_______________________________________ From: Thom van Dooren [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 6:21 AM
Thoughts on the anthropocene, nonhuman agency and interdisciplinarity In the lead up to the launch of Environmental Humanities in November, we’ve started a series of ‘profiles’ of members of the journal’s Editorial Board; asking them what they think about some important topics. In the first series of profiles, we asked: 1. The ‘Anthropocene’ has become something of a buzzword in its migration from geology to philosophy and beyond. Do you find it to be a productive concept? What can the humanities contribute to its articulation and critique? 2. Many recent movements and fields in the humanities have given credence to the agency and interconnectivity of things, objects, networks. Is this a much-needed decentring, or is there still a uniqueness of the living worth voicing or defending? (Or even the human?) 3. How has your disciplinary specialisation been affected by environmental discourse? What obstacles or enticements to interdisciplinary work have you encountered? Check out fascinating replies from: Brett Buchanan (Laurentian University, Canada) Eileen Crist (Virginia Tech, USA) Clare Palmer (Texas A&M University, USA) Mick Smith (Queen’s University, Canada) http://environmentalhumanities.org/about/profiles In the weeks to come, we’ll post replies to similar questions from some of the other members of our fantastic Editorial Board<http://environmentalhumanities.org/about/editorial-board>. If you’d like to follow the journal through our email list, twitter (@EnvHumanities), facebook or RSS feed, please visit our website: http://environmentalhumanities.org/about
