Vol. 28, No. 1-2


Focus Editors: Robin Truth Goodman and Aaron Jaffe

”Control is not discipline,” famously argued Gilles Deleuze. The future of neoliberal society for him was not about ”confining people” but rather ”multiplying the means of control” over them. Today, as we grapple with the destructive legacies of neoliberal society, Deleuze’s prognostications about ”control” seem even more prescient. Neoliberal society as a control society seems to be ”never finished with anything — the corporation, the educational system, the armed services being metastable states coexisting in one and the same modulation, like a universal system of deformation” — even if we are finished with it and want to move beyond its destruction and violence. At the present, control modulates conditions of permanent crisis, endless environmental degradation, and creative destruction making every aspect of society less habitable and more insufferable. From the increasing financialization of everyday life to the growing administration and automation of social processes, control has come to take on an expanding and expansive role in the contemporary world — one that is neither ontologized nor automated but rather engineered for polarization and the increasing transfer of wealth upwards. Still, whether the present cultural and political moment calls for a move beyond the conceits of Deleuze and other twentieth-century speculation on control is open for debate.

Deadline for submissions: 1 August 2019.

See information on submissions.

Vol. 29, No. 1-2

Paranoid Politics

Focus Editor: Frida Beckman

The ”paranoid style in American politics,” as Richard Hofstader famously outlined it in the 1960s, is one in which threats, hostilities, and treacheries are seen as directed not toward an individual so much as ”against a nation, a culture, a way of life.” Hofstadter wrote in and about a Cold War scenario. Today, as we witness a resurgence of xenophobia, nationalism, and fascism, of conservative and aggressive masculinity, of mistrust of ”elites,” and a distrust of news, information, and facts, we may want to inquire into the nature of a more contemporary paranoid style—a paranoid style under neoliberalism. Taking both paranoia and style seriously, what cultural, theoretical, and political formations can be seen to express, resist, or otherwise configure the paranoid style of the 21st century?

Deadline for submissions: 1 August 2020.

See information on submissions.

Vol. 30, No. 1-2

Theorizing Asia

Focus Editor: Alex Taek-Gwang Lee

Asia is not self-evident. The region called Asia was culturally defined after the Russia-Japan War and geopolitically designed after the Second World War. Modern Asia was the historical byproduct of colonialism and its effects; the rise of nationalism in Asia was collective resistance to colonial modernization. Modernity in Asia has been the consequence of the dialectical process between modernization and counter-modernization. Its complicated historical background registers the strong demand of ”Asian theory” for analyzing the structure of Asian modernity. Recently, as participating in the global distribution of labor, contemporary Asia has attracted many scholars not only for its rapid economic development, but its cultural products. Asian contemporary artists and writers have critically acclaimed for their successful recognition. This issue aims to bring together various theoretical interventions into Asian literature, contemporary art and culture as well as any inquiry into the intellectual history of critical theory in Asia. Focus will be placed on the dynamic relation between Western theory and Asian intellectual history.

Deadline for submissions: 1 August 2021.

See information on submissions.

[Home] [Current Issue] [Past Issues] [Subscriptions] [Submissions] [Editors]