Advertisement

Mutual Becomings? In Search of an Ethical Pedagogic Space in Human-Horse Relationships

  • Reingard SpannringEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Education and the Environment book series (PSEE)

Abstract

The chapter is framed by the posthumanist discourse within environmental education. It scrutinizes texts on “mutual becoming” in human-horse relationships and reveals unquestioned anthropocentric and speciesist assumptions, suggesting a more critical and liberating understanding of mutual becoming and posthumanist learning. The empirical basis of the chapter is an autoethnography informed by multispecies ethnography and zooanthropology, which brings the socio-cognitive potential and needs of the equine learning partners to bear on what an ethical pedagogic space could be.

References

  1. Andrzejewski, J., Pedersen, H., & Wicklund, F. (2009). Interspecies education for humans, animals, and the earth. In J. Andrzejewski, M. P. Baltodano, & L. Symcox (Eds.), Social justice, peace, and environmental education (pp. 136–154). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Anthony, D. W. (2010). The horse, the wheel, and language. How bronze-age riders from the Eurasian steppes shaped the modern world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Argent, G. (2012). Toward a privileging of the nonverbal: Communication, corporeal synchrony, and transcendence in humans and horses. In J. A. Smith & R. W. Mitchell (Eds.), Experiencing animal minds. An anthology of animal-human encounters (pp. 111–128). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bekoff, M. (2000). Redecorating nature. Reflections on science, holism, humility, community, reconciliation, spirit, compassion and love. Human Ecology Review, 7, 59–67.Google Scholar
  5. Bekoff, M. (2014). Rewilding our hearts: Building pathways of compassion and coexistence. Novato, CA: New World Library.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, A., & Russell, C. (2000). Beyond human, beyond words: Anthropocentrism, critical pedagogy, and the poststructuralist turn. Canadian Journal of Education, 25(3), 188–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Best, S. (2005). Genetic science, animal exploitation, and the challenge for democracy. In C. Gigliotti (Ed.), Leonardo’s choice (pp. 3–19). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Birke, L. (2007). “Learning to speak horse”: The culture of “natural horsemanship”. Society & Animals, 15(3), 217–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Birke, L. (2009). Interwoven lives: Understanding human/animal connections. In T. Holmberg (Ed.), Investigating human. Animal relations in science, culture and work (pp. 18–31). Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala Universitet.Google Scholar
  10. Birke, L., Bryld, M., & Lykke, N. (2004). Animal performances: An exploration of intersections between feminist science studies and studies of human/animal relationships. Feminist Theory, 5(2), 167–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Birke, L., & Parisi, L. (1999). Animals, becoming. In H. P. Steeves (Ed.), Animal others: On ethics, ontology, and animal life (pp. 55–73). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  12. Brandt, K. (2004). A language of their own: An interactionist approach to human-horse communication. Society and Animals, 12(4), 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Buber, M. (1996). I and thou (trans: Kaufmann, W.). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  14. Carlson, D. (2014). Foreword. In N. Snaza & J. Weaver (Eds.), Posthumanism and educational research (pp. ix–xiv). Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  15. Corman, L., & Vandrovcová, T. (2014). Radical humility: Toward a more holistic critical animal studies pedagogy. In A. Nocella II, J. Sorenson, K. Socha, & A. Matsuoka (Eds.), Defining critical animal studies: An introduction to an intersectional social justice approach to animal liberation (pp. 135–157). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  16. De Giorgio, F., & De Giorgio-Schoorl, J. (2013). The cognitive horse. Hoofddorp: Institute for Zooanthropology.Google Scholar
  17. De John Anderson, V. (2006). Creatures of empire. How domestic animals transformed early America. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1977). Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
  19. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2002). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  20. Fawcett, L. (2009). Feral sociality and (un)natural histories. On nomadic ethics and embodied learning. In M. McKenzie, P. Hart, H. Bai, & B. Jickling (Eds.), Fields of green. Restorying culture, environment, and education (pp. 227–236). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  21. Franklin, A. (1999). Animals and modern cultures. A sociology of human-animal relations in modernity. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Gamborg, C., Gremmen, B., Christiansen, S. B., & Sandoe, P. (2010). De-domestication. Ethics at the intersection of landscape restoration and animal welfare. Environmental Values, 19(1), 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Game, A. (2001). Riding. Embodying the centaur. Body & Society, 7, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haraway, D. J. (2008). When species meet. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hempfling, K. F. (2001). Dancing with horses: Collected riding on a loose rein. North Pomfret, VT: Trafalgar Square.Google Scholar
  26. Hung, R. (2015). To be as not to be. In search of an alternative humanism in the light of early Daoism and deconstruction. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 49(3), 418–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays in livelihood, dwelling, and skill. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Kirksey, E., & Helmreich, S. (2010). The emergence of multispecies ethnography. Cultural Anthropology, 25(4), 545–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kopnina, H. (2017). Beyond multispecies ethnography: Engaging with violence and animal rights in anthropology. Critique of Anthropology, 37(3), 333–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lloro-Bidart, T. (2014). They call them ‘good-luck polka dots’: Disciplining bodies, bird biopower, and human-animal relationships at the Aquarium of the Pacific. Journal of Political Ecology, 21, 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lloro-Bidart, T. (2018). A feminist posthumanist multispecies ethnography for educational studies. Educational Studies, 54(3), 253–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Loch, S. (1990). Dressage: The art of classical riding. North Pomfret, VT: Trafalgar Square.Google Scholar
  33. Maurstad, A., Davis, D., & Cowles, S. (2013). Co-being and intra-action in horse-human relationships. A multi-species ethnography of be(com)ing human and be(com)ing horse. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale, 21(3), 322–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Maziere, C., & Gunnlaugson, O. (2015). A case for developing spiritual intelligence in leaders through equine facilitated learning. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 8(1), article 10.Google Scholar
  35. Nibert, D. A. (2013). Animal oppression and human violence. Domesecration, capitalism, and global conflict. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Ogden, L. A., Hall, B., & Tanita, K. (2013). Animals, plants, people, and things: A review of multispecies ethnography. Environment and Society: Advances in Research, 4(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pedersen, H. (2010). Is ‘the posthuman’ educatable? On the convergence of educational philosophy, animal studies, and posthumanist theory. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(2), 237–250.Google Scholar
  38. Pedersen, H. (2013). Follow the Judas sheep. Materializing post-qualitative methodology in zooethnographic space. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 717–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pickering, A. (2005). Asian eels and global warming. A posthumanist perspective on society and the environment. Ethics & the Environment, 10(2), 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rossini, M. (2006, September). To the dogs: Companion speciesism and the new feminist materialism. Kritikos: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal of Postmodern Cultural Sound, Text and Image, 3. http://intertheory.org/rossini. Accessed 17 May 2017.
  41. Rotas, N. (2015). Ecologies of praxis. Teaching and learning against the obvious. In N. Snaza & J. Weaver (Eds.), Posthumanism and educational research (pp. 91–103). Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  42. Russell, C. (1995). The social construction of orangutans: An ecotourist experience. Society and Animals, 3(2), 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Russell, C. L., & Hodson, D. (2002). Whalewatching as critical science education? Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(4), 485–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Savvides, N. (2012). Communication as a solution to conflict: Fundamental similarities in divergent methods of horse training. Society & Animals, 20(1), 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schuurman, N. (2015). Conceptions of equine welfare in Finnish horse magazines. Society & Animals, 23(3), 250–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith, S. J. (2011). Becoming horse in the duration of the moment: The trainer’s challenge. Phenomenology & Practice, 5(1), 7–26.Google Scholar
  47. Smuts, B. (2001). Encounters with animal minds. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8(5–7), 293–309.Google Scholar
  48. Snaza, N., & Weaver, J. (Eds.). (2014). Posthumanism and educational research. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  49. Spannring, R. (2015). I and animal thou. Perspectives for educational theory. Society & Animals, 23, 613–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stewart, A. (2011). Becoming-speckled warbler. Re/creating Australian natural history pedagogy. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1), 68–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Warkentin, T. (2011). Interspecies etiquette in place: Ethical affordances in swim-with-dolphins programs. Ethics & the Environment, 16(1), 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weaver, J. (2014). To what future do the posthuman and posthumanism (re)turn us; meanwhile how do I tame the lingering effects of humanism? In N. Snaza & J. Weaver (Eds.), Posthumanism and educational research (pp. 183–194). Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  53. World Horse Welfare, & Eurogroup for Animals. (2015). Removing the blinkers. The health and welfare of European equidae in 2015. http://www.worldhorsewelfare.org/Removing-the-Blinkers. Accessed 17 Feb 2017.
  54. Zukosky, M. L. (2016). Przewalski’s horses in Eurasia. New York, NY: Lexington Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Educational ScienceUniversity of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations