Gabriel Rockhill
Villanova University, Philosophy, Faculty Member
- Collège International de Philosophie, Philosophy, Faculty MemberCritical Theory Workshop - Sorbonne, Social Sciences and Humanities, Faculty Memberadd
- Historiography, Political Philosophy, Contemporary French Philosophy, Critical Theory, Aesthetics, Sociology of Knowledge, and 38 moreFilm Theory, Jacques Rancière, Cornelius Castoriadis, History of Philosophy, Philosophy, Political Theory, Comparative Literature, Michel Foucault, Film Studies, Postmodernism, Philosophy of Art, Postcolonial Theory, Contemporary History, Social and Political Philosophy, Social Philosophy, Philosophy of History, Philosophy of Literature, Postcolonial Studies, Etienne Balibar, Achille Mbembe, Aesthetics and Politics, Feminism, Post-Colonialism, Radical Geography, Historiography (in Art History), Art History, International Political Theory, History Of Modern Philosophy, Modern Political Philosophy, Feminist Theory, Queer Theory, Pierre Macherey, Philippe Descola, Bruno Latour, Losurdo Domenico, Loic Wacquant, Arundhati Roy, and Chandra Talpade Mohantyedit
- Gabriel Rockhill is a French-American philosopher, cultural critic and writer. He is Associate Professor of Philosoph... moreGabriel Rockhill is a French-American philosopher, cultural critic and writer. He is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Villanova University and Founding Director of the Atelier de Théorie Critique at the Sorbonne. He is the author of "Contre-histoire du temps présent" (CNRS Editions, 2017), "Interventions in Contemporary Thought: History, Politics, Aesthetics" (Edinburgh University Press, 2016), "Radical History & the Politics of Art" (Columbia University Press, 2014) and "Logique de l’histoire: Pour une analytique des pratiques philosophiques" (Editions Hermann, 2010). He also co-edited and and contributed to "Politics of Culture and the Spirit of Critique: Dialogues" (Columbia University Press, 2011), "Jacques Rancière: History, Politics, Aesthetics" (Duke University Press, 2009) and "Technologies de contrôle dans la mondialisation: Enjeux politiques, éthiques et esthétiques" (Editions Kimé, 2009). In addition to his scholarly work, which includes numerous academic articles, he has been actively engaged in extra-academic activities in the art and activist worlds, as well as a contributor to public intellectual debate. For more information: http://gabrielrockhill.comedit
In "Counter-History of the Present," Gabriel Rockhill contests, dismantles, and displaces one of the most widespread understandings of the contemporary world: that we are all living in a democratized and globalized era intimately... more
In "Counter-History of the Present," Gabriel Rockhill contests, dismantles, and displaces one of the most widespread understandings of the contemporary world: that we are all living in a democratized and globalized era intimately connected by a single, overarching economic and technological network. Noting how such a narrative fails to account for the experiences of the billions of people who lack economic security, digital access, and real political power, Rockhill interrogates the ways in which this grand narrative has emerged in the same historical, economic, and cultural context as the fervid expansion of neoliberalism. He also critiques the concurrent valorization of democracy, which is often used to justify U.S. military interventions on the behalf of capital. Developing an alternative account of the current conjuncture that acknowledges the plurality of lived experiences around the globe and in different social strata, he shifts the foundations upon which debates about the contemporary world can be staged. Rockhill's counter-history thereby offers a new grammar for historical narratives, creating space for the articulation of futures no longer engulfed in the perpetuation of the present.
"A high level polemic attacking the current enthusiasm for the notion of globalization—which Gabriel Rockhill regards as a feature of the political imaginary of our time—Counter-History of the Present will be discussed alongside work by Jameson, Harvey, and Lyotard." — Andrew Feenberg, author of "The Philosophy of Praxis: Marx, Lukács, and the Frankfurt School"
"In an era that, according to Lyotard, was supposed to have seen the end of the grand narratives, a grand narrative is spreading according to which globalization, technological development, and democracy are irresistibly marching forward in step. Gabriel Rockhill refutes this apologetic discourse not simply by appealing to growing social polarization, to shantytowns condemned to backwardness, to the toppling of democratically elected governments established by self-styled champions of democracy. 'Counter-History of the Present' is also an occasion for critical reflection on a series of theoretical categories (beginning with that of history) that dominant contemporary thought employs in an apologetic and often Eurocentric sense. In this way, Rockhill’s book is thus an important reference point for understanding and transforming the present." — Domenico Losurdo, author of "War and Revolution: Rethinking the Twentieth Century"
"A high level polemic attacking the current enthusiasm for the notion of globalization—which Gabriel Rockhill regards as a feature of the political imaginary of our time—Counter-History of the Present will be discussed alongside work by Jameson, Harvey, and Lyotard." — Andrew Feenberg, author of "The Philosophy of Praxis: Marx, Lukács, and the Frankfurt School"
"In an era that, according to Lyotard, was supposed to have seen the end of the grand narratives, a grand narrative is spreading according to which globalization, technological development, and democracy are irresistibly marching forward in step. Gabriel Rockhill refutes this apologetic discourse not simply by appealing to growing social polarization, to shantytowns condemned to backwardness, to the toppling of democratically elected governments established by self-styled champions of democracy. 'Counter-History of the Present' is also an occasion for critical reflection on a series of theoretical categories (beginning with that of history) that dominant contemporary thought employs in an apologetic and often Eurocentric sense. In this way, Rockhill’s book is thus an important reference point for understanding and transforming the present." — Domenico Losurdo, author of "War and Revolution: Rethinking the Twentieth Century"
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Information Technology, Technology, Globalization, Political Theory, and 20 moreMarxism, Historiography, Continental Philosophy, Information Communication Technology, History of Capitalism, Athenian Democracy, Globalisation and Development, Capitalism, Media and Democracy, Democracy, Direct Democracy, Radical Democracy, Contemporary Continental Philosophy, Global Capitalism, Contemporary Society, Historical Methodology, Democracy and Citizenship Education, Pollitical Philosophy, Postcolonial and Anticolonial Studies, and The History of the Present
Il est communément admis que nous vivrions une ère mondiale où un réseau économique et technologique relie toujours davantage les quatre coins du globe et où la démocratie s’impose comme la condition nécessaire de la vie politique.... more
Il est communément admis que nous vivrions une ère mondiale où un réseau économique et technologique relie toujours davantage les quatre coins du globe et où la démocratie s’impose comme la condition nécessaire de la vie politique. Pourtant, cette image d’un âge global aussi avancé que civilisé est loin d’aller de soi ou d’être anodine. Enracinée dans un champ de forces sociopolitiques et économiques, elle sert souvent de véhicule clandestin pour des projets redoutables. Une telle vision du temps présent, ainsi que l’imaginaire historique et politique qui l’a produite, demandent à être interrogés, en particulier les concepts clés de mondialisation, technologie et démocratie. Et ceci non point pour présenter une description alternative de notre époque à partir des mêmes phénomènes de base mais pour développer une contre-histoire visant à reconfigurer le possible historique. Tenter d’ouvrir une brèche pour participer à un véritable futur, autre que celui qui s’impose à nous, en nous enfermant dans le destin intransigeant d’un avenir à subir, tel est l’objet de ce livre.
Research Interests: Critical Theory, History, Cultural Studies, Information Technology, Philosophy, and 16 moreTechnology, Globalization, Political Theory, Marxism, Historiography, Ideology, Contemporary French Philosophy, Information Communication Technology, Marxist theory, Democracy, Social Imaginaries, Globalization and Development, Contemporary Philosophy, Contemporary Continental Philosophy, The History of the Present, and Political Imaginary
With the aim of rethinking the state and stakes of contemporary theory, Gabriel Rockhill critically works through some of the most important recent philosophical writings on the intertwined topics of history, politics and art. He offers... more
With the aim of rethinking the state and stakes of contemporary theory, Gabriel Rockhill critically works through some of the most important recent philosophical writings on the intertwined topics of history, politics and art. He offers guidance to some of the complex debates in these areas, as well as a commanding overview of the key issues and some of the central figures, including Foucault, Derrida, Castoriadis, Badiou and Rancière.
By resituating theoretical work in a broader force field of culture and power, he advances an innovative and nuanced description of recent intellectual developments that calls into question the now standard but rather stereotypical accounts of prominent thinkers and philosophical movements. Far from hiding behind the towering figures with whom he engages, Rockhill stakes out positions in relationship to them and formulates precise arguments in favour of a novel understanding of the historical relationship between art and politics, arguing that there is a need for a deep shift in the tectonic plates that undergird these debates. The result is an invitation not only to retool extant methodological paradigms but also to ultimately reinvent the practice of theory itself.
By resituating theoretical work in a broader force field of culture and power, he advances an innovative and nuanced description of recent intellectual developments that calls into question the now standard but rather stereotypical accounts of prominent thinkers and philosophical movements. Far from hiding behind the towering figures with whom he engages, Rockhill stakes out positions in relationship to them and formulates precise arguments in favour of a novel understanding of the historical relationship between art and politics, arguing that there is a need for a deep shift in the tectonic plates that undergird these debates. The result is an invitation not only to retool extant methodological paradigms but also to ultimately reinvent the practice of theory itself.
Research Interests: Aesthetics, Political Philosophy, Political Theory, Genealogy, Historiography, and 15 moreDeconstruction, Philosophy of Art, Contemporary French Philosophy, Jacques Rancière, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Aesthetics and Politics, Alain Badiou, Democracy, Philosophy of Architecture, Contemporary Philosophy, Cornelius Castoriadis, Contemporary Continental Philosophy, Philosophy of Difference, and Foucault Archaeology Geneology Method
The primary objective of this book is to open space for rethinking the relationship between art and politics. It seeks to combat one of the fundamental assumptions that has plagued many of the previous debates on this issue: that art and... more
The primary objective of this book is to open space for rethinking the relationship between art and politics. It seeks to combat one of the fundamental assumptions that has plagued many of the previous debates on this issue: that art and politics are distinct entities definable in terms of common properties, and that they have privileged points of intersection, which can be determined once and for all in terms of an established formula. This common sense assumption is rooted in a transcendent illusion according to which there are more or less fixed characteristics that unify our terms, concepts, and practices in such a way as to guarantee their meaning.
Against this substantialist approach, "Radical History & the Politics of Art" argues for a praxeological account that begins the other way around by analyzing specific cultural practices without presupposing a conceptual unity behind them. Such an orientation is radically historicist in the sense that it recognizes that all of our practices—be they linguistic, theoretical, aesthetic or political—are historically constituted and that they are necessarily part of a temporal dynamic. Hence the contingent nature of the labels used to classify various practices or even identify ‘practice’ as such.
Radical history thereby proposes a significant departure from the extant debates on art and politics by maintaining that there is no ‘art’ or ‘politics’ in general, nor a singular relation between them. There are only historically constituted practices in various conjunctures, some of which have been labeled, through practical acts of denomination, as ‘artistic’ or ‘political.’ Instead of proposing one more response to the oft-repeated question ‘what is the relationship between Art and Politics?’ this book seeks to overcome the presuppositions that plague such a question. It thereby changes the very nature of the investigation by asking: ‘how do the diverse aspects of practices identified as ‘aesthetic’ and ‘political’ overlap, intertwine and sometimes merge in precise socio-historical force fields of action?
Against this substantialist approach, "Radical History & the Politics of Art" argues for a praxeological account that begins the other way around by analyzing specific cultural practices without presupposing a conceptual unity behind them. Such an orientation is radically historicist in the sense that it recognizes that all of our practices—be they linguistic, theoretical, aesthetic or political—are historically constituted and that they are necessarily part of a temporal dynamic. Hence the contingent nature of the labels used to classify various practices or even identify ‘practice’ as such.
Radical history thereby proposes a significant departure from the extant debates on art and politics by maintaining that there is no ‘art’ or ‘politics’ in general, nor a singular relation between them. There are only historically constituted practices in various conjunctures, some of which have been labeled, through practical acts of denomination, as ‘artistic’ or ‘political.’ Instead of proposing one more response to the oft-repeated question ‘what is the relationship between Art and Politics?’ this book seeks to overcome the presuppositions that plague such a question. It thereby changes the very nature of the investigation by asking: ‘how do the diverse aspects of practices identified as ‘aesthetic’ and ‘political’ overlap, intertwine and sometimes merge in precise socio-historical force fields of action?
Research Interests:
"Philosopher, c’est, pense-t-on, faire de l’histoire de la philosophie ; c’est lire et interpréter les textes canoniques des grands penseurs de la tradition européenne en suivant l’enchaînement des idées depuis les Grecs anciens. Cette... more
"Philosopher, c’est, pense-t-on, faire de l’histoire de la philosophie ; c’est lire et interpréter les textes canoniques des grands penseurs de la tradition européenne en suivant l’enchaînement des idées depuis les Grecs anciens. Cette manière de pratiquer la philosophie est devenue tellement naturelle qu’elle en a oublié sa propre historicité. D’où la nécessité de la mettre en évidence en examinant de près ses multiples conséquences. C’est justement un des objectifs de l’analytique des pratiques philosophiques entreprise dans le présent ouvrage.
Ce livre propose en même temps une logique historique et herméneutique alternative s’inscrivant en faux contre la philosophie contemporaine, notamment dans ses diverses tentatives de « rupture », plus ou moins superficielles sur le plan pratique. Dans un dialogue avec les sciences humaines et sociales, il reprend à nouveaux frais et d’un tout autre point de vue les trois moments privilégiés de notre histoire de « la » philosophie (le commencement, le tournant moderne, le moment présent). Ne visant pourtant pas à entériner la réduction de la philosophie à une pratique historique et herméneutique, il s’agit avant tout de mettre en lumière la contingence d’une telle détermination afin de déplacer les marges de manœuvre imposées aux penseurs d’aujourd’hui et faire de la place à d’autres pratiques théoriques (qu’elles soient historiques et herméneutiques ou non). Le résultat, c’est une investigation méthodologique dont les enjeux et les conséquences dépassent de loin les limites de la philosophie dans son acceptation traditionnelle.
Approximate English Translation:
Philosophy, we tend to think, amounts to doing the history of philosophy, to reading and interpreting the canonical texts of the great thinkers of the European tradition, following the sequence of ideas since the ancient Greeks. This way of practicing philosophy has become so natural—at least within the ‘continental’ tradition—that it has forgotten its own historicity. It is for this reason that it is necessary to bring it to light by examining its multiple consequences. This is precisely one of the objectives of the analytic of philosophic practices undertaken in the present work.
This book proposes, at the same time, an alternative historical and hermeneutic logic that critically distances itself from contemporary philosophy, particularly in its diverse attempts to propose a “rupture,” which remain more or less superficial at a practical level. In dialogue with the social and human sciences, it reassesses, from an entirely different point of view, the three privileged moments of our supposed history of philosophy (the beginning, the modern turn, the present moment). It does not aim, however, at endorsing the reduction of philosophy to a historical and hermeneutic practice. It is above all a matter of bringing to light the contingency of such a determination in order to displace the margins of maneuverability imposed on thinkers today and to make room for other theoretical practices (if they be historical and hermeneutic or not). The result is a methodological investigation whose stakes and consequences far surpass the limits of philosophy as it is traditionally understood."
Ce livre propose en même temps une logique historique et herméneutique alternative s’inscrivant en faux contre la philosophie contemporaine, notamment dans ses diverses tentatives de « rupture », plus ou moins superficielles sur le plan pratique. Dans un dialogue avec les sciences humaines et sociales, il reprend à nouveaux frais et d’un tout autre point de vue les trois moments privilégiés de notre histoire de « la » philosophie (le commencement, le tournant moderne, le moment présent). Ne visant pourtant pas à entériner la réduction de la philosophie à une pratique historique et herméneutique, il s’agit avant tout de mettre en lumière la contingence d’une telle détermination afin de déplacer les marges de manœuvre imposées aux penseurs d’aujourd’hui et faire de la place à d’autres pratiques théoriques (qu’elles soient historiques et herméneutiques ou non). Le résultat, c’est une investigation méthodologique dont les enjeux et les conséquences dépassent de loin les limites de la philosophie dans son acceptation traditionnelle.
Approximate English Translation:
Philosophy, we tend to think, amounts to doing the history of philosophy, to reading and interpreting the canonical texts of the great thinkers of the European tradition, following the sequence of ideas since the ancient Greeks. This way of practicing philosophy has become so natural—at least within the ‘continental’ tradition—that it has forgotten its own historicity. It is for this reason that it is necessary to bring it to light by examining its multiple consequences. This is precisely one of the objectives of the analytic of philosophic practices undertaken in the present work.
This book proposes, at the same time, an alternative historical and hermeneutic logic that critically distances itself from contemporary philosophy, particularly in its diverse attempts to propose a “rupture,” which remain more or less superficial at a practical level. In dialogue with the social and human sciences, it reassesses, from an entirely different point of view, the three privileged moments of our supposed history of philosophy (the beginning, the modern turn, the present moment). It does not aim, however, at endorsing the reduction of philosophy to a historical and hermeneutic practice. It is above all a matter of bringing to light the contingency of such a determination in order to displace the margins of maneuverability imposed on thinkers today and to make room for other theoretical practices (if they be historical and hermeneutic or not). The result is a methodological investigation whose stakes and consequences far surpass the limits of philosophy as it is traditionally understood."
Research Interests:
This book of tightly woven dialogues engages prominent thinkers in a discussion about the role of culture-broadly construed-in contemporary society and politics. Faced with the conceptual inflation of the notion of 'culture,' which now... more
This book of tightly woven dialogues engages prominent thinkers in a discussion about the role of culture-broadly construed-in contemporary society and politics. Faced with the conceptual inflation of the notion of 'culture,' which now imposes itself as an indispensable issue in contemporary moral and political debates, these dynamic exchanges seek to rethink culture and critique beyond the schematic models that have often predominated, such as the opposition between "mainstream multiculturalism" and the "clash of civilizations."
