Against abjection.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Against abjection. / Tyler, Imogen.
In: Feminist Theory, Vol. 10, No. 1, 04.2009, p. 77-98.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Tyler, I 2009, 'Against abjection.', Feminist Theory, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 77-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700108100393

APA

Tyler, I. (2009). Against abjection. Feminist Theory, 10(1), 77-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700108100393

Vancouver

Tyler I. Against abjection. Feminist Theory. 2009 Apr;10(1):77-98. doi: 10.1177/1464700108100393

Author

Tyler, Imogen. / Against abjection. In: Feminist Theory. 2009 ; Vol. 10, No. 1. pp. 77-98.

Bibtex

@article{c7f8105b10c94234b013af49ff82c216,

title = "Against abjection.",

abstract = "This article is about the theoretical life of `the abject'. It focuses on the ways in which Anglo-American and Australian feminist theoretical accounts of maternal bodies and identities have utilized Julia Kristeva's theory of abjection. Whilst the abject has proved a compelling and productive concept for feminist theory, this article cautions against the repetition of the maternal (as) abject within theoretical writing. It argues that employing a Kristevan abject paradigm risks reproducing, rather than challenging, histories of violent disgust towards maternal bodies. In place of the Kristevan model of the abject, it argues for a more thoroughly social and political account of abjection. This entails a critical shift from the current feminist theoretical preoccupation with the `transgressive potentiality' of `encounters with the abject' to a consideration of consequences of being abject within specific social and political locations.",

keywords = "abject • disgust • Kristeva • maternal • motherhood • violence",

author = "Imogen Tyler",

note = "The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Feminist Theory, 10 (1), 2009, {\textcopyright} SAGE Publications Ltd, 2009 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Feminist Theory page: http://fty.sagepub.com/ on SAGE Journals Online: http://online.sagepub.com/",

year = "2009",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1177/1464700108100393",

language = "English",

volume = "10",

pages = "77--98",

journal = "Feminist Theory",

issn = "1741-2773",

publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",

number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Against abjection.

AU - Tyler, Imogen

N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Feminist Theory, 10 (1), 2009, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2009 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Feminist Theory page: http://fty.sagepub.com/ on SAGE Journals Online: http://online.sagepub.com/

PY - 2009/4

Y1 - 2009/4

N2 - This article is about the theoretical life of `the abject'. It focuses on the ways in which Anglo-American and Australian feminist theoretical accounts of maternal bodies and identities have utilized Julia Kristeva's theory of abjection. Whilst the abject has proved a compelling and productive concept for feminist theory, this article cautions against the repetition of the maternal (as) abject within theoretical writing. It argues that employing a Kristevan abject paradigm risks reproducing, rather than challenging, histories of violent disgust towards maternal bodies. In place of the Kristevan model of the abject, it argues for a more thoroughly social and political account of abjection. This entails a critical shift from the current feminist theoretical preoccupation with the `transgressive potentiality' of `encounters with the abject' to a consideration of consequences of being abject within specific social and political locations.

AB - This article is about the theoretical life of `the abject'. It focuses on the ways in which Anglo-American and Australian feminist theoretical accounts of maternal bodies and identities have utilized Julia Kristeva's theory of abjection. Whilst the abject has proved a compelling and productive concept for feminist theory, this article cautions against the repetition of the maternal (as) abject within theoretical writing. It argues that employing a Kristevan abject paradigm risks reproducing, rather than challenging, histories of violent disgust towards maternal bodies. In place of the Kristevan model of the abject, it argues for a more thoroughly social and political account of abjection. This entails a critical shift from the current feminist theoretical preoccupation with the `transgressive potentiality' of `encounters with the abject' to a consideration of consequences of being abject within specific social and political locations.

KW - abject • disgust • Kristeva • maternal • motherhood • violence

U2 - 10.1177/1464700108100393

DO - 10.1177/1464700108100393

M3 - Journal article

VL - 10

SP - 77

EP - 98

JO - Feminist Theory

JF - Feminist Theory

SN - 1741-2773

IS - 1

ER -

Research

Electronic data

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords