Romanticism and Evolution conference

May 12-14 2011, University of Western Ontario. Details here.

The aim of “Romanticism & Evolution” will be to explore and defamiliarize prevailing notions of evolution by tracing their modern origins to literary and scientific discourses of the transitional period c. 1775-1850, a time that witnessed the genesis of the modern idea of “literature” alongside the emergence of specialized disciplines, such as geology, biology, physiology, chemistry, psychology, and anthropology.

Looks terrific, and would be great for some of my recent interests. Shame I will still be on the other side of the world.

Posted in Conferences | Leave a comment

A supervisor’s revenge

Ouch. Find it here.

Posted in Universities | Leave a comment

Gould, Verne, Conan Doyle

Sitting around in airports and (briefly) on planes is good reading time, though I tend to take something on the lighter side of the pile. First on the list was Stephen Jay Gould’s Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. It’s quite an old book, and I’ve had a copy for years. Now I finally had a reason to read it. The Burgess Shale was a significant fossil field in British Columbia – an interesting book though I’m not sure it’s especially useful for my work, and apparently it is not without problems. I will probably look at Simon Conway Morris, The Crucible of Creation for a different perspective.

I then moved onto Jules Verne’s Journey to the Centre of the Earth. I read this years ago as a kid – and yes, I have heard the very dodgy Rick Wakeman concept album – but I wanted to revisit it because of the fossil theme. Next up was Conan Doyle’s The Lost World – not sure I’d ever read that before, though as with Verne I’d seen film and TV versions. Both are short and quick reads.

Why are Verne and Conan Doyle interesting? Partly because they provide versions of the idea that the fossil record shows not the remains of extinct creatures, but of creatures that are no longer living in known places. Instead of opening up the idea of deep time, of a past that is difficult to comprehend, especially in literal interpretations of Genesis, many thinkers proposed that the no-longer known animals simply existed elsewhere. This was of course more plausible when the question was that of insects, fish or smaller creatures that were fossilised – dinosaurs was coined as a term only in 1842. Verne (1864) and Conan Doyle (1912) situate these creatures in inaccessible places – deep underground or on a remote plateau in the Amazon rainforest. Both are quite late, especially Conan Doyle, and both have their protagonists running against conventional wisdom which denies the possibility of access to these places and/or the existence of such creatures. I wonder if the dinosaurs exhibited at the Crystal Palace in 1854 were inspirations? Both are obviously fictions, and I’m not suggesting either author actually believed in continued existence. But there were certainly people proposing this idea in more general terms somewhat earlier. Were there previous examples in literature? (There are other later ones – Edgar Rice Burrough’s The Land that Time Forgot, for instance, and a whole slew of films, etc.) Previously (and of course now, but I really don’t want to get into creationism) the claim was that prior animals had been wiped out by ‘the flood’. I’m not sure this will go anywhere, but it seems interesting that one way of dealing with the abyss of deep time was to push these creatures further away spatially.

Posted in Fossils | 1 Comment

“Performing Geopolitics” workshop at Durham

“Performing Geopolitics”

22-23 June 2011

Department of Geography, University of Durham

A 2-day workshop organised by the Politics-State-Space and Lived and Material Cultures Research Clusters

This workshop seeks to open up a conversation concerning the interplay between subjectivity, spatiality and materiality as constitutive features of the geopolitical. In response to recent calls for a critical geopolitics that challenges the centrality of Western elite practices and representations, the workshop aims to conceptualize how political subjectivity and materiality intersect in and through geopolitical space and asks what this might mean for the way in which the geopolitical is performed.

The workshop draws inspiration from a range of contemporary geographical approaches: recent feminist scholarship on the embodiment of political subjects, research on transnational citizenship and subaltern geopolitics on the value of theorising the geopolitical from the margins; and recent work on the geographies of materiality and affect and the roles they play in shaping contemporary geopolitical orderings. By considering these approaches together, the workshop aims to work toward a reconceptualisation of the everyday enactments of the geopolitical. The workshop is furthermore concerned with questions of methodology, namely with the methods available for tracing the material through the geopolitical.

We are now inviting submissions of abstracts for papers in a variety of formats, including 10-minute position papers and 20-minute research papers on these themes. Participants might, for instance, explore how recent critiques of scale inform critical geopolitical thought (Marston 2000, 2004, Marston et al 2005, Jones et al 2007, Law 2004, Gibson-Graham 2002), or the material assemblage of contemporary geopolitical orders (Ong and Collier 2005, Bennett 2010).

We are particularly keen to encourage submissions by postgraduate researchers and have a small number of postgraduate bursaries available to assist with travel expenses. Please let us know, if you are interested in applying for one of these.

Confirmed Participants:

Professor Audrey Kobayashi (Queen’s University, Canada)

Dr. Merje Kuus (University of British Columbia, Canada)

Professor Lynn Staeheli (Durham University, United Kingdom)

Professor Joe Painter (Durham University, United Kingdom)

Dr. Martin Müller (University of St. Gallen, Switzerland)

Participants not intending to give papers are also welcome to register.

