Beyond existential and neoliberal explanations of consumers’ embodied risk-taking: CrossFit as an articulation of reflexive modernization

This study analyzes CrossFit as a marketplace culture that articulates several key dimensions of reflexive modernization. Through this analysis, we illuminate a different set of theoretical relationships than have been addressed by previous accounts of physically challenging, risk-taking consumption practices. To provide analytic clarity, we first delineate the key differences between reflexive modernization and the two interpretive frameworks—the existential and neoliberal models—that have framed prior explanations of consumers’ proactive risk-taking. We then explicate the ways in which CrossFit’s marketplace culture shapes consumers’ normative understandings of risk and their corresponding identity goals. Rather than combatting modernist disenchantment (i.e., the existential model) or building human capital for entrepreneurial competitions (i.e., the neoliberal model), CrossFit enthusiasts understand risk-taking as a means to build their preparatory fitness for unknown contingencies and imminent threats. Our analysis bridges a theoretical chasm between studies analyzing consumers’ proactive risk-taking behavior and those addressing the feelings of anxiety and uncertainty induced by the threat of uncontrollable systemic risks.

Refiguring Reader-Response: Experience and Interpretation in J.G. Ballard's Crash

In »Refiguring Reader-Response: Experience and Interpretation in J.G. Ballard's Crash«, Ciarán Kavanagh seeks to establish a methodological basis for reader-response analysis and to give substance to theory through its deployment in his study of Ballard's novel, a text which combines and subverts multiple frameworks. His chapter thus focusses on the microcosmic, line-by-line reading experience provided by two excerpts that exemplify Ballard's clinical over-description of damaged and refigured bodies, as well as on macrocosmic interpretive frameworks relating to genre, embodiment, and aesthetics

COVID-19 y seguridad regional. Macro-seguritización global, adaptaciones locales y dilemas de la cooperación latinoamericana

El presente artículo analiza las principales líneas en torno de las cuales se ha interpretado y utilizado la seguritización de la COVID-19 en América Latina. Partiendo de una comprensión de la seguritización que incorpora un diálogo entre lo local y lo global para interpretar el alcance concreto del proceso, se observan las formas variadas en que distintos países de la región adaptaron discursos seguritarios de alcance global. Para ello, se analizan las principales dinámicas globales de seguritización en torno de la COVID-19, las particularidades de sus principales contrapartes locales y las acciones extraordinarias legitimadas a partir de ellas. Se argumenta que las variaciones en las construcciones de la “amenaza pandémica” de los actores regionales, realizadas de manera aislada y leídas a través de marcos interpretativos distintos, son a la vez consecuencia y agravante de desacuerdos políticos entre mandatarios nacionales. De esta manera, se busca realizar un balance general que sirva de base para continuar debatiendo uno de los múltiples aspectos en que la actual pandemia ha afectado la seguridad regional. AbstractThis article analyses the main lines around which the securitization of COVID-19 has been interpreted and used in Latin America. Starting from an understanding of securitization that incorporates a dialogue between the local and the global to interpret the specific characteristics of the process, the investigation observes the varied ways in which different countries in the region have adapted global security discourses. The main global security dynamics around COVID-19, the particularities of its main local counterparts, and the extraordinary actions legitimized as a result of them are analysed. It is argued that the variations in the constructions of the “pandemic threat” by regional actors, carried out in isolation and read through different interpretive frameworks, are both a consequence and an aggravating factor of political disagreements between national leaders. In this way, the article seeks to make a general balance that serves as the basis for continuing the debate on the many aspects in which the current pandemic has affected regional security.

Shadowed Silhouettes

This chapter explores questions of loss, theft, and erasure by considering the collections of Indigenous artifacts in early American museums through the eyes of Native visitors and writers. Many museums, including Peale’s Philadelphia Museum, the Salem East India Marine Society, and the Columbian Institute in Washington, D.C., framed the theft and appropriation of Indigenous artifacts as a form of preservation linked to antiquarianism and myths of the “vanishing Indian.” Descriptions of visiting delegations to Philadelphia, however, challenge such attempts at erasure, revealing how Native visitors subtly performed their resistance to such practices within museum galleries. The literary collaborations between ethnologist Henry Rowe Schoolcraft and his wife, the métis Ojibwe poet Jane Johnston Schoolcraft, similarly demonstrate the conflicts between White and Indigenous collecting practices and interpretive frameworks. These accounts show how Native writers and visitors contested the broader claims to ownership and authority being invoked by museums during this period.

The Indian behind the Artefact or Things behind the Process?: Humanism, Post-humanism and the Transition to the Neolithic

In recent years, traditional models produced to ac- count for the transition to the Neolithic have been challenged with the creation of narratives that seek to portray the character of this change in specific socio- historical milieus. At the other end of the spectrum, approaches influenced by the material turn have read- dressed this context, defining the Neolithic as a spe- cific horizon within an ever-increasing entanglement. Whilst these interpretive frameworks have yet not been challenged, they might gradually give rise to a new polarization in the debate about the Mesolithic- Neolithic transition. These approaches differ not only in that they operate at different scales of analysis (lived experience, macro-scale). They ultimately echo the humanist/post-humanist debate currently held in theoretical archaeology. In this article, I argue that neither of these ap- proaches is successful in revealing the complex set of forces that triggered the transition to the Neolithic. Drawing from this discussion, I suggest that a more comprehensive review of this context of change re- quires the fusion of elements discussed by these mod- els. This situation hastens new challenges to archaeo- logical practice, and it raises a series of questions on the current state of archaeological theory.

THE SPREAD OF FARMING ECONOMY IN THE WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN: A SHORT REPLY TO AMMERMAN (2021)

ABSTRACTManen et al. provide here a reply to the critical comment published by A. J. Ammerman regarding their article “The Neolithic Transition in the Western Mediterranean: a complex and non-linear diffusion process—the radiocarbon record revisited,” published in 2019 in Radiocarbon. They also use this occasion to reaffirm the need to elaborate novel interpretive frameworks that combine both geo-chronological and cultural data.

“Philosopher” and “Philosophy” in Kyivan Rus’ Written Sources: of the 11-14th centuries. The Need for a new Asking of the “Old” Question

The author justifies the need to return to an analysis of the meaning of such words as “philosophy” and “philosopher” in the Kyivan Rus’ written sources of the 11th–14th centuries. In the author’s view, this is explained not only by the inaccuracies the earlier research committed but also by the necessity to take contemporary achievements of Byzantine philosophical historiography into account. The author concludes that the preserved Kyivan Rus’ written sources reflect certain Byzantine interpretations of the words “philosopher” and “philosophy” as understood within particular interpretive frameworks: philosophy may refer to a specifically “Christian” or “external” philosophy, presuppose rational or mystical comprehension of divine wisdom, become verbalized or not. Some sources probably espouse an understanding of philosophy as a practice of true life. The word “philosopher” had different connotations, as well. It referred to advisers or officeholders at the court of the Byzantine emperor, wise princes, church intellectuals, connoisseurs of biblical books, etc. The author invalidates the idea that in Kyivan Rus’, there existed a holistic understanding of philosophy and philosophers. Instead, one should interpret these words as having a limited plurality of meanings.

Introduction

This chapter discusses the history of translations in Arabic literature. The book begins with the first translations performed by Lebanese and Egyptian translators under the auspices of British missionary societies in Malta in the 1830s and ends in the first decade of the twentieth century with the translations of British and French sentimental and crime novels published in Cairo. Each connects the purportedly marginal enterprise of translating foreign fiction, performed by well-known and forgotten translators, to the concerns of canonical nahḍa thinkers and the literary and cultural debates in which they participated. These authors developed translation techniques and writing styles that cultivated a new mode of reading that the book calls reading in translation, which required the reader to move comparatively within and among languages and with the awareness of the diverging interpretive frameworks that animated the investments of multiple audiences. Far from being mere bad translators, these authors appear as translation theorists and informed commentators on literary history. Presenting their own work as occurring within an ongoing history of translation rather than deviating from it, these translators contend that the Arabic novel takes translation and cultural transfer as its foundation, as does the European novel. This book takes the implications of these translators' claims seriously, counterpoising them to standard accounts of the novel's supposed travels in translation.