influence. For many Americans who opposed intervention in Southeast Asia, Israeli violence differed in its “purity of arms.” According to this framing, in direct contrast to an American government waging wars half a world away, Israel zealously fought for its very survival right at its doorstep. It was witnessing the demolition of Palestinian homes to make way for Israeli settlers in the West Bank that caused Halper to renounce this narrative and rededicate his life.
the collection centres on the broad theme of how mostly American and Israeli lawyers, statesmen and military officers used issues that arose in the two conflicts to proclaim exceptions to the general ban on war as entrenched in 1945 through the United Nations Charter.
While Halper’s journey may be a unique one, it is nevertheless a testament to how intersections between post-Second World War conflict in Southeast Asia and the Middle East shaped the lives of so many different people in so many different ways. For anyone interested in how this multitude of individual experiences might be understood in relation to broader systemic forces, especially the variable medium for navigating “legitimate” violence deemed the “laws of war”, historian Brian Cuddy and international lawyer Victor Kattan’s Making Endless War is an invaluable resource. Comprised of ten robust chapters and an insightful forward by Richard Falk (a leading international legal critic of the Vietnam War and later the one-time United Nations Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories), Making Endless War proceeds on a roughly chronological basis from 1945 to the present day, tracing developments and unearthing connections between the two (meta-)conflicts. With chapters confronting a variety of issues from multiple perspectives, the collection centres on the broad theme of how mostly American and Israeli lawyers, statesmen and military officers used issues that arose in the two conflicts to proclaim exceptions to the general ban on war as entrenched in 1945 through the United Nations Charter. While its detailing of legal doctrine is truly world-class, Making Endless War’s revelation of the individual personalities, diplomatic intrigue and political struggles behind ostensibly “apolitical” technicalities is equally outstanding.
Vietnam, emboldened by its resistance to the US, led efforts in the 1970s to include non-state national liberation movements within a regime of the laws of war that hitherto only granted rights to state actors.
One illustration of how this text accomplishes its multi-faceted, but nevertheless cohesive, focus across chapters concerns the debate on the revision of the laws of war via two Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions. In Chapter Five, Amanda Alexander explores the significance of how Vietnam, emboldened by its resistance to the US, led efforts in the 1970s to include non-state national liberation movements within a regime of the laws of war that hitherto only granted rights to state actors. Following this, in Chapter Six, Ihab Shalbak and Jessica Whyte centre the Janus-faced quality of what this revision meant for the Palestinians. While it provided their cause with a newfound degree of institutional legitimation, it also constrained Palestinian efforts to unite themselves as a revolutionary people whose struggle could not be divided along the lines presumed by the law. From here, co-editor Victor Kattan presents an account in Chapter Seven of how Israel moved from being the sole dissident resisting revision in the 70s (due to its application to the Palestinians) to being joined by the US in the 80s. This coincided with the ascent of the Reagan Administration in the 80s where an influential grouping of Neoconservatives and Vietnam veterans – invoking arguments pioneered by Israel – similarly prevented the US from ratifying the Geneva Convention’s Additional Protocols. Finally, in Chapter Eight, Craig Jones examines how, despite their nations’ disavowal, American and Israeli lawyers became adept at using the laws of war to enable, as opposed to constrain, violence through developing a regime of so-called “operational law” that integrated international and domestic legal standards in a manner “…designed specifically to furnish military commanders with the tools they required for ‘mission success’” (215).
With the ascent of the Reagan Administration in the 80s […] an influential grouping of Neoconservatives and Vietnam veterans – invoking arguments pioneered by Israel – similarly prevented the US from ratifying the Geneva Convention’s Additional Protocols
When reading Making Endless War in this present moment, it is naturally impossible to disconnect its insights from the most recent bloodshed in Israel-Palestine that erupted almost immediately following the collection’s release. Fortuitous in the most horrific way possible, Cuddy and Kattan provide an invaluable service in exposing the impossibly high stakes of the despair invoking “endlessness” that animates their collection’s poignant title. However, by connecting the greater Arab-Israeli conflict to the Vietnam War, the editors make a significant contribution in decentring the widespread viewpoint that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is fundamentally unique – a presumption that unites pro-Israel and pro-Palestine advocates who agree on virtually nothing else. In this way, Making Endless War provides a powerful statement on how episodes of violence, however specific they might appear, cannot be understood independent of greater forces – including (and perhaps especially) the principles and institutions that present their mission as an effort to constrain armed conflict. As such, Cuddy and Kattan’s collection can be viewed as a major innovation in building a greater genealogy of global violence.
Making Endless War provides a powerful statement on how episodes of violence, however specific they might appear, cannot be understood independent of greater forces – including (and perhaps especially) the principles and institutions that present their mission as an effort to constrain armed conflict.
