The Affective Aesthetics of Transnational Feminism

WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) The Affective Aesthetics of Transnational Feminism Silvia Schultermandl, Katharina Gerund, and Anja Mrak ABSTRACT: This review essay offers a consideration of affect and aesthetics in transnational feminism writing. We first discuss the general marginalization of aesthetics in selected canonical texts of transnational feminist theory, seen mostly as the exclusion of texts that do not adhere to the established tenets of academic writing, as well as the lack of interest in the closer examination of the features of transnational feminist aesthetic and its political dimensions. In proposing a more comprehensive alte ati e, e d a o the u e t e-tu to a ds aestheti s a d espe iall o ‘ita Felski s o k i this o te t. This app oa h o ks agai st a he e euti s of suspi io i lite a a al ses a d e-directs scholarly attention from the hidden messages and political contexts of a literary work to its aesthetic qualities and distinctly literary properties. While proponents of these movements are not necessarily interested in the political potential of their theories, scholars in transnational feminism like Samantha Pinto have shown the congruency of aesthetic and political interests in the study of literary texts. E te di g Felski s a d Pi to s espective projects into an approach to literary aesthetics more oriented toward transnational feminism on the one hand and less exclusively interested in formalist experimentation on the other, we propose the concept of affective aesthetics. It productively complicates recent theories of literary aesthetics and makes them applicable to a diverse range of texts. We exemplarily consider the affective dimensions of aesthetic strategies in works by Christina Sharpe, Sara Ahmed, bell hooks, and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, who promote the idea of feminism as an everyday practice through aesthetically rendered texts that foster a personal and intimate link between the writer, text, and the reader. The affective dimensions of transnational feminist writing prove to be an effective political strategy. We indicate how this approach might contribute to a reading of genre-defying nonexperimental texts in order to exhaust their full political potential—in form, context, and affective strategy—for a transnational feminist agenda. KEYWORDS: feminist theory; affect; Rita Felski; Samantha Pinto; Audre Lorde; Gloria Anzaldúa; bell hooks; Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie Introduction In this review essay, we set out to explore the ways in which transnational feminism has accounted for the aesthetic and affective dimensions of texts, be they literature, theory, or political writing. Taking our cues from early transnational feminists like Audre Lorde and Gloria Anzaldúa and their productive blurring of generic and discursive boundaries, we probe what transnational feminism in general, and transnational feminist theory in particular, can gain from the renewed attention to aesthetics and especially to the affective potential of 1 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) (literary) texts.1 Therefore, in the first part of our essay, we analyze selected canonical texts in transnational feminism and examine how they have negotiated (or ignored) questions of the aestheti so fa . I the se o d pa t, e offe a e ie of ‘ita Felski s e e t o k i the o te t of the u e t e-tu to a ds aestheti s i the hu a ities. This tu a e oth dangerous and useful for transnational feminism: It can be dangerous because it runs the risk of depoliticizing texts and narratives by privileging questions of aesthetics and literary form; and it can be useful because it may offer ways to develop a transnational feminist theory of affect and aesthetics. The various counter- ea tio s to a he e euti s of suspi io in literary analyses—ranging from notions of post-critique to surface reading to reparative and descriptive reading practices—seek to re-direct scholarly attention from the hidden messages and political contexts of a literary work to its aesthetic qualities and distinctly literary properties.2 Proponents of this new aestheticism are, generally speaking, invested in recuperating the symbolic and cultural capital of literary studies proper and of literature in a narrow sense. While these scholars are not necessarily interested in the political potential of their theories for social movements and feminist thinking, Samantha Pinto locates her study on experimental literary texts and their specific aesthetics squarely within a transnational feminist discourse. We thus turn to her work in the third part of our essay, in order to pinpoint the congruency of aesthetic and political interests in the study of literary texts which 1 Vice versa, it would be a worthwhile endeavor to explore how women-of-color/multicultural/ transnational feminisms may contribute to recent theories of the aesthetic; this, however, lies beyond the scope of this essay. 2 The discourse of new aestheticism is shaped by a variety of different academic political projects. Relevant for our project here are discussions situated at the intersection of literary studies and cultural studies a d at the i te se tio of uee fe i is a d affe t theo . Eliza eth “. A ke a d ‘ita Felski s edited collection Critique and Postcritique (2017) falls in line with the first, as does Stephen Best and “ha o Ma us s spe ial issue of Representations entitled The Way We Read Now (2009). For Anker and Felski s post iti al eadi g a d Best a d Ma us su fa e eadi g, the o je ts of stud a e e lusi el literary texts and reading is to be understood predominantly as an attempt to honor the aesthetic properties of literary texts. By contrast, projects situated at the intersection of queer feminism and affect theory formulate reading practices as expressions of the affective relationships between the critic and her objects of studies; there the focus of investigation lies more prominently on affect than on aesthetics. Both ‘o Wieg a s otio of a epa ati e tu a d Heathe K. Lo e s des ipti e eadi g highlight the affective-interpellatory capacity of all objects of study, literary texts included. Both trends share a commitment to restoring the affective agency inherent in objects of studies by referencing, among others, B u o Latou s o k o A to Net o k Theo , E e Kosofsk “edg i k s e upe atio of aestheti immersion, or Ervi g Goff a s theo of so ial i te a tio . 2 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) eso ate ith t a s atio al fe i ist theo . At the o e of Pi to s a al sis a e te ts hi h, ot u like A zaldúa s a d Lo de s, all attention to social exclusion through innovative litera fo . E te di g Felski s a d Pi to s espe ti e p oje ts to o k o lite a aestheti s more oriented toward transnational feminism on the one hand and less exclusively interested in formalist experimentation on the other, we propose, in the fourth and concluding part of the essay, the idea of affective aesthetics as a concept which brings into sharper focus the affective dimension of aesthetic strategies.3 Sketching an analysis of recent feminist writings from Christina Sharpe to Sara Ahmed and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, we seek to uncover these strategies in openly political and ideologically invested theoretical musings instead of searching for the supposedly hidden meanings and ideologies in literature that foregrounds its complex aesthetics. Thus, we acknowledge that transnational feminism should pay more atte tio to aestheti s a d that it a p odu ti el o pli ate a d eati el a -use 4 re- cent theories of literary aesthetics for its own political purposes and in order to apply them to a diverse range of texts at the crossroads of literary production, political discourse, and theoretical musings. Transnational Feminism and Literary Form Transnational feminism has (at least indirectly) been thriving on aesthetic innovation and formal experimentation as affective strategies, which invite readers to critically reflect on their positionalities and politics. Many of the seminal authors in transnational feminism based in the US, e.g. Gloria Anzaldúa and Audre Lorde, have first been categorized as literary authors and/or activists and have only much later and/or partially been recognized as 3 While the term affective aesthetics has been used in different fields and with different connotations, we employ this terminology here to emphasize that we are interested specifically in the affective dimension of aesthetics. 4 This otio of a -use goes a k to Ga at i Chak a o t “pi ak s An Aesthetic Education in the Era of Globalization , a p oje t hi h she la els sa otagi g “ hille f o he pe spe ti e as a post olo ial a d et opolita ig a t . “he spe ifies that the te a -use indexes the subversive, fo elo , age he p oje t lai s, ut also its dou le i d i the se se that the Lati p efi a ea otio a a a d age , poi t of o igi , suppo ti g, as ell as the duties of sla es -4). “pi ak s otio of a -use appropriately captures the complexity transnational feminist theory accords bifurcated and hybridized subjects. 3 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) theorists. While transnational feminism5 at large has paid attention to aesthetics and form, transnational feminist theory has egle ted to full a ou t fo lite atu e s aestheti di e sion in two senses: first, in that it tends to exclude texts that do not formally adhere to the generic features of theoretical academic writing and second, in that it is only marginally invested in in-depth reflections of aesthetics, i.e., a rigorous pursuit of the questions what a transnational feminist aesthetic might look like and what it might offer to the broader politial p oje t. I he essa T a s atio al Fe i is i the Cambridge Companion to Transna- tional American Literature (2017), Crystal Parikh offers a paradigmatic example in this regard. She emphasizes the political and ideological contexts that shaped transnational femi ist lite atu e. Pa ikh s defi itio of transnational feminist literature as an expression of the pe so al a d the politi al, the lo al a d the glo al, a d the i di idual a d the structural, without resorting to culturalist presumptions, caricatures, and stereotypes about what these conditions a d o lds a tuall a e a d ho the o e i to o ta t ith othe s presents a concise overview of the political stakes transnational feminism negotiates (226). Her specifi atio that t a s atio al fe i is alls fo aestheti st ategies ale t to the national, racial, and ethnic borders between women, as well as disciplinary, occupational, and representational ones, and writing that queries our deeply entrenched boundaries, such as those between the public and the private, theory and praxis, individualism and collaboration, in the institutional and activist spheres of knowledge production, and the p o esses of esea h a d the k o ledge o je ts i hi h these p o esses esult affirms the importance of aesthetics but does not consider the issue further. This marginalization of aesthetics within transnational feminism is part of a bigger problem surrounding the study of ethnic American literatures, which for a long time have been read for the cultural specificities they depict. Immanentist readings abounded which contributed to a pe siste t di hoto izatio et ee aestheti s a d politi s. I Cultu al Di e sit a d We use t a s atio al fe i is as a u ella te to des i e a politi al p oje t that e o passes s hola ship, a ti is , a d a tisti e p essio . The te t a s atio al fe i ist theo signifies the discursive formation in which some texts specifically become intelligible and recognized as theory, a d t a s atio al fe i ist iti g su arily refers to texts that can be linked to the political agenda of transnational feminism regardless of their generic categorization. 5 4 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) the P o le of Aestheti s, E o Elliott o te ds that du i g the episte ologi al shift brought on by multiculturalism, literary studies focused predominantly on the material realities depicted in literary texts (13–14). For this endeavor, the existing critical tradition in aesthetics and form yielded little productive ground, and hence ethnic American literary studies emerged as a critical field without developing a strong tradition in aesthetics. Still, this marginalization is particularly surprising because both literature and theories discussed under the label of transnational feminism share a commitment to providing room for individual identities and experiences, a plurality of voices and perspectives, and a sensitivity to cultural difference and its formal expressions. Transnational feminist critics, authors, and activists have called attention to the gross misreadings of ethnic American literatures as quasieth og aphi sou es p o idi g i do s i to the p esu ed alte it of o -white authors (Amireh and Majaj 2). This agenda has emerged from a long-standing (and still ongoing) struggle to expose power relations, politics of recognition, and privileged narratives and voices. For instance, in the context of US-based feminism, the landmark publication This Bridge Called My Back (1981) has drawn attention to the exclusivity of hegemonic white feminist discourse and offered a much-needed intervention to position radical women of color at the center of transnational feminist thought. The works of Audre Lorde and Gloria Anzaldúa—two prominent critics included in the anthology—demonstrate the problematic dynamics of articulating a transnational feminist project in aesthetic and affective terms and from subject positions hardly recognized/recognizable within a feminist theory dominated by white scholars who have emerged from the so-called second wave. Part of the challenge for both Lorde and Anzaldúa in this context is to subvert dominant identity categories of womanhood, nationality, etc. and to question the authority of the hegemonic theoretical discourse while also opening up frameworks for solidarity across diffe e es. I he Ope Lette to Ma fe i ist, hile also e te di g a Dal , fo e a ple, Lo de e pli itl iti izes the hite i itatio —rather than an open demand—to Daly to re- think her categories (90). Similarly, Anzaldúa ends her preface to Borderlands with a potentiall e o iliato gestu e: Toda e ask to e 5 et half a . This ook is ou i itatio to WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) . pag. .6 I stead of you—from the new mestizas eggi g fo e t a e i to the esta - lished academic feminist dis ou se, A zaldúa s i itatio appeals to a i plied readership of white fellow critics and feminists but, at the same time, challenges their established genres, categories, and theoretical distinctions. Her book and by extension her political project never cohere into a single genre: Borderland/La Frontera: The New Mestiza (1984) includes, for example, autobiographical moments, theoretical meditations, and poems. It constantly shifts between linguistic codes and registers and, overall, embraces an aesthetics that reflects the complexities, contradictions, and conflicts of borderland identities. The inadequacy of the aste s dis ou se/la guage to des i e si ulta eousl o-existent subject positions is also e ide ed i Lo de s ha a te isti pu li self-ide tifi atio as a mothe , poet a io Veau la k, les ia , fe i ist, i . Like A zaldúa, she pu sues a fe i ist p oje t a oss dif- ferent genres ranging from essays, speeches, diaries, and poems to her genre-bending auto iog aphi al cover as a io o k Zami: A New Spelling of My Name (1982), which is labelled on the thog aph . 7 Lo de s a d A zaldúa s espe ti e su je t positio s a d polit- ical agendas materialize in unconventional aesthetic forms which employ emotional experience as authorizing gesture, as means to create solidarity across differences, and as ways of knowing beyond traditional Western epistemologies. Feelings are relevant to the production a d e eptio of thei te ts, as A zaldúa holds, fo e a ple i sisti g that iti g is a se suous a t Borderlands n. pag.). Lorde also locates a liberatory potential within each and e e eade : The hite fathe tells us I thi k the efo e I a . The Bla k us sa s I feel the efo e I a e f ee othe ithi all of Sister Outsider 38). Their strategies of affective inter- pellation and the aesthetic experiences prompted by their writings exemplify a gesture of solidarity that seeks to work productively with and across often divisively used categories of difference. In doing so, they also point towards a subversion or at least problematization of A zaldúa s use of the e fo eg ou ds a olle ti e ide tit a d desig ates he iti g as a communal act. 7 The very term biomythography highlights the gender- e di g aestheti s of Lo de s auto iog aph . I the larger context of genre categories in auto/biography studies, it also challenges the white, masculine, Enlightened authorial subjectivity from which the genre of autobiography was predominantly derived in lite a studies at the ti e he Lo de a d A zaldúa pu lished thei s. Fo details, see Leigh Gil o e s Auto iographi s: A Fe i ist Theory of Wo e ’s Self-Representation (1994). 6 6 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) atio al ide tities a d to a ds a t a s atio al fe i ist theo . “till, p oje ts like Lo de s a d A zaldúa s hi h fo eg ou d aestheti s a d affe ti e e pe ie e at the o e of thei fe i ist agenda tend to register with scholars more often as literary experiments and/or political activism than as theoretical contributions sui generis.8 Aesthetics and the Limits of Postcritique In order to account for the affective and aesthetic dimensions interlinked with the political projects of literary texts, transnational feminist theory needs to further appropriate and update the instruments of literary analysis and criticism in line with its non-essentialist position and its dedication to cultural sensibility. Aesthetics, understood as general aesthetic judgment and as specific analysis of literary form, can then become an invaluable tool for investigating and developing transnational feminist practices. In The Limits of Critique, Rita Felski diagnoses that the field of aesthetics has been unduly pushed to the margins of current cultural studies approaches—a d he e is u e tl fa i g a legiti atio isis .9 She argues that because critique privileges context over form, and reflection over immersion, it is inapt to register the political commentary embedded in liter- Co epts su h as the o de la ds a d the Mestiza ha e o etheless ade thei a i to theoretical discourses, particularly in cultural studies. For example, in the introduction to Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, Cha d a Talpade Moha t o eptualizes otio s of ollective sel es a d o s ious ess a of A zaldúa s estiza o s ious ess a d the o s ious ess of the o de la ds – . The o ept of the o de la ds u de pi s Ca e Kapla s, ‘o e t Ca s, a d I de pal G e al s essa s i Scattered Hegemonies. The very title of Andrea Lunsford and Lahoucine Ouzga e s essa olle tio , hi h fo uses o o de la d pedagog a d heto i al p a ti es, Crossing Borderlands: Composition and Postcolonial Studies, sig als the e t alit of A zaldúa s o k to its inquiries. 9 We use Felski as li hpi of the oade dis ou se a ou d the alleged li its of iti ue. Felski s efforts to renegotiate the standing of literary studies within the humanities builds on a number of scholarly interventions that preceded her formulation of a postcritique moment in her own work and her curatorial efforts to strengthen the foothold of aesthetics in the journal New Literary History, for which she has ee se i g as edito si e . C iti s hose o k g eatl shaped Felski s eje tio of the hermeneutics of suspicion include Paul de Man and Bruno Latour as well as—to a lesser degree—Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick. Furthermore, insights on recent epistemological shifts in literary studies proposed by scholars in the fields of new formalism, pragmatis , a d ethi s fi d e p essio i Felski s iti is of critique. The presence of these intersecting critical traditions in her own work and her general interest in feminism provide us with an array of connecting points to transnational feminism at large and to our interest in the intersections between affect, aesthetics, and transnational feminist thinking. 8 7 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) atu e s aestheti di e sio s. Felski does ot o te d that a p ope eadi g of a lite a text disregards entirely its social or political underpinnings; rather, she sees the aesthetic and the social/political as inextricably entwined. Thus, i stead of teasi g out the te t s so iopolitical foundation, readers might benefit from having their perception or understanding altered in the act of reading. Felski locates the limits of critique in its inability to register the affect work of literary texts. Its critical idioms of suspicion (Ricoeur) and paranoia (Sedgwick) a ifest i i hat Felski alls a iti al ood The Limits of Critique 6) characterized through uisiti e a d a al ti al e s su h as i te ogate, u stif , desta ilize, take issue, a d take u of age ask, e pose, su e t, unravel, de- . As a alte ati e to the iti ue, Felski deli eates the otio of post iti al eadi g, iti al ood hi h hi ges o the p e - ises of actor-network theory, post-historicist criticism, and affective hermeneutics (The Limits of Critique a d is a atte of atta hi g, ollati g, egotiati g, asse fo gi g li ks et ee thi gs that e e p e iousl u o e ted li g—of , as opposed to de o - structing, dissecting, and denunciati g. “u h a positi e app oa h to eadi g gestu es towards a reconciliation between aesthetics and politics, form and context, thinking and feeling. Felski uilds he a gu e t a ou d the t a sfo ati e pote tial of lite atu e s affe ti e o k by rejecting critique that treats the text exclusively as an object of (suspicious) scrutiny. For her, the limits of critique lie in its tone-deafness to its own employ of affect as a mode of describing the reader-text relationship. Unlike reader-response theory, which treats readers as de oid of o i tio o passio , Felski tu s to the eade s affe ti e, su je ti e e pe ie e of the te t, e it i the fo of iti ue s spi it of dise ha t e t The Limits of Critique 2) or of her own theorization of affectively connotated aesthetic experiences.10 By throwing into relief the affective qualities of critique, she debunks the general assumption that iti ue is p i a il f ee of e otio s a d thus the literary studies (The Limits of Critique o e se ious o p ope pu suit i . C iti ue, the , is i esse e ha a te ized 10 a In Uses of Literature (2008), Felski defines recognition, enchantment, knowledge and shock as four potential aesthetic experiences of literary texts a d ases the o eade s a ilit to o e t to lite a texts and the fictional worlds they depict. 