Deadline: 15 April 2011

Please submit your abstract to:
Kathrin Hörschelmann (kathrin.horschelmann@durham.ac.uk); Matthew Kearns (m.b.kearnes@durham.ac.uk), or Andrew Baldwin (w.a.baldwin@durham.ac.uk)

Posted in Conferences | Leave a comment

Mehdi Belhaj Kacem on Tunisia

A Tunisian Renaissance – Interview with Mehdi Belhaj Kacem here (thanks to Clive at Pop Theory for the link). MBK is French-Tunisian, and offers some critical thoughts on French intellectuals and the revolution:

This is a fact that the Badious and the Zizeks of the world mustn’t make us forget, and especially not a Tunisian in 2011: the Stalinist and Maoist regimes were thoroughly abominable. A Chinese woman whose family actively participated in the Cultural Revolution told me that for her it was worse than Auschwitz. As far as that’s concerned, one really has to beware of the shortcuts one takes, playing at a trendy leftist in the comfort of a bourgeois academic apartment. The “Badiou affair” may very well blow up in our faces just as much as the “Heidegger affair.” What I’ve read from Badiou and Zizek on the Tunisian revolution is absolutely useless. Tunisian philosophers have told me they regret that a Deleuze, a Foucault, a Derrida isn’t still around. They would have found the right, resonant words to take the measure of the event. I find the silence of people like Nancy and Rancière regrettable. Their sensitivity is totally right for what has happened.

The whole thing is worth a look, though I couldn’t vouch for the translation – anyone know the link to the original?

[Update, in comments Antoine provides the French original of part of this interview, which is here. Thanks Antoine!]

Posted in Alain Badiou, Mehdi Belhaj Kacem, Slavoj Zizek | 1 Comment

Sydney talks

The University of Western Sydney talk went well, eventually. Things started to go wrong at the airport, when the first plane I was on had a fuel leak and was cancelled. Then the second, rebooked, flight was delayed. Then the computer system for Qantas crashed and they had to do everything by hand – long paper lists and ticking off names. This flight departed an hour late; and it was already a later flight. So I arrived in Sydney at about 1.10pm, when it should have been two hours before. UWS is, as the name suggests, quite a way to the west of Sydney, and the taxi driver wasn’t convinced it was UWS and not University of Sydney. It was, I insisted. I gave him the address, for the Parramatta campus, but it didn’t have a street number, and his GPS wouldn’t accept it. Eventually I convinced him to head to Parramatta and we’d find it when there. He then discovered the seminar was 2pm and I was the speaker. He assured me it would only take 20 minutes. “What is the talk about?” “Geography”, was my immediate answer. “Ah”, he said, “what’s the capital of Algeria?” Fortunately I passed this little geography test, and he just about muddled through his own, getting me to UWS about 2 minutes to 2pm. A slightly anxious group were waiting for me – I had of course phoned ahead to say I was on my way and would get there. “Was I ready to go?”

We get to the room and there are computer problems. They can’t get the laptop and the projector to recognise each other. Okay, I’ll start without and pick it up when you get it working. I am always ready to speak without the technical stuff working (past experiences of seeing other people’s talks fall apart when this happens), but the talk is quite quote-heavy and it helps the audience. Anyway, about 5 minutes in it seems to be working and the tech people leave; then it crashes and won’t go forward or back. So again I go back to working without slides, while someone is called to fix this new problem. A new laptop is brought in and plugged in and set up while I’m still talking and then I get back in sync. The new setup still doesn’t allow me to see what’s on the screen behind me (we couldn’t get it to be on both the laptop screen and the projector, and I was done with messing at this point). For the last 25 minutes or so it looked to be working okay from the audience side, but was still a bit of a challenge for me.

The questions were, for me, the best bit. This really is the point of giving talks – I don’t understand people who speak for almost all of the allotted time and then answer 1 or 2 questions with long rambling answers. I want to have a bit of a debate, and hear what people make of the work. So there were good questions about indigeneous issues; the relation between the political-legal and political-technical; textual issues of language and philology; property rights in Rome; and some I’m sure I’ve forgotten. It seemed to go down well, but nothing like travel delays and computer malfunctions to keep you on your toes…

Compared to that, the University of New South Wales talk was straight-forward. Of course, no talk should ever be simple, and there were a few differences between the talks. Because I was speaking to law scholars I said a bit more about Roman law, and because the ‘Land, Terrain, Territory’ paper had been pre-circulated I was able to speed over some of the conceptual stuff to spend a little more time on the historical detail. The set-up of the room again meant I couldn’t see the the powerpoint in front of me – I hate turning around to read quotes off the screen which means having your back to the audience – so I was forced to use a printout as a prompt. Note to computer people – put the technical stuff, and a screen, in front of the speaker; that way they can fix stuff and read from the screen while still looking at the audience. Anyway.

The questions were good, and varied. Extra-territorial sites; the notion of terroir and wine-growing; Jean Bodin; Burgundy (the region this time, not the wine); a little on Foucault; contemporary relevance of this; and a very nice closing question about how I ended up in Geography…

Thanks to everyone who made these visits happen – Greg, Brett, Ruth and Kay at UWS; and Ben at UNSW. Now back in Canberra – next talk in Tasmania in 10 days time.

Posted in The Birth of Territory, Travel | Leave a comment

Crampton, Elden, Chomsky

Jeremy Crampton uses the opportunity of linking to my interview to recount an embarassing story about us here.

Posted in Jeremy Crampton, Noam Chomsky | Leave a comment

Off to Sydney

Just about to head to Sydney to give talks at the University of Western Sydney and the University of New South Wales. Both will be on ‘The Birth of Territory’. The very different audiences – the Centre for Cultural Research at UWS and the Gilbert & Tobin Centre of Public Law,at UNSW should make for interesting discussions.

Because of these talks, and an intriguing invitation to write a short piece for a rather different audience, I’ve stopped working on fossils for a couple of days and gone back to territory. But recently on fossils I’ve been particularly intrigued by the work of Nicholaus Steno (Niels Stenson) and Georges Cuvier.

Posted in Fossils, The Birth of Territory | Leave a comment

Interview

I’m interviewed by John Protevi over at the New APPS site.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Babich on Foucault-Nietzsche-Heidegger

Babette Babich’s book chapter “A Philosophical Shock’: Foucault’s Reading of Heidegger and Nietzsche” is available open access here.

Posted in Friedrich Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger, Michel Foucault | Leave a comment