FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4387397746> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4387397746 endingPage "7" @default.
• W4387397746 startingPage "1" @default.
• W4387397746 abstract "Belated Futures Stephanie Foote, Anthony Lioi, and Dana Luciano Last year, the Resilience collective—Stephanie Foote, Anthony Lioi, and Dana Luciano—asked a range of environmental humanists to speculate about the state of the field for this double issue marking the tenth anniversary of the journal’s publication. In part, we imagined this as a call-back to the journal’s first issue. Resilience 1.1 was entirely dedicated to a suite of manifestos about the environmental humanities. Some of those essays described the state of the field, some argued for the value of how the humanities could contribute to ongoing conversations about environmental policies, histories, and philosophies, and still others pointed out the work the humanities had yet to do in order to address the knotted questions of materiality and textuality. Despite their differences, all of the first issue’s pieces were short, punchy, and written in accessible language. They sought to provoke rather than to persuade, to stake out positions rather than to meticulously gloss a textual passage or a theoretical idea. They asked readers to imagine scholarship that could have an effect on real-world problems and made a brief for the humanities as the site of generative intellectual potential. But ten years ago, there were many fewer environmental humanists than there are now and fewer publications where such positions could be advanced. Now, the field is growing more quickly than anyone can keep up with it, splintering into distinct areas of inquiry like energy humanities, posthumanism, blue humanities, ecomedia, waste studies and so on. Even over the ten-year span of the journal, a surfeit of good work, a plenitude of scholars, a wealth of new modes of inquiry has emerged. If we can judge by the amount of work being produced in academia, the brief for the humanities as a core contributor to environmental [End Page 1] thinking seems to have succeeded. But as our contributors argue in this issue, there’s still work to do to imagine how the humanities can survive, as well as how they can make meaningful connections to the world as it is experienced by social actors structurally excluded from such conversations. It seems odd to think about plenitude and wealth in a field that emerged in part from an increased awareness of the scarcity of resources and the massive redistribution of wealth that followed from the triumph of global capitalism over the last three centuries. Seen that way, environmental humanism (EH) as a discipline has parasitically benefitted from the ongoing climate disaster. There’s so much to study and talk about; the cascade of failures is overwhelming. But perhaps a better way to think about it, as some of our contributors argue, is to slow down and ask again how the field of EH can create ethical scholarly relationships around core issues of access to information and access to basic rights. In this vein, our contributors have tasked themselves with asking what the world as it is needs from humanists. In the first issue of Resilience, the question that underwrote many of the contributions was how to even define EH. That is, the question that subtended the manifestos was about how and why the humanities mattered in the study of environmental decline and crisis. What would interdisciplinary thinking look like if organized around the category of environmental crisis? But the contributors who accepted our invitation to speak open-endedly about the field in this issue are concerned with what work our work—the work called for in these earlier writings—has already done, as well as what it might yet do. Looking over the essays included here, what we see, and we hope you see too, is that the humanists speculating about the future of the field are now imagining different ways to increase access to humanistic work, pushing humanists to think about different publics. As they do so, many of them caution us about our own fantasies about how we approach our work and its core presuppositions. Lawrence Buell, Stephanie LeMenager, Priscilla Wald, and Jeffrey Jerome Cohen offer us lessons in uncertainty and faith. Wald, who tracks the word “resilience” etymologically, asks us to consider what it might..." @default.
• W4387397746 created "2023-10-07" @default.
• W4387397746 creator A5041216970 @default.
• W4387397746 creator A5093015679 @default.
• W4387397746 creator A5093015680 @default.
• W4387397746 date "2022-01-01" @default.
• W4387397746 modified "2023-10-07" @default.
• W4387397746 title "Belated Futures" @default.
• W4387397746 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/res.2022.a904094" @default.
• W4387397746 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4387397746 type Work @default.
• W4387397746 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4387397746 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4387397746 hasAuthorship W4387397746A5041216970 @default.
• W4387397746 hasAuthorship W4387397746A5093015679 @default.
• W4387397746 hasAuthorship W4387397746A5093015680 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C102792161 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C106159729 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C106306483 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C153606108 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C15708023 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C24351657 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C2778061430 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C2778643427 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C2779726722 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C29595303 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C102792161 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C106159729 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C106306483 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C107038049 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C124952713 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C142362112 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C144024400 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C153606108 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C15708023 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C162324750 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C17744445 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C199539241 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C24351657 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C2778061430 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C2778643427 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C2779726722 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C29595303 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C52119013 @default.
• W4387397746 hasConceptScore W4387397746C95457728 @default.
• W4387397746 hasIssue "1-2" @default.
• W4387397746 hasLocation W43873977461 @default.
• W4387397746 hasOpenAccess W4387397746 @default.
• W4387397746 hasPrimaryLocation W43873977461 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W1537854028 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W1928205513 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W2061160635 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W2089974345 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W2348674810 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W2382688108 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W2386420851 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W2985536292 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W4210723185 @default.
• W4387397746 hasRelatedWork W4386696290 @default.
• W4387397746 hasVolume "10" @default.
• W4387397746 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4387397746 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4387397746 workType "article" @default.