Re-visiones #8


Terms & Conditions

Alejandro Cerón

Artist /


Study (Moten & Harney, 2013) and disidentification (Muñoz, 1999), are terms that could be understood as conditions for divergent un-individuated production. These strategies are productive in the way they (de)generate, constructive from their insistent refusal of the instituted. By identifying connections between these strategies, the text points at their transformative potential. Could these performative processes displace or decentralize dominant modes of production?


Study; disidentification; precarity; production.


1.1.Negative Terms as Conditions of Production. Introduction

Academia is one of the many institutions affecting subject and social formation. If we were to reflect on its state, agenda and infrastructures, it might be useful to think about how institutions are legitimated. Isn’t it through the use of institutions that we become part of them?

Made up of knowledge and culture, institutions are political and administrative bodies, world-making products that are financially codependent. They are resourceful infrastructures often distributing the contradiction we inhabit. Writer and academic bell hooks notes that ‘in a culture of domination almost everybody engages in behaviors that contradict their beliefs and values.’1 Institutional critique, for example, legitimizes the object it criticizes. Paradoxically established as the institution of critique, this practice works to expose the transcendental conditions of institutions, amplifying rather than undermining them.2 Speculative and transversal institutional practices in endangered hope articulate potentialities for change. Entangled in relations of mutual dependency, we have the potential to cut through institutional entanglement from within.

If we were to keep unpacking institutional recognition, we would find ourselves once again entangled within the terms and conditions of production. As part of the institutions we are born into and perpetuate, in order to negate them we must necessarily acknowledge their social and historical conditions of production. Constantly contested, in liquefied (re)definition, abstract and concrete circumstances are both prescribed and chosen. How do these conditions influence production when the object of production is the human subject and social subject?

While some conditions are contextually imposed, the majority are constructions within a specific agenda. Pervasive and persistently pushed by, through and into us, the circumstances under which we perform are embraced as different forms of government and policy-making. Individuating precarity, for example, as opposed to communal precariousness, influences everything we account for —the way we carry and distribute ourselves, the manner in which we produce the self and the social. The first part of this text focuses on governmental precarity (Lorey, 2015). The argument is constructed around theoretical writings and supported by practical examples such as ‘The Never-Never Girl’ campaign (1971). The performative works A Friend to the idea (Sully, 2016) and Who moves and who doesn’t? (Ngamcharoen, 2018), will prove helpful in supporting this argument.

The terms proposed as conditions of production are the notions of study, as described in The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning & Black Study, and disidentification, the performative strategy articulated by José Esteban Muñoz in Disidentifications: Queers of Color and the Performance of Politics. Both terms may have the potential to assist in institutional unsettlement and (de)generation.

These terms, and the way they relate to each other, shape the ‘second’ part of the text. Similar in tone, this part is not as clearly defined, but rather shines through the structure, coming and going, in a constant state of becoming. Elliptical and at times lyrical, the style of this text could be classified as ambiguous or blurry. The structure presents deliberate inconsistencies, forcing the reader to work with and through the text, back and forth in space, to connect the terms within it. The writing fluctuates. I would like to ask for patience from the reader; we could see this as an exercise in blind hope or trust. Written with a mind to the form as much as the content, this reading attempts not to favor either of them. A certain degree of repetition is descriptive of cyclic movement within the