Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Academic and research fields are moved by fads, waves, revolutionaries, paradigm
shifts, and turns.They all imply a certain degree of change that alters the conditions of
a stable system, producing an imbalance that needs to be addressed by the field itself.
New Approaches to Latin American Studies: Culture and Power offers researchers
and students from different theoretical fields an essential, turn-organized overview
of the radical transformation of epistemological and methodological assumptions
in Latin American studies from the end of the 1980s to the present. Sixteen chap-
ters written by experts in their respective fields help explain the various ways in
which to think about these shifts. Questions posited include:
Among the turns included are: memory, transnational, popular culture, deco
lonial, feminism, affect, indigenous studies, transatlantic, ethical, post/hegemony,
deconstruction, cultural policy, subalternism, gender and sexuality, performance,
and cultural studies.
What is the status of theoretical thinking about Latin America? New Approaches to
Latin American Studies: Culture and Power includes thought-provoking and engaging
answers to this question offered by contemporary thinkers and critics who trace
the genealogies, challenges, and contributions of sixteen “turns” or paradigm shifts
in the critical engagement of Latin America as an object and subject of study.
—Yolanda Martínez-San Miguel, Professor of Latino and Caribbean Studies and
Comparative Literature, Rutgers-New Brunswick
NEW APPROACHES
TO LATIN AMERICAN
STUDIES
Culture and Power
ii
First published 2018
by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2018 Taylor & Francis
The right of Juan Poblete to be identified as the author of the editorial material, and of the
authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78
of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any
form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks,
and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Poblete, Juan, editor.
Title: New approaches to Latin American studies: culture and power /edited by Juan Poblete.
Description: New York, NY: Routledge, 2018. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017020212 (print) | LCCN 2017021841 (ebook) | ISBN 9781315158365
(Master) | ISBN 9781351656351 (WebPDF) | ISBN 9781351656344 (ePub) |
ISBN 9781351656337 (Mobipocket/Kindle) | ISBN 9781138067967 (hardback: alk. paper) |
ISBN 9781138067974 (pbk.: alk. paper) | ISBN 9781315158365 (ebk)
Subjects: LCSH: Latin America–Study and teaching (Higher) |
Hispanic Americans–Study and teaching (Higher)
Classification: LCC F1409.9 (ebook) | LCC F1409.9 .N49 2018 (print) |
DDC 980.007–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017020212
ISBN: 978-1-138-06796-7 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-138-06797-4 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-15836-5 (ebk)
Typeset in Bembo
by Out of House Publishing
v
CONTENTS
Notes on contributors ix
Acknowledgments xv
viii Contents
Index 272
ix
CONTRIBUTORS
Sonia E. Alvarez is Director of the Center for Latin American Studies, Caribbean
and Latina/o Studies and Leonard J. Horwitz Professor of Latin American Politics
and Society at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. She is author or coed-
itor of Engendering Democracy in Brazil: Women’s Movements in Transition Politics,
The Making of Social Movements in Latin America: Identity, Strategy, and Democracy,
Cultures of Politics/Politics of Cultures: Re-visioning Latin American Social Movements,
Translocalities/Translocalidades: Feminist Politics of Translation in the Latin/a Américas,
x
x Contributors
and Beyond Civil Society: Activism, Participation and Protes. She has published exten-
sively, in Spanish and Portuguese, as well as English, with many essays written col-
laboratively, on topics including social movements, feminisms, NGOs, civil society,
race/racism, transnational activism, and democratization. She is currently engaged
in research on women, gender, and sexuality in contemporary protest and, with
Barbara Cruikshank, co-coordinates an international research-action network on
the global politics of protest.
Claudia de Lima Costa teaches literary theory, feminist theories, and cultural
studies at the Federal University of Santa Catarina, in Florianópolis, Brazil. She is
coeditor of Translocalities/Translocalidades: Feminist Politics of Translation in the Latin/
a Américas (2014). She has also published journal articles and book chapters on
feminist translations and decolonial feminisms. Her current research focuses on
the intersections between material feminisms, decolonial feminisms, and the onto-
logical turn.
x
Nicole Fabricant received her Ph.D. in anthropology from Northwestern
University in 2009 and is Associate Professor of Anthropology at Towson
University. She is author of Mobilizing Bolivia’s Displaced: Indigenous Politics and
the Struggle over Land (2012). She is coeditor with Bret Gustafson (Washington
University) of Remapping Bolivia: Resources, Indigeneity and Territory in a Plurinational
State (2011). She has written a series of peer-reviewed and popular articles on
the Cruceño right wing, resource extractivism, and landless movement politics in
lowland Bolivia.
Erin Graff Zivin is Professor of Spanish and Portuguese and Comparative Literature,
and Chair of the Department of Comparative Literature at the University of
Southern California. She is the author of Figurative Inquisitions: Conversion, Torture,
and Truth in the Luso-Hispanic Atlantic (2014; winner of the 2015 Award for Best
Book, Latin American Jewish Studies Association) and The Wandering Signifier:
Rhetoric of Jewishness in the Latin American Imaginary (2008), and the editor of The
Ethics of Latin American Literary Criticism: Reading Otherwise (2007) and The Marrano
Specter: Derrida and Hispanism (forthcoming, 2017).
Contributors xi
chilena (2007), Chile in Transition: The Poetics and Politics of Memory (2006), Diamela
Eltit: conversación en Princeton (2002), and Los años de silencio: conversaciones con nar-
radores chilenos que escribieron bajo dictadura (2002). He is also coeditor, with Vicky
Unruh, of Telling Ruins in Latin America (2009), and of Latin American Documentary
Film in the New Millennium (2016), with María Guadalupe Arenillas.
Robert McKee Irwin is Chair of the Graduate Group in Cultural Studies and
a professor in the Department of Spanish and Portuguese at the University of
California, Davis. He is author of Mexican Masculinities and Bandits, Captives,
Heroines and Saints: Cultural Icons of Mexico’s Northwest Borderlands. He is coeditor
of Dictionary of Latin American Cultural Studies with Mónica Szurmuk (English and
Spanish editions), Hispanisms and Homosexualities with Sylvia Molloy, Sports and
Nationalism in Latin America with Héctor Fernández L’Hoeste and Juan Poblete,
and The Famous 41 with Edward McCaughan and Michelle Nasser, as well as
coauthor with Maricruz Castro Ricalde of El cine mexicano “se impone” and Global
Mexican Cinema: Its Golden Age. He also edited new editions of Eduardo Castrejón’s
Los 41: novela crítico-social and Aurelio Pérez Peña’s Heroína. He is currently work-
ing on a digital storytelling project with recent deportees in Tijuana.
xii Contributors
Laura Podalsky teaches Latin American film and cultural studies at the Ohio State
University. Her research and teaching interests are in Latin American film, cultural
studies, urban studies, and youth studies. She is the coeditor of the forthcom-
ing Routledge Companion to Latin American Cinema (along with Marvin D’Lugo
xi
Contributors xiii
and Ana López) as well as the author of The Politics of Affect and Emotion in the
Contemporary Latin American Cinema: Argentina, Brazil, Cuba and Mexico (2011) and
Specular City: Transforming Culture, Consumption, and Space in Buenos Aires, 1955–
1973 (2004) on Argentine film and urban culture. She serves as an editor on the
peer-reviewed journal Studies in Spanish and Latin American Cinemas and is cur-
rently working on a book manuscript comparing youth, film, and youth cultures
in Argentina and Mexico.
xiv Contributors
Democracy (2011), and numerous articles examining the relations among cultural
history, literature, and political philosophy. He is the co-translator to English of
Roberto Espósito’s The Origin of the Political: Hannah Arendt or Simone Weil? (2017),
a coeditor of the University of Texas Series Border Hispanisms, and general editor
of the online journal Política común (https://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/pc/).
xvi
xv
newgenprepdf
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the work, friendship, and patience of all the con-
tributors in this volume. Important too was the support of my colleagues in the
Culture, Power, and Politics section of the Latin American Studies Association.
xvi
I would also like to thank my colleagues in the Literature and Latin American
and Latino Studies departments at the University of California at Santa Cruz, for
two decades of engagement in thinking transnationally. Finally, thanks are due to
Natalja Mortensen and Maria Landschoot, editors extraordinaire, and the rest of
the production team at Routledge.
xvi
1
INTRODUCTION
Twenty-Five Years of Latin American Studies
Juan Poblete
How, when, and to what effect did we come to see affect as a form of social
dynamic and power different and distinct from reason and ideology? When was
hegemony, as the production of common sense through intellectual means, dis-
placed by a posthegemonic account of nonideological control in immanent pro-
cesses of daily life? When and why was the long-lasting man of reason, modernity,
and humanism critiqued from the viewpoint of his exclusions; when was his foun-
dational social contract perceived as the basis of oppression? When and how was
modernity seen as having less to do with the eighteenth century of rationalism,
secularization, and science-based progress and more with colonial religious zeal and
racist articulations of labor and subjecthood? When was Latin America extended to
the north of the continent and beyond? When, why, and how were its nation-states
seen as not fully capable of accounting for the diverse social, cultural, economic,
and political processes that multiplied difference within and beyond their borders?
This volume was born out of an interest to respond to these and many other
questions that point to a radical transformation of the issues, scales, scopes, episte-
mological, and methodological assumptions of Latin American studies in the past
quarter century, from the end of the 1980s to the current moment. More specifi-
cally, the volume wants to organize the answers to these questions around the issue
of turns in disciplinary and interdisciplinary spaces (as in linguistic or cultural turn
as I show below).
In 2013, I became the co-chair of the Culture, Power, and Politics section of
the Latin American Studies Association (LASA). One of the immediate responsi-
bilities of the job was to organize the three congress panels our section gets, based
on the number of members associated with the section, in order to showcase
research in the area. My idea for the section’s three slots was to organize three
2
2 Juan Poblete
Introduction 3
This anthology appears at a moment when not only have theoretical discus-
sions of literature become stagnant but articles and books are published in
defense of the conceptual stalemates that have led to this very immobility.
In the early years of the new millennium, theorists are busily writing about
the impasse in which theory finds itself.
(1)
Patai and Corral are part of a group of scholars in different fields who
reacted to what they considered Theory’s empire. The capitalization of the
noun alluded to a certain hegemony of French poststructuralism, the reactions
against which manifested in fields such as film studies (David Bordwell and
Noel Carroll’s 1996 Post-theory: Reconstructing Film Studies) or philosophy (Paul
Boghossian’s 2007 Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism). The
arc they responded to is neatly summarized in the title of historian Georg
Iggers’ Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the
Postmodern Challenge (2005).
Theory, as such, may be have been a good example of what Thomas Kuhn
famously called a paradigm shift. Kuhn began distinguishing between normal
4
4 Juan Poblete
science, crisis, and extraordinary science, the latter being the result of cumulative
pressure produced by inexplicable anomalies that eventually force a revolution
and then a new phase of normal science. The activities of these periods of nor-
mal science are determined by paradigms, i.e. ensembles of shared understand-
ings of concepts, problems, and exemplary solutions to those problems and, thus,
models for new problems. The paradigm or disciplinary matrix provided a lan-
guage, a mode of reasoning and a modus operandi. But when it entered into crisis
due to the accumulation of persistent and important anomalies, the questions
became: What could remain in place? Was there a substantial enough continuity
of the basic disciplinary enterprise in question? Kuhn’s answer was that para-
digms are not just incompatible but also incommensurable. The world observed
by science, but also the world of the scientist, look and feel different from within
the new paradigm.
The cultural or linguistic turn, what eventually became Theory, with its
emphasis on historically produced languages of the social—based on the artic-
ulation of both arbitrary and historically changing codifications, themselves
depending on sets of differences that established negative or relational rather
than positive or essential identities—was a radical reconceptualization of the
ontology of the social. It was, we could say, a paradigmatic change or an episte-
mological break affecting the central definitions of what Man was, how human-
ism was thus defined, and what kinds of exclusions or plays of differences were 4
central to his identity. What are now called new materialisms and the anthro-
pocene may well be thought of as paradigmatic shifts in the general orientation
of, at least, the social and human sciences. They would include new materialism,
post-human, and nonrepresentational turns that try to go beyond the limitations
(human and semiotic) of the previous Theory paradigm; or queer and disability
studies turns that operate past the normative models of humanism, history, and
society.
Turns, on the other hand, may then be area-or issue-specific reactions to
Theory’s underexamined and still humanist assumptions or, more radically, more
focused substitutes to Theory’s all-encompassing ambitions. Thus, when Patricia
Ticineto Clough explains in the introduction to her coedited collection The
Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social the import of the affective turn, she states:
Introduction 5
Thus conceived, the affective turn would seem to straddle the distinction
between a broad paradigm shift (of which it would seem to be a part) and a more
focused turn in the area of emotions and affects. As part of a paradigm shift, the
affective would participate in the displacement of the still-human and subject-
centered nature of Theory, despite the fact that Theory had emerged precisely as
a radical critique of what it conceived as the failures or limitations of the white
male subject of humanism. From the viewpoint of actor-network theory, informa-
tion and systems theory, or Deleuzian philosophy,Theory seemed still too focused
on the singularity of the subject and the human, paying little attention to their
interactions and assemblages with technology, the nonorganic, and the nonhu-
man. As a turn, on the other hand, the affective could more specifically refer to
the multidisciplinary expansion of research at the intersection of the body–mind
divide. In both cases a new form of materialism and posthumanism would seem
to be emerging.
4
In Re-framing the Transnational Turn in American Studies, Fluck et al. (2011)
assert: “ ‘The Transnational Turn’ in American studies has effected the most
significant re-imagining of the field of American Studies since its inception”
(1). In introducing the contributions in their volume Beyond the Cultural
Turn: New Directions in the Study of Society and Culture, Bonnell and Hunt (1999)
state that they all share the following: “(1) questions about the status of ‘the
social’; (2) concerns raised by the depiction of culture as symbolic, linguistic and
representational system; (3) seemingly inevitable methodological and epistemo-
logical dilemmas; (4) a resulting or perhaps precipitating collapse of explanatory
paradigms; and (5) a consequent realignment of the disciplines (including the rise
of cultural studies)” (6). Finally, striking a useful cautionary note, as historians
tend to do, but at the same time embracing the need to think through “turns,”
the editors of a 2012 American Historical Review forum on “Historiographic Turns
in Critical Perspective” declare:
While the contributors of this forum present different views on this intel-
lectual trajectory, for the most part they refuse to see “turning” as simple
or unproblematic […] Rather, they both analyze the turns and historicize
them—subjecting them to a searching and wide ranging critique that at
once reminds us of what can be gained by such historiographical retrospec-
tion and also what might be lost in thinking of them in both definitive and
categorical terms.
(698)
6
6 Juan Poblete
In Latin American studies, as the essays in this collection seek to explain and
explore, there have been in the past twenty-five years a number of influential
turns, many of which would seem to be part of a similar paradigmatic shift as that
which confronted Theory, transnationalism, or the cultural and linguistic turns.
Between the mid 1970s and the late 1980s, i.e. between the arrival of military
dictatorships and authoritarian governments in the continent, on the one hand,
and the end of the Cold War, on the other, the paradigm of dependency theory
and Third World inflected Marxisms, which had significantly influenced both the
social sciences and the humanities, began to yield to theories of world systems,
hybridization, financial restructuring, and migration flows, softening or blurring
the distance between First and Third Worlds and displacing nation-centered meth-
odologies. Eventually they became first, the theorizing of postmodernity, a new
epoch in Western history, and then, globalization theory and the analysis of culture
and society under planetary neoliberalism. These, respectively, time-and space-
based new theories, pushed Latin Americanist humanities and social sciences into
deconstructing and overcoming the limitations of the nation-state as a naturalized
container for the perfect coincidence of territory, culture, and society. In Latin
American studies this work was developed during the 1990s by, among others,
cultural-studies scholars under the influence of their historian peers from India.
One of the clearest forms of this program and critique can be found in the Latin
American Subaltern Studies Group Manifesto. It highlights the need to distin- 6
guish among the state (historically at the service of the economic interests of
the national bourgeoisie), the nation (which the manifesto sees, in its historically
dominant discursive shape, as the almost exclusive result of the labor of the state
and its institutions, themselves dominated by the white bourgeoisie), and the peo-
ple, defined as the ensemble of subaltern populations whose participation, ways of
cultural, social and political organization, must be visibilized.
The nation-state and the social sciences that naturalized some of its key cat-
egories, questions, ways of collecting data, methodologies, etc., was one of the
central elements against which a significant amount of what has been and is new
in the past twenty-five years of Latin American studies was reacting. However, the
revalorization of civil society, democratic processes, cultural practices within the
nation and in the face of de-nationalizing dynamics of transnational capital and
new-media omnipresence, have also been important factors in such developments
in the past quarter century.
This radical rethinking of the temporal and spatial coordinates of nation-state-
centered modernity led to intersectional and interdisciplinary approaches such as
feminism, cultural studies, transnationalism, and complexity-based theories, which
questioned the previous epistemological hegemony of more disciplinary pure his-
tory, sociology, philosophy, and formalism. Theory, too, had its regional impact
through the diffusion in Latin America of Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida,
Pierre Bourdieu, Stuart Hall, French feminists, and others.Theory, cultural studies,
feminisms, intersectionality were also other names for a turn away or a distancing
7
Introduction 7
from the hegemony of mainstream sociology and economics, with the accompa-
nying reductions of the social to all-encompassing and all-explaining categories,
such as class and rational choice individual in the pursuit of maximizing individ-
ual gains. Culture and power were intertwined in more complex, interesting, and
promising ways that the many turns here included set out to investigate.
While a few of the contributors to this volume are Latin American scholars
residing in Latin America, most of them are US-based Latin Americanists, and this
book reflects, by design, that perspective. I am beginning work on a companion
volume that will invite Latin American scholars in the south of the continent to
first determine which could be the turns that have actually shaped the conversa-
tions in that part of the region and then produce their own synthesis of why and
to what effect they matter for the subcontinent and beyond.
An Overview of This Volume
In “The Memory Turn,” Michael J. Lazzara explores memory as a concept around
which activists and academics have sought to denounce human-r ights violations
and articulate the challenges of consolidating democracy in the aftermath of polit-
ical violence. Since the 1980s, it has become firmly entrenched in the disciplines
of the humanities and social sciences and, little by little, has gained institutional
6
presence.
Lazzara’s chapter offers key signposts and questions to invite a conversation
about the “memory turn”: the specific trajectories memory studies have taken
in Latin America, the challenges this area of inquiry presents, its possible futures,
and its pedagogical potential. He argues that while memory continues to har-
bor significant pedagogical and political potential for Latin American area studies,
scholars of memory studies must also remain on guard against an exhaustion of the
topic, always encouraging renewal and new theorizations germane to the scenarios
and cases that urgently need to be studied. Of equal importance, memory studies
must insist on the repoliticizing—or continued politicizing—of an interdisciplin-
ary space of inquiry that was born out of political struggle and that, through sub-
sequent institutionalization or inertia, risks losing touch with its activist origins
and mission. He suggests that despite certain limitations memory studies can still
be a powerful tool for facilitating conversations across disciplinary spaces within
the academy, as well as for building bridges between academic and extra-academic
spaces, or between politically engaged and committed academics working in the
global north and global south.
In my chapter, “The Transnational Turn,” I state that transnationalism and
more generally transnational studies emerged in the early 1990s as a methodo-
logical, epistemological, and political response to the challenge of thinking the
brave new world that globalization had produced. This included the acceleration
of flows and time and the reconfiguration of space, with the concomitant rele-
vance of new scales and scopes but also the differential rates of the circulation of
8
8 Juan Poblete
goods and finance, on one end, and people, on the other. I study the transnational
turn through a focus on three texts that can be unquestionably called pioneering
within the field. They are: one justly famous article, “Mexican Migration and the
Social Space of Postmodernism” (1991) by Roger Rouse; and two books, Nations
Unbound: Transnational Projects, Postcolonial Predicaments, and Deterritorialized Nation-
States by Linda Basch, Nina Glick Schiller, and Cristina Szanton Blanc (1994);
and The Transnational Villagers by Peggy Levitt (2001). I then assess the promises of
and critiques to transnationalism and conclude with some comments on current
neonationalists’ US-based responses to it.
In “The Popular Culture Turn,” Pablo Alabarces states that the study of Latin
American popular cultures was marginalized during the neoliberal decade result-
ing in the expulsion of popular cultures from research agendas. They were dis-
solved instead into analytical categories that claimed to be more appropriate and
suitable during times of hybridization, “des-colección” (de-collection) and deter-
ritorialization, each of which gained popularity in the publishing and academic
markets.Twenty years later, proposes Alabarces, we are witnessing both a reopening
of those agendas and the reappearance of displaced categories and subjects. The
new political success of national-popular narratives in the continent, for example,
speaks more of continuities and, again, returns, rather than dissolutions and clo-
sures. Popular cultures, which disappeared from the research agenda in the 1990s,
reappear in the new century because they never truly went away. Dressed in new 8
robes and including innovative practices and unstable and mobile texts, popular
cultures continue to function as signposts, revealing the degree to which the pos-
sibility of a democratic culture is negotiated, discussed, and disputed.
Erin Graff Zivin’s “The Ethical Turn” asks when did we, as a field, turn “toward”
ethics—if we can say that we did—and from what did we turn away? The so-
called “turn to ethics” has itself become a trope, a turning, and a symptomatic trope
at that. It is a trope that reveals a profound anxiety with what has been a perva-
sive disciplinary obsession over the relation between politics and literature, and
between politics and intellectual and artistic production more broadly. The turn
to ethics tends to presuppose a turn away from politics or a substitution of one for
the other. The chapter focuses upon four types of readings of ethical philosophy
in Latin American and Latin Americanist thought: theological, literary, political, and
deconstructive. The first section evaluates Enrique Dussel’s assimilation of the work
of Emmanuel Levinas into his own philosophy of Latin American liberation. The
second section juxtaposes Dussel’s Levinasianism with Doris Sommer’s ostensibly
very different Levinasian approach to literary studies. The third section unpacks
the debate over the relation between ethics and political militancy that surfaces
in Argentina following the publication of philosopher Oscar del Barco’s letter
“No Matarás.” The final section considers several recent, more deconstructive
approaches to ethics in Latin American studies that refuse the logic of recognition-
identification on which one paradigm of substitution turns, and which provide
new, unfamiliar concepts of ethics, politics, and the relation between the two.
