Advertisement

This Is Not … a Turn to Affect: Feeling Between Ontology and Anthropology

  • Paul Stenner
Chapter
Part of the Studies in the Psychosocial book series (STIP)

Abstract

This chapter constitutes an intervention into the so-called affective turn. It centres upon a critique of the affect/emotion distinction upon which this turn ‘turns’. The chapter begins with a discussion of Raymond Williams’s concept of ‘structure of feeling’, which is used to explicate one key inspiration for a turn to affect: a distinction between ‘event’ and ‘structure’. But the affect/emotion distinction also plays out in terms of a difference between an ontological account of feeling (applicable, via Spinoza and Whitehead, to the entirety of nature) and an anthropological account. Through these arguments, the turn to affect is re-construed as the cultural emergence—still in process—of a coherent species of transdisciplinary process thought.

References

  1. Atlan, H. (1998/2011). Intentional self-organization: Emergence and reduction, toward a physical theory of intentionality. In S. Geroulanos & T. Mayers (Eds.), Henri Atlan: Selected writings on self-organization, philosophy, bioethics and Judaism. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bergson, H. (1908/1991). Matter and memory (trans: Paul, N.M. & Palmer, W.S.). New York: Zone.Google Scholar
  3. Bion, W. R. (1961). Experiences in groups and other papers. London: Tavistock.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, J. W. (2012). Love and other emotions: On the process of feeling. London: Karnac.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, S., & Stenner, P. (2001). Being affected: Spinoza and the psychology of emotion. International Journal of Group Tensions, 30(1), 81–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, S. D., & Tucker, I. (2010). Eff the ineffable: Affect, somatic management, and mental health service users. In M. Gregg & G. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Clough, P. T. (2010). The affective turn: Political economy, biomedia and bodies. In M. Gregg & G. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Craib, I. (1997). Social constructionism as a social psychosis. Sociology, 31(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crawford, J., Kippax, S., Onyx, J., Gault, U., & Benton, P. (1992). Emotion and gender: Constructing meaning from memories. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Cristea, G. (1991). Pre-theatre: Rock paintings and engravings in central Sahara (Tassili n. Ajjer). Assaph – Studies in the theatre, 7, 121–160.Google Scholar
  11. Cromby, J. (2011). Scullery’s question: Multiplicity, felt experience and continuity. In P. Stenner, J. Cromby, J. F. Motzkau, J. Yen, & Y. Haosheng (Eds.), Theoretical psychology: Global transformations and challenges. Toronto: Captus Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cromby, J. (2015). Feeling bodies: Embodying psychology. London: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Damasio, A. (2000). The feeling of what happens. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  14. Damasio, A. (2004). Looking for Spinoza. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  15. Damasio, A. (2006). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. Harmondsworth: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
  16. Deleuze, G. (1993). The fold: Leibniz and the baroque. London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  17. Deleuze, G. (2007). Postscript on the societies of control. Available at http://deleuzelectures.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/postscript-on-societies-of-control.html. Accessed 15 July 2012.
  18. Durkheim, E. (1912/2001). In M. Cladis (Ed.), The elementary forms of religious life (C. Cosman, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Edwards, D. (1999). Emotion discourse. Culture and Psychology, 5(3), 271–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edwards, D. (2006). Discourse, cognition and social practices: The rich surface of language and social interaction. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 41–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elliott, A., & Frosh, S. (Eds.). (1995). Psychoanalysis in context: Paths between theory and modern culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Garfinkel, H. (1988). Evidence for the locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, logic, reason, meaning, method, etc. In and as of the essential quiddity of immortal ordinary society (I of IV): An announcement of studies. Sociological Theory, 6(1), 103–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gaster, T. H. (1950). Thepsis: Ritual and drama in the ancient near east. New York: Henry Schuman.Google Scholar
  24. Gatens, M. (1996). Imaginary bodies: Ethics, power and corporeality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Gibbs, A. (2010). After affect: Sympathy, synchrony, and mimetic communication. In M. Gregg & G. J. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader. London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Goffman, I. (1961). Encounters. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  28. Greco, M., & Stenner, P. (2008). Emotions: A social science reader. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Green, A. (1977). The conception of affect. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 58(2), 129–156.Google Scholar
  30. Green, A. (1999). The fabric of affect in the psychoanalytic discourse (A. Sheridan, Trans.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Grosz, E. (1994). Volatile bodies: Toward a corporeal feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Harré, R. (Ed.). (1986). The social construction of emotion. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  33. Harrison, J. E. (1913). Ancient art and ritual. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hemmings, C. (2005). Invoking affect: Cultural theory and the ontological turn. Cultural Studies, 19(5), 548–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (2000). Doing qualitative research differently: Free association, narrative and the interview method. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. James, W. (1884). What is an emotion? Mind, 9(34), 188–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. James, W. (1912/2003). Essays in radical empiricism. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  38. Langer, S. K. (1942/1978). Philosophy in a new key: A study in the symbolism of reason, rite, and art (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Lewis-Williams, J., Dowson, T., Bahn, P., Bandi, H., Bednarik, R., Clegg, J., Consens, M., Davis, W., Delluc, B., Delluc, G., Faulstich, P., Halverson, J., Layton, R., Martindale, C., Mirimanov, V., Turner, C., II, Vastokas, J., Winkelman, M., & Wylie, A. (1988). The signs of all times: Entoptic phenomena in upper Palaeolithic art. Current Anthropology, 29(2), 201–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Leys, R. (2012). The turn to affect: A critique. Critical Inquiry, 37(3), 434–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Massumi, B. (1995). The autonomy of affect. Cultural Critique, 31(2), 83–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Massumi, B. (2002). Parables for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matte Blanco, I. (1975). The unconscious as infinite sets. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  44. Matte Blanco, I. (1988). Thinking, feeling and being. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Merchant, C. (1980). The death of nature: Women, ecology, and the scientific revolution. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  46. Moore, S. F. (2013). Law as process: An anthropological approach. Oxford: James Currey Publishers.Google Scholar
  47. Morrissey, The Smiths. (1985). Nowhere fast. On Meat is murder. Sire Records.Google Scholar
  48. Pickard-Cambridge, A. W. (1927). Dithyramb, tragedy and comedy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  49. Rozik, E. (2002). The roots of theatre: Rethinking ritual and other theories of origin. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.Google Scholar
  50. Schütz, A. (1945). On multiple realities. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 5(4), 533–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sedgwick, E. K., & Frank, A. (1995). Shame in the cybernetic fold: Reading Silvan Tomkins. Critical Inquiry, 21(2), 496–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sehgal, M. (2014). Diffractive propositions: Reading Alfred North Whitehead with Donna Haraway and Karen Barad. Parallax, 20(3), 188–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Seigworth, G., & Gregg, M. (2010). An inventory of shimmers. In M. Gregg & G. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Spinoza, B. (1670/1951). A theologico-political treatise (Elwes, Trans.). London: Dover.Google Scholar
  55. Spinoza, B. ([1677] 1989). Ethics: Including the improvement of the understanding (R. H. M. Elwes, Trans.). New York: Prometheus books.Google Scholar
  56. Stenner, P. (2004). Is autopoietic systems theory alexithymic? Luhmann and the socio-psychology of emotions. Soziale Systeme, 10(1), 159–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stenner, P. (2015). A transdisciplinary psychosocial approach. In K. Slaney, J. Martin, & J. Sugarman (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches and new directions for social science. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  58. Stenner, P., & Greco, M. (2013). Affectivity. Informática na Educaçao: Teoria e Prática, 16(1), 49–70.Google Scholar
  59. Stenner, P., & Moreno, E. (2013). Liminality and affectivity: The case of deceased organ donation. Subjectivity, 6(3), 229–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Thrift, N. (2004). Intensities of feeling: Towards a spatial politics of affect. Geografiska Annaler, 86, 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tomkins, S. (1962). Affect, imagery, consciousness (Vol. 1). New York: Springer Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  62. Tomkins, S. (2008). Revisions in script-theory. In M. Greco & P. Stenner (Eds.), Emotions: A social science reader. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  63. Venn, C. (2010). Individuation, relationality, affect: Rethinking the human in relation to the living. Body and Society, 16(1), 129–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Whitehead, A. N. (1926/2005). Religion in the making. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Whitehead, A. N. (1929/1985). Process and reality. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  67. Whitehead, A. N. (1933/1935). Adventures in ideas. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Whitehead, A. N. (1938/1966). Modes of thought. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  69. Williams, R. (1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Zorich, Z. (2011). A chauvet primer. Archaeology, 65(2), 1–5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Stenner
    • 1
  1. 1.School of PsychologyThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations