barcelona Cultura disidencia Europa filosofía Humanidades Marina Garcés

A project directed by Marina Garcés

The miscellany of heterogeneous texts that make up Humanities in Motion, anthology just lately revealed by Inexperienced Ray, is to start with the reflection of a concrete expertise or, higher, of a collection of experiences of collective reflection carried out inside the framework of the Open Classroom of the Institut d'Humanitats de Barcelona. As the thinker and project coordinator Marina Garcés factors out in the prologue: the Open Classroom was born with the intention of being an area of free entry and much more free spirit, to which some people who have been recently proposing concepts, creating analysis or realizing actions within the humanistic subject might go to elucidate their tasks »(p.9).

Thus, Humanities in action reflects the experience of the Open Classroom to the extent that it collects brief texts signed by the individuals who introduced their work, over two years, in the first twenty conferences of the project; texts that, regardless of the disparity of themes and approaches, share the same concern for the world during which we reside and for the position of the humanities, understood not solely “as a set of educational disciplines that we have now historically referred to as 'letters' , but as an open set of activities that elaborate the which means of human experience from the attitude of their freedom and dignity “(p.10).

Cowl of the ebook.

This concern materializes in another way in each of the texts. In the writing that opens the ebook, signed by the same Marina Garcés, the concern takes the form of a criticism in the direction of the “humanities ZERO”, a humanities decreased to pure entertainment object, to shopper product, to worth (symbolic or materials ) of change, but in any case “neither make us more educated, nor more free, nor more sensitive, nor more equal, nor more wise” (p.19).

This modern deadlock within the humanities bifurcates into two opposite tendencies. The primary, which the philosopher calls “retroutopic”, is that of one who falls into nostalgic immobility, who regrets the loss of importance of the humanities and idealizes them, disregarding most of the problematic features of humanist thought and tradition:

Without humanities there isn’t a democracy, they say. They overlook the historical past of the 20 th century, when probably the most discovered societies in history committed probably the most atrocious crimes and constructed probably the most terrifying political nightmares. With out humanities there isn’t a tolerance. They overlook that humanism was the ideological nucleus of colonization and of its imperial, racist and patriarchal project. Without humanities there isn’t any freedom. They overlook that tradition has not only been a useful resource of resistance, however has additionally been – and, the truth is, extra incessantly – a device of domination and development of domination frameworks, both national and sophistication (p. twenty).

The forgetfulness of the retroutopic tendency is compensated by its opposite tendency, a “hypercritical” tendency that emphasizes all features of the relationships between information and energy, to be able to “unmask, diagnose, dismember and denounce the languages ​​and establishments of the tradition »(p.20). The work of these hypercritical consciences is important in order that there isn’t a uncritical protection of the humanist legacy, but having clearly discovered the relations between information and power, says Garcés, typically translates into oblivion, “inside the framework of circumstances social, technological, political and cultural of our time »(p.21), of the relationships between information and emancipation.

Marina Garcés exhibits a essential concern for the “humanities ZERO”, a humanities decreased to pure entertainment, to shopper product. This modern deadlock in the humanities bifurcates into two opposite tendencies: the one which the philosopher calls “retroutopic” -the one who falls into nostalgic immobility- and the “hypercritical” -the one that emphasizes all points of the relationships between information And power-.

How one can get out of this impasse? The right way to get well the uncomfortable side effects, reworking and emancipating, of which the ZERO Humanities lack? Confronted with a civilizational disaster of planetary proportions, derived from the progressive depletion of the essential assets (material and immaterial) that permit the present production, financial and shopper system to perform, we must guess on “humanities in transition”, suggests Garcés: a “transition towards an emancipation that takes care, from the reciprocity, of our planetary interdependence” (p.25). For this, it’s necessary to rethink emancipation in its relations with energy and information.

Beyond the Kantian proposal, which consisted in daring to assume for oneself, however restricted to methods of understanding the prerogatives of the educated, European and masculine bourgeoisie, at the moment the question of emancipation “does not depend solely on entry to know, but of the potential for with the ability to enter into equal circumstances within the dispute over who can know what, from the place validity is given to our information and what penalties they have on how we stay “(p.27).

These three elementary relationships between information and emancipation (the who, the the place from, and the results) should guide us within the transition in the direction of a humanities that recuperate “their insubordinate and transforming force”, and reconfigure as a elementary software for the task collective improvement of which means and value of human experience “from the point of view of their dignity”, incorporating “the conflicting, open and shared display of these three dimensions of thought” (p.28).

To overcome the impasse, Garcés is committed to a “humanities in transition”, rethinking emancipation in its relations with power and information. The three elementary relationships between information and emancipation that should guide the transition will subsequently be who, where from, and with what penalties.

From this first text that defines a framework, a crucial area, a area of research and dialogue on which to work, we will read all the contributions that happen as incursions into widespread ground carried out from beginning points (by methodology , practices, and intentions of the authors) basically totally different. Ingrid Guardiola, for instance, dedicates her text, Negation, to rethinking the thought of ​​denial, of rejection, as a type of collective resistance and dissidence: not understood as a collective and solidary gesture that responds to a state of affairs of structural injustice:

Denial shouldn’t be productive in a mercantilist, but humanistic sense: it produces fraternity, solidarity, resistance, dissidence and interrupts the chain of orders and order drawn up by the financial and political elites. Denial is proactive and dialogical, it allows a change in fact in events. The only thing that forestalls us from saying “no” is worry, a posh worry that is typically less related to existentialist anguish (the sensation of loss, the vertigo of demise) than to the worry of betraying the system with its chain of orders and his radical positivism. This worry isn’t born of ourselves, but has been inculcated with precision. Saying no to this worry is a precedence with a view to freely train the non-proactive. (p.132)

Likewise, returning to the query of emancipation, Pablo La Parra Pérez asks himself, based mostly on his analysis on militant cinema, how we will as soon as again look politically on the pictures of the struggles of the past. What he seeks, he says, is to rediscover his lived expertise in these photographs of wrestle. And it is precisely reflecting on this vivid current of the past struggles and on the potential for studying it in certain scenes of dissent from the film Numax presents … (1979) by Joaquín Jordá, who urges us to abandon “a look of retrospective judgment relating to the scenes of dissent from the previous »and stop analyzing these photographs« when it comes to success or failure »(p.163).

Frame of the film Numax presents … (1979) by Joaquín Jordá, talked about in the chapter “Memoria”, by Pablo La Parra Pérez. [Foto vía Cultura en acción].

As an alternative of accepting “the great neoliberal slogan” of the “there is no alternative” Thatcher, imagining the struggles of the previous as efforts condemned to disenchantment, it’s mandatory to seek out methods to generate a dialogue between the struggles of our current and the lived experience of the experiences of past wrestle – a will, this, which we also discover in the primary novels of the militant writers collective Wu Ming, which transport us to the present lived previous struggles as the peasant revolt led by Thomas Müntzer in 1525, or the lives violated in the totally different fronts for the atrocities of the First World Warfare. Briefly, recollects La Parra Pérez:

It isn’t about encapsulating the previous struggles in a logic of isolated and extraordinary occasions, as if they have been butterflies stuck in the panel of an entomologist: nothing more depoliticizing than presenting politics as a rarity, isolated from on a regular basis life. The target is to assume that our historic narratives can weave an insubordinate reminiscence, capable of eliciting complicities between the struggles of the present and the lived experience of emancipation prior to now. (p.163)

Going via many different reflections – on curiosity and the desire to know (Manel Ollé), the obstinacy of which we should arm ourselves to build collectively an alternative choice to capitalist realism (María Noido), the value of ineffectiveness and unproductiveness (Eudald Espluga), the vindication of the complexity of the themes and their identities and otherness (Karo Moret) – Humanities in action encourages us to commit ourselves to a essential work crucial for our time. The work of starting -in action! – a thought, re-activate a reflection -always heterogeneous and multiform- to face, without reservation, the questions concerning the modern state of the humanities and their paper (s) In our life.

This can be a non-profit rationalization.

Submit Views: