“Ahmed emphasizes the necessity of ‘disorientation,’ a challenge to normative ways of seeing, thinking, being, and feeling in the world that destabilizes commonsensical assumptions and in so doing enables the world to be moved in a different direction.”
Discussing the way reading black feminist and feminist of color scholarship in graduate school impressed upon her, she writes:
“I decided then: theoretical work that is in touch with a world is the kind of theoretical work I wanted to do. Even when I have written texts organized around the history of ideas, I have tried to write from my own experiences: the everyday as animation. In writing this book, I wanted to stay even closer to the everyday than I had before. This book is personal. The personal is theoretical. Theory itself is often assumed to be abstract: something is more theoretical the more abstract it is, the more it is abstracted from everyday life. To abstract is to drag away, detach, pull away, or divert. We might then have to drag theory back, to bring theory back to life.”
SOURCE: McMahon, John. “Sara Ahmed and the Cultural Politics of Emotion.” Do the Lap.
“Since, in our society, free choice is elevated into a supreme value, social control and domination can no longer appear as infringing on subject’s freedom. They have to appear, instead, as (and be sustained by) the very self-experience of individuals as free. There is a multitude of forms of this un-freedom appearing in the guise of its opposite. When we are deprived of universal healthcare, we are told that we are given a new freedom of choice, namely to choose our healthcare provider; when we no longer can rely on long-term employment and are compelled to search for a new precarious position every couple of years, we are told that we are given the opportunity to re-invent ourselves and discover new, unexpected, and creative potentials that lurked in our personality; when we have to pay for the education of our children, we are told that we become the “entrepreneurs of the self,” acting like a capitalist who has to choose freely how he will invest the resources he possesses (or has borrowed) – into education, health, travel… Constantly bombarded by imposed ‘free choices,’ forced to make decisions for which we are mostly not even properly qualified nor possess enough information about, we more and more experience our freedom as what it effectively is: a burden that deprives us of the true choice of change.”
SOURCE: Žižek, Slavoj. “Fictitious Capital and the Return of Personal Domination.” The Philosophical Salon.
Excerpt from Robert Zaretsky’s interview with Mohammad Hekmat:
What are the pleasures and difficulties in translating Camus into Farsi? Are these difficulties only linguistic, or are there philosophical and political challenges as well?
“Linguistically, the difficulty is in certain terms that he uses. Perhaps the most difficult term, which I have seen other translators struggle with too, is the word absurd. There is no direct translation of the word absurd into Persian. I have seen different approaches by Iranian translators — some even just use the transliteration of the word. His more philosophical works have been much harder to translate. I tried to read The Myth of Sisyphus in Persian, and it’s extremely hard to understand. This has been a general issue with translation of modern and Western philosophy into Persian. There is simply a shortage of terms, and the style had no tradition. There have been numerous efforts to invent new words, many of which have been successfully adopted, but it’s an ongoing process.”
SOURCE: Zaretsky, Robert. “Reading ‘The Stranger’ in Tehran: An Interview with Mohammad Hekmat.” Los Angeles Review of Books.