"Reality is not defined as matters of fact. Matters of fact are not all that is given in experience. Matters of fact are only very partial and, I would argue, very polemical, very political renderings of matters of concern and only a subset of what could also be called state of affairs. It is this second empiricism, this return to the realist attitude, that I'd like to offer as the next task for the critically minded (232)."
In Bruno Latour's article; Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern, he proposes that critique has a problem with approaching reality. Current critique approaches a subject matter or topic with a deconstructionist, subtraction-minded view only to provide a narrow answer. This form of critique takes experience away where one approaches things as matters of concern. With a critique focusing on matters of concern one will approach things as fragile, where you need to take caution and care. Matters of fact give a potentially polemic, politically driven answers that are simplified and specific yet have hidden agendas, motivations, and selfish needs. Overall, this quote from Latour's article provides significant meaning to this paper by pointing out our current critique structure that subtracts and takes away from matter instead of a critique that aims to build, to expand matter.
When I reflect on our recent poster presentation I think about the process. Of gathering information, formulating our ideas and concepts, creating an aesthetically pleasing visual, synthesizing interview interesting interview questions, then seeing other groups and their final product I question the process. I wonder, 'how much if it was a matter of fact?' 'A matter of concern?' Looking back at my intentions I believe that I wanted to build a presentation that gave insight to the experience of trans. We used multiple forms of presentation with videos, text, pictures, and data while attempting to build and critique using a matter of concern.
It is difficult to know exactly whether or not it was seen as being critiqued as matter of concern when an audience looked at our presentation. I wondered if everyone, if anyone saw this as an eclectic presentation that built onto knowledge, that created a cumulative experience, that was a journey with additions along the way as well as potential for more. It had intentions to be critiqued as a matter of concern with an approach giving the audience multiple perspectives and overview without having hidden desires, goals or agendas.
Latour's article has given me a mode of criticism that has made me reflect and reexamine my core beliefs, identity, and truths. I can view issues, subjects and problems not as a deconstructionist who narrows it down into something I idealized, but I can add value and layers to my perspective. Matter of concern should be considered a form of critique that could create a substantial paradigm shift in our mode of criticism.
Quinn, I also reflected on our poster project in the same way. We truly did want to create an opportunity for people to explore this area of gender and sexuality that really crossed lines. We only touched on the intricate web of transgender and I like how you describe that it should be critiqued as a matter of concern because that is exactly true. Sometimes people will try to ignore the existence of something like trans and not make it part of their own reality, but that was what we wanted to change by showing that this was an important subject and cannot be simply ignored.
ReplyDeleteIf mean are men, and women are women--as a 'matter of fact'--no space exists for trans identity. By calling simple, natural facts into question, L opens space. Sure, we didn't need him to do it, and what he (and all the trans people) did scares the hell out of those really invested in a singular, natural reality. But this really is a new way of seeing. If you like things like trans identity, it's a Good Thing. If not---well---not so much.
ReplyDelete