Abstract
The domestication of suffering into pain and the translation of this pain into harm and injury starts off the process of admitting sufferers into the privileges of liberalism: the identity derived from this injury, the rights that compensate for the injury, and the interests that render injury fit for trade. Each stage of this process entails a series of translations, abstractions, and representations that are themselves suffered, not least when the sufferer self-represents as victim and when suffering that is not granted the status of injury within the liberal schema strikes back disoriented or triumphant.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
My sense of the word aesthetic derives most centrally from Terry Eagle-ton’s classic genealogy in The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell, 1990)
Herbert Marcuse’s The Aesthetic Dimension: Toward a Critique of Marxist Aesthetics (Boston: Beacon, 1978)
Lambert Zuidervaart’s reading of it in Adorno’s Aesthetic Theory: The Redemption of Illusion (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991).
Hanna Fenichel Pitkin, The Concept of Representation [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967], 2.
Claire Colebrook, “Questioning Representation,” SubStance 92 (2000): 47–67;
Jane Mansbridge, “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes,’” Journal of Politics 61 (1999): 628–57;
Anne Philips, The Politics of Presence (Oxford, UK: Clarendon, 1995);
Nadia Urbinati, “Representation as Advocacy: A Study of Democratic Deliberation,” Political Theory 28 (2000): 758–86;
Melissa Williams, Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998).
Frank R. Ankersmit, Aesthetic Politics: Political Philosophy Beyond Fact and Value (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1996)
Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan: With Selected Variants from the Latin Edition of 1668, ed. E. M. Curley (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994), 101–5.
Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (New York: International Publishers, 1964);
Karl Marx, “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,” in The Marx-Engels Reader, ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: Norton, 1978), 594–17;
Karl Marx, “Introduction,” in Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy, trans. Martin Nicolaus (London; New York: Penguin Books, 1993), 100–111.
Martha B. Helfer, The Retreat of Representation: The Concept of Darstellung in German Critical Discourse (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996).
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, “Can the Subaltern Speak?” in Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, eds. Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988), 276.
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues, ed. Sarah Harasym (New York: Routledge, 1990), 108;
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, The Spivak Reader: Selected Works of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ed. Donna Landry and Gerald M. MacLean (New York: Routledge, 1996), 6.
Strong, Jean Jacques Rousseau: The Politics of the Ordinary (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994), 56–57.
John Rawls, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, ed. Erin Kelly (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), 7–8, 80–81.
John Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), 15.
John Rawls, “Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14 (1985): 238–39.
Bruce Ackerman, “Political Liberalisms,” Journal of Philosophy 91 (1994): 364–86.
George Armstrong Kelly, “Veils: The Poetics of John Rawls,” Journal of the History of Ideas 57, no. 2 (1996): 345–46.
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005), 17, 19.
Michael D. Weiss, “A Jurisprudence of Blindness: Rawls’s Justice and Legal Theory,” Drake Law Review 42 (1993): 573.
Sheldon S. Wolin, “The Liberal/Democratic Divide: On Rawl’s Political Liberalism,” Political Theory 24 (1996): 107.
Roberto Alejandro, “What Is Political about Rawl’s Political Liberalism?” Journal of Politics 58 (1996): 1–24;
Stephen L. Esquith and Richard T. Peterson, “The Original Position as Social Practice,” Political Theory 16 (1988): 300–334.
John Rawls, “The Sense of Justice,” in Collected Papers, ed. Samuel Richard Freeman (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 112.
David Morris, “About Suffering: Voice, Genre, and Moral Community,” in Social Suffering, ed. Arthur Kleinman, Margaret M. Lock, and Veena Das (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 29.
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, Daybreak: Thoughts on the Prejudices of Morality, ed. Maudemarie Clark and Brian Leiter (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997), sec. 114, 69.
Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols, or, How to Philosophize with the Hammer (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997), 21–22.
Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morals and Ecce Homo, trans. Walter Arnold Kaufmann and R. J. Hollingdale (New York: Vintage, 1989), 3:12, 119.
Friedrich Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy and The Case of Wagner, trans. Walter Arnold Kaufman [New York: Vintage Books, 1967], sec. 9, 71
Morton Schoolman, Reason and Horror: Critical Theory, Democracy, and Aesthetic Individuality (New York: Routledge, 2001).
Jorge Luis Borges, “Funes, the Memorious,” in Ficciones, ed. Anthony Kerrigan, trans. Anthony Bonner (New York: Grove, 1994), 107–16.
Copyright information
© 2010 Asma Abbas
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Abbas, A. (2010). Theater of the Ascetic. In: Liberalism and Human Suffering. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230113541_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230113541_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-28898-4
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-11354-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)