Prefaced by an introduction relating current cultural debates to the critical theory tradition, this book examines the politics of culture and the spirit of critique from three different vantage points. To begin, Gabriel Rockhill and Alfredo Gomez-Muller provide a stage-setting dialogue, followed by discussions with two major representatives of contemporary critical theory: Seyla Benhabib and Nancy Fraser. Working at the horizons of this tradition, Judith Butler, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Cornel West then provide important critical perspectives on cultural politics. The book's concluding section engages with Michael Sandel and Will Kymlicka, who work out of the Rawlsian tradition yet are uniquely concerned with the issue of culture, broadly understood. The epilogue, an interview with Axel Honneth, returns to the core issue of critical theory in cultural politics. Ranging from recent developments and progressive interventions in critical theory to dialogues that incorporate its insights into larger discussions of social and political philosophy, this book sharpens old critical tools while developing new strategies for rethinking the role of 'culture' in contemporary society.
Prefaced by an introduction relating current cultural debates to the critical theory tradition, this book examines the politics of culture and the spirit of critique from three different vantage points. To begin, Gabriel Rockhill and Alfredo Gomez-Muller provide a stage-setting dialogue, followed by discussions with two major representatives of contemporary critical theory: Seyla Benhabib and Nancy Fraser. Working at the horizons of this tradition, Judith Butler, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Cornel West then provide important critical perspectives on cultural politics. The book's concluding section engages with Michael Sandel and Will Kymlicka, who work out of the Rawlsian tradition yet are uniquely concerned with the issue of culture, broadly understood. The epilogue, an interview with Axel Honneth, returns to the core issue of critical theory in cultural politics. Ranging from recent developments and progressive interventions in critical theory to dialogues that incorporate its insights into larger discussions of social and political philosophy, this book sharpens old critical tools while developing new strategies for rethinking the role of 'culture' in contemporary society.
Research Interests:
A l’heure où les sociétés contemporaines – si l’on en croit certains « grands récits » – sont censées évoluer vers un monde de plus en plus unifié, l’expansion massive des technologies de contrôle, sous leurs multiples aspects, tend à... more
A l’heure où les sociétés contemporaines – si l’on en croit certains « grands récits » – sont censées évoluer vers un monde de plus en plus unifié, l’expansion massive des technologies de contrôle, sous leurs multiples aspects, tend à contrarier un tel schéma en rendant paradoxales les dynamiques que l’on prétend résumer sous le concept de « mondialisation ». Les dispositifs de contrôle, dont la diffusion devient quasiment l’expression d’une règle commune dans une époque où les régimes d’exception tendent à prévaloir, ne renvoient pas cependant à un immense pouvoir tutélaire qui agirait de manière parfaitement homogène sur la totalité du corps social. Ces dispositifs sont plutôt la manifestation d’un pouvoir diffus, dont l’hétérogénéité et la complexité nous imposent des modes spécifiques d’interprétation, justifiant de croiser les approches disciplinaires (philosophique, historique, politologique et littéraire). Il convient en effet d’examiner sous différents angles théoriques et pratiques des modes de contrôle protéiformes qui concernent autant les flux de population et de communication, que les affects et les imaginaires individuels et collectifs.
Il s’agit d’interroger leur possible indissociabilité en analysant les différents mécanismes de pouvoir qui agissent sur les processus de subjectivation. Est-ce à dire toutefois que les médiations technologiques nous soumettent massivement à des logiques de désubjectivation ? Ne sont-elles pas, au contraire, l’enjeu de « résistances », ou plus subtilement, de formes nouvelles de détournement et d’appropriation ? Comment en définitive peut-on tenter d’évaluer, au-delà de tout déterminisme réducteur, le rapport entre la diffusion de technologies de contrôle et l’état de la démocratie dans nos sociétés dites « mondialisées » ?
C’est l’un des défis du présent ouvrage que d’explorer ces questions à travers l’analyse de divers enjeux politiques, éthiques et esthétiques.
Ont contribué à cet ouvrage : Emily Apter, Didier Bigo, Pierre-Antoine Chardel, Yves Citton, Elie During, Robert Harvey, Philippe Mengue, Paul Patton, Gabriel Périès, Gabriel Rockhill et Bernard Stiegler.
Il s’agit d’interroger leur possible indissociabilité en analysant les différents mécanismes de pouvoir qui agissent sur les processus de subjectivation. Est-ce à dire toutefois que les médiations technologiques nous soumettent massivement à des logiques de désubjectivation ? Ne sont-elles pas, au contraire, l’enjeu de « résistances », ou plus subtilement, de formes nouvelles de détournement et d’appropriation ? Comment en définitive peut-on tenter d’évaluer, au-delà de tout déterminisme réducteur, le rapport entre la diffusion de technologies de contrôle et l’état de la démocratie dans nos sociétés dites « mondialisées » ?
C’est l’un des défis du présent ouvrage que d’explorer ces questions à travers l’analyse de divers enjeux politiques, éthiques et esthétiques.
Ont contribué à cet ouvrage : Emily Apter, Didier Bigo, Pierre-Antoine Chardel, Yves Citton, Elie During, Robert Harvey, Philippe Mengue, Paul Patton, Gabriel Périès, Gabriel Rockhill et Bernard Stiegler.
Research Interests:
The French philosopher Jacques Rancière has influenced disciplines from history and philosophy to political theory, literature, art history, and film studies. His research into nineteenth-century workers’ archives, reflections on... more
The French philosopher Jacques Rancière has influenced disciplines from history and philosophy to political theory, literature, art history, and film studies. His research into nineteenth-century workers’ archives, reflections on political equality, critique of the traditional division between intellectual and manual labor, and analysis of the place of literature, film, and art in modern society have all constituted major contributions to contemporary thought. In this collection, leading scholars in the fields of philosophy, literary theory, and cultural criticism engage Rancière’s work, illuminating its originality, breadth, and rigor, as well as its place in current debates. They also explore the relationships between Rancière and the various authors and artists he has analyzed, ranging from Plato and Aristotle to Flaubert, Rossellini, Auerbach, Bourdieu, and Deleuze.
The contributors to this collection do not simply elucidate Rancière’s project; they also critically respond to it from their own perspectives. They consider the theorist’s engagement with the writing of history, with institutional and narrative constructions of time, and with the ways that individuals and communities can disturb or reconfigure what he has called the “distribution of the sensible.” They examine his unique conception of politics as the disruption of the established distribution of bodies and roles in the social order, and they elucidate his novel account of the relationship between aesthetics and politics by exploring his astute analyses of literature and the visual arts. In the collection’s final essay, Rancière addresses some of the questions raised by the other contributors and returns to his early work to provide a retrospective account of the fundamental stakes of his project.
Contributors. Alain Badiou, Étienne Balibar, Bruno Bosteels, Yves Citton, Tom Conley, Solange Guénoun, Peter Hallward, Todd May, Eric Méchoulan, Giuseppina Mecchia, Jean-Luc Nancy, Andrew Parker, Jacques Rancière, Gabriel Rockhill, Kristin Ross, James Swenson, Rajeshwari Vallury, Philip Watts
The contributors to this collection do not simply elucidate Rancière’s project; they also critically respond to it from their own perspectives. They consider the theorist’s engagement with the writing of history, with institutional and narrative constructions of time, and with the ways that individuals and communities can disturb or reconfigure what he has called the “distribution of the sensible.” They examine his unique conception of politics as the disruption of the established distribution of bodies and roles in the social order, and they elucidate his novel account of the relationship between aesthetics and politics by exploring his astute analyses of literature and the visual arts. In the collection’s final essay, Rancière addresses some of the questions raised by the other contributors and returns to his early work to provide a retrospective account of the fundamental stakes of his project.
Contributors. Alain Badiou, Étienne Balibar, Bruno Bosteels, Yves Citton, Tom Conley, Solange Guénoun, Peter Hallward, Todd May, Eric Méchoulan, Giuseppina Mecchia, Jean-Luc Nancy, Andrew Parker, Jacques Rancière, Gabriel Rockhill, Kristin Ross, James Swenson, Rajeshwari Vallury, Philip Watts
Research Interests:
Cornelius Castoriadis (1922-1997) was a philosopher, social critic, political activist, practicing psychoanalyst and professional economist. His work is widely recognized as one of the most singular and important contributions to... more
Cornelius Castoriadis (1922-1997) was a philosopher, social critic, political activist, practicing psychoanalyst and professional economist. His work is widely recognized as one of the most singular and important contributions to twentieth-century thought.
In this collection of interviews, Castoriadis discusses some of his most important ideas with leading figures in the disciplines that play such a crucial part in his philosophical work: poetry, psychoanalysis, biology and mathematics. Available in English for the first time, these interviews provide a concise and accessible introduction to his work as a whole, allowing him to draw on the astounding breadth of his knowledge (ranging from political theory and sociology to ontology and the philosophy of science). They also render Castoriadis’ cutting, polemical and entertaining style while displaying the originality and clarity of his primary concepts. Intellectually provoking, this timely collection shows how Castoriadis’ polemics are sharp and riveting, his conceptual manoeuvres rigorous and original, and his passion inspiring. This is an excellent introduction to one of Europe’s most important intellectuals.
In this collection of interviews, Castoriadis discusses some of his most important ideas with leading figures in the disciplines that play such a crucial part in his philosophical work: poetry, psychoanalysis, biology and mathematics. Available in English for the first time, these interviews provide a concise and accessible introduction to his work as a whole, allowing him to draw on the astounding breadth of his knowledge (ranging from political theory and sociology to ontology and the philosophy of science). They also render Castoriadis’ cutting, polemical and entertaining style while displaying the originality and clarity of his primary concepts. Intellectually provoking, this timely collection shows how Castoriadis’ polemics are sharp and riveting, his conceptual manoeuvres rigorous and original, and his passion inspiring. This is an excellent introduction to one of Europe’s most important intellectuals.
Research Interests:
The Politics of Aesthetics rethinks the relationship between art and politics, reclaiming "aesthetics" from the narrow confines it is often reduced to. Jacques Rancière reveals its intrinsic link to politics by analysing what they both... more
The Politics of Aesthetics rethinks the relationship between art and politics, reclaiming "aesthetics" from the narrow confines it is often reduced to. Jacques Rancière reveals its intrinsic link to politics by analysing what they both have in common: the delimitation of the visible and the invisible, the audible and the inaudible, the thinkable and the unthinkable, the possible and the impossible.
Presented as a set of inter-linked interviews, The Politics of Aesthetics provides the most comprehensive introduction to Rancière's work to date, ranging across the history of art and politics from the Greek polis to the aesthetic revolution of the modern age.
Already translated into five languages, this English edition of The Politics of Aesthetics includes a new afterword by Slavoj Zizek, an interview for the English edition, a glossary of technical terms and an extensive bibliography.
Presented as a set of inter-linked interviews, The Politics of Aesthetics provides the most comprehensive introduction to Rancière's work to date, ranging across the history of art and politics from the Greek polis to the aesthetic revolution of the modern age.
Already translated into five languages, this English edition of The Politics of Aesthetics includes a new afterword by Slavoj Zizek, an interview for the English edition, a glossary of technical terms and an extensive bibliography.
