|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
134377
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article introduces Adriana Cavarero's concept of “horrorism” into International Relations (IR) discussions of the relationship between war and citizenship. Horrorism refers to a violent violation of vulnerable humans who are defined by their simultaneous openness to the other's care and harm. With its motif of physical and ontological denigration, horrorism offends the human condition by making its victims gaze upon and/or experience repugnant violence and bodily disfiguration precisely when the vulnerable are most in need of care. The article argues that horrorism complicates disciplinary understandings of contemporary violence which tend to see terrorism, but not horrorism, in war and which generally neglect to theorize how violence—and particularly horrorism—is embedded in, and exchanged, through state/citizen relationships. To elaborate these arguments, the article analyses three pieces of war art: Jeremy Deller's “Baghdad, 5 March 2007,” Donald Gray's mural, “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” and a still image from Cynthia Weber's film, “Guadalupe Denogean: ‘I am an American.’” By taking the War on Terrorism as their subject, these pieces demonstrate how war makes visible the terror and horror in state/citizen relationships. The article concludes by reconsidering how encountering signs of horrorism might broaden our frames of war and further our empathic vision toward the precarious victims of horrorism or, alternatively, might confirm the patriotic allegiances of imperial citizens in ways that further bind their citizenship to state political and economic violence and narrow the scope for genuine empathy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
066540
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Routledge, 2006.
|
| Description |
viii, 186p.
|
| Standard Number |
0415375363
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 050337 | 791.43658/WEB 050337 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
146179
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article outlines two theoretical and methodological approaches that take a queer intellectual curiosity about figurations of “homosexuality” and “the homosexual” as their core. These offer ways to conduct international relations (IR) research on “the homosexual” and on international relations figurations more broadly, for example, from “the woman” to “the human rights holder.” The first approach provides a method for analyzing figurations of “the homosexual” and sexualized orders of IR that are inscribed in IR as either normal or perverse. The second approach offers instructions on how to read plural figures and plural logics that signify as normal and/or perverse (and which might be described as queer). Together, they propose techniques, devices, and research questions to investigate singular and plural IR figurations—including but not exclusively those of “the homosexual”—that map international phenomena as diverse as colonialism, human rights, and the formation of states and international communities in ways that exceed IR survey research techniques that, for example, incorporate “the homosexual” into IR research through a “sexuality variable.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
105638
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article investigates how modern neo-liberal states are 'securing by design' - harnessing design to new technologies in order to produce security, safety, and protection. We take a critical view toward 'securing by design' and the policy agendas it produces of 'designing out insecurity' and 'designing in protection' because securing by design strategies rely upon inadequate conceptualisations of security, technology, and design and inadequate understandings of their relationships to produce inadequate 'security solutions' to ready-made 'security problems'. This critique leads us to propose a new research agenda we call Redesigning Security. A Redesigning Security Approach begins from a recognition that the achievement of security is more often than not illusive, which means that the desire for security is itself problematic. Rather than encouraging the design of 'security solutions' - a securing by design - a Redesigning Security Approach explores how we might insecure securing by design. By acknowledging and then moving beyond the new security studies insight that security often produces insecurity, our approach uses design as a vehicle through which to raise questions about security problems and security solutions by collaborating with political and critical design practitioners to design concrete material objects that themselves embody questions about traditional security and about traditional design practices that use technology to depoliticise how technology is deployed by states and corporations to make us 'safe'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
066268
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2005.
|
| Description |
p482-499
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
153307
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Dennis Altman and Jonathan Symons’ book Queer Wars is a useful point of departure for thinking about sexual orientation and gender identity issues in contemporary international politics. It is motivated by two important empirical questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|