8 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) attitude of vigilance, detachment, and wariness (suspicion) with identifiable conventions of commentary (hermeneutics)—allowing us to see that critique is as much a matter of affect and rheto i as of philosoph o politi s The Limits of Critique 3). To remedy this situation, Felski e phasizes the po e of affe t: The i po t of a te t is ot e hausted hat it e- veals or conceals about the social conditions that surround it. Rather, it is also a matter of what it sets alight in the reader—what kind of emotions it elicits, what changes of perceptio it p o pts, hat o ds a d atta h e ts it alls i to ei g The Limits of Critique 179). The affective potential of literary texts depends on the acknowledgment of their inherent agency. Instead of defining the dynamics between reader and text through reader-responsetheo s o ept of a tualizatio , Felski a o ds lite a te ts the ole of a ti e age ts i the building of networks and alliances, which actor-network-theo sees as a t s disti ti e qualities [that] do not rule out social connections but are the very reason that such connectio s a e fo ged a d sustai ed The Limits of Critique . Follo i g B u o Latou s idea that as actants, reader and text are equally invested with agency, she views literature not o l as ate ial ope to theo ut as theo itself: To defi e lite atu e as ideolog is to have decided ahead of time that literary works can be objects of knowledge but never sources of knowledge. It is to rule out of court the eventuality that a literary text could know as u h, o o e, tha a theo Uses of Literature . Felski s post iti al eadi g is the e- fore potentially able to register the affective dimensions of transnational feminist literature and the ways in which it engenders a difference in the reader, a response or reaction. By p oposi g that [ ]athe tha looki g ehi d the te t—for its hidden causes, determining conditions, and noxious motives—we might place ourselves in front of the text, reflecting on hat it u fu ls, alls fo th, akes possi le lite atu e s pote tial to t a sfo The Limits of Critique 12), Felski acknowledges eade s politi s a d positio alities. This notion of readerly affect a d lite atu e s pote tial to ake a diffe e e a e alig ed with transnational feminist ideas about raising political consciousness, promoting dialogue, and forging alliances. Accounting for immersion and aesthetic experience can even add a new direction to transnational feminism, where aesthetics has been sidelined by methodologies and perspectives derived from post-colonial theory, new historicism, or dias- 9 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) pora studies. However, while we share the general assessment regarding the peripheral state of aesthetics in politically motivated literary theories and reading practices, we take issue with some of the possible consequences of Felski s approach: first, her critique runs the risk of depoliticizing its literary objects—at least inadvertently—by theorizi g the te t s affective politics mostly in terms of aesthetic experience of individual readers and not in terms of aesthetic interpellation at large; and second, it risks a re-solidification of genre boundaries and hierarchies between literary texts and theoretical, political, or activist writi gs postulati g lite atu e s a p io i e eptio al status. Transnational feminism, we be- lieve, would be ill-advised to take these risks that cut to the core of its theoretical premises (fluidity of identities and genres, anti-essentialist notions, etc.). It could, however, benefit from an in-depth reflection of the aesthetic and affective strategies that develop and carry the transnational political momentum across the discourses of feminist literature, feminist theory, and feminist activism. Heeding this call for renewed attention to the aesthetic, transnational feminist theory may expand its canon, strengthen connections between seemingly separate discourses/genres to promote its agenda, and develop methodologies that allow for an analysis of the affective work of (literary) texts. Transnational Feminist Aesthetics and Experimental Literary Form The study of aesthetics is indeed largely missing from recent publications in transnational feminist theory. By-now seminal texts including the edited collections Scattered Hegemonies: Postmodernity and Transnational Feminist Practices (1994) by Inderpal Grewal and Caren Kaplan and Between Woman and Nation: Nationalisms, Transnational Feminisms, and the State (1999) by Caren Kaplan, Norma Alarcón, and Minoo Moallem, as well as Chandra Talpade Moha t s o og aph Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity (2003), do not accord aesthetics much importance in the de-essentialization of gender, race, and nationhood. In the introduction to Scattered Hegemonies, for instance, G e al a d Kapla defi e t a s atio al fe i ist p a ti es as o pa ati e o k f ee of the elati isti li ki g of diffe e es u de take p opo e ts of glo al fe i is . Put another way, transnational feminism must engage in the comparison of multiple and overlappi g opp essio s ithout p o oti g a theo 10 of hege o i opp essio u de a u ified WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) atego of ge de – . P oje ts, like G e al a d Kapla s, d a la gely from the fields of political science, anthropology, economics and cultural studies and discuss literary texts as expressions of global power inequalities—if they address literature at all.11 Debunking the laels used to desig ate the alte it of Thi d Wo ld of thei la ki g age o e a d the dis u si e o st u tio o pa ed to that of Fi st Wo ld o e , this od of o k i esti- gates the mechanisms and contexts which enable the proliferation of essentialist categorization along the lines of race, gender, and nationhood. More recent publications such as A a da Lo k “ a a d ‘i ha Naga s edited olle tio Critical Transnational Feminist Praxis a d Leela Fe a des s stud Transnational Feminism in the United States: Knowledge, Ethics, and Power (2013) continue to ignore literary texts specifically as well as the aesthetics of transnational feminism at large.12 “a a tha Pi to s Difficult Diasporas: The Transnational Feminist Aesthetic of the Black Atlantic (2013) is one of the few theoretical approaches that has tried to tackle the issue of aesthetics within the context of transnational feminism. In her study, Pinto explores a selection of works by black women writers from various parts of the world (Jackie Kay, Elizabeth Alexander, Deborah Richards, Ama Ata Aidoo, Adrienne Kennedy, Zora Neale Hurston, Erna Brodber, Bessie Head, Zoë Wicomb, Pauline Melville, Harryette Mullen, and M. NourbeSe 11 Grewal and Kaplan address the issue of the aesthetic in the framework of postmodernism, though their focus is not on the aesthetic movement of postmodernism, but on the political, historical and cultural implications of Western postmodernity. In this sense, they explore the possibility for social ha ge i a al ses a d e p essio s of post ode it that lo ate a d li k di e se so ial theo ies a d politi al p a ti es to ou t esista e to ode eo-capitalist structures around the globe. While literary texts range among the expressions of transnational feminist politics their collection investigates, the focus is not on the affective economies their formal and aesthetic properties may engender. 12 Contextually oriented is also the study Transnational Feminism in the United States, in which Leela Fernandes investigates the knowledge production, representation and the ethical dimension of transnational feminism and beyond. Fernandes takes up a critical stance in interrogating the concept of transnational feminism in the United States academia, which, she claims, remains entangled in ste eot pi al ep ese tatio s of o e f o the est of the o ld. Over seven chapters, Fernandes tackles a number of concerns, from human rights, regimes of difference, representations, visibility and knowledge, to women studies in the US academia. She strives to bridge the chasm between theory and practice and argues that k o ledge itself ep ese ts a fo of p a ti e a d that dis u si e p a ti es that i ulate ithi the a ade ha e eal i pli atio s a d effe ts , hi h ea s that a ade i space is not separated from societal issues and can intervene in dismantling hegemonic political practices. This is also la gel t ue fo A a da Lo k “ a a d ‘i ha Naga s edited olle tio Critical Transnational Feminist Praxis. 11 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) Philip) and brings them together through their experimental writing and innovation in literary form, bridging the traditional gap between politics and aesthetics. As the title indicates, Pinto is interested in the concepts of mobility and diaspora in the Black Atlantic literary imaginary and their expression through aesthetics that destabilize existing understandings of racial and gender difference. Her close readings of literature ranging from poetry, drama, a d auto iog aph , to sho t a d lo g fi tio , i estigate the a si hi h a e, ge de , and other social constructions of difference wound up being represented through literary fo . The aestheti ethodolog that Pi to de elops i he eadi gs seeks ot o l to disrupt the Eurocentric representations of black women diaspora but to show how aestheti fo has the apa it to diso de sto ies of diffe e e i lass oo s a d s hola l writing (208). Such an undertaking strongly resonates with central objectives of transnational feminist theory and practice: it engenders a sensitivity to different voices and perspectives, it unsettles hierarchies, and it forges solidarities across difference. Difficult Diasporas extricates transnational feminism from an exclusively political context and fuses it with literary theory and aesthetics. Pinto leaves no doubt about her appreciation of the political dimension of aesthetics. Right at the outset of her study, she specifies that aestheti s is ot just a fo ut the fo of politi s th ough hi h ge de a d a e ope ate (3, original emphasis). Hence, she promotes political consciousness not only through a conte tual ut also th ough a te tual a al sis of lite a o ks, as ep ese tatio is fou d ot always in the obvious mimetic places but in the forms, genres, structures, and rhetorical patterns that express a relationship to various structures of meaning and reading that do not necessarily seem in direct relation to recognizable discourses of race, gender, and/or locatio . Pi to s i o atio lies ot i the e e ed ealig e t of politi s a d aestheti s but in the methodological weight that she puts on the texts as aesthetic products and only subsequently on the context in which they are embedded. In her analyses, literary texts are not only sources for contextual reading but active agents that engage with their readers and critics in an effort to change the conceptual framework of our understanding of gender and a e. “he elie es that [l]ite a a d ultu al p odu tio a e […] i ti atel a d pe asi el present in how we construct analytics of race, gender, and location, in that they invoke and 12 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) provoke contradictory desires to have the known world reflected but also to create new and a ied o e tio s –5). Throughout her study, Pinto systematically brings together differ- ent writers, genres, and narratives to reveal their similarities without falling prey to generalizatio s o e i g the autho s ultu al lo ales, et . Fo e a ple, i the thi d hapte she discusses works by African American playwright Adrienne Kennedy and Ghanaian author Ama Ata Aidoo to examine diasporic histories through alternative stagings of racial and gendered bodies and to undermine the ostensive gendered solidarity. The aesthetic practices featu ed i the sele ted o ks shape ho e e ei e a d i agi e ea i g i the o ld, and, put simply, different forms can create different knowledges, innovations in the order of e e p og essi e thought . The diffi ult i the title of Pi to s stud espeaks the ki d of e gage e t these i o ati e works demand of the reader— eadi g that is diffi ult affe ti el and politically, that can push us into questioning what we think of as politically progressive under the name of race a d ge de studies . Diffi ult is a o stitue t of the aestheti -political work of innova- tive literary form in capturing the effect of diaspo a o la k o e s su je ti ities a d identities. In her theorization of difficulty Pinto takes cues from African American poet Erica Hu t s e pe i e tal poeti s hi h suggests that diffi ult su je ts la k o e as au- thors/agents/disciplinary formations of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries) require diffi ult o je ts i o ati e lite a te ts to ep ese t a d e tai l to upe d e isti g so- cial orders (3). The bipartisan aesthetic methodology that encompasses the affective and political component inherent to the literary form allows Pinto to foreground affect not merely as aesthetic experience but as affective interpellation and political strategy within the text. The (innovative) literary form itself becomes the focal point for exploring and rethinking identity politics, urging us to revise the conventional reading and teaching strategies and to app oa h lite a te ts ot just as e ide e of the histo i al a d philosophi al appa atuses around it but as sites of theorizing, sites of ethod itself . Despite their fundamental political and methodological differences, both Pinto and Felski recognize the affective dimensions of literary texts and their significance as aesthetic products in and of themselves. They point out that focusing exclusively on the context rather 13 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) than the text leads to exclusionary and skewed conclusions in literary criticism. Nonetheless, Felski fo eg ou ds affe t that de i es f o the eade s e pe ie e of the te t, hile Pi to focuses on certain aesthetic mechanisms that she uncovers in innovative works by black women writers and their immediate political implications. We believe that transnational feminism would not only benefit from a stronger focus on aesthetics in literary (and other) texts but that it could especially use, ab-use, and develop the various notions of affect articulated in these approaches to further its political project. Affective Aesthetics and Transnational Feminist Theory To develop this theoretical perspective, we draw on anothe e e t tu and social sciences— a el the tu i the hu a ities to affe t —as a kind of corrective and methodological li k et ee aestheti s a d politi s. This affe ti e tu has take o a ious fo crossed disciplinary boundaries.13 Accordi g to Pat i ia Clough, it e p esses a e atio of odies, te h olog , a d atte i stigati g a shift i thought i sa d o figu- iti al theo […] [and it] throws thought back to the disavowals constitutive of Western industrial capitalist societies, bringi g fo th ghosted odies a d the t au atized e ai s of e ased histo ies – 3). This new discourse on emotions, affect, and feeling14 has been fundamentally shaped by feminist scholars like Sara Ahmed, Lauren Berlant, or Ann Cvetkovich. Concepts such as pu li feeli g 15 o i ti ate pu li sphe es Lau e Be la t espe ti el ha e ought to the fore the political aspects of affects and emotions and their significance for collective identities and activism. Unsettling the presumed binary between private and public, this 13 See, for example, Emotions and Social Change: Historical and Sociological Perspectives (Brooks/Lemmings, 2014), Affective Relations: The Transnational Politics of Empathy (Pedwell, 2014), Politics and the Emotions: The Affective Turn in Contemporary Political Studies (Hoggett/Thompson, 2012), The Affect Theory Reader (Gregg/Seigworth, 2010), Emotions: A Cultural Studies Reader (Harding, 2009), or The Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social (Clough/Halley, 2007). 14 Follo i g De o ah Gould, affe ts a e o o s ious a d u a ed, ut e e theless egiste ed, experiences of bodily energy and intensity that a ise i espo se to sti uli i pi gi g o the od . E otio s a e defi ed, a o di g to B ia Massu i, as the e p essio of affe t i gestu e a d la guage, its o e tio al o oded e p essio . Feelings is understood here as the overarching concept that encompasses affect and emotion. 15 The term public feeling has been coined by a group of activists, artists, and scholars, who cofounded the Feel Tank Chicago (Lauren Berlant, Vanalyne Green, Deborah Gould, Mary Patten, Rebecca Zorach, et al.). 14 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) scholarship re- odes affe t f o a a o defi itio as p esu a l p i ate, i di idualized state or experience to a broader phenomenon that is structural, systemic, and inherently political. It is in this context that we situate our notion of affective aesthetics. Affective aesthetics heeds the call of scholars like Felski or Pinto to pay increasing attention to the aesthetic quality of literary texts. However, it does so with a strong emphasis on the politics of and inscribed in these aesthetics and it does neither necessarily reproduce the exceptional or at least exemplary status of literary texts in a narrow sense, especially in their experimental forms, nor affirm the nimbus of theoretical writing proper. While the re-turn towards aesthetics has raised crucial questions of the de- and re-politicization of cultural productions and the seeming dichotomy between aesthetics and politics, from a transnational feminist perspective, this binary opposition can easily be deconstructed and hardly holds up upo lose i spe tio . A a da Lo k “ a a d ‘i ha Naga s Critical Transnational Feminist Praxis (2010), for example, sets out to overcome the traditional dichotomies of i di iduall / olla o ati el p odu ed k o ledges, a ade ia / a ti ism, and theory / ethod i t a s atio al fe i is .16 In line with such criticism, critical practices attend- ing to affective aesthetics question boundaries between genres, formats, and discourses, tease out the theoretical potential of literary texts and, in turn, pay attention to the aesthetics of writings and speech acts usually categorized and analyzed as primarily political or theoretical. The notion of affective aesthetics also accords new meaning to texts whose affective dimension does not unfold through complex literary devices and formal experimentation, like the works Pinto considers, but through a seemingly plain literary style. Our own critical practice engages affective aesthetics as political strategy and marks the affective dimension in transnational feminist writing of different genres as a link between politics and aesthetics.17 Although the suggest that i te ea i g theo ies a d p a ti es of k o ledge p odu tio th ough collaborative dialogues provides a way to radically rethink existing approaches to subalternity, voice, autho ship, a d ep ese tatio , the do not foreground the possibilities that aestheticism can bring to this process. Their theory is exclusively context-oriented, eschewing a more aesthetic examination of literary production. 17 It is in this sense that our notion of affective aesthetics differs from existing projects investigating 16 15 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) The idea of feminism as an everyday practice (potentially) available to everyone is a thought aesthetically rendered in genre-defying theory texts that employ the personal as vehicle to establish a connection between the (transnational) feminist critic and her community of eade s. ‘e e t p og a ness and Being ati e a ples i lude Ch isti a “ha pe s In the Wake: On Black- a d “a a Ah ed s Living a Feminist Life (2017). Both texts introduce the personal and anecdotal as a starting point for theorizations of intersectional feminism. Their anecdotes about lived experiences affectively interpellate readers in that they illustrate, in emotionally-charged ways, the i justi es agai st hi h the o k. “ha pe s deli ea- tion of a succession of personal losses and the overarching theme of mourning, and also the polysemy of the term wake (vigil, alertness, the wake of the ship) all suggest emotional and existential scenarios that resonate with present and historical struggles for Black survival. While Sharpe uses anecdotes to enrich her theoretical musings and to provide entry points into her highly aestheticized critical intervention, she certainly does not ascribe to a plain style and experiments with form to a certain degree. Her text thus irritates the boundaries between seemingly objectifiable-theoretical scholarship and subjective-personal experience. Ah ed sha es ith “ha pe a se se that the pe so al is theo eti al ut is o e i est- ed in reaching out to her readers in order to make her ideas applicable to their political activism and emotional experiences. This is evident throughout Living a Feminist Life, with regard to its language, style, and register; and the applicability of her ideas is proclaimed by the ook s appe di hi h i ludes a toolkit a d a a ifesto. The atte pt to ea h a oad au- dience also becomes clear in her choice of medium: she wrote the book parallel to her blog on the same issues. Ah ed s te t fo eg ou ds the a i ale t feeli gs su ou di g a pe - so s ole as fe i ist killjo , the o sta t fight o e e e da hoi es a d the ealizatio that feminist praxis may make others feel uncomfortable. She uses mundane and intimate the affective nature inherent in aesthetic-political performances, commodities, and texts. In particular, we are not interested in the affective underpinnings of aesthetic categories in the ways that Sianne Ngai has theorized with regard to modernist and postmodernist aesthetics and late-capitalist commodity culture in Ugly Feelings (2005) and Our Aesthetic Categories: Zany, Cute, Interesting (2012). While we are indebted to the insights into the nexus of feelings and aesthetics such projects offer, we place our own focus of interest more directly on the aesthetic-political than on the formulation of aesthetic categories in the sense of value judgement. 16 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) situations like the ruined family dinner when the feminist killjoy refuses to laugh over an i se siti e joke to ake he poi t: Whe ou e pose a p o le ou pose a p o le . This quote is also an example of the aphorisms she uses to break down complex power dynamics into take-home messages. This st ateg of affe ti e i te pellatio is ot e i fe i ist iti g. ell hooks Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics (2000), for example, is a project which set out to bring feminist theory, which often suffers from being too hermetically academic, closer to lay eade s: I just felt that so eho the o e e t had failed if e ould ot o fe i ist politi s to e e o e i . “he also otes that the idea pushed he to u i ate ite a eas to read book that would explain feminist thinking and encourage folks to embrace feminist politi s i . He aestheti st ategies the efo e hi ge o the deli e ate use of si ple it- ing, accessible language, clarity and conciseness to bring feminism to as wide a readership as possible. She directly addresses the reader from the start to establish a relationship of intimacy. Drawing on her own activities in feminist groups, the entire text is written in the form of a dialogue offering different viewpoints and encouraging active reflection and participation: the reader is asked to take sides and to consider the situations they encounter. In addition to its rhetorical appeal, the text also addresses emotionalized topics including reproductive rights, women at work, parenting, and marriage to affectively involve its readers. hooks uses everyday situations and practical advice to build theoretical concepts, which Ah ed ould all s eat o epts f. –13). Chi a a da Ngozi Adi hie s e e t essa Dear Ijeawele, or A Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions (2017) similarly hides its complexity behind a plain style, political rhetoric, and sentimental tropes. It is a paradigmatic example of the workings of affective aesthetics in transnational feminist writing. Adi hie s o k i ge e al osses ou da ies a d ope l p o otes a politi al age da. As E est E e o u holds, fo Chi a a da Ngozi Adi hie, storytelling in whatever genre, is not just art; it is art with a purpose, art with social responsibility. In her wo ks i deed, a t a d ideolog i fo , o ple e t a d affi ea h othe (12). Her essay Dear Ijeawele can be read as part literary production, political intervention, and theoretical musing. It affectively interpellates its readers on various levels through its 17 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) use of literary devices as well as political rhetoric, which create intimacy, engage in constellations of transnational public feelings, and showcase the inextricable connection between aesthetics and politics. Adi hie s Dear Ijeawele is not a diffi ult te t i Pi to s se se. Ne e theless, its use of a essible and jargon-free language generates affective attachments through literary form to propose a reconsideration of how to raise young girls (and boys) in accordance with dominant gender concepts. The epistolary character of her manifesto—prefaced with the indication that the subsequent fifteen suggestions are to be understood as her letter to a friend— establishes intimate links to readers both on the level of content and on the level of aesthetic experience. It simulates a personal, intimate conversation on the affectively-charged occasio of the i th of Adi hie s f ie d s a gi l Chizalu . Adi hie thus lo ates he fe i ist political project within the realm of child-rearing responsibilities and reproductive labor.18 He te t e plo s a heto i of hat Lee Edel a has te ed ep odu ti e futu is to affectively attach readers to the feminist political cause via a common concern for the wellei g of ou hild e . Bolste i g hete o o ativity, reproductive futurism, as Edelman has argued, mobilizes a collective identification with a common moral responsibility towards futu e ge e atio s, thus e de i g u thi ka le […] the possi ilit of a uee this organizing principle of o u al elatio s esista e to . “i ila l , Adi hie s atte tio to the top- ic of child- ea i g i st u e talizes the affe ti e atta h e t to hild e s ell-being for a g eate politi al i est e t i p ese t fe i ist a ti is . U like Edel a s u i e sal iti ue of heteronormativity, which focuses on white, middle-class narratives of futurism, Adichie, on the surface, is concerned with one specific–and specifically racialized and gendered–baby and her mother. As readers, however, we are prompted to recognize a more general concern for feminist parenting and to feel responsible not only for that particular child but also the well-being and future of feminism. The direct address of the letter may allow for readers ‘ead th ough the le s of auto/ iog aph studies, Adi hie s te ts utilizes personal anecdotes to create urgency and poignancy for transnational feminism at large. This is also true for her essay We Should All Be Feminists , a othe e a ple f o Adi hie s oeu e he e plai st le is pa t a d pa el of her affective aesthetics. 18 18 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) from different positionalities to identify with the agenda of the text and to cultivate a sensibility which is both feminist and transnational. Aestheti all , the epistola ualit of Adi hie s te t i te sifies this le el of i ti a . It e- ates the impression that the real-life reader serves as a stand-in for the fictional reader.19 This generates the aesthetic effect that Adichie addresses her audience directly, a very powerful strategy to confront them with her feminist politics. This exchange transposes the conversation about feminist politics from the private intimate to the intimate public, to use Be la t s te i olog . Th ough a li guisti egiste that o ju es up a o e satio et ee othe s a d a o e all ge tle, e e ole t, opti isti , a d pe so al to e, Adi hie s te t a succeed in the affective interpellation of its readers.20 The affective aesthetics of her text, including its adoption of epistolary features, its casual register, and its emotionalized discussion of intimate topics, not only asserts the value of feminist parenting per se but links complex social justice issues to prevalent gender ideals. The fifteen suggestions her text presents are insightful, practicable, and accessible, so that readers may come away with the feeling that feminist social change is not only possible but easy. Adi hie s te t is ot a lite a te t i the a o se se—it is a political manifesto or how-to manual—but it employs literary devices to affectively interpellate its readers and to promote its politi al age da. The hoi e to keep it si ple esults nonetheless in a highly aestheti- cized product that is clearly political and uses literary devices and affective strategies to engage with the difficulties of transnational feminism. While many proponents of the re-turn towards aesthetics, like Rita Felski, search for the aesthetic qualities in literature and endow the ith e e ed sig ifi a e, te ts like Adi hie s all fo atte tio to the aestheti 19 ualit In her groundbreaking study Epistolarity: Approaches to a Form (1982), Janet Gurkin Altman disti guishes et ee the e te al a d the i te al eade of the epistola o el s lette s a d poi ts out that the two converge precisely because of the letter format (cf. 88). 20 The te t s epistola p ope ties also eso ate ith the ulti edia disse i atio of Adi hie s o k overall. For instance, her reading and performance in front of a live audience of her TEDx talk version of We Should All Be Feminists generates a similar intimacy as does the direct address to readers in Dear Ijeawele. In the published version of We Should All Be Feminists, the stylistic features of the text—clearly written to be spoken in a semi-public setting—also affectively i te pellates eade s i to Adi hie s t a s atio al fe i ist age da. ‘e ei ed a oss diffe e t edia, Adi hie s o k ust the efo e e considered in line with a larger phenomenon of public intimacy surrounding scholars, artists, and activists. 