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Aesthetics, Political Philosophy, Art Theory, Political Theory, and 9 moreFrankfurt School (Philosophy), Aesthetics and Politics, Art Theory and Politics, Social and Political Philosophy, Frankfurt School, Contemporary Philosophy, Art and Cultural Theory, Postcolonialism, Gender and Feminism, Contemporary Continental Philosophy, and Art Theory and Criticism
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Cultural Studies, Economics, Political Economy, Aesthetics, and 14 moreArt Theory, Political Theory, Marxism, Contemporary Art, Visual Culture, Historiography, Ideology, Continental Philosophy, Social Activism, Neoliberalism, Modernism, Art Theory and Politics, 20th century Avant-Garde, and Art Theory and Criticism
With a few rare but important exceptions, it is arguable that the majority of contemporary philosophic debates on art and politics—at least in certain circles—have favored the visual arts and literature over and against architecture and... more
With a few rare but important exceptions, it is arguable that the majority of contemporary philosophic debates on art and politics—at least in certain circles—have favored the visual arts and literature over and against architecture and urban design. However, if there is one art that appears to be prototypically political, in the sense that it is almost inevitably the site of collective decisions that directly shape the social body while simultaneously being subject to multifarious communal appropriations, it is surely architecture. This paradox leads to a question of central importance, which serves to guide the current analysis: why have many of the major philosophic debates on art and politics in the contemporary world sidelined what is perhaps the political art par excellence?
Research Interests:
L’objectif principal de cet article est de mettre en évidence l’axiologie métaphilosophique et la logique normative binaire – la valorisation de la différence par rapport à l’identité – qui a dominé « la philosophie de la différence » en... more
L’objectif principal de cet article est de mettre en évidence l’axiologie métaphilosophique et la logique normative binaire – la valorisation de la différence par rapport à l’identité – qui a dominé « la philosophie de la différence » en France, et qui a trouvé un terrain d’accueil relativement favorable dans « la politique de la différence » en Amérique du Nord. En détaillant une série d’opérations conceptuelles liées à cette axiologie fondamentale, il s’agira de remettre en question la sacralisation de la différence en nous interrogeant notamment sur ses conséquences politiques.
Research Interests:
This paper aims at identifying, explaining and jettisoning the ontological illusion that has plagued a significant portion of the debate on the relationship between art and politics in the modern world. This illusion can be succinctly... more
This paper aims at identifying, explaining and jettisoning the ontological illusion that has plagued a significant portion of the debate on the relationship between art and politics in the modern world. This illusion can be succinctly summed up in terms of the three basic questions that seem to serve as the natural starting point for this very debate: What is art? What is politics? What is the link between art and politics? While it is true that the responses to these questions have varied widely, they nonetheless share the same methodological framework of ontological description: they purport to describe the being of art and politics as well as the nature of their relationship. Moreover, the works evaluated are often understood according to what I propose to call the talisman complex, or the steadfast assumption that art is political precisely insofar as it harbors an inherent force capable of directly producing political consequences. The aesthetic and political ontology operative in the talisman complex is, finally, bound up with a specific conception of the role of the analyst: in approaching the question of the politics of art, the critic is supposed to simply describe and judge the nature of what already exists. In direct opposition to both the ontological illusion and the talisman complex, I argue that art and politics have no fixed being but are differentially constituted socio-historical practices. I thereby propose to jettison the ontological illusion that undergirds much of the debate on art and politics in favor of a radical historicist analytic of practice, according to which ‘art’ and ‘politics’ are recognized as socio-historical concepts in struggle. Instead of searching for the privileged point of intersection or natural link between art and politics, I argue that various relations are constructed and dismantled in the social field (and that the critic plays a crucial role in this ongoing struggle). In short, this paper proposes to break with the ontological illusion of the politics of art in favor of analyzing and participating in the social politicity of aesthetic practices.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This paper explores Michel Foucault’s contribution to rethinking the nature of the present through his examination of the ontology of contemporary reality he locates in Immanuel Kant’s “What Is Enlightenment?” By raising a series of... more
This paper explores Michel Foucault’s contribution to rethinking the nature of the present through his examination of the ontology of contemporary reality he locates in Immanuel Kant’s “What Is Enlightenment?” By raising a series of critical questions concerning the epochal thinking that plagues Foucault’s various engagements with this text, the article goes on to argue that the attempt to find a single concept—or question—that appropriately summarizes a given era is an endeavor fraught with methodological problems. Highlighting the limitations of Foucault’s approach in spite of his attempt to rethink modernity as an attitude, the paper concludes by advocating an alternative logic of history that definitively abandons epochal thinking in favor of a topological mapping of historical force fields in which it is recognized that there is no being behind time.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: French Literature, French Studies, Political Theory, Historiography, Literary Criticism, and 19 moreModern Art, Philosophy of Literature, Continental Philosophy, Contemporary French Philosophy, Flaubert, Literary Theory, Modernist Literature (Literary Modernism), Jacques Rancière, Modernity, 20th Century French Literature, 19th Century French Literature, Stéphane Mallarmé, Modernism, Marcel Proust, Art Theory and Politics, Honoré de Balzac, Art and Politics, Realism, and Victor Hugo
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Cultural Studies, Ethics, Metaphilosophy, Pragmatism, and 11 moreMulticulturalism, Globalization, Political Theory, Marxism, Ideology, Continental Philosophy, Émmanuel Lévinas, Emancipation, Contemporary Political Theory, Contemporary Continental Philosophy, and Radical Political Theory
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
French La critique formulée par Jacques Derrida de la lecture proposée par Michel Foucault de quelques lignes de Descartes est souvent prise comme un tournant décisif dans l’histoire de la pensée française de l’après-guerre. Elle aurait... more
French
La critique formulée par Jacques Derrida de la lecture proposée par Michel Foucault de quelques lignes de Descartes est souvent prise comme un tournant décisif dans l’histoire de la pensée française de l’après-guerre. Elle aurait ouvert la brèche, creusée également par d’autres, entre le structuralisme des maîtres à penser des années 1950 et le « néo- » ou « post-structuralisme » de la nouvelle génération philosophique. Or une telle interprétation, fondée sur le schéma simpliste de l’enchaînement des mouvements de pensée, rate l’essentiel : le rappel à l’ordre philosophique lancé par Derrida à son ancien maître de philosophie, qui s’éloignait dans les eaux obscures des sciences sociales et humaines. En reprenant ici ce débat déjà ancien, nous montrons qu’il s’agit moins de quelques mots de Descartes que du rapport entre le droit de la philosophie et les faits de l’histoire, à savoir de la relation entre deux méthodes herméneutiques, deux conceptions du passé, deux images de la pensée, etc. En conjuguant une micro-analyse du débat avec une macro-analyse de la conjoncture socio-historique, nous nous intéressons à la manière dont l’espace des savoirs détermine et oriente des débats intellectuels et des stratégies discursives. Ceci nous permet de jeter une lumière nouvelle sur la métaphilosophie de la pratique philosophique en nous interrogeant sur ses objets d’analyse, ses méthodes, et ses valeurs implicites. Nous rencontrons ainsi des questions fondamentales qui dépassent largement le cadre d’une simple analyse interne du débat.
Approximate English Translation
Jacques Derrida’s critique of the reading proposed by Michel Foucault of a few lines by Descartes is often taken as a decisive turning point in the history of postwar French thought. It supposedly opened a break, like the work of others at the time, between the structuralism of the intellectual leaders of the 1950s and the “neo-” or “post-structuralism” of the new philosophic generation. However, such an interpretation, which is founded on the simplistic schema of the chain of intellectual movements, misses what is essential: the call to return to philosophic order that Derrida addresses to his former philosophy professor, who was drifting out into the obscure waters of the social and human sciences. In taking up this old debate, we show that it is less a question of a few words by Descartes than of the relationship between the right of philosophy and the facts of history, that is to say of the relation between two hermeneutic methods, two conceptions of the past, two images of thought, etc. By combining a micro-analysis of the debate with a macro-analysis of the socio-historical conjuncture, we investigate the way in which the space of knowledge determines and orients intellectual debates and discursive strategies. This allows us to throw new light on the metaphilosophy of philosophic practice by inquiring into its objects of analysis, its methods, and its implicit values. We thereby encounter fundamental questions that go well beyond the framework of a simple internal analysis of the debate.
La critique formulée par Jacques Derrida de la lecture proposée par Michel Foucault de quelques lignes de Descartes est souvent prise comme un tournant décisif dans l’histoire de la pensée française de l’après-guerre. Elle aurait ouvert la brèche, creusée également par d’autres, entre le structuralisme des maîtres à penser des années 1950 et le « néo- » ou « post-structuralisme » de la nouvelle génération philosophique. Or une telle interprétation, fondée sur le schéma simpliste de l’enchaînement des mouvements de pensée, rate l’essentiel : le rappel à l’ordre philosophique lancé par Derrida à son ancien maître de philosophie, qui s’éloignait dans les eaux obscures des sciences sociales et humaines. En reprenant ici ce débat déjà ancien, nous montrons qu’il s’agit moins de quelques mots de Descartes que du rapport entre le droit de la philosophie et les faits de l’histoire, à savoir de la relation entre deux méthodes herméneutiques, deux conceptions du passé, deux images de la pensée, etc. En conjuguant une micro-analyse du débat avec une macro-analyse de la conjoncture socio-historique, nous nous intéressons à la manière dont l’espace des savoirs détermine et oriente des débats intellectuels et des stratégies discursives. Ceci nous permet de jeter une lumière nouvelle sur la métaphilosophie de la pratique philosophique en nous interrogeant sur ses objets d’analyse, ses méthodes, et ses valeurs implicites. Nous rencontrons ainsi des questions fondamentales qui dépassent largement le cadre d’une simple analyse interne du débat.
Approximate English Translation
Jacques Derrida’s critique of the reading proposed by Michel Foucault of a few lines by Descartes is often taken as a decisive turning point in the history of postwar French thought. It supposedly opened a break, like the work of others at the time, between the structuralism of the intellectual leaders of the 1950s and the “neo-” or “post-structuralism” of the new philosophic generation. However, such an interpretation, which is founded on the simplistic schema of the chain of intellectual movements, misses what is essential: the call to return to philosophic order that Derrida addresses to his former philosophy professor, who was drifting out into the obscure waters of the social and human sciences. In taking up this old debate, we show that it is less a question of a few words by Descartes than of the relationship between the right of philosophy and the facts of history, that is to say of the relation between two hermeneutic methods, two conceptions of the past, two images of thought, etc. By combining a micro-analysis of the debate with a macro-analysis of the socio-historical conjuncture, we investigate the way in which the space of knowledge determines and orients intellectual debates and discursive strategies. This allows us to throw new light on the metaphilosophy of philosophic practice by inquiring into its objects of analysis, its methods, and its implicit values. We thereby encounter fundamental questions that go well beyond the framework of a simple internal analysis of the debate.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Feminist Theory, Political Theory, Revolutions, French Revolution, and 12 moreCritical Race Theory, Haitian Revolution, Equality, American Revolution, Social movements and revolution, Frederick Douglass, Aimé Césaire, Mary Wollstonecraft, Etienne Balibar, Declaration of Independence, Critical Philosophy of Race, and Olympe De Gouges
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Cultural History, Cultural Studies, French Studies, Marxism, Cultural Theory, and 16 morePost-Marxism, Ideology, Contemporary French Philosophy, Jacques Lacan, Roland Barthes, Marxist theory, Michel Foucault, Jean Paul Sartre, Annales school, Foucault power/knowledge - discourse, Raymond Aron, French Critical Theory, CIA, French Theory, 20th century French philosophy, and Bernard Henry-Levy
Research Interests: Political Economy, Political Philosophy, Indigenous Studies, Political Theory, Environmental Studies, and 8 moreResistance (Social), Indigenous Knowledge, Ecology, Oil and gas, Environmental Sustainability, Indigenous Peoples, Cultural power and resistance, and International political economy of oil and gas
Research Interests: Political Theory, Research Methodology, Hermeneutics, Contemporary French Philosophy, Michel Foucault, and 5 moreWriting in the Disciplines, Contemporary Philosophy, Philosophical Methodology, Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, contemporary continental philosophy, axiology (theories and applied research on values), philosophical and cultural anthropology, diversity managment, gender studies, intercultural communication, and translations studies, and Contemporary Continental Philosophy
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Philosophy, Aesthetics, Political Philosophy, Censorship, and 10 moreArt Theory, Political Theory, Politics, Aesthetics and Politics, Censorship (History), Censorship of literary and popular culture texts, Book Censorship (history), Self-Censorship, Internet censorship, and Continental Philosophy and Aesthetics
Excerpt: “Let us not […] utter the dummy’s name but instead call for a general moratorium on it. It is time to recognize it for what it is—a product of the media-money complex—and talk only of productrump, or more simply product rump. […]... more
Excerpt: “Let us not […] utter the dummy’s name but instead call for a general moratorium on it. It is time to recognize it for what it is—a product of the media-money complex—and talk only of productrump, or more simply product rump. […] We must not forget that it is the system, not the person, that is the ultimate problem. In fact, there is not really a person here. There is productRump, the tail end of the corporate glitz machine, the rump of a debunk system of hype and distraction in the name of profit and power. Although this butt looms particularly large in its vulgar posturing and machismo, we must not let the backend mask what is behind it. It is only the protruding derrière of an enormous network of media-cracy—i.e. mediocrity—that has produced it."
