Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:18:15.220Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Distribution of Emotions: Affective Politics of Emancipation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Brigitte Bargetz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Currently, affect and emotions are a widely discussed political topic. At least since the early 1990s, different disciplines—from the social sciences and humanities to science and technoscience—have increasingly engaged in studying and conceptualizing affect, emotion, feeling, and sensation, evoking yet another turn that is frequently framed as the “affective turn.” Within queer feminist affect theory, two positions have emerged: following Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick's well‐known critique, there are either more “paranoid” or more “reparative” approaches toward affect. Whereas the latter emphasize the potentialities of affect, the former argue that one should question the mere idea of affect as liberation and promise. Here, I suggest moving beyond a critique or celebration of affect by embracing the political ambivalence of affect. For this queer feminist theorizing of affective politics, I adapt Jacques Rancière's theory of the political and particularly his understanding of emancipation. Rancière takes emancipation into account without, however, uncritically endorsing or celebrating a politics of liberation. I draw on his famous idea of the “distribution of the sensible” and reframe it as the “distribution of emotions,” by which I develop a multilayered approach toward a nonidentitarian, nondichotomous, and emancipatory queer feminist theory of affective politics.

Type
Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 30 , Issue 3: Special Issue: Emancipation , Summer 2015 , pp. 580 - 596
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmed, Sara. 2000. Strange encounters: Embodied others in post‐coloniality. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ahmed, Sara. 2004. The cultural politics of emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Ahmed, Sara. 2010. Happy objects. In The affect theory reader, ed. Gregg, Melissa and Seigworth, Gregory J. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Angerer, Marie‐Luise. 2014. Desire after affect. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.Google Scholar
Balibar, Étienne. 2002. Politics and the other scene. London and New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Bargetz, Brigitte. 2014. Mapping affect: Challenges of (un)timely politics. In Timing of affect: Epistemologies, aesthetics, politics, ed. Angerer, Marie‐Luise, Bösel, Bernd, and Ott, Michaela. Zürich and Berlin: diaphanes.Google Scholar
Bargetz, Brigitte, and Freudenschuss, Magdalena. 2012. Der emotionale Aufstand: Verhandlungen um eine Politik der Gefühle in Zeiten der Krise. Femina Politica: Zeitschrift für feministische Politikwissenschaft 21 (1): 107–15.Google Scholar
Berlant, Lauren. 2000. The subject of true feeling: Pain, privacy and politics. In Transformations: Thinking through feminism, ed. Ahmed, Sara, Kilby, Jane, Lury, Celia, McNeil, Maureen, and Skeggs, Beverly. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Butler, Berlant. 2005. The epistemology of state emotion. In Dissent in dangerous times, ed. Sarat, Austin. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith. 2009. Frames of war: When is life grievable? New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith, and Chakravorty Spivak, Gayatri. 2007. Who sings the nation‐state? Language, politics, belonging. New York: Seagull Books.Google Scholar
Chambers, Samuel A. 2013. The lessons of Rancière. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, Samuel A., and O'Rourke, Michael. 2009. Introduction. Borderlands 8 (2). http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol8no2_2009/chambersorourke_intro.pdf (accessed February 7, 2014).Google Scholar
Chen, Mel Y. 2011. Toxic animacies, inanimate affections. QLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 17 (2–3): 265–86.Google Scholar
Clarke, Jackie. 2013. Rancière, politics and the social question. In Rancière now: Current perspectives on Jacques Rancière, ed. Davis, Oliver. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Clough, Patricia T. 2010. The affective turn: Political economy, biomedia, and bodies. In The affect theory reader, ed. Gregg, Melissa and Seigworth, Gregory J. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Cvetkovich, Ann. 2012. Depression: A public feeling. Durham, N.C.:Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Oliver. 2010. Jacques Rancière. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Faludi, Susan. 2007. The terror dream: Myth and misogyny in an insecure America. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
Feminist, Theory. 2014. The time of reparation: In dialogue with Robyn Wiegman. Feminist Theory 15 (1).Google Scholar
Fraisse, Geneviève. 2013. Emancipation versus domination. In Rancière now: Current perspectives on Jacques Rancière, ed. Davis, Oliver. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 2013. Between marketization and social protection: Resolving the feminist ambivalence. In Fortunes of feminism, ed. Fraser, Nancy. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Frye, Marilyn. 1983. The politics of reality: Essays in feminist theory. Trumansburg, N.Y.: The Crossing Press.Google Scholar
Gatens, Moira. 1995. Imaginary bodies: Ethics, power and corporeality. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Grossberg, Lawrence. 1992. We gotta get out of this place: Popular conservatism and postmodern culture. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hemmings, Clare. 2005. Invoking affect: Cultural theory and the ontological turn. Cultural Studies 19 (5): 548–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemmings, Clare. 2012. Affective solidarity: Feminist reflexivity and political transformation. Feminist Theory 13 (2): 147–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaggar, Alison M. 1989. Love and knowledge: Emotion in feminist epistemology. In Women, knowledge, and reality: Explorations in feminist philosophy, ed. Garry, Ann and Pearsall, Marilyn. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Koivunen, Anu. 2010. An affective turn? Reimagining the subject of feminist theory. In Working with affects in feminist readings: Disturbing differences, ed. Liljeström, Marianne and Paasonen, Susanna. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Laclau, Ernesto. 1996. Emancipation(s). New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Lorde, Audre. 1984. Sister outsider: Essays and speeches. Berkeley: The Crossing Press.Google Scholar
Lorey, Isabell. 2012. Demokratie statt Repräsentation: Zur konstituierenden Macht der Besetzungsbewegungen. In Occupy! Die aktuellen Kämpfe um die Besetzung des Politischen, ed. Lorey, Isabell, Kastner, Jens, Raunig, Gerald, and Waibel, Tom. Vienna: Turia + Kant.Google Scholar
Love, Heather. 2010. Truth and consequences: On paranoid reading and reparative reading. Criticism 52 (2): 235–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massumi, Brian. 2002. Parables for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendel, Iris, and Neuhold, Petra. 2012. Emanzipation statt Integration. Migrazine 4 (1). http://www.migrazine.at/artikel/emanzipation-statt-integration (accessed August 7, 2014).Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal. 2002. Politics and passions: The stakes of democracy. Centre for the Study of Democracy. https://www.westminster.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/6456/Politics-and-Passions.pdf (accessed February 7, 2014).Google Scholar
Navaro‐Yashin, Yael. 2009. Affective spaces, melancholic objects: Ruination and the production of anthropological knowledge. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 15 (1): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panagia, Davide. 2010. “Partage du sensible”: The distribution of the sensible. In Jacques Rancière: Key concepts, ed. Deranty, Jean‐Philippe. Durham, UK: Acumen.Google Scholar
Pedwell, Carolyn, and Whitehead, Anne. 2012. Affecting feminism: Questions of feeling in feminist theory. Feminist Theory 13 (2): 115–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokhovnik, Raia. 1999. Rational woman: A feminist critique of the dichotomy. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Puar, Jasbir K. 2007. Terrorist assemblages: Homonationalism in queer times. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 1991. The ignorant schoolmaster: Five lessons in intellectual emancipation. Trans. Kristin Ross. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 1999. Disagreement: Politics and philosophy. Trans. Julie Rose. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 2004. The philosopher and his poor. Trans. Andrew Parker. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 2008. The politics of aesthetics: The distribution of the sensible. Trans. Gabriel Rockhill. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 2009a. Aesthetics and its discontents. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 2009b. The emancipated spectator. Trans. Gregory Elliott. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Reddy, Chandan. 2011. Freedom with violence: Race, sexuality, and the US state. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauer, Birgit. 1999. “Politik wird mit dem Kopfe gemacht”: Überlegungen zu einer geschlechtersensiblen Politologie der Gefühle. In Masse, Macht, Emotionen: Zu einer politischen Soziologie der Emotionen, ed. Klein, Ansgar and Nullmeier, Frank. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Sauer, Birgit. 2015. Affektive Gouvernementalität: Eine geschlechtertheoretische Perspektive. In Un‐Wohl‐Gefühle: Eine Kulturanalyse gegenwärtiger Befindlichkeiten, ed. Mixa, Elisabeth, Miriam Pritz, Sarah, Tumeltshammer, Markus, and Greco, Monica. Bielefeld: transcript.Google Scholar
Scott, Joan Wallach. 2012. Emancipation and equality: A critical genealogy. Utrecht: Utrecht University. http://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/274997/Oratie_Scott_2012.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed November 7, 2014).Google Scholar
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. 2003. Paranoid reading and reparative reading, or, you're so paranoid, you probably think this essay is about you. In Touching feeling: Affect, pedagogy, performativity, ed. Kosofsky Sedgwick, Eve. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seigworth, Gregory J., and Gregg, Melissa. 2010. An inventory of shimmers. In The affect theory reader, ed. Gregg, Melissa and Seigworth, Gregory J. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Skeggs, Bev. 2005. The making of class and gender through visualizing moral subject formation. Sociology 39 (5): 965–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelman, Elisabeth V. 1989. Anger and insubordination. In Women, knowledge, and reality: Explorations in feminist philosophy, ed. Garry, Ann and Pearsall, Marilyn. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Terada, Rei. 2001. Feeling in theory: Emotion after the “death of the subject”. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, Imogen. 2008. Methodological fatigue and the politics of the affective turn. Feminist Media Studies 8 (1): 85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiegman, Robyn. 2014. The times we're in: Queer feminist criticism and the reparative “turn”. Feminist Theory 15 (1): 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zerilli, Linda M. G. 2005. Feminism and the abyss of freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Žižek, Slavoj. 2008. The lesson of Rancière. In The politics of aesthetics: The distribution of the sensible. Trans. Gabriel Rockhill. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar