Advertisement

Eye-to-Eye with Otherness: A Childhoodnature Figuration

  • Iris DuhnEmail author
  • Gloria Quinones
Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)

Abstract

Taking a narrative approach that follows Haraway’s (Staying with the trouble. Making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press, Durham/London, 2016) call for making kin with growing awareness of a looming 6th mass extinction of species, the chapter focuses on multispecies encounters to consider what childhoodnature as a concept can do for research. The intention is neither to focus on what can be learned from multispecies child-animal encounters, nor is it an attempt to document such encounters in “real life.” Rather, the chapter experiments with the porosity and liveliness of materialized thought (the text) as it gives form to an event (the multispecies encounter) across time and in place. The intention is to speculatively imagine a childhoodnature figuration of a hen and a child as a lively encounter that ripples through time/place and that generates unexpected lines of inquiry. The chapter experiments with a speculative approach to explore new ways of thinking and doing multispecies relationships as “earthly encounters” that matter to politics and ethics of sharing worlds. This, we argue, is an essential task in the midst of loss of diversity as it opens spaces for new imaginings about sharing worlds through kin-making in childhoodnature research.

Keywords

Speculation Kin-making Figuration Stories that matter Multispecies 

References

  1. Adamson, J. (2012). Indigenous literatures, multinaturalism, and Avatar: The emergence of indigenous cosmopolitics. American Literary History, 24(1), 143–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, US: Duke University Press Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting diffraction: Cutting together-apart. Parallax, 20(3), 168–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bauman, W. A. (2015). Climate weirding and queering nature: Getting beyond the Anthropocene. Religions, 6(2), 742–754. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/10.3390/rel6020742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bear, C. (2011). Being Angelica? Exploring individual animal geographies. Area, 43(3), 297–304.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2011.01019.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Braidotti, R. (2011). Nomadic theory: The portable Rosi Braidotti. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cuomo, C. (1998). Feminism and ecological communities: An ethic of flourishing. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Dovey, K. (2010). Becoming places: Urbanism/architecture/identity/power. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Duhn, I. (2012). Making ‘place’ for ecological sustainability in early childhood education. Environmental Education Research, 18(1), 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ellsworth, A. (2005). Places of learning: Media, architecture, pedagogy. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  12. Emery, N. J. (2000). The eyes have it: The neuroethology, function and evolution of social gaze. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews, 24(6), 581–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foote, K. J., Joy, M. K., & Death, R. G. (2015). New Zealand dairy farming: Milking our environment for all its worth. Environmental Management, 56(3), 709–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  15. Foucault, M. (1991). Politics and the study of discourse. In C. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect. Studies in governmentality (pp. 53–72). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  16. Foucault, M. (1994). The political technology of individuals. In J. Faubion (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Power. Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (pp. 403–417). London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  17. Grosz, E. (2011). Becoming undone: Darwinian reflections on life, politics, and art. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Halberstam, J. (2010). Animal sociality beyond the hetero/homo binary. Women & Performance: A Journal of Feminist Theory, 20(3), 321–331.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0740770x.2010.529255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Haraway, D. (2008). When species meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  20. Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the trouble. Making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham/London: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. hooks, B., & Mesa-Bains, A. (2006). Homegrown: Engaged cultural criticism. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ingold, T. (2016). Lines: A brief history. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Irigaray, L. (2004). Animal compassion. In P. Atterton, M. Calarco, & P. Singer (Eds.), Animal philosophy: Essential readings in continental thought (pp. 193–202). London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  24. Irigaray, L. (2008). Sharing the world. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  25. Itier, R. J., & Batty, M. (2009). Neural bases of eye and gaze processing: The core of social cognition. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews, 33(6), 843–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research: viewing data across multiple perspectives. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Kahn, B. (2017). We just breached the 410 parts per million treshold. Retrieved from http://www.climatecentral.org/news/we-just-breached-the-410-parts-per-million-threshold-21372.
  28. Kolbert, E. (2014). The sixth extinction: An unnatural history. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  29. Kristeva, J. (1991). Strangers to ourselves. New York/London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  30. Latour, B. (2010). A plea for earthly sciences. In J. Burnett, S. Jeffers, & G. Thomas (Eds.), New social connections: Sociology’s subjects and objects (pp. 72–84). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Latour, B. (2014). Agency at the time of the Anthropocene. New Literary History, 45(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Levinas, E. (2004). The name of a dog, or natural rights. In P. Atterton, M. Calarco, & P. Singer (Eds.), Animal philosophy: Essential readings in continental thought (pp. 45–50). London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  33. Marder, M. (2013). Plant-thinking: A philosophy of vegetal life. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Mikethechickenvet. (2014). Retrieved from https://mikethechickenvet.wordpress.com/2014/04/.
  35. Morton, T. (2010). The ecological thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard 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’ educable? On the convergence of educational philosophy, animal studies, and posthumanist theory. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(2), 237–250.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01596301003679750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Plumwood, V. (2008). Tasteless: Towards a food-based approach to death. Environmental Values, 17(3), 323–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Potts, A. (2012). Chicken. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
  40. Potts, A., & Haraway, D. (2010). Kiwi chicken advocate talks with Californian dog companion. Feminism & Psychology, 20(3), 318–336.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353510368118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Power, E. (2008). Furry families: Making a human–dog family through home. Social & Cultural Geography, 9(5), 535–555.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360802217790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rose, G. (2007). Visual methodologies: An introduction to the interpretation of visual materials. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Silbergeld, E. K. (2016). Chickenizing farms and food: How industrial meat production endangers workers, animals, and consumers. Baltimore, MA: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Sleeter, C. E. (2017). Critical race theory and the whiteness of teacher education. Urban Education, 52(2), 155–169.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916668957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sykes, H. (2008). Narratives in Aboriginal, history and place-based education. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(5), 541–544.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2008.00434.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Taylor, A. (2013). Reconfiguring the natures of childhood. Milton Park, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Tito, J., & Reinfeld, R. (2007). Matarakau nga korero mo nga rongoa o Taranaki. Healing stories of Taranaki. New Plymouth, New Zealand: Karangaora.Google Scholar
  48. Tomlinson, A. (2009). Mr. Joy, Dear Little Rooster Who Brough Joy to Nursing Home Residents, Has Died. Retrieved from http://www.all-creatures.org/stories/a-mrjoy.html.
  49. Tsing, A. (2012). Unruly edges: Mushrooms as companion species. Environmental Humanities, 1, 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yusoff, K. (2012). Aesthetics of loss: Biodiversity, banal violence and biotic subjects. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(4), 578–592.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2011.00486.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yusoff, K. (2013). Geologic life: Prehistory, climate, futures in the Anthropocene. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 31(5), 779–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityFrankstonAustralia

Section editors and affiliations

  • Karen Malone
    • 1
  • Iris Duhn
    • 2
  • Marek Tesar
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre for Educational ResearchWestern Sydney UniversitySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Education, Peninsula CampusMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations