The Category of Violence

Veranstalter
Centre for Citizenship, Civil Society and the Rule of Law, University of Aberdeen
Veranstaltungsort
Ort
Aberdeen
Land
United Kingdom
Vom - Bis
23.06.2011 - 24.06.2011
Deadline
28.02.2011
Von
Trevor Stack

We are used to thinking of ‘violence’ as violence and, indeed, as something more real than almost anything else. As something that defies categorization; that just is. In this workshop we propose to suspend our belief that there is such a thing called violence, and instead focus on how we and others use ‘violence’ as a category of action, whether in designing government policy, passing judgement in court, producing films, writing newspaper articles or political theory, diagnosing patients, or simply chatting about other people. Our intention is not to define violence or even to offer alternative definitions, but instead to think how violence gets defined and with what consequences.

How, why and with what consequences do people deploy the category of violence? How do they distinguish between ‘violent’ and ‘non-violent’, and to what effect? For example, how is the line drawn between ‘violent’ and ‘peaceful’ protest and between ‘tough’ and ‘brutal’ policing of protests, and what rides on those distinctions? More broadly, what are the effects of scholars marking off as ‘violent’ whole areas of human life, as in the pathology of ‘violent’ tendencies, or of labeling whole regions of world as ‘violent’? Or of art taking ‘violence´ self-consciously as its object, as in Clockwork Orange? Law generally avoids the term ‘violence’ in favour of more ‘neutral’ terms such as coercion – but with what results? With what consequences does violence get linked to categories such as religion and sex, often considered ‘sources of violence’? And what are the effects of disputing the boundaries of violence, for example when we label as ‘symbolic violence’ actions that are not normally described as ‘violent’?

We are not necessarily looking for polished research papers but for provocative responses to our questions that will help to spark energetic discussion – at least half the workshop time will be set aside for discussion – among a very diverse group of participants from across the humanities and social sciences.

The following have already agreed to participate:
- Vivenne Jabri, Professor of International Politics and Director of the Centre for International Relations at King’s College London, whose current research and writing focus on war/violence and conceptions of cosmopolitan political community in a globalised world
- Fiona Sampson, poet (latest volume entitled Rough Music) and writer on the philosophy of language and the creative process
- Andrea Mura, political philosopher at the University of Loughborough, whose work has centred on the theoretical interplay between continental and Islamic philosophy, focusing on contemporary debates on universalism, territoriality, modernity, and hyper-modernity, and on the work of Jacques Lacan

Programm

Sessions

1. Violence as category: opening the debate

The first panel will begin with three or four very different examples of how ‘violence’ is distinguished from ‘non-violent’, in a bid to open up our discussion and start tracing connections across a wide range of contexts. For example, how does ‘violence’ get defined in scientific and/or non-scientific scholarship, and to what effect? Why are legislators and lawyers reluctant to use violence as a concept while policy uses it frequently? And in what ways and to what ends does ‘violence’ get represented in art or in ritual?

2. ‘Violence’ as limit to legality, civility and normality

Violence has long been used to mark off other categories such as civility, legality and normality. ‘Violence’ began to be constituted in 17th century Europe as a threat to the state and its ‘civil society’, and in the present day organizations and movements are often assessed in terms of their propensity for ‘violence’, while scholars look for ‘violent’ pathogens (literally or metaphorically) in individuals. We are looking for speakers to offer two different examples in order to open up our discussion of how ‘violence’ is used to police the boundary of the legal, the civil and the normal.

3. Kindred categories: sex and violence, religion and violence, power and violence

Why and to what effect does violence get linked to other categories such as religion, sex and power, which get blamed for being sources of violence? How has the history of such categories become intertwined in notions of ‘religious violence’ or ‘sexual violence’, for example?

4. When the boundaries of ‘violence’ get disputed

How, why and with what consequences do we dispute the boundaries of violence, for example by labeling as ‘symbolic violence’ actions that are not normally described as violent? What happens, for example, when scholars argue that policy-makers ‘do violence’ by describing Afghan women as oppressed? Or when analysts describe as ‘state violence’ actions – such as policing or war – that are not normally characterized as such?

5. Violence as category, as disruption: a final reflection

The final panel will pose a series of questions that invite us to reflect on our attempts during the workshop to focus on violence as a category rather than as a phenomenon. Given that violence is considered something that somehow defies or disrupts categorization, what are the consequences of trying to focus on violence as category? What kind of category is violence, and how does that affect the way it works?

Kontakt

Trevor Stack
Department of Hispanic Studies, University of Aberdeen,
Aberdeen AB24 3UB, U.K.
t.stack@abdn.ac.uk

http://abdn.ac.uk/cisrul/events/617/