The Individual and Society

99 Pages·2007·0.573 MB·English

by  coll.

uest

The Postgraduate e-journal by Students in
the Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social
Sciences at Queen’s University Belfast

Issue 5. Autumn 2007
‘The Individual and Society.’

ISSN 1750-9696.
Contents and Notes on Authors:

Pages 1 to 14: Making Bodies Liza Griffin.
Liza Griffin has recently completed her PhD in geography at the Open University. She
currently does research on environmental politics and is particularly interested in debates
in cultural geography and political theory.

Pages 15 to 29: ‘La parole aux négresses’ (Thiam, 1978): West African Women Writers and the
Literature of Social Change. Catherine Keating.
Catherine Keating is a PhD student at the National University of Ireland, Galway. She
completed an MA in French at NUIG which examined issues of feminism in the novel
Segou by Maryse Conde. She is an IRCHSS scholar and her current research examines the
evolution of the novel by West African women from Mali, Burkina Faso and Senegal.

Pages 30 to 46: The Significance of Social and Political Context: A Qualitative Study of Adults
Bereaved During Childhood and Adolescence Due to the Northern Ireland Troubles. Damian
McNally
Damien McNally is politics graduate of QUB and this research was undertaken during
completion of the M.Sc. in Social Research Methods with the Open University. His
research interests are in the field of bereavement, specifically the longer-term bereavement
experience of those affected by homicide and conflict. He is a member of the Management
Committee of the WAVE Trauma Centre for over 4 years and is currently Chair. I work in
the field of community relations in Northern Ireland.

Pages 47 to 59: The Immortal Self: Surrealist Alter-Egos. Rachael Grew.
Rachael Grew is a postgraduate student at the University of Glasgow studying History of
Art. Having completed an M.Phil. on alchemical imagery in the work of Remedios Varo
and Leonor Fini, for her PhD she has turned her attention to the use of a single alchemical
image - the androgyne - in the art of a wider variety of artists from the Symbolist and
Surrealist movements. As well as alchemy and Surrealism her research interests include the
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.
Tarot and Surrealist costume design and the discourse between works produced by male
and female artists. This paper has come from part of my PhD research.

Pages 60 to 73: War, Proportionality, and Noncombatant Immunity. Antony Lamb.
Antony Lamb is currently a postgraduate student (M.Litt. candidate) in the Department of
Philosophy at the University of Bristol. His research interests are issues to do with the
ethics of war; more specifically, the moral justification of international laws concerning
armed conflict. He also lecturers in philosophy at Coleg Gwent tertiary college.

Pages 74 to 84: For What Is Identity without a Stake in One’s Country? Richard Lee
Richard Lee is a part-time PhD student in the Department of Literature at the Open
University. His thesis examines the capacity of literature to supplement or interrupt
historical representations of the Partition of India in 1947. His research interests include
the Independence and Partition of India, gender issues in South Asia, historiography,
trauma and memory, and post-colonial literature.

Pages 85 to 96: The Colonial Other in E.M. Forster’s A Passage to India. Zoé Lehmann
Zoé Lehmann is a graduate of the University of Sussex, and is currently writing her
dissertation for an MA in English Literature with the Open University. Her dissertation
will explore supernatural stories of the late nineteenth century, and their relationship to
moral preoccupations of the period.

ii
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.
Making Bodies
Liza Griffen
Abstract
Our bodies play an influential part in the production of our society and in the mediation between
society and nature. Yet, despite its importance, a comprehensive theorisation of the body has
proved elusive. The most dominant paradigms in theorising bodies have been those associated
with the linguistic turn and, in particular, discourse studies. This paper argues that, however
persuasive, linguistic theories cannot be used on their own to interpret many of the body’s
practices and expressive powers. For such totalising, purely ‘textual’, philosophies neglect those
aspects of life that actually structure linguistic systems themselves; such as being and
performing in the world. I argue that somatic feeling exists before and underneath linguistic
expression, and is not subordinate to it. The case is made through considering the connections
between textural theories and uninterpretive praxis. In sum, it is necessary to look beyond
linguistic theory to another kind of approach which attempts to theorise what cannot be
represented, that is, non-representational theory.
Introduction
Much research on bodies which uses language texts and discourse as its predominant mode of
analysis has understood them as part of the 'immaterial' world. That is, it has interpreted bodies
as symbolic sites that are docile and inscribed. This highly influential research downplays the
practical moments and rhythms, experiences and praxes that configure our bodies – such as
repetitive work on the factory line or dance. This happens because movements and practices are
not easy to interpret or evoke by using language. Perhaps, therefore, we should put linguistic
theory on one side, and try to theorise these more 'practical' aspects of the social through applied
engagement with the world. In so doing we would hope to add a missing depth of understanding
to the body and help to rebalance the recent valorisation of the body as simply a site of
interpretation. We might do this with the aid of theories of the non-representational, including
performativity and embodiment. In emphasising the usefulness of such non-representational
theory, I also show how the purest interpretations of, and reliance on, textual theories of the body
are insufficient for its understanding.
1
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.

But first I outline why the body has become an important and yet contested site in social theory. I
go on to describe how, although textual theories have had much to offer the understanding of
bodies, they have rendered the body into a kind of lifeless, docile ‘cadaver’. I then show how
non-representational theories (such as embodiment and performativity) can help to theoretically
revitalise this cadaver. Finally, I argue that a turn toward non-representational theory need not
imply a negation of textual theory, or a reinforcement of realist-idealist dualisms.
Theories of the Body
The cultural importance of the body has recently been re-emphasised in the light of Western
society’s current individualist preoccupation with the body aesthetic, and also the body’s part in
spiritual pursuits like Yoga and pilgrimage. What’s more, it appears that ‘fleshiness’ is
increasingly evident in popular culture and advertising. However, the body is also significant in
terms of social theory. Here, it has recently been theorised as the manifest and material
expression of the individual self, often being regarded as the container of social identity. But this
has not always been the case. In the 1970s for instance, phenomenologists, tended to conceive of
the body as an ‘experience’ that performed in advance of the conscious mind, and in so doing
they revealed the expressive way that bodies belonged to the world (Kearney 1984).
Phenomenological theory, then, effectively reduced the body and its effects to non-discursive,
non-cognitive ‘experience’. Similarly, pragmatists, like John Dewey, while seeing the need to
take into account conscious cognition, acknowledged that non-cognitive experience was
imperative to the understanding of the body. Dewey however argued that pre-conscious
experiences were given meaning through language: thus they then become cognitive and
embroiled within discourse (see Shusterman 1997).

Later the ‘linguistic turn’ saw this interest in the body renewed, but this time it was conceived as
a largely passive surface inscribed by ‘texts’, i.e. signs and symbolic practices. Here, the body is
important as a site which can be mapped or written upon. However, more recently still, the body
has been theorised in its more corporeal and performative sense (see below).

2
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.
These two notions of the body – (i) as a site of inscription and (ii) as an active, fleshy agent
which cannot be represented - mirror the tension between those who champion representational
theories as a way of giving meaning to the world and those who favour more material, non-
representational, performative explanations (Seager 1997).
Representational theory: The body as a site of inscription
Philosophy and social theory have long been preoccupied with language. This preoccupation
culminated with the ‘linguistic turn’ and emergence of a totalising ideology in which nothing
appeared to matter outside of textual explanations. For example, Foucault’s (1980) social
constructivist theory of knowledge suggests that the body is textual in origin because it is
constructed primarily through discourses that are based around shared symbols and regulatory
norms. That is to say our bodies are effectively ‘parchment’ for society’s discourses. Discursive
practices get written upon bodies through, for example, disciplines and punishments. This form
of social constructivism limits the extent to which we see ourselves as shaped by our physical
bodies. It simultaneously implies that human physicality, or the pre-discursive body, can never
be directly apprehended, as our comprehension of it is obstructed by the ‘grids of meaning’
placed over it by our linguistic discourses (Shilling, 2000). Cream (1995: 33) asserts that the
“social body constrains the way the physical body is conceived and bodily experience, in turn,
reinforces and mediates the understanding of the social”.

Other theorists within this paradigm would go further, to suggest that bodies can be actually
constituted by discursive practice. So, for example, pregnant women can effectively be forced to
hide their ‘bumps’ or act in a demure fashion (Longhurst 2000). Or, as Cream (1995: 33)
describes it, these practices of the body are essentially interpretive, and “there is no way that a
body can escape its social and cultural setting. There is no body outside of its context”.

Indeed, symbolic practices like initiation ceremonies and ‘cults of physicality’ - for instance
where teenage boys engage in exercises affecting their physical growth, muscular and skeletal
development - do shape bodies (Connell 1995). Furthermore social categorisations can realise
actual behaviour; for instance Victorian women did ‘swoon’ and really did suffer from continual
maladies (Hargreaves 1985). What’s more, as Freund (1990) explains, social comparisons and
3
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.
power struggles and the stress that accompanies them may actually produce neuro-hormonal
imbalances which can affect blood flow and body immunity; that is, socially held values do have
material effects on the nature of the physical body. Similarly, beliefs and power relations can
also constitute the body through their effect on posture and muscle tensions (Shilling 2000).
This is illustrated by bodily disciplines like the Alexander Technique, which teaches cognisant
control over posture and movement. In doing so the Technique aims to bring the body’s
movement and bearing into the realm of consciousness and discourse. Hence in performing
Alexander, it is said, we can alter the ingrained habits that our bodies display in the unconscious,
such as poor posture.

But this social constructivism of the body may produce some ideological problems. For
linguistically discursive bodies may be subject to a cultural relativism that could sanction such
‘cultural practices’ as foot binding and female circumcision (Soper 1995). Another worrying
aspect of ‘writing the body’ is that men’s and women’s bodies are essentially products of a
linguistic binary opposition. These categories and laws provided by language (such as the
‘strong solider’ or the ‘nimble seamstress’), and essentialised by discourse fortify the fetters for
socio-political domination .

Texts that write bodies can, however, be more fluid and open ended, rather than merely
recreating those binary and essentialised oppositions that we are familiar with. They can
sometimes transcend them to create more diversity. For instance, while structural linguistics
may have aided the dominance of the dualistic categorisations of ‘woman’ and ‘man’, we are
increasingly familiar with other textual categories that disrupt such dichotomies: the
transgendered, the bisexual, for instance.

So there is room for texts to be less rigid and thus more useful for theorising the body. For

example, Hélène Cixous’s (1994) writing about gender is poetic, non-linear and anti-theoretical.
In it she disorders traditional frameworks and uses what she calls ‘sorties’ or ‘ways out’ of the
language system. However, again there is a problem. The paradox of these ‘playful texts’ -
which supposedly cannot be theorised, enclosed or coded linguistically – is that they still rely on
formal systems made up of symbols and laws. This shows how some textual philosophers, many
4
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.
of which still see the need for a ‘more real’ grasp of the body, cannot completely escape the
matrix of texts through which they construct the world.
Non-representational Theory: In the Flesh
Yet, while arguments for a more playful inscribed body may be compelling, most neglect the
inner and moving body (see Thrift & Dewsbury 2000). This is one of several shortcomings of
the textual interpretation perspectives described above. They may assert that bodies are shaped
by interpretive practices, but they do not explain how the ‘performing’ of these practices might
create the visceral:

Though the human body is surely shaped to some extent by linguistic and
interpretative practices, it has often been identified as the site of more
immediate, uninterpreted experience (Shusterman, 2000: 9).

Additionally, most of the social constructivist/interpretive theories considered above tend to
emphasise the regulatory, oppressive, aspects of body production, neglecting the more
celebratory or expressive components that can be created by social practice. Although
Foucault’s theorisation of the body through, for example, the gaze, the institution and biopower
contains some truth, all these techniques produce the body through normalising regulatory
behaviour. That is, they largely focus on the ‘push’ or negative factors. Such linguistic
approaches give us insight into what ‘is done’ to the body, but say much less about how, for
example, it is to be actually embodied, what it can do, how it is implicated in our agency and
how our experience is mediated through it (Shilling 2000). Bodies as 'parchment' only tell us
part of the story then, simply mapping an abstract representation of the body rather than
understanding it as it does and as it lives.

