To what extent do non-human animals participate in that particular political configuration known as a public? While conventional wisdom about publics is predicated on a vision of political agency that privileges discursive and deliberative processes, recent scholarship situated in the material turn in the social sciences and humanities challenges the notion that publics are purely human and constituted exclusively through language. With these theorizations as a backdrop, this paper takes into consideration the multiple species that are implicated in political life and that play a role in constituting publics. Placing material definitions of publics in line with central concerns raised by human-animal studies, it is argued that animality is significant to publics in ways that have yet to be sufficiently theorized. The intent of this research is to invite further investigation of the myriad ways in which animal bodies and lives influence public formations in a manner that accounts for and also exceeds human capacity for symbolic communication.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Bingham N. Bees, butterflies, and bacteria: Biotechnology and the politics of nonhuman friendship Environment & Planning A 2006 38 3 483 498
Braun B. & Whatmore S. Political matter: Technoscience, democracy and public life 2010 Minneapolis, MN University of Minnesota Press
Bird Rose D. Cosmopolitics: The kiss of life New Formations 2012 76 101 113
Brown M. Science in democracy: Expertise, institutions, and representation. 2009 Cambridge, MA, and London, United Kingdom MIT Press
Derrida J. The animal that therefore I am (more to follow) Critical Inquiry 2002 28 2 369 418
Derrida J. & Mallet M. The animal that therefore I am. 2008 New York, NY Fordham University Press
Dewey J. The public and its problems 1927 Athens, OH Ohio University Press
Dillard-Wright D. Thinking across species boundaries: general sociality and embodied meaning Society & Animals 2009 17 53 71
Eckersley R. Environmentalism and political theory: Toward an ecocentric approach 1992 New York, NY State University of New York Press
Elder G. , Wolch J. & Emel J. Race, place and the bounds of humanity Society & Animals 1998 6 2 183 202
Habermas J. Burger T. The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society 1989 Cambridge, MA MIT Press
Haraway D. Grossberg L. , Nelson C. & Treichler P. The promises of monsters Cultural studies 1992 London, United Kingdom, and New York, NY Routledge
Haraway D. The companion species manifesto: dogs, people and significant otherness 2003 Chicago, IL Prickly Paradigm Press
Haraway D. When species meet 2008 Minneapolis, MN University of Minnesota Press
Hobson K. Political animals? On animals as subjects in an enlarged political geography Political Geography 2007 26 3 250 267
Ingold T. Rethinking the animate, reanimating thought Ethnos 2006 71 1 9 20
Latour B. Porter C. We have never been modern 1993 Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press
Latour B. Porter C. Politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy 2004 Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press
Latour B. Latour B. & Weibel P. From realpolitik to dingpolitik—or how to make things public Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy 2005 Boston, MA MIT Press
Lorimer H. Cultural geography: The busyness of being ‘more-than-representational’ Progress in Human Geography 2005 29 83 94
Marres N. Latour B. & Weibel P. Issues spark a public into being: A key but often forgotten point of the Lippman-Dewey debate Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy 2005 Boston, MA MIT Press
Marres N. Braun B. & Whatmore S. J. Front-staging nonhumans: Publicity as a constraint on the political activity of things Political matter: Technoscience, democracy and public life 2010 Minneapolis, MN University of Minnesota Press
Marres N. & Lezaun J. Materials and devices of the public: An introduction Economy & Society 2011 40 4 489 509
Michael M. Technoscientific bespoking: Animals, publics and the new genetics New Genetics and Society 2001 20 3 205 224
Michael M. Comprehension, apprehension, prehension: heterogeneity and the public understanding of science Science, Technology, & Human Values 2002 27 3 357 378
Michael M. Roadkill: Between humans, nonhuman animals and technologies Society & Animals 2004 12 4 277 297
Peters J. Glasser T. & Salmon C. Historical tensions in the concept of public opinion Public opinion and the communication of consent 1995 New York, NY The Guilford Press
Rasmussen C. The autonomous animal: Self governance and the modern subject 2011 Minneapolis, MN University of Minnesota
Spiegel M. The dreaded comparison: Human and animal slavery 1997 New York, NY Mirror
Thrift N. Non-representational theory: Space, politics, affect 2008 London, United Kingdom, and New York, NY Routledge
Warner M. Publics and counterpublics Public Culture 2002 14 49 90
Weil K. A report on the animal turn Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 2010 21 2 1 23
Weil K. Thinking animals: Why animal studies now 2012 New York, NY Columbia University Press
Whatmore S. Hybrid geographies: Natures, cultures, spaces 2002 London, United Kingdom Sage
Wolfe C. Human, all too human: “Animal studies” and the humanities PMLA 2009 124 2 564 575
Wolfe C. What is posthumanism? 2010 Minneapolis, MN University of Minnesota Press
All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 667 | 122 | 12 |
Full Text Views | 187 | 7 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 61 | 10 | 4 |
To what extent do non-human animals participate in that particular political configuration known as a public? While conventional wisdom about publics is predicated on a vision of political agency that privileges discursive and deliberative processes, recent scholarship situated in the material turn in the social sciences and humanities challenges the notion that publics are purely human and constituted exclusively through language. With these theorizations as a backdrop, this paper takes into consideration the multiple species that are implicated in political life and that play a role in constituting publics. Placing material definitions of publics in line with central concerns raised by human-animal studies, it is argued that animality is significant to publics in ways that have yet to be sufficiently theorized. The intent of this research is to invite further investigation of the myriad ways in which animal bodies and lives influence public formations in a manner that accounts for and also exceeds human capacity for symbolic communication.
All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 667 | 122 | 12 |
Full Text Views | 187 | 7 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 61 | 10 | 4 |