19 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) of texts (in a broad sense) in order to understand the affective workings and political effects. Avoiding the pitfalls of universalization and depoliticization that would impede or betray a transnational feminist agenda, affective aesthetics may help to further subvert the generic markers which so often seem to cement the boundaries between activism, scholarship, and a tisti e p essio . As Adi hie s plai st le sho s, affe ti e aestheti s a e wed neither to experimental literary form nor to the reading experience. Transnational feminism has a lot to gain from reading texts, literary and otherwise, as aesthetic products with affective (and thus political) potential. It can tap into the political potential of writings in different genres and forms to advance its agendas and utilize affective strategies to mobilize audiences across academic, artistic, and activist circles and across national boundaries. Our cursory glance at texts by Adichie, Sharpe, Ahmed and hooks foregrounds a particular kind of affective interpellation, namely one that touches on feelings surrounding existential situations—birth, death, life, loss. These tropes are part of an aesthetics that builds on affective structures which translate well across cultural difference, even though the issues at hand are firmly rooted in concrete social conditions that cannot be generalized. Sharpe s atte tio to a spe ifi U“/Bla k e pe ie e, fo e a ple, o Adi hie s evocation of one particular Nigerian child insist on this specificity. At the same time, the affective aesthetics they employ may register with readers in different national, social, and cultural settings and situations. The accessibility of these texts may be enhanced by a seemingly plain style, a personalized approach, and sentimental tropes but this should not gloss over the fact that they deal with complex issues. And, they do so via an aesthetic that may not be experimental in form or literary in a narrow sense but one that is no less intellectually saturated, affectively effective, and politically powerful. A turn to the affective aesthetics of (transnational) feminist texts therefore yields new insights into critical interventions in politics, culture, and academia. Works Cited Adichie, Chimamanda Ngozi. We Should All Be Feminists. Fourth Estate, 2014. —. Dear Ijeawele, Or a Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions. Knopf, 2017. 20 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) Ahmed, Sara. Living a Feminist Life. Duke UP, 2017. Altman, Janet Gurkin. Epistolarity: Approaches to a Form. Ohio State UP, 1982. Amireh, Amal, and Lisa Suhair Maja. Introduction. Going Global: The Transnational Reception of Third World Women Writers, edited by Amal Amireh and Lisa Suhair Majaj, Garland, 2000, pp. 1–25. Anker, Elizabeth S., and Rita Felski, editors. Critique and Postcritique. Duke UP, 2017. Anzaldúa, Gloria. Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. Aunt Lute Press, 1987. Best, Stephe , a d “ha o Ma us. “u fa e ‘eadi g: A I t odu tio . The Way We Read Now, special issue of Representations, vol. 108, no. 1, 2009, pp. 1–21. Brooks, Ann, and David Lemmings, editors. Emotions and Social Change: Historical and Sociological Perspectives. Routledge, 2014. Clough, Patricia Ticineto. Introduction. The Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social, edited by Patricia Ticineto Clough and Jean Halley, Duke UP, 2007, pp. 2–3. Clough, Patricia Ticineto, and Jean Halley, editors. The Affective Turn: Theorizing the Social. Duke UP, 2007. Edelman, Lee. No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive. Duke UP, 2004. Elliott, E o . Cultu al Di e sit a d the P o le of Aestheti s. Aesthetics in a Multicultural Age, edited by Emory Elliott, Lou Freitas Caton and Jeffrey Rhyne, Oxford UP, 2002, pp. 3–27. Emenyonu, Ernest N. Introduction. A Companion to Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, edited by Ernest N. Emenyonu. James Currey, 2017. Felski, Rita. The Limits of Critique. U of Chicago P, 2015. —. Uses of Literature. Blackwell, 2008. Fernandes, Leela. Transnational Feminism in the United States: Knowledge, Ethics, and Power. NYU Press, 2013. Gilmore, Leigh. Auto iographi s: A Fe i ist Theory of Wo e ’s Self-Representation. Cornell UP, 1994. Gregg, Melissa, and Gregory J. Seigworth, editors. The Affect Theory Reader. Duke UP, 2010. Gould, De o ah. O Affe t a d P otest. Political Emotions: New Agendas in Communication, edited by Janet Staiger, Ann Cvetkovich, and Ann Reynolds, Routledge, 2010, pp. 18–44. 21 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) Grewal, Inderpal, and Caren Kaplan. Introduction: Transnational Feminist Practices and Questions of Postmodernity. Scattered Hegemonies. Postmodernity and Transnational Feminist Practices, edited by Inderpal Grewal and Caren Kaplan, U of Minnesota P, 1994, pp. 1–33. Harding, Jennifer, and E. Deirdre Pribram, editors. Emotions: A Cultural Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009. hooks, bell. Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics. South End Press, 2000. Hoggett, Paul, and Simon Thompson, editors. Politics and the Emotions: The Affective Turn in Contemporary Political Studies. Continuum, 2012. Kaplan, Caren, Norma Alarcón, and Minoo Moallem, editors. Between Woman and Nation: Nationalisms, Transnational Feminisms, and the State. Duke UP, 1999. Latou , B u o. Wh Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Co e . Critical Inquiry, vol. 30, 2004, pp. 225–248. Lorde, Audre. Zami: A New Spelling of My Name. A Biomythography. The Crossing Press, 1982. —. Sister Outsider. The Crossing Press, 1984. —. A Ope Lette to Ma Dal . This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, edited by Cherrie Moraga and Gloria Anzaldúa, Kitchen Table, 1981, pp. 9497. Lo e, Heathe K. Close ut ot Deep: Lite a Ethi s a d the Des ipti e Tu . New Literary History, vol. 41, no. 2, 2010, pp. 371–391. Massumi, Brian. Parables for the Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation. Duke UP, 2002. Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity. Duke UP, 2003. —. Introduction: Cartographies of Struggle. Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, edited by Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Ann Russo, and Lourdes Torres. Indiana UP, 1991. pp. 1–47. Moraga, Cherrie, and Gloria Anzaldúa, editors. This Bridge Called My Back: Writings By Radical Women of Color. Kitchen Table, 1981. Ngai, Sianne. Our Aesthetic Categories: Zany, Cute, Interesting. Harvard UP, 2012. —. Ugly Feelings. Harvard UP, 2005. Pa ish, C stal. T a s atio al Fe i is . The Cambridge Companion to Transnational American Literature, edited by Yogita Goyal, Cambridge UP, 2017, pp. 221-236. 22 WiN: The EAAS Wo e ’s Network Jour al Issue 1 (2018) Pedwell, Carolyn. Affective Relations: The Transnational Politics of Empathy. Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Pinto, Samantha. Difficult Diasporas: The Transnational Feminist Aesthetic of the Black Atlantic. NYU Press, 2013. Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. Pa a oid ‘eadi g a d ‘epa ati e ‘eadi g: o , You e “o Pa a oid, You Probably Think This Introduction is about You. Novel Gazing: Queer Readings in Fiction, Duke UP, 1997, pp. 1–37. Sharpe, Christina. In the Wake: On Blackness and Being. Duke UP, 2016. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. An Aesthetic Education in the Era of Globalization. Harvard UP, 2012. Swarr, Amanda Lock, and Richa Nagar. Introduction: Theorizing Transnational Feminist Praxis. Critical Transnational Feminist Praxis, edited by Amanda Lock Swarr and Richa Nagar, SUNY Press, 2010, pp. 1–20. Veaux, Alexis de. Warrior Poet: A Biography of Audre Lorde. Norton, 2004. Wieg a , ‘o . The Ti es We e I : Quee Fe i ist C iti is Feminist Theory, vol. 15, no. 1, 2014, pp. 4–25. 23 a d the ‘epa ati e Tu .