Affect, practice and contingency: critical discursive psychology and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick

Subjectivity - Tập 12 - Trang 101-116 - 2019
Maree Martinussen1, Margaret Wetherell1
1School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Tóm tắt

This article intersperses Sedgwick’s analysis of paranoid theory and critical discursive psychology, focusing in particular on tools for researching affect and emotion. It is suggested that there are some surprising convergences between Sedgwick’s conclusions about reparative ways of analysing and the emphases in critical discursive psychology. Both stress contingency and craft, the uncertain trajectories of discourses, and what Sedgwick describes as ‘the middle ranges of agency’. Key differences lie in the theory of affect adopted. Critical discursive psychology remains more committed to analyses of the ideological. A further aim of this article is to illustrate the main concerns of discursive research on affective practice. To this end, an extract from a focus group exchange concerning women’s friendships and the experience of being rejected by a friend is explored, highlighting the patterning of everyday meaning making imbued with emotion, strategic identity work, and the ways in which participants mobilise psy techniques and vocabularies to hopeful ends.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Ahmed, S. 2004. Affective economies. Social Text 22 (279): 117–139.

Barbour, K., and A. Hitchmough. 2014. Experiencing affect through site-specific dance. Emotion, Space and Society 12 (1): 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2013.11.004.

Blackman, L. 2011. Affect, performance and queer subjectivities. Cultural Studies 25 (2): 183–199.

Blackman, L., et al. 2008. Creating subjectivities. Subjectivity 22: 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2008.8.

Blackman, L., and C. Venn. 2010. Affect. Body & Society 16 (1): 7–28.

Blackman, L., and V. Walkerdine. 2001. Mass hysteria: Critical psychology and media studies. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave.

Clough, P.T. 2008. The affective turn: Political Economy, Biomedia and Bodies. Theory, Culture & Society 25 (1): 1–22.

Clough, P.T. 2009. The new empiricism: Affect and sociological method. European Journal of Social Theory 12 (1): 43–61.

Dobson, A.S., and A. Kanai. 2018. From “can-do” girls to insecure and angry: Affective dissonances in young women’s post-recessional media. Feminist Media Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1546206.

Edley, N. 2001. Analysing masculinity: Interpretative repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions. In Discourse as data: A guide for analysis, eds. M. Wetherall, S. Taylor, and S. J. Yates, 189–228. Milton Keynes.

Facundo, A.C. 2016. Oscillations of literary theory: The paranoid imperative and queer reparative. Albany: SUNY Press.

Figlerowicz, M. 2012. Affect theory dossier: An introduction. Qui Parle 20 (2): 3–18.

Garcia, L.-M. 2016. Beats, flesh, and grain: sonic tactility and affect in electronic dance music. Sound Studies 1 (1): 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/20551940.2015.1079072.

Gill, R. 2008. Culture and subjectivity in neoliberal and postfeminist times. Subjectivity 25 (1): 432–445. https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2008.28.

Hemmings, C. 2005. Invoking affect: Cultural theory and the ontological turn. Cultural Studies 19 (5): 548–567.

Johnson, K. 2015. Sexuality: A psychosocial manifesto. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Knudsen, B.T., and S. Carsten. 2015. Affective methodologies: Developing cultural research strategies for the study of affect, eds. B.T. Knudsen and S. Carsten. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Leys, R. 2011. The turn to affect: A critique. Critical Inquiry 37 (3): 434–472. https://doi.org/10.1086/659353.

Martinussen, M. 2018b. Reason, season or life? Heterorelationality and the limits of intimacy between women friends. Sociological Research Online. https://doi.org/10.1177/1360780418816334.

Martinussen, M. 2019. Significant others? Friendships between women and neoliberal relational life (Doctoral Thesis). Auckland: University of Auckland.

Martinussen, M., M. Wetherell, and V. Braun. in press. Just being and being bad: Female friendship as a refuge in neoliberal times. Feminism & Psychology.

McLeod, J., and K. Wright. 2009. The talking cure in everyday life: Gender, generations and friendship. Sociology 43 (1): 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508099101.

Parker, I. 1999. Critical psychology: Critical links. Annual Review of Crticial Psychology 1: 3–18.

Scheer, M. 2012. Are emotions a kind of practice (and is that what makes them have a history)? A bourdieuian approach to understanding emotion. History and Theory 51: 193–220.

Sedgwick, E.K. 2003. Touching feeling. Durham: Duke University Press.

Shahani, N. 2012. Queer retrosexualities: The Politics of reparative return. Lanham, MD: Lehigh University Press.

Walkerdine, V. 1990. Schoolgirl fictions. London: Verso.

Wetherell, M. 1998. Positioning and interpretative repertoires: conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue. Discourse & Society 9 (3): 387–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926598009003005.

Wetherell, M. 2008. Subjectivity or psycho-discursive practices? Investigating complex intersectional identities. Subjectivity 22 (2008): 73–81.

Wetherell, M. 2013. Affect and discourse—What’s the problem? From affect as excess to affective/discursive practice. Subjectivity 6 (4): 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2013.13.

Wetherell, M. 2015. Trends in the turn to affect: A Social psychological critique. Body & Society. http://bod.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/27/1357034X14539020.abstract.

Wetherell, M., L. Smith, and G. Campbell. 2018. Introduction: Affective Heritage Practices. In Emotion, affective practice and the past in the present, eds. M. Wetherell, L. Smith, G. Campbell. London: Routledge.

Wiegman, R. 2014. The times we’re in: Queer feminist criticism and the reparative “turn”. Feminist Theory 15 (1): 4–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700113513081a.

Wright, K. 2008. Theorizing therapeutic culture: Past influences, future directions. Journal of Sociology 44 (4): 321–336.