Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Session 13: Affective state and body talk



The readings for this session deal with state as it is thought of in biological and sexual terms that render the abstract state into a physical reality easier to connect with. Thinking about state in bodily terms offers us a theoretical allowance to ascribe desires, feelings and other biological states to the otherwise lifeless political machinery. Readings take us away from the world of dry political theory to the world of feelings, desires and passions which state evokes in its everyday social life and in its representation by the media. 

Inspired by the work of Marx and later Marxist scholars such as Walter Benjamin and Theodor Adorno, Michael Taussig is of the opinion that state fetishism is not as much talked about as commodity fetishism though state is reified similarly. Alluding to A.R. Brown’s anarchical thoughts on the nonexistence and fictional quality of state, he puts forth the question of the ‘reality of the political power’ of the fiction of the state in the form of state fetishism. He counterposes Philip Abrams critical insights to Brown’s fictionalization stating that state is not the reality that stands behind the fiction, but it is the mask or façade that blocks our vision to comprehend the reality of the political practice and the exercise of power. He enquires into the processes by which state becomes associated with the repressive powers and is symbolically recognized by the people over whom it exercises power. True to the poststructuralist treatment of reality and representation, state is seen as a representation that occludes the reality behind it, rather than being the reality that hides itself behind the mask. He uses the analogy of nervous system to describe the state phenomenon. Like the nervous system, the functioning of which we are capable of conceiving as an idea but not in its tangible materiality, the idea of the state must be believed but its existence as an abstract formal object disputed. In its magic like quality, state resembles God. State for him is like impure sacred (very much like black magic forces) which though evokes horror commands respect.

Taussig reiterates the contradictory nature of the idea of the state which exercises monopoly over the legitimate use of violence and is at the same time an ‘embodiment of reason’ in its everyday functioning through bureaucracy (this insight is not new following our discussions on Weber and others throughout this seminar). He holds that a keen understanding of the cultural practice of statecraft is required to make sense of how these two contradictory forces combine together. Further he adds it is essential to look at the confluence of violence and reason to unmask the violence that always hides behind the reason and reduces reason to just a mask, a power-effect making the modern state legitimized by rational and legal authority a fetish that commands obedience while threatening to wield violence at any moment. Throughout the discussion, he uses very powerful sexual metaphors to unravel the mystic, horrific nature of state fetishism. For instance, speaking of violence-reason combine, he uses the phrase “institutional penetration of reason by violence”.  

Elaborating on the idea of maleficium (an evil magical force), he refers to various anthropological and sociological insights (mainly Durkheim) on magic and mystery and traces a genealogy of totem and its working to illuminate on the fetishistic quality of state. He likens the idea of state to the idea of God that often is a proxy for the superseding authority of the society (particularly Durkheim’s description on the constitution and working of sacred within a society) and engages with the theories of representation and signification to tell us how fetish is a signifier that “depends upon signification, yet erases it” resulting in the ‘worship of the objectness’ itself. State likewise is a totem – an empty signifier bereft of signification beyond its symbolic existence, an effect produced by a hollow core. His own work on sorcery, magical objects helps him to understand the mysterious authority of the state as a force that elicits both reverence and trepidation, like any sacred object. He alludes to literary works of Jean Genet and Sartre to elaborate on the mystical, the saintly and the criminal side of the state. In this postmodern treatment of state – representation becomes more important than the represented, and in the last analysis one should realize the nonexistence of the represented. Taussig also argues that social scientists of all kinds have consistently ignored this fetishistic quality of state and often their epistemological endeavours are already subsumed and afflicted by the same kind of state fetishism. He urges all scholars to overcome the thralldom of the state and enquire its fetishistic influence.  

Aretxaga’s article on strip search of women prisoners in an Irish prison also engages partly with the magical authority that is attributed to the state which can be examined only during excesses when the authority exercised cannot be justified by those who wield power in the name of the state. The prison location where the bodies are subject to total state control seems like an ideal location to understand the ultimate weapon of the state – violence. She builds her arguments on Abrams (reification of state), Taussig and Foucault. She examines state in the excesses it can’t reason out much along the lines of Taussig’s discussion of violence and reason. The significance of her analysis is in bringing the gender factor to the dynamics of power relations exercised in the name of the state. Extending Foucault’s observations on technologies of discipline that act on the bodies of subjects, she underlines the gender difference when the same kind of discipline is exercised over female subjects. Making the power of the state symbolic of male power, the intimate power dynamics as seen through strip searches becomes a performance of violence tantamount to rape on its female subjects. The way power operates on female subjects, she argues is fundamentally different from the way it does on male subjects, thus visibilising the sexual selves of the female prisoners. Violence against the integrity of personhood in the private space of each of their prison cells a realization of sexual fantasy. Aretxaga in recounting the narratives of women prisoners and reporting the after effects of the strip search on prisoners repeatedly emphasizes the unjustified arbitrariness of state power and the fear it induces among the victims of strip search. She uses Deleuzian theoretical framework and discusses technologies of control, fascination with them, ‘fantasies animating them’ and ‘fictions that legitimize them’. She shows how state violence is gendered and sexualized.

Weiss’ article on Israeli nation and the discursive construction of nation, its semiotic significance when associated with the concept of body discusses the process of gendering the political body of the state. It particularly focuses on the role of media in the formation of public opinion especially with regard to terrorism against Israeli state. It discusses the active part played by media in the setting the political agenda of the state. Doing a content analysis of media content of the coverage of terrorist attack on Israeli state it shows how it takes the form of a certain kind of ‘bodyTalk’ and explains the processes through which nations are inscribed onto bodies.  

No comments:

Post a Comment