Vulnerability: Difference between revisions

From Knowledge-land-scape
Saskia (talk | contribs)
Saskia (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:


Write something about vulnerability
Among such initial affective responses were dissociation, defensiveness, and resistance. V.C. De Groot, for example, being immersed in a relationship with the community of Gjoa Haven to a degree not shared by the other academic members of the research team, took such negative perceptions of research to reflect directly on his personal research history with Gjoa Haven. Initially V.C. de Groot defended himself, by pointing out how he has repeatedly reminded the members of the Gjoa Haven HTA throughout their respective collaborations that expectations of outcomes resulting in an upward revision of quota were not going to be met in the shorter term by their shared work. One of the opportunities that a testimonial reading offers us, however, is to acknowledge the role of emotions and explore how they reflect the stakes at play when we conceptualize ourselves as implicated subjects.  Instead of reacting in more “knee-jerk”, or defensive manners, a testimonial reading redirects one towards exploring responses that may assist in becoming a more accountable research partner towards the communities one collaborates with.
 
De Wildt, Whitelaw and Lougheed did not perceive Gjoa Haven’s critique of research outcomes as directed towards V.C de Groot’s prior work in the community per se. Rather they saw such comments as expressing frustration with research practices in general, extending beyond projects related to polar bears - and as a critique of the GN, in particular towards their surveys leading to Gjoa Haven’s near moratorium, and their subsequent lack of timely accountability towards the community. The initial affective response from those three academic partners ranged from defensiveness about the legitimacy of scientific research, a fear of losing community support, and guilt or cognitive dissonance between (violent) historical research practices, and on our current research practices and collaboration.
 
 


=<span id="Unsettlement"></span>Unsettlement=
=<span id="Unsettlement"></span>Unsettlement=

Revision as of 16:21, 19 November 2024

Among such initial affective responses were dissociation, defensiveness, and resistance. V.C. De Groot, for example, being immersed in a relationship with the community of Gjoa Haven to a degree not shared by the other academic members of the research team, took such negative perceptions of research to reflect directly on his personal research history with Gjoa Haven. Initially V.C. de Groot defended himself, by pointing out how he has repeatedly reminded the members of the Gjoa Haven HTA throughout their respective collaborations that expectations of outcomes resulting in an upward revision of quota were not going to be met in the shorter term by their shared work. One of the opportunities that a testimonial reading offers us, however, is to acknowledge the role of emotions and explore how they reflect the stakes at play when we conceptualize ourselves as implicated subjects. Instead of reacting in more “knee-jerk”, or defensive manners, a testimonial reading redirects one towards exploring responses that may assist in becoming a more accountable research partner towards the communities one collaborates with.

De Wildt, Whitelaw and Lougheed did not perceive Gjoa Haven’s critique of research outcomes as directed towards V.C de Groot’s prior work in the community per se. Rather they saw such comments as expressing frustration with research practices in general, extending beyond projects related to polar bears - and as a critique of the GN, in particular towards their surveys leading to Gjoa Haven’s near moratorium, and their subsequent lack of timely accountability towards the community. The initial affective response from those three academic partners ranged from defensiveness about the legitimacy of scientific research, a fear of losing community support, and guilt or cognitive dissonance between (violent) historical research practices, and on our current research practices and collaboration.


Unsettlement

“It is precisely by denying culpability or assuming that one is not implicated in violent relations toward others, that one is outside them, that violence can be perpetuated. Violence, especially of the liberal varieties, is often most easily perpetrated in the spaces and places where its possibility is unequivocally denounced” (Berlant, 2018, as cited in Rothberg, 2020, p.49).

Text about unsettlement

Stay with the trouble: "Speak Truth to Power"