While their comparative framework might be viewed as limited in its representations, the editors are eminently aware of this, and this very awareness forms a cornerstone of their methodology. On this point, they deliberately confront the significance of how, especially within the centres of global power, “[t]he Vietnam War and the multiple Arab-Israeli conflicts became cultural moments that captured the public imagination in ways few other conflicts did, even those that were more lethal (262).” With this comparative captivation itself an important finding, there is no reason why the insights developed through Making Endless War cannot be extended to include the multitude of other forces, fixations, and personalities that can be located within the many ideologies of war that shape our lives. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a particularly vast and gut-wrenching repository of said ideologies. Sadly, there is no shortage of material for interested scholars to draw upon.
This post gives the views of the author, and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, or of the London School of Economics and Political Science. The LSE RB blog may receive a small commission if you choose to make a purchase through the above Amazon affiliate link. This is entirely independent of the coverage of the book on LSE Review of Books.
Image Credit: Michiel Vaartjes on Shutterstock.
The Feudal World
Between dodging viruses and pondering fascism and climate disasters,
I have been re-reading a truly uplifting book which I hadn't visited for many
years. It's the masterpiece of the French historian Marc Bloch, Feudal
Society, first published in 1940. I have a 2-volume paperback of the
English translation, which I bought as a student for the terrifying price of 3
dollars and 60 cents.
It's social history or historical
sociology, whichever you like. Bloch set himself the austere task of
anatomizing a whole society, tracing the basic relationships that made it a
distinct social formation. But it is also full-blooded history, concerned with
the conditions that brought this society into being, its attitudes, its
divisions, its conflicts, its laws; with how it survived in western Europe for five
hundred years or so, and how it changed.
Bloch's picture of feudalism isn't derived, as so many
discussions of social structures are, from a pre-formed model. It's built up from a wide range of the surviving evidence: handwritten documents of course,
but also the names of villages, the shapes of fields, the decorations of
churches, and so on. And it's far from static. The book briskly narrates
invasions, technological changes, intellectual debates, feuds; and it's
concerned not just with mapping divisions in feudal society, but, in some detail, with how new
hierarchies were made.
And for all the austerity of the task, Bloch is a lively
writer. He has verve and humour. Sometimes he takes the reader aside for a
moment, to talk about the fragmented state of the evidence, or to speculate on
mediaeval minstrels' sources for the stories they chanted and sang. The feudal
period, he notes, was one of the great ages of forgery, with landowners, kings,
monastries and even the Popes relying on grossly fabricated documents. Fake
news is nothing new!
Some other lines of thought also bring me back to the present.
Bloch suggests there was in those days a pervasive sense of precarity, even of doom.
Especially in the earlier centuries, people widely thought they were living in
the end times, that human history did not have many more years to run. I'm hearing some of those tones now, as we contemplate climate catastrophe and the refusal of state and corporate power-holders to make a real change of direction.
Eighty years after Feudal Society was published, it's easy to see
its limits. For one thing, half the population of feudal society is missing:
the book says almost nothing about women's lives. (Ironically, the title in French
is feminine: La société féodale.) Doubtless, too, the book is quite outdated as historiography. Its division of early and late periods seems
mechanical, and later historians have found out much more about the common
people than Bloch did. But I still think it was a remarkable piece of work.
I have two other books by Bloch, very different. One was used as a
textbook when I was a student at the University of Melbourne, the reflective
essay The historian's craft. The other, less known to academics, is Strange
Defeat. Bloch was an officer in the French army in both world wars. He
briefly escaped at Dunkirk from the German invasion in 1940 but returned to
France. Strange Defeat is a memoir of his experience and a reflection on
the collapse. As a Jew, Bloch was in the cross-hairs of Vichy and Nazi
antisemitism. He joined the resistance and went underground as a courier and
organizer; was finally captured by the secret police, tortured and shot. The rest
is silence.
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-469750017 -1073732485 9 0 511 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
ISA Award
Just announced: I'm being given the International
Sociological Association's Award for Excellence in Research and Practice.
This award is given once every 4 years; it's a great honour. My thanks to the
ISA! And to the many, many colleagues & friends I have worked with, over
the years.
The social science I value is engaged in the world, it
doesn't watch from a distance. It's empirical and utopian. It's willing
to explore questions ranging from personal life to global empire. It doesn't
flinch from issues of violence and power. But it also asks how new and
better possibilities emerge.
As I argue in The Good University, intellectual work
needs co-operation. I've been privileged to work with many people on problems
that truly matter. Decoding the multiple forms of inequality, and building a
postcolonial social science, are steps towards a just and sustainable world.