Another problem is that theorising bodies through deploying fixed, basically linguistic,
discourses tends to ignore uninterpreted 'moments' which we experience in daily activity, such as
the succession of rich multiple potentials that are afforded by the performance of dance, for
example. This leaves us with only the bare bones of an event (see Harrison 2000). Moreover, in
the process meaning is no longer gleaned from the event itself (like the actual dance) but rather
5
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.
from ‘outside’ knowledge (i.e. an accepted or conventional term for a dance movement that may
resemble the one actually being performed). Thus language slides into the interstices between
material and fleshy bodies and the immaterial world, and linguistic interpretation loses some of
the meaning produced by the occurrence. This meaning escapes, effectively allowing material
practices to become 'torn from the body' (Lefebvre 1991) and leaving a ‘carcass’ rather than a
living body. Because of this, Schieffelin (1998) argues that when we reduce performances to
texts they are destroyed. For example Labannotation (a code to represent the movements of the
body) does not at all convey the dance, just as the score is not the music.

Foucault himself (1984) acknowledges the possibility of ‘limit-experiences’, like extreme or
profound pleasures, that escape textual interpretation, and which could make or produce the
body (Shusterman 1997). But even this reasoning ignores the potential of more quotidian
performances, like dance, walking or sex, that occur in the ‘now’. This is because an important
dimension of immediate experience is missing from the discursive figuration of the body. It
leaves a void because language always leads us to the past or future , but never the present.
Textual-historical approaches present a body looking backwards at what has already happened
and ignore the potential of what the body might become. But the body acts in the present and is
constantly improvising. It initiates actions which seem to come from nowhere, or which are
created by the intelligence of the body, not the mind - because consciousness is often bypassed
in, for example such practices as Jazz improvisation1 (Thrift & Dewsbury 2000).

Furthermore, creating meaning from outside of the body gives us less sense that we can
intervene in its production (Thrift & Dewsbury 2000). The body as merely a textual site means
that all one can do is to interpret the leftover empty carcass which becomes merely “…a vehicle
for the expression of a reified social rationality” (Jackson 83: 329). Foucault’s notion of
discursive bodies for instance, effectively renders them docile or dissected - a cadaver. It is
restricted to conceptualising the body in relation to social inscriptions of knowledge and power.
To add to what was said above, its surveillance gives us no perception of the sensuous, the
reactive or the possible.

1 However, the notion that improvisation bypasses consciousness is rejected by many musicians and musicologists
who instead see cognitive awareness as a fundamental part of the process (see Fischlin and Heble (2004)).
6
Quest. Issue 5. Autumn 2007.
ISSN 1750-9696.

Hence, linguistic systems are apparently insufficient and problematic for explaining the body’s
living corporeality. And one of the things missing is the realisation that much of what is unseen
and unthought but is still highly significant in our lives, like walking through the city or knowing
where your car keys are, is to do with our ‘embodiment’. Embodiment refers to the idea that
perception, understanding and consciousness are materialised by practice, and exist primarily
within a membrane of flesh and blood (Harrison 2000). The unseen and unthought are, then,
embodied. And they become so through the process of encountering and being in the world,
often bypassing our cognitive senses. To reiterate, the everyday practices that configure our
bodies (that is, our bodies as the fleshy manifestation of practices, encounters and events) are
very often neglected by social theory. And many of these embodiments cannot be theorised
using discursive or representational theories because they relate to the non-cognitive or pre-
discursive body.

Hence if we are to take these practices seriously we need to look beyond representational
interpretations of the body towards the non-representational and the performative, which
embraces corporeal performances and embodiment. For Nigel Thrift (2000 A), such non-
representational theory is a:

radical attempt to wrench the social sciences and humanities out of their
current emphasis on representation and interpretation by moving away from a
view of the world based on contemplative models of thought and action
towards theories of practice which amplify the flow of events (p. 556).

Such a perspective uses the notion of performance to theorise day-to-day improvisations, like
strolling through the park, acting or dancing. The idea of performativity has its roots in speech
act theory and starts from the proposition that textual utterances can actually ‘constitute’ the
objects and subjects that are being referred to. However, this largely representational perspective
on performativity is then extended, e.g. by authors like Butler (1990) to explain how it is not
only words that can be creative of subjects: it is the daily behaviour of individuals, based on their
7