Undoing mastery: With ambivalence?
Linz, Jess; Secor, Anna J.
In this commentary, we respond to Derek Ruez and Daniel Cockayne’s article ‘Feeling Otherwise: Ambivalent Affects and the Politics of Critique in Geography’. We do so by picking up ambivalence—or more precisely, ambivalence about ambivalence—as a tool with which Ruez and Cockayne leave us. We find this tool somewhat difficult to grasp, but we understand this as part of its design. Ambivalence undoes the subject’s mastery. In doing so, we find that an airing of ambivalence gives other kinds of entangled, indeterminate, and unknowing relations room to breathe.
Linz, J., & Secor, A. J. (2021). Undoing mastery: With ambivalence?. Dialogues in Human Geography, 11(1), 108-111. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820621995626
|Journal Article Type||Article|
|Online Publication Date||Mar 8, 2021|
|Publication Date||Mar 1, 2021|
|Deposit Date||Nov 15, 2021|
|Publicly Available Date||Nov 15, 2021|
|Journal||Dialogues in Human Geography|
|Peer Reviewed||Peer Reviewed|
Published Journal Article
Publisher Licence URL
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
You might also like
(Re)birthing the maternal
Lockdown time, time loops, and the crisis of the future
Geopolitics of Disability and the Ablenationalism of Refuge
Encountering Berlant part two: Cruel and other optimisms