9
Introduction 9
Gareth Williams’ “The Subalternist Turn” discusses the contributions and limi-
tations of the three main strands of thought that came out of the Latin American
subaltern studies configuration of the 1990s, taking into consideration the pos-
sibility of their relation, or lack of a relation, to an actual “turn” in the field.
The three main strands in question are: populism/“post-subalternism,” so-called
“decolonial theory,” and the posthegemonic turn. Examining the three strands in
terms of their genealogies and internal logics, the essay concludes that the only
actual turn in the field is provided by the infrapolitical turn toward posthegemonic
democracy.This is the case because the two other configurations offer identitarian
grounds for thought that do nothing to dislodge the received anthro-logocentrism
of the field in its criollista-indigenista vein.
Under the title of “The Cultural Studies Turn” Mabel Moraña approaches
the social and ideological contexts that surrounded the emergence of cultural
studies and the circumstances of its adoption and transformation in American
and Latin American academic and intellectual environments. The chapter elabo-
rates on factors affecting knowledge production and models of representation in
Western cultures in the last decades of the twentieth century, thus precipitating the
restructuring of the humanities and the social sciences. These changes had direct
impact on the reconfiguration of Latin Americanism as a transnationalized field.
The chapter points to the contributions and shortcomings of cultural studies as
8
a new avenue for the comprehension of social change and for the interpretation
of new forms of subjectivity, collective agency, and social dynamics, such as those
related to the practices of migration, interculturalism, infrapolitics, and the like. It
also elaborates on the changing role of intellectuals and cultural institutions in a
world impacted by the new horizons opened by digital technologies.
Nelson Maldonado-Torres’ chapter, “The Decolonial Turn” focuses on dis-
courses about coloniality and decoloniality. The concept of decolonial turn calls
attention to this work, but it can also be understood as a shift in attitude and as
a project that is grounded on various waves of decolonization efforts in Latin
America and other colonized settings. The decolonial turn also poses colonialism
as a fundamental problem that is intrinsic to Western modernity, and the colonized
as a potential agent of radical epistemic, symbolic, and material change. The essay
offers a definition of decolonial turn, an account of the origin of the concept, and
examples of twentieth-and twenty-first-century expressions, with emphasis in the
Caribbean, Latin America, and the United States.
The past thirty years in Latin America, state Nicole Fabricant and Nancy
Postero in their “The Indigenous Studies Turn” chapter, have been marked by
the struggles of indigenous peoples, who have emerged as important political
actors, calling attention to the territorial, political, and economic exclusions that
continue to mark their everyday lives. Claiming citizenship and human rights,
indigenous peoples have demanded both self-determination and political partici-
pation, calling for the decolonization of their nation-states and an end to systemic
racism. Scholars have increasingly argued that who counts as indigenous is a fluid
10
political question, emerging from struggles over particular social, cultural, envi-
ronmental, and economic matters during particular moments. Indigeneity can
function as a powerful political force, utilized by indigenous groups as emancipa-
tory politics or by others seeking to appropriate it for their own interests to enact
forms of governance. The chapter focuses on four themes that are animating
scholarship today: (1) Since the 1990s, neoliberal states have instituted forms of
state recognition called “neoliberal multiculturalism.” Scholars have analyzed the
political openings this form of identity politics provided as well as the dangers
and limitations it entails. (2) As extractivist development continues across the
region, scholars have studied indigenous relations to natural resources, illustrating
the tensions indigenous communities face: resisting development or participating
in the global capitalist market knowing it may cause negative ecological, territo-
rial consequences for their lands and peoples. (3) The struggles of indigenous
women have been a key site for rethinking the intersectional relations between
gender, race, and class. (4) Finally, scholars in the ontological turn have drawn
attention to the radically different worlds indigenous people inhabit, calling us to
decolonize Western scholarship by attending to indigenous ontological relations
with nonhuman beings.
“The Performance Turn,” says Angela Marino in her chapter here, refers to
changing trends moving from text-based to embodied forms of knowledge and
transmission. The chapter reviews three central debates in the fields of Latin 10
American studies and performance to suggest that the performance turn calls
for a shift in methodology to reflect the complexity of performativity and per-
formed behaviors. The debates discussed in the chapter are: (1) ephemerality and
evidence; (2) performativity and the performatic; and (3) approaches to aesthetics
and power. Through these debates, new models of approaching cultural memory
have emerged. In particular, combining praxis and scholarship sheds light on issues
of spatial and temporal difference, historically and currently, as well as questions
of spectatorship and reception. The effect of the performance turn has thus led to
new directions in methods, a broadening of objects of study to relationships and
process, and a renewed emphasis on transdisciplinarity in the arts and sciences.
In “Turning to Feminisms,” Sonia E. Alvarez and Claudia de Lima Costa sus-
tain that the “mainstream” of Latin American studies of culture, power, and politics
did not take (and perhaps still has not taken) feminist insights to heart and that
prevailing strands of early gender studies in the region did not make culture a cen-
tral axis of analysis either. Though feminist interventions arguably had a marked
impact on cultural studies in the Anglo-American academy, Alvarez and Costa
argue that influence was marginal, at best, in scholarly circles in the South of the
Americas, despite the clear political significance of culture for early second-wave
feminist activism in the region. Zeroing in on Brazil, they review several factors
that help explain why hegemonic feminist scholarship tended to neglect culture
and, especially, cultural politics. They further maintain that, by the early 1990s,
activist cultural interventions had been rendered less visible with the ascent of
1
Introduction 11
why this is and what theoretical impasses these two competing paradigms present
for future work in transatlantic studies.
In “The Gender and Sexuality Turn,” Robert McKee Irwin and Mónica
Szurmuk posit that new theoretical approaches to gender and sexuality, a grow-
ing participation of women and an increasing visibility of sexual diversity in the
academy, and the changing attitudes of a new generation led to a major shift in
the treatment of gender and sexuality both in the Latin American academy and
among Latin Americanists in the global north. The essay lays out how this shift
played out in the late 1990s and early 2000s, focusing on the work of several key
figures including Sylvia Molloy, Marta Lamas, Carlos Monsiváis, Nelly Richard,
and Heloísa Buarque de Hollanda. It also looks at more recent decolonial trends
that in the United States bring theories of intersectionality and especially race to
bear on theories of gender and sexuality under the rubric of what has come to be
known as queer of color critique, and in Latin America articulate autochthonous
perspectives on these issues through the development of “la teoría cuir” or theo-
ries of sexual dissidence. In both cases, contemporary theorists build on the think-
ing of pioneering (pre-Judith Butler) scholars such as Gloria Anzaldúa (in the
United States) and Néstor Perlongher (in Latin America) to address problematics
of race, transgenderism, rights, and bio-and necro-politics in a changing land-
scape in which many questions that were unthinkable in the 1980s (e.g., same-sex
marriage) have become mainstream even as state violence has intensified against 12
disenfranchised women and sexually diverse populations.
Laura Podalsky’s “The Affect Turn” charts the growing acknowledgment of the
role of emotion, affect, and/or sensorial flows as generative forces in larger socio-
cultural and political processes within particular disciplines—most notably, literary
studies, cultural criticism, film studies, and, to a much lesser degree, anthropology
and history.The first section examines the motivating factors that have encouraged
scholars in those fields to “think affect” or to perceive in the cluster of terms asso-
ciated with that concept a means by which to illuminate Latin American sociocul-
tural dynamics. These include the interest in examining the psychosocial afterlife
of repressive dictatorships and armed conflicts; the role of affective dynamics in
uniting particular collectives from queer communities to social movements; and
the place of emotional regimes in bolstering a given sociopolitical order, socioeco-
nomic program or state-formation from the colonial period to the present.
The essay further argues that this growing body of scholarship betrays an
underlying concern about the social function of emotion that emerges, in part,
from the valorization of “critical distance” and the suspicion about the sensorial
as hallmarks of scholarly inquiry in ways seldom acknowledged by the schol-
ars themselves. The essay concludes with a consideration of potentially fruitful
avenues for future research.
In his chapter, Abraham Acosta provides a reading of what has been called
the “posthegemonic turn” in Latin America. It develops a conceptualization of
posthegemony as, on the one hand, the generalized political condition brought
13
Introduction 13
about by the social and economic effects of neoliberalism’s global reign and the
subsequent displacement of the nation-state as arbiter of sovereign control and
governmentality. On the other, it reads posthegemony in light of, and as a direct
corollary to, the simultaneous emergence of affect theory in the US academy.
Drawing from theorists such as Gramsci, Hardt and Negri, Carlo Galli and Brian
Massumi, and reading from recent insights into the posthegemonic by Gareth
Williams, Jon Beasley-Murray, and Alberto Moreiras, this essay explores the politi-
cal and epistemological implications of posthegemony in Latin America and else-
where as well as what the concept may mean in future critical discussions on
politics and culture.
References
AHR. “AHR Forum: Historiographic ‘Turns’ in Critical Perspective.” American Historical
Review, vol. 117, no. 3, 2012, pp. 671–813.
Atkinson, Anthony. Inequality:What Can Be Done. Harvard UP, 2015.
Basch, Nina, Glick Schiller and Cristina Blanc. Nations Unbound: Transnational Projects,
Postcolonial Predicaments, and Deterritorialized Nation-States. Gordon & Breach, 1994.
Boghossian, Paul. Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism. Oxford UP, 2007.
Bonnell,Victoria E. and Lynn Hunt, editors. Beyond the Cultural Turn: New Directions in the
Study of Society and Culture. UC Press, 1999.
Bordwell, David and Noel Carroll, editors. Post-theory: Reconstructing Film Studies. U of
12
Wisconsin P, 1996.
CEPAL. Inestabilidad y desigualdad: la vulnerabilidad del crecimiento en América Latina y el Caribe.
United Nations, 2015.
Fluck,Winfried, Donald E. Pease, and John Carlos Rowe, editors. Re-framing the Transnational
Turn in American Studies. Dartmouth College Press, 2011.
Iggers, Georg. Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the
Postmodern Challenge. Wesleyan UP, 2005.
Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, fiftieth anniversary edition. Chicago
UP, 2012.
Milanovic, Branko. Global Inequality. Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 2016.
Patai, Daphne and Wilfrido Corral, editors. Theory’s Empire. Columbia UP, 2005.
Piketty, Thomas. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 2014.
Reich, Robert. Saving Capitalism for the Many Not the Few. Knopf, 2015.
Rouse, Roger. “Mexican Migration and the Social Space of Postmodernism.” Diaspora,
vol. 1, no. 1, 1991, pp. 8-23.
Stiglitz, Joseph. The Price of Inequality. W. W. Norton, 2013.
Ticineto Clough, Patricia and Jean Halley, editors. The Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social.
Duke UP, 2007.
Introduction
AHR . AHR Forum: Historiographic Turns in Critical Perspective. American Historical Review,
vol. 117, no. 3, 2012, pp. 671813.
Atkinson, Anthony . Inequality: What Can Be Done. Harvard UP, 2015.
Basch, Nina , Glick Schiller and Cristina Blanc . Nations Unbound: Transnational Projects,
Postcolonial Predicaments, and Deterritorialized Nation-States. Gordon & Breach, 1994.
Boghossian, Paul . Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism. Oxford UP,
2007.
Bonnell, Victoria E. and Lynn Hunt , editors. Beyond the Cultural Turn: New Directions in the
Study of Society and Culture. UC Press, 1999.
Bordwell, David and Noel Carroll , editors. Post-theory: Reconstructing Film Studies. U of
Wisconsin P, 1996.
CEPAL . Inestabilidad y desigualdad: la vulnerabilidad del crecimiento en Amrica Latina y el
Caribe. United Nations, 2015.
Fluck, Winfried , Donald E. Pease , and John Carlos Rowe , editors. Re-framing the
Transnational Turn in American Studies. Dartmouth College Press, 2011.
Iggers, Georg . Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the
Postmodern Challenge. Wesleyan UP, 2005.
Kuhn, Thomas . The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, fiftieth anniversary edition. Chicago
UP, 2012.
Milanovic, Branko . Global Inequality. Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 2016.
Patai, Daphne and Wilfrido Corral , editors. Theorys Empire. Columbia UP, 2005.
Piketty, Thomas . Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 2014.
Reich, Robert . Saving Capitalism for the Many Not the Few. Knopf, 2015.
Rouse, Roger . Mexican Migration and the Social Space of Postmodernism. Diaspora, vol. 1,
no. 1, 1991, pp. 823.
Stiglitz, Joseph . The Price of Inequality. W. W. Norton, 2013.
Ticineto Clough, Patricia and Jean Halley , editors. The Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social.
Duke UP, 2007.
Turning to Feminisms
Alvarez, Sonia E. Latin American Feminisms Go Global: Trends of the 1990s, Challenges for
the New Millennium. Cultures of Politics/Politics of Cultures: Re-visioning Latin American
Social Movements, edited by Sonia E. Alvarez , Evelina Dagnino , and Arturo Escobar .
Westview Press, 1998, pp. 293324.
Alvarez, Sonia E. . Enacting a Feminist Politics of Translation.
Translocalities/Translocalidades: Feminist Politics of Translation in the Latin/a Amricas,
edited by Sonia E. Alvarez , Claudia de Lima Costa , Vernica Feliu , Rebecca Hester , Norma
Klahn , and Millie Thayer . Duke UP, 2014, pp. 118.
Alvarez, Sonia E. , Arturo Escobar , and Evelina Dagnino . Introduction: The Cultural and the
Political in Latin American Social Movements. Cultures of Politics/Politics of Cultures: Re-
visioning Latin American Social Movements, edited by Sonia E. Alvarez , Evelina Dagnino ,
and Arturo Escobar . Westview Press, 1998, pp. 129.
Alvarez, Sonia E. , Nal Faria , and Miriam Nobre . Introduo: Um Outro Mundo [Tambm
Feminista] Possvel: Construindo Espaos Transnacionais e Alternativas Globais desde os
Movimentos. Revista Estudos Feministas, vol. 11, no. 2, 2003, pp. 652654.
Azeredo, Sandra . Teorizando sobre Gnero e Relaes Raciais. Revista Estudos Feministas,
vol. 2, special issue, 1994, pp. 203216.
Brundson, Charlotte . A Thief in the Night: Stories of Feminism in the 1970s at CCCS. Stuart
Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies, edited by David Morley and Chen Kuan-Hsing .
Routledge, 1996, pp. 276286.
Cardoso, Claudia Pons . Amefricando o Feminismo: O Pensamento de Llia Gonzalez.
Revista Estudos Feministas, vol. 22, no. 3, 2014, pp. 965986.
Castro, Eduardo Viveiros de . Perspectival Anthropology and the Method of Controlled
Equivocation. Tipit: Journal of the Society for Anthropology of the Lowland South America,
vol. 2, no. 1, 2004, pp. 120.
Costa, Albertina de Oliveira . Womens Studies in Brazil, or the Tightrope-Walking Strategy.
Brazilian Issues on Education, Gender, and Race, edited by Elba Siqueira de S Barretto and
Dagmar M. L. Zibas . Fundao Carlos Chagas, 1996, pp. 3747.
Costa, Albertina de Oliveira and Cristina Bruschini . editors. Uma Questo de Gnero. Editora
Rosa dos Tempos/Fundao Carlos Chagas, 1992, pp. 5492.
Costa, Ana Alice Alcntara and Ceclia Sardenberg . Teora e Praxis Feminista na Academia:
Os Ncleos de Estudos sobre a Mulher nas Universidades Brasileiras. Revista Estudos
Feministas, vol. 2, special issue, 1994, pp. 387400.
Costa, Claudia de Lima . Feminismos Descoloniais para Alm do Humano. Revista Estudos
Feministas, vol. 22, no. 3, 2014, pp. 929934.
De La Cadena, Marisol . Indigenous Cosmopolitics in the Andes: Conceptual Reflections
beyond Politics. Cultural Anthropology, vol. 25, no. 2, 2010, pp. 334370.177
Del Sarto, Ana . Foundations: Introduction. The Latin American Cultural Studies Reader,
edited by Ana Del Sarto , Alicia Ros , and Abril Trigo . Duke UP, 2004, pp. 153181.
Evaristo, Conceio . Becos da Memria. Mazza Edies, 2006.
Ferreira, Gleidiane de S. Feminismo e Redes Sociais na Marcha das Vadias no Brasil.
Revista Artemis, vol. 15, no. 1, 2013, pp. 3343.
