1887
Volume 20, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1569-2159
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9862
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Discourse theory has always paid explicit attention to the material dimension of social reality, with, for instance, the dislocation concept attributing an active role to the material. Still, it lacks attention for the specificity of the material-as-material, and tends to attribute a privileged position to the discursive as provider of meaning to these materials. This article argues that there is a need for a critical dialogue between discourse theory and new materialism, leading to the development of non-hierarchical approaches towards the discursive and the material realms. One particular approach, a model that is labelled the discursive-material knot, is proposed and developed in this article. This model expands the discourse-theoretical vocabulary so as to include bridging concepts such as invitation, investment and entextualisation. Moreover, it also allows for the development of new discursive-material research agendas, one of which, in relation to the environment and human-animal relations, is discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.20045.car
2020-12-14
2021-01-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alexander, Richard J.
    2009Framing Discourse on the Environment. A Critical Discourse Approach. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Barad, Karen
    2007Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Barad, Karen, with Rick Dolphijn, and Iris van der Tuin
    2012 “An Interview with Karen Barad.” InNew Materialism: Interviews and Cartographies, edited byRick Dolphijn, and Iris van der Tuin, 48–70. Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bauman, Richard, and Charles L. Briggs
    1990 “Poetics and Performance as Critical Perspectives on Language and Social Life.” Annual Review of Anthropology19: 59–88. 10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.000423
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.000423 [Google Scholar]
  5. Beirne, Piers
    2014 “Theriocide: Naming Animal Killing.” International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy3(2): 49–66. 10.5204/ijcjsd.v3i2.174
    https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v3i2.174 [Google Scholar]
  6. Burr, Vivien
    2003Social Constructionism. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Carpentier, Nico
    2017The Discursive-Material Knot: Cyprus in Conflict and Community Media Participation. New York: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑1‑4331‑3754‑9
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4331-3754-9 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2020 “The Prague Zoo Wolf Assemblage: Reflections on the Frontiers of the Discursive and the Material.” Fotograf35: 4–7.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Carpentier, Nico, Benjamin De Cleen, and Leen Van Brussel
    2019 “Introduction: Discourse Theory, Media and Communication, and the Work of the Brussels Discourse Theory Group.” InCommunication and Discourse Theory: Collected works of the Brussels Discourse Theory Group, edited byLeen Van Brussel, Benjamin De Cleen, and Nico Carpentier, 3–31. Bristol, UK & Portland, OR, USA: Intellect.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Conty, Ariane F.
    2018 “The Politics of Nature: New Materialist Responses to the Anthropocene.” Theory, Culture & Society35(7–8): 73–96. 10.1177/0263276418802891
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276418802891 [Google Scholar]
  11. DeLanda, Manuel
    1996The Geology of Morals. A Neo-Materialist Interpretation. Accessed1 July 2020. www.t0.or.at/delanda/geology.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Derrida, Jacques
    2008The Animal That Therefore I Am. New York: Fordham University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2011The Beast and the Sovereign. VolumeI. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dingler, Johannes
    2005 “The Discursive Nature of Nature: Towards a Postmodern Concept of Nature.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning7(3): 209–225. 10.1080/15239080500339679
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339679 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dolphijn, Rick, and Iris van der Tuin
    eds. 2012New Materialism: Interviews and Cartographies. Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press. 10.3998/ohp.11515701.0001.001
    https://doi.org/10.3998/ohp.11515701.0001.001 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dourish, Paul, and Melissa Mazmanian
    2013 “Media as Material. Information Representations as Material Foundations for Organizational Practice.” How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies, edited byPaul R. Carlile, Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas, 92–118. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199671533.003.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199671533.003.0005 [Google Scholar]
  17. Edward, Mark
    2008 “A (Brief) Critique of Laclau and Mouffe’s Discourse Analysis”, 11September. Accessed1 July 2020. https://struggleswithphilosophy.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/a-brief-critique-of-laclau-and-mouffes-discourse-analysis/
  18. Figari, Helene, and Skogen, Ketil
    2011 “Social Representations of the Wolf.” Acta Sociologica54(4): 317–332. 10.1177/0001699311422090
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699311422090 [Google Scholar]
  19. Geras, Norman
    1987 “Post-Marxism?” New Left Review163: 40–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Glynos, Jason
    2012 “Body, Discourse, and the Turn to Matter.” InLanguage, Ideology, and the Human: New Interventions, edited bySanja Bahun, and Dusan Radunović, 173–192. London: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Glynos, Jason, and David Howarth
    2007Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory, London and New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203934753
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203934753 [Google Scholar]
  22. Griggs, Steven, and David Howarth
    2019 “Discourse, Policy and the Environment: Hegemony, Statements and the Analysis of U.K. Airport Expansion.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning21(5): 464–478. 10.1080/1523908X.2016.1266930
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2016.1266930 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hajer, Maarten
    2005 “Coalitions, Practices, and Meaning in Environmental Politics: From Acid Rain to BSE.” InDiscourse Theory in European Politics, edited byDavid Howarth, and Jacob Torfing, 297–315. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230523364_13
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230523364_13 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hajer, Maarten, and Wytske Versteeg
    2005 “A Decade of Discourse Analysis of Environmental Politics: Achievements, Challenges, Perspectives.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning7:3, 175–184. 10.1080/15239080500339646
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339646 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hannigan, John
    2014Environmental Sociology. London and New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315796925
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315796925 [Google Scholar]
