#vanessa andreotti

[asg-stuff]

Chief Ninawa Huni Kui, from the Amazon... talks about the fact that climate change, climate destabilization, and biodiversity collapse are not things that are happening outside of us. The famines, fires, and floods that are happening in our environment are also happening in our internal landscapes. Our formal modern education is extremely effective at numbing us to the expressions of these effects, but they are still there and cannot be repressed forever. (Hospicing Modernity: A Conversation (Vanessa Machado de Oliveira Andreotti and Lucia Pietroiusti) | e-flux Journal)

[asg-stuff]

...an ‘entity map’ – one whose purpose is ‘not to represent something already visible, but to do work in the world by surfacing what is unconscious, invisibilised, and naturalised, and moving things within and between us’. In this sense, she [Vanessa Andreotti] tells us, the evolving map invites us ‘into an aesthetic experiment where we can un-numb and activate other senses in order to experience reality in a different way – intellectually, affectively, and relationally’. (via What Use is Art? - Dark Mountain)

[toknowtheland]

Tomorrow I will be airing Elwood Jimmy’s talk from this year’s Decolonizing Thanksgiving Dinner for all those who missed it, or wanted to hear it again.

You can check out the book (and even download it) here.

[lasmaracuyas]

How can we deal with the perceived contradiction between the demand for an ethics of justice that recognizes injustice unequivocally, and a call for an ethics of unconditional hospitality (or mature love) that places alterity in the realm of the inaccessible, that requires that knowing about the self and the other remains elusive and equivocal, and that sees justice itself as a non-teleological continuous conversation? How can certain and uncertain knowing be demanded at the same time?

“Conflicting Epistemic Demands in Poststructuralist and Postcolonial Engagements With Questions of Complicity in Systemic Harm”, Vanessa Andreotti

[lasmaracuyas]

[A]nswerability is no longer a choice that can be evaded, as freedom depends on the acknowledgement of the unequal distribution of vulnerabilities (the past), the need to free signification (the present), and the imperative to see justice as a nonteleological agonistic continuous conversation that one cannot escape from (the future). Therefore, freedom is no longer an entitlement, but it is responsibility itself: one cannot be genuinely free if one sees freedom as an individual or collective entitlement as this freedom is already captured within an identity frame…[Q]uestions that emerged for me were: how can we (re)construct ideas of personal and collective freedoms in ways that (a) implicate our own freedom in the freedom of Others and (b) mobilize a commitment to address injustices? How can ethics take account of the past at the same time that it addresses problematic patterns in the present and opens up new possibilities for the future? And how do we account for the epistemic paradox of the need to see injustice (i.e., complicity in harm) in unequivocal ways and justice and alterity, as possibilities of signification and radical relationality beyond knowledge and language, in equivocal ways? 

"Conflicting Epistemic Demands in Poststructuralist and Postcolonial Engagements With Questions of Complicity in Systemic Harm", Vanessa Andreotti

[lasmaracuyas]

The body of literature I draw on affirms that “wrongs” are caused by knowledge too. The “every knowledge is an ignorance” approach requires an understanding of how knowledges are produced, how they relate to power and how they may shape subjectivities and relationships in conscious and non-conscious ways. This shift in conceptualization on its own would change the exercise considerably. For example: after identifying “wrongs,” participants could be invited to perform an analysis of what (socially, culturally, and historically situated) systems of knowledge/power production produce such wrongs; after identifying “rights” they would be invited to analyse what kinds of systems of knowledge production produce the possibilities for the “rights” they are able to imagine, and what kinds of ignorance could block their imagination to other possible “rights”, or make their own knowledge systems complicit in the production of the wrongs they intend to right. 

"Education, Knowledge and the Righting of Wrongs," Vanessa de Oliveira Andreotti