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Political Sociology, Political Philosophy, Media Studies, Media and Cultural Studies, and 22 morePolitical Theory, Democratic Theory, Mass Communication, Media and Democracy, Humor/Satire, Democracy, Elections, Election Studies, Election Campaigning, Culture Industry, Mass media, Satire, Satire, Irony, Parody, Political Satire, Journalism And Mass communication, Media theory and Research, Media and Culture, Society of the Spectacle, Sociology of Mass Media, Sociology of Mass Communication, Primary Election, and Sociology of Mass Communication and Media
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The Critical Theory Workshop/Atelier de Théorie Critique is an intensive research program whose primary objective is to provide an international forum for trans-disciplinary and comparative work in critical social theory, in the most... more
The Critical Theory Workshop/Atelier de Théorie Critique is an intensive research program whose primary objective is to provide an international forum for trans-disciplinary and comparative work in critical social theory, in the most expansive sense of the term. Participants are exposed to the work of contemporary thinkers and engage with current debates in the Francophone world and beyond. Special attention is paid to traditions of thought that have been structurally suppressed in the academy, including Marxism, anarchism, the black radical tradition, anticolonial theory, anti-capitalist feminism and radical ecological thought.
The Workshop, which takes place at the EHESS in central Paris and does not follow the traditional structure of a course, is comprised of three interlocking components:
• Débats: invited speakers debate a common theme or current research projects.
• Rencontres: intellectuals are invited to participate in interviews on their work.
• Groupes de travail: the participants workshop their own research.
The overall objective is to bring together a diverse panoply of thinkers in order to cultivate productive, collaborative and transdisciplinary research. For additional information and applications (the due date is March 15, but there is a rolling admissions policy so early applications are welcome): https://criticaltheoryworkshop.com
The Workshop, which takes place at the EHESS in central Paris and does not follow the traditional structure of a course, is comprised of three interlocking components:
• Débats: invited speakers debate a common theme or current research projects.
• Rencontres: intellectuals are invited to participate in interviews on their work.
• Groupes de travail: the participants workshop their own research.
The overall objective is to bring together a diverse panoply of thinkers in order to cultivate productive, collaborative and transdisciplinary research. For additional information and applications (the due date is March 15, but there is a rolling admissions policy so early applications are welcome): https://criticaltheoryworkshop.com
Research Interests:
The Critical Theory Workshop/Atelier de Théorie Critique is an intensive research program whose primary objective is to provide an international forum for trans-disciplinary and comparative work in critical social theory, in the most... more
The Critical Theory Workshop/Atelier de Théorie Critique is an intensive research program whose primary objective is to provide an international forum for trans-disciplinary and comparative work in critical social theory, in the most expansive sense of the term. Participants are exposed to the work of contemporary thinkers and engage with current debates in the Francophone world and beyond. Special attention is paid to traditions of thought that have been structurally suppressed in the academy, including Marxism, anarchism, the black radical tradition, anticolonial theory, and radical ecological thought.
The Workshop, which takes place at the EHESS in central Paris and does not follow the traditional structure of a course, is comprised of three interlocking components:
• Débats: invited speakers debate a common theme or current research projects.
• Rencontres: intellectuals are invited to participate in interviews on their work.
• Groupes de travail: the participants workshop their own research.
The overall objective is to bring together a diverse panoply of thinkers from different horizons in order to cultivate productive debates on topical issues. Invited guests for 2018 thus far include Seloua Luste Boulbina, Jonathan Eburne, Eric Hazan, Jennifer Ponce de León and Delia Popa.
The Workshop, which takes place at the EHESS in central Paris and does not follow the traditional structure of a course, is comprised of three interlocking components:
• Débats: invited speakers debate a common theme or current research projects.
• Rencontres: intellectuals are invited to participate in interviews on their work.
• Groupes de travail: the participants workshop their own research.
The overall objective is to bring together a diverse panoply of thinkers from different horizons in order to cultivate productive debates on topical issues. Invited guests for 2018 thus far include Seloua Luste Boulbina, Jonathan Eburne, Eric Hazan, Jennifer Ponce de León and Delia Popa.
Research Interests: Critical Theory, Social Theory, Aesthetics, Political Philosophy, Feminist Theory, and 14 morePolitical Theory, Marxism, Postcolonial Studies, Revolutions, Critical Social Theory, Critical Race Theory, Continental Philosophy, Contemporary French Philosophy, Marxist theory, Aesthetics and Politics, Historical Materialism, Contemporary Continental Philosophy, French Critical Theory, and Anticolonial Theory
The Critical Theory Workshop / Atelier de Théorie Critique is an intensive research program whose primary objective is to provide an international forum for trans-disciplinary and comparative work in critical social theory, in the most... more
The Critical Theory Workshop / Atelier de Théorie Critique is an intensive research program whose primary objective is to provide an international forum for trans-disciplinary and comparative work in critical social theory, in the most expansive sense of the term. Participants are exposed to the work of contemporary thinkers and engage with current debates in the Francophone world and beyond.