  26. Haraway, Donna J.
    2004 “Cyborgs to Companion Species: Reconfiguring Kinship in Technoscience”, InThe Haraway Reader, edited byDonna J. Haraway, 295–332. New York and London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 2016Staying with the Trouble. Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hardy, Cynthia, and Robyn Thomas
    2015 “Discourse in a Material World.” Journal of Management Studies52(5): 680–696. 10.1111/joms.12113
    https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12113 [Google Scholar]
  29. Heidegger, Martin
    1996 Being and Time. Translated byJoan Stambaugh. Albany: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Howarth, David
    1998 “Discourse Theory and Political Analysis.” InResearch Strategies in the Social Sciences, edited byElinor Scarbrough, and Eric Tanenbaum, 268–293. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/0198292376.003.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1093/0198292376.003.0012 [Google Scholar]
  31. Howarth, David, and Jacob Torfing
    eds. 2005Discourse Theory in European Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230523364
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230523364 [Google Scholar]
  32. Irwin, Alan
    2001Sociology and the Environment. Cambridge: Polity.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Joseph, Jonathan
    2003Hegemony: A Realist Analysis. London and New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203166529
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203166529 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kleese, Deborah
    2002 “Contested Natures: Wolves in Late Modernity.” Society & Natural Resources15(4): 313–326. 10.1080/089419202753570800
    https://doi.org/10.1080/089419202753570800 [Google Scholar]
  35. Laclau, Ernesto
    1990a “New Reflections on the Revolution of our Time.” InNew Reflections on the Revolution of our Time, edited byErnesto Laclau, 3–85. London: Verso.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. ed. 1990bNew Reflections on the Revolution of our Time, London: Verso.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal Mouffe
    1985Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards A Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 1987 “Post-Marxism Without Apologies.” New Left ReviewI(166): 79–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Latour, Bruno
    2017Facing Gaia. Eight Lectures on the New Climatic Regime. Cambridge: Polity.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lynn, William S.
    2010 “Discourse and Wolves: Science, Society, and Ethics.” Society and Animals18: 75–92. 10.1163/106311110X12586086158529
    https://doi.org/10.1163/106311110X12586086158529 [Google Scholar]
  41. Marres, Noortje
    2012Material Participation. Technology, the Environment and Everyday Publics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137029669
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137029669 [Google Scholar]
  42. Meadows, Donella H., Dennis L. Meadows, Jørgen Randers, and William W. III Behrens
    1972The Limits to Growth. New York: Universe Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Mellor, Mary
    2000 “Feminism and Environmental Ethics: A Materialist Perspective.” Ethics and the Environment5(1): 107–123. 10.1016/S1085‑6633(99)00026‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1085-6633(99)00026-1 [Google Scholar]
  44. Petráček, Tomáš
    2017Power and Exploitation in the Czech Lands in the 10th–12th Centuries: A Central European Perspective. Leiden, Boston: Brill. 10.1163/9789004331495
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004331495 [Google Scholar]
  45. Robisch, S. K.
    2009Wolves and the Wolf Myth in American Literature. Reno, Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Schou, Jannick
    2016 “Ernesto Laclau and Critical Media Studies: Marxism, Capitalism, and Critique.” tripleC, 14(1): 292–311. 10.31269/triplec.v14i1.740
    https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v14i1.740 [Google Scholar]
  47. Sharp, Liz, and Tim Richardson
    2001 “Reflections on Foucauldian Discourse Analysis in Planning and Environmental Policy Research.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning3(3): 193–209. 10.1002/jepp.88
    https://doi.org/10.1002/jepp.88 [Google Scholar]
  48. Stengers, Isabelle
    2015In Catastrophic Times: Resisting the Coming Barbarism. Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press/Meson Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Theodorakea, Ilektra Theodora, and Erica von Essen
    2016 “Who Let the Wolves Out? Narratives, Rumors and Social Representations of the Wolf in Greece.” Environmental Sociology2(1): 29–40. 10.1080/23251042.2015.1119349
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2015.1119349 [Google Scholar]
  50. Torfing, Jacob
    1999New Theories of Discourse. Laclau, Mouffe and Žižek. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Von Essen, Erica, Hans Peter Hansen, M. Nils Peterson, and Tarla R. Peterson
    2018 “Discourses on Illegal Hunting in Sweden: The Meaning of Silence and Resistance.” Environmental Sociology4(3): 370–380. 10.1080/23251042.2017.1408446
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2017.1408446 [Google Scholar]
  52. Wise, Michael D.
    2016Producing Predators: Wolves, Work, and Conquest in the Northern Rockies. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press. 10.2307/j.ctt1d4v126
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1d4v126 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.20045.car
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.20045.car
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): discourse theory , dislocation , entanglement , entextualisation , investment , invitation , knot and new materialism
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error