Capture: American Pursuits and the Making of a New Animal Condition by Antoine Traisnel (review)

IF 0.3 4区 文学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Kara M. Mitchell
{"title":"Capture: American Pursuits and the Making of a New Animal Condition by Antoine Traisnel (review)","authors":"Kara M. Mitchell","doi":"10.1353/con.2022.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"in her sixties” (p. 43) or “cow-colored pit bull-type dog we [rescue staff and volunteers] guesstimated to be about three years old” (p. 128). While the move to describe people and dogs in a similar fashion underscores the need for equitable relations and should be applauded, such descriptions, when used repeatedly, tend to flatten the complexity, messiness, and mutability of identity, and run against the very arguments of the book. A better approach could involve taking more space to tell the stories of individuals through their own words, or, in the case of canine informants, to describe their lives using the best information available and in ways that center their perspectives. The monograph could have also situated multispecies justice within the existing body of research constituting this field and elaborated on such work within the contexts of dog rescues and cultures. Weaver correctly attributes the concept to Haraway, his graduate mentor, in a footnote buried within the introduction and then briefly revisits the term in the final pages of the book where he invents the phrase “multispecies transformative justice” (p. 184). At no point, however, is the larger body of work associated with multispecies justice—or with multispecies studies and multispecies ethnography, for that matter—mentioned or engaged, even though Bad Dog participates in these areas of thought. Despite constituting part of the title, the field of multispecies justice is conspicuously absent from the rest of the book. Engaging the work of David Naguib Pellow, David Schlosberg, Kyle Whyte, Ursula Heise, Sunaura Taylor, Thom van Dooren, and Danielle Celermajer —to name a few—would have not only placed Bad Dog in conversation with the growing field, but also explicitly placed multispecies research that remains hesitant to focus on race, sexuality, ability, class, and gender in conversation with feminist and queer theory that continues to overlook the roles of other species. Indeed, the absence of multispecies literature points to an institutional gulf separating multispecies research from the social justice–oriented scholarship that guides the book. Bad Dog insists that the pursuit of equitable, multispecies worlds requires departing from the confines of disciplinarity to instead coinhabit the mutual, multi-sited, multispecies spaces that dogs and people make together every single day. In doing so, Weaver’s book exemplifies the participatory, public-facing scholarship needed to assemble more accountable modes of thinking and relating.","PeriodicalId":55630,"journal":{"name":"Configurations","volume":"30 1","pages":"107 - 110"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Configurations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/con.2022.0005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

in her sixties” (p. 43) or “cow-colored pit bull-type dog we [rescue staff and volunteers] guesstimated to be about three years old” (p. 128). While the move to describe people and dogs in a similar fashion underscores the need for equitable relations and should be applauded, such descriptions, when used repeatedly, tend to flatten the complexity, messiness, and mutability of identity, and run against the very arguments of the book. A better approach could involve taking more space to tell the stories of individuals through their own words, or, in the case of canine informants, to describe their lives using the best information available and in ways that center their perspectives. The monograph could have also situated multispecies justice within the existing body of research constituting this field and elaborated on such work within the contexts of dog rescues and cultures. Weaver correctly attributes the concept to Haraway, his graduate mentor, in a footnote buried within the introduction and then briefly revisits the term in the final pages of the book where he invents the phrase “multispecies transformative justice” (p. 184). At no point, however, is the larger body of work associated with multispecies justice—or with multispecies studies and multispecies ethnography, for that matter—mentioned or engaged, even though Bad Dog participates in these areas of thought. Despite constituting part of the title, the field of multispecies justice is conspicuously absent from the rest of the book. Engaging the work of David Naguib Pellow, David Schlosberg, Kyle Whyte, Ursula Heise, Sunaura Taylor, Thom van Dooren, and Danielle Celermajer —to name a few—would have not only placed Bad Dog in conversation with the growing field, but also explicitly placed multispecies research that remains hesitant to focus on race, sexuality, ability, class, and gender in conversation with feminist and queer theory that continues to overlook the roles of other species. Indeed, the absence of multispecies literature points to an institutional gulf separating multispecies research from the social justice–oriented scholarship that guides the book. Bad Dog insists that the pursuit of equitable, multispecies worlds requires departing from the confines of disciplinarity to instead coinhabit the mutual, multi-sited, multispecies spaces that dogs and people make together every single day. In doing so, Weaver’s book exemplifies the participatory, public-facing scholarship needed to assemble more accountable modes of thinking and relating.
Antoine Traisnel的《捕捉:美国的追求与创造新的动物条件》(综述)
在她60多岁的时候”(第43页)或“我们[救援人员和志愿者]估计大约三岁的牛色比特犬”(第128页)。虽然以类似的方式描述人和狗的举动强调了公平关系的必要性,应该受到赞扬,但这种描述在反复使用时,往往会淡化身份的复杂性、混乱性和可变性,并与本书的论点背道而驰。一个更好的方法可以是花更多的空间通过个人的语言讲述他们的故事,或者,就犬类线人而言,用现有的最佳信息描述他们的生活,并以他们的观点为中心。该专著还可以将多物种司法置于构成该领域的现有研究机构中,并在救狗和文化的背景下详细阐述这类工作。韦弗在引言中的脚注中正确地将这一概念归因于他的研究生导师哈拉韦,然后在书的最后几页简要回顾了这个词,他发明了“多物种变革性正义”这一短语(第184页)。然而,尽管Bad Dog参与了这些思想领域,但在任何时候都没有提及或参与与多物种正义相关的更大的工作——或者与多物种研究和多物种民族志相关的工作。尽管构成了标题的一部分,但本书其余部分明显没有多物种司法领域。参与David Naguib Pellow、David Schlosberg、Kyle Whyte、Ursula Heise、Sunaura Taylor、Thom van Dooren和Danielle Celermajer的工作——仅举几个例子——不仅会让Bad Dog与这个不断发展的领域对话,而且会明确地将多物种研究置于犹豫是否关注种族、性、能力、阶级,以及与女权主义者和酷儿理论对话中的性别,这些理论继续忽视其他物种的角色。事实上,多物种文献的缺失表明,多物种研究与指导本书的以社会正义为导向的学术存在着制度鸿沟。Bad Dog坚持认为,追求公平、多物种的世界需要脱离规则的限制,而是共同创造狗和人每天共同创造的相互、多地点、多物种空间。在这样做的过程中,韦弗的书体现了参与性的、面向公众的学术,需要汇集更负责任的思维和联系模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Configurations
Configurations Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Configurations explores the relations of literature and the arts to the sciences and technology. Founded in 1993, the journal continues to set the stage for transdisciplinary research concerning the interplay between science, technology, and the arts. Configurations is the official publication of the Society for Literature, Science, and the Arts (SLSA).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信