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-536859905 -1073732485 9 0 511 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
Teachers, and Sociologists
The Journal of Professional Learning, sponsored by
the NSW Teachers' Federation, has just published a condensed version of my
paper on the nature of teachers' work in schools. It's available (open access) here: https://cpl.asn.au/journal/semester-2-2021/vital-elusive-and-fantastically-complex-teacher-s-worth
. Please be my guest!
Re the future of sociology: Alain Caillé (Nanterre University)
and Frédéric Vandenberghe (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro) have just
published For a New Classic Sociology: A Proposition, followed by a Debate,
Routledge, 2021. It has their
"position paper" outlining an intriguing agenda for re-shaping
sociology, plus responses by eleven colleagues. I'm a participant in the Debate
section, arguing for shaking free of global-North hegemony and building world
perspectives: "For sociology: more ambitious, more practical, and
definitely polyphonic" (pp. 77-83).
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-536859905 -1073732485 9 0 511 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
Call for Papers: From Economic Rationalism to Global Neoliberalism?
From Economic Rationalism to Global Neoliberalism?
A Workshop for Early-Career and Postgraduate Researchers
RMIT, Melbourne, Fri 2nd December, 2016
Hosted by The Australian Sociological Association’s (TASA) Sociology of Economic Life thematic group and Centre for Applied Social Research, RMIT
CALL FOR PAPERS
This year marks the 25th anniversary of Michael Pusey’s seminal text of economic sociology, Economic Rationalism in Canberra. Pusey’s book helped instigate a national conversation and publicised the concept of ‘economic rationalism’. It was ranked by TASA as one of the 10 most influential books in four decades of Australian sociology and described by The Age as a ‘celebrated analysis of how economic rationalism came to dominate policy making in Canberra’.
Today, the idea of ‘neoliberalism’ has entered into widespread use in the academy, society and social movements, evoking many of the free market, anti-statist notions critiqued in Pusey’s work. Despite short-lived claims that the 2008 global recession would bury neoliberalism, the politics of free markets and austerity seems as dominant as ever, in Australia and globally. Moreover, scholarship and debate about neoliberalism has exploded in the last quarter of a century.
In this context, this workshop offers a chance for emerging scholars undertaking studies of neoliberalism and economic rationalism, as it manifests in Australia and globally, to present their research at a day-long event in Melbourne. Held the day after TASA’s annual conference in Melbourne, this workshop will offer Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students and Early-Career Researchers (i.e., within five years of their PhD award) the chance to present their research in a supportive environment of peer-to-peer discussion and mentorship from leading scholars, including Michael Pusey who will read papers and provide extensive feedback.
We invite abstracts of 100-150 words and a brief (i.e., 50 words or less) biographical note, which should include reference to your HDR/ECR status. Authors of accepted abstracts will be asked to submit full papers of between 4000-7000 words (double-spaced) including tables, notes and references. We welcome research that focuses on any aspect of neoliberalism or economic rationalism within sociology as well as cognizant disciplines such as political science, political economy, geography, etc. Accepted papers will receive critical feedback by a senior scholar (who will also act as discussant) and at least one ECR/HDR peer at the workshop. Authors of accepted papers are expected to make a brief presentation of their paper at the workshop.
We plan to submit selected papers as a special section for the Journal of Sociology or a similar journal in the field (where they would be subject to the normal refereeing process). Please note that, as we cannot offer financial subsidies for participants, we particularly encourage those presenting papers at the 2016 TASA conference to submit papers for this workshop. (Note that TASA conference abstracts are due by 17th June, 2016 – for details, visit http://conference.tasa.org.au/).
Authors of accepted papers will be expected to be available for the full day of the workshop. We welcome papers exploring the following, and other, topics and questions related to the theme of the workshop:
- What is the nature of economic rationalism and neoliberalism today, in Australia or elsewhere?
- Are economic rationalism and neoliberalism the same thing?
- Should we understand contemporary economic policy making as a form of zombie economics?
- Is the term ‘neoliberalism’ useful?
- Is there a distinctively Australian variety of neoliberalism?
- How has the nature of the market, individuals, and society changed since the late 1970s?
- What are the implications of relying on markets and money to measure values? What happens to values when they are translated into a form that is legible to markets?
- Have economic rationalism and neoliberalism been successful? In what ways?
- Is it correct to argue that neoliberal economic reform represents a political project that shifts income and power to corporations and elites?
Please submit abstracts, following the specifications above, to tom.barnes@acu.edu.au or elizabeth.humphrys@uts.edu.au (co-conveners of Sociology of Economic Life thematic group, TASA) no later than Mon 27th June, 2016. (Authors of accepted abstracts will be asked to submit full papers for peer review within approx. 2-3 months of notified acceptance.) If you have questions, feel free to contact us.
The post Call for Papers: From Economic Rationalism to Global Neoliberalism? appeared first on Progress in Political Economy (PPE).