Franco, Jean . Un Matrimonio Imperfecto: Estudios Culturales y Feminismo. Nuevo Texto
Crtico, vol. 1314, no. 25/28, 2000, pp. 7585.
Gonalves, Eliane , Ftima Freitas , and Elismnnia Oliveira . Das Idades Transitrias: As Jovens
no Feminismo Brasileiro Contemporneo, suas Aes e seus Dilemas. Revista Feminismos, vol.
1, no. 3, 2013.
Gonzalez, Llia . Por um Feminismo Afrolatinoamericano. Revista Isis Internacional, vol. 9,
1988, pp. 133141.
Gunn Allen, Paula . The Sacred Hoop: Recovering the Feminine in American Indian
Traditions. Beacon P, 1992.
Hermida, Viviane . Marcha das Vadias: Reflexes Iniciais sobre a Trajetria de uma Expresso
dos Feminismos no Brasil. Unpublished essay, 2014.
Hollanda, Helosa Buarque de . Os Estudos de Mulher e Literatura no Brasil: Uma Primeira
Avaliao. Uma Questo de Gnero, edited by Albertina de Oliveira Costa and Cristina Bruschini .
Editora Rosa dos Tempos/Fundao Carlos Chagas, 1992, pp. 5492.
Jesus, Carolina Maria de . Quarto de Despejo: Diro de Uma Favelada. Francisco Alves,
1960.
Lao-Montes, Agustn . Afro-Latinidades: Bridging Blackness and Latinidad. Technofuturos:
Critical Interventions in Latino/a Studies, edited by Nancy R. Mirabal and A. Lao-montes .
Lexington Books, 2007, pp. 117140.
Lugones, Mara . Heterosexualism and the Colonial/Modern Gender System. Hypatia, vol. 22,
no. 1, 2007, pp. 186209.
Lugones, Mara . The Coloniality of Gender. The Palgrave Handbook on Gender and
Development: Critical Engagements in Feminist Theory and Practice, edited by Wendy
Harcourt . Palgrave, 2016, pp. 1333.
Martello, Laura . Tenses e Desafos na Construo de Espaos e Encontros entre Feministas
Jovens Autonomistas no Contexto Brasileiro e Latinoamericano (20112014). Ph.D.
dissertation, Federal University of Minas Gerais, 2015.
Martnez, Mara Tereza , Mnica Cejas, Merarit Viera, Luisa Fernanda Hernandez Herse, and
Linda Daniela Villegas Mercado. Ninguna Guerra en mi Nombre: Feminismo y Estudios
Culturales en America Latina. Nmadas, vol. 40, 2014, pp. 159173.
Masiello, Francine . Conhecimento Suplementar: Queering o Eixo Norte/Sul. Revista Estudos
Feministas, vol. 8, no. 2, 2000, pp. 4961.
Moraa, Mabel , editor. Nuevas Perspectivas desde/sobre Amrica Latina: El Desafiio de los
Estudios Culturales. Instituto Internacional de Literatura Iberoamericana/Universidad de
Pittsburgh, 2002.
Name, Leo and Julia Zanetti . Meu Corpo, Minhas Redes: A Marcha das Vadias do Rio de
Janeiro. Anais da ANPUR, 2013.
Oyewumi, Oyeronke . The Invention of Women: Making an African Sense of Western Gender
Discourses. U of Minnesota P, 1997.
Paredes, Julieta . Hilando Fino desde el Feminismo Comunitrio. Comunidad Mujeres
Creando Comunidad/CEDEC, 2010.
Prada, Ana Rebeca . Is Anzalda Translatable in Bolivia? Translocalities / Translocalidades:
The Politics of Feminist Translation in the Latin/a Americas, edited by Sonia E. Alvarez ,
Claudia de Lima Costa , Vernica Feliu , Rebecca J. Hester , Norma Klahn , and Millie Thayer
. Duke UP, 2014, pp. 5777.178
Pratt, Mary Louise . Women, Literature, and National Brotherhood. Women, Culture, and
Politics in Latin America, edited by Emilie Bergmann , Janet Greenberg , Gwen Kirkpatrick ,
Francine Masiello , Francesca Miller , Marta Morero-Frosch , Kathleen Newman , and Mary
Louise Pratt . U of California P, 1992, pp. 4873.
Richard, Nelly . Respuestas a un Cuestionario: Posiciones y Situaciones. En Torno a los
Estudios Culturales: Localidades, Trayectorias y Disputas, edited by N. Richard . Editorial
ARCIS/CLACSO, 2010, pp. 6782.
Segato, Rita Laura . Gender, Politics, and Hybridism in the Transnationalization of the Yorub
Culture. Orisa Devotion as World Religion: The Globalization of the Yorub Religious Culture,
edited by Jacob K. Olupona and Terry Rey . U of Wisconsin P, 2008, pp. 485512.
Stengers, Isabelle . The Cosmopolitical Proposal. Making Things Public: Atmospheres of
Democracy, edited by Bruno Latour and Peter Weibel . MIT Press, 2005, pp. 9941004.
Trigo, Abril . Practices: Introduction. The Latin American Cultural Studies Reader, edited by
Ana Del Sarto , Alicia Ros , and Abril Trigo . Duke UP, 2004, pp. 347374.
Walsh, Catherine . Shifting the Geopolitics of Critical Knowledge: Decolonial Thought and
Cultural Studies Others in the Andes. Cultural Studies, vol. 21, no. 23, 2007, pp. 224239.
Ydice, George . Contrapunteo Estadounidense/Latinoamericano de los Estudios Culturales.
Estudios y Otras Practicas Intelectuales Latinoamericanas en Cultura y Poder, edited by
Daniel Mato . Clacso/Universidad Central de Venezuela, 2002, pp. 339352.