Iván Sandoval Cervantes (PhD Candidate in Anthropology at the University of Oregon)
- Wednesday, May 22 from 3:30pm-5:00pm
- Thomson 403
This paper is an attempt to theoretically construct a concept of multi-species ethnography that addresses the ways in which the inequalities produced by processes of globalization affect nonhuman animals. In this sense, a multi-species ethnographical project should see nonhuman animals not only as symbols or as part of the natural resources available to humans but as part of complex historical interspecies trajectories (Kirksey and Helmreich 2010).
These trajectories include notions about ownership that regulate the relations between human and nonhuman animals. It is by analyzing these trajectories that multi-species ethnographies can question how different nonhuman animal species have been placed in what I call (based Aiwha Ong’s (2006) concept of “graduated citizenship”) “graduated humanness” that encompasses ideas about animal and human rights, and the agency of nonhuman animals, and that influences how humans interact with nonhuman animals. To exemplify the use of this theoretical framework I will analyze an event that took place in Mexico City in January 2013 that involved a pack of “wild” dogs “attacking” and “killing” a group of people in Mexico City’s most populated borough.
María Elena García (CHID/JSIS)
- Thursday May 16, 12:00–1:30
- Thomson 403
Peru is in the midst of a much celebrated gastronomic boom. Promoters of this boom invoke the country’s “natural” biodiversity as key to Peruvian cuisine’s success. This local celebration of food, along with the push toward the global marketing of Peruvian cuisine, has implied greater extraction and consumption of “natural resources” such as indigenous grains, tubers, fruits, and animals that are seen as some of the central ingredients of novoandino cuisine. While the extraction of other kinds of natural resources have resulted in waves of protest over the “destruction of nature”, less has been said about the extraction, consumption and in some cases genetic manipulation of the plants and animals at the center of the so-called gastronomic revolution. This paper is an exploration of the biopolitics and cosmopolitics of Peruvian food. Specifically, I offer a multispecies, gendered analysis of the genetic and reproductive manipulation of guinea pig bodies taking place as a result of the national excitement around Peruvian novoandino cuisine.
Catherine Hagan (Assistant Professor, Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, University of Missouri)
- Monday May 6, 12:00–2:00
- Savery 408
This workshop will continue a conversation that began last year, when we explored the issue of compassion fatigue and burnout in people working with animals in research. Again, the primary context to be discussed is people working with animals in research. While a discussion of alternatives to animal use is important, this workshop is not intended to be a discussion about whether or not it is appropriate for animals to be used in such circumstances. Rather, we will focus on exploring ideas and strategies for supporting people whose jobs involve difficult and emotionally demanding aspects of animal care.
Catherine Hagan is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Veterinary Pathobiology at the University of Missouri. She received a B.S. degree in Biological Sciences from Stanford University, a D.V.M. from the University of California, Davis, and a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cellular Biology from the University of Washington, Seattle. She completed a residency at UW in the Department of Comparative Medicine in laboratory animal medicine and comparative pathology in 2008 and was an acting faculty member there until leaving this past fall. Her research explores stress, serotonin, and brain innate immunity.
Annie Dwyer (English)
- Thursday April 25, 12:00–1:30
- Thomson 403
This paper is an excerpt from a dissertation chapter entitled “Primitive Accumulations.” The chapter explores how material practices involving animals and emergent meanings of animality set the stage for the performance of masculinity and the enactment of racialized violence. The human-animal encounter that anchors the discussion is the hunt, more specifically, representations of hunting written either by or about Theodore Roosevelt. In reading these representations, this chapter traces how animality accrues the sense of savagery — expressed and accessed through the exercise of violence — in the American cultural imaginary over the course of the Progressive era. Ultimately, this chapter links the cultural reimagining of the animal as a “barbarous beast” to the resurgence of a primitivist imaginary authorizing capitalist accumulation — what we might call primitive accumulation, to both invoke and expand Marx’s use of the term.
The excerpt I will be distributing focuses specifically on Roosevelt’s famous 1902 Mississippi bear hunt. During the hunt, Roosevelt dramatically displayed his “good sportsmanship” in refusing to kill a black bear that had been beaten and tied so that he might claim the trophy. While the event is well-known for inspiring the creation of the teddy bear, scholars have largely neglected how the subtext of the news coverage — a public debate about lynching — propelled the story’s rise to celebrity. The black hunting guide who led the hunt, Holt Collier, figures as largely as Roosevelt in representations of the event, as he held the bear at bay under pressure to help Roosevelt “bag” his game. In showing how representations of the event fueled the myth of the black rapist, I also explore how the permissibility of violence against animals and the reinvestment of animality with the sense of savagery underwrote the justification of mob violence in the Jim Crow south.
Karen S. Emmerman, PhD in Philosophy, University of Washington
- Monday, February 25
- 12:00–2:00, Thomson 403
In Respect for Nature, Paul W. Taylor argued that humans have a duty to make restitution any time we harm wild animals and plants in service of human interests. He suggested that restitution is crucial for showing respect for the lives and well-being of the living things we harm in the course of pursuing our lives. Taylor further averred that restitution, when properly undertaken, means “we need not bear a burden of eternal guilt because we have used them – and will continue to use them – for our own ends. There is a way to make amends” (Taylor 1986, 306). While Taylor’s reminder that restitution is a vital part of our interactions with nonhumans whenever we cause them harm, he does not reflect deeply on the complications encountered by these efforts in the inter-species realm.
In this essay, I propose to undertake a careful examination of the complexities of making restitution (or undertaking the work of moral repair as I call it, borrowing from Margaret Urban Walker) to nonhuman animals. In particular, I will explore how captivity complicates our efforts to successfully do the work of moral repair when we have harmed, neglected, or otherwise inflicted damage on nonhuman animals. Where captivity is a necessary part of our efforts to make things right again, it may well be that we can never fully make amends.
Katie Gillespie, Geography
- Monday, January 28
- 12:00–2:00, Thomson 403
Feminist scholars concerned with the plight of animals and women have argued that female animals tend to be disproportionately exploited for their productive and reproductive capabilities. And this is certainly the case; female farmed animals are used in a number of ways that uniquely exploit their female reproductive capabilities. However, an expanded, more geographical, feminist approach uncovers the ways in which the commodification of farmed animal bodies is highly gendered for both male and female animals.
Using the empirical case study of the dairy industry in the Pacific Northwestern United States, this paper performs a gendered analysis of the commodification of the bovine bodies and lives at the heart of the industry. This paper first reviews the more overt ways in which the female reproductive body is used alongside the less commonly researched role of the male body in order to draw out the ways in which animals are uniquely commodified based on their sex. Next, this paper takes up an exploration of the various discourses (the popular discourse, the formal industry discourse and the colloquial industry discourse) that work to reproduce the lived realities of bovine animals in the industry.
Through a review of the lived realities of these animals, the violence of the system itself becomes clear, but this violence is then simultaneously both concealed and further expressed by the discourses of consumers and producers. This paper explores this sexualized violence against the animal in the hopes of drawing attention to the mundane, everyday forms of violence that remain largely unseen.
We will be meeting to discuss works by
- Katie Gillespie on January 28, 2013 from 12:00–2:00, Room TBA
- Karen Emmerman on February 25, 2013 from 12:00–2:00, Room TBA.
More information soon!
A workshop with Sabine Noellgen on her paper on gender and nature in Werner Herzog’s works.
- Date: Monday, November 26th, 2012
- Time: 2:30pm to 4:00pm
- Location: Thompson 403
“‘An Hombre Like Me’: Masculinity and Nature in Werner Herzog’s Grizzly Man (paper under consideration for Colloquia Germanica’s special issue on Literature and the Environment 2012) attempts to counter a lack of gender approaches to Werner Herzog’s films. I propose that Herzog, whose larger body of films displays a striking excess of masculine failures, presents the subject of his documentary as a social misfit and outsider, who fails both to survive in the wild and, more importantly, to live with other people. My paper detects how Herzog codes this failure and positions himself towards the gender and species ambiguity displayed. Moreover, my investigation of narrative performativity in Grizzly Man get an ecocritical edge when suggesting that both narrators’ construction of masculine identity is closely tied to their filmic representation of nature. Ultimately, I propose, Herzog’s final jump from looking at one man’s identity crisis to a universal human condition not only disregards the gender aspects of the story that he tells, but, when reestablishing a nostalgic look at nature that allows for equally nostalgic heroic masculinity, leaves his own preconceived notions of nature unexamined.”
When: Friday October 12, 2012, 12pm to 2:00pm
Where: Room 115, William Gates Hall
Who: Jasmin Singer and Mariann Sullivan (www.ourhenhouse.org)
Join the brains behind Our Hen House, Jasmin Singer and Mariann Sullivan, for this unique roundtable discussion that explores their collaboration with activists, academics and everyone in between.
Our Hen House (www.ourhenhouse.org/), named by VegNews Magazine as the 2011 Indie Media Powerhouse, is a multimedia hub of opportunities to mainstream the movement to end animal exploitation. Jasmin and Mariann, the founders — and the hosts of the popular Our Hen House podcast – will share the path that led them to creating Our Hen House, how the site is influenced and informed by academics’ involvement, and how we can use our own particular skills, talents and experience to build a new world free of animal exploitation. In this intimate workshop, animal law professor Mariann Sullivan and writer Jasmin Singer, will share ideas for turning thought into action, and action into real change. With a focus on ‘The Gay Animal,’ ‘The Legal Eagle,’ and other unique projects of Our Hen House, this workshop also offers the opportunity to explore the intersections of various social movements and our role in moving those efforts forward.
A Healthy Co-Existence: Animal Law, Public Health and Safety
- Friday, 13th of April, 2012, 8:30am — 4:30pm
Presented by: Student Animal Legal Defense Fund University of Washington Chapter
For more information about this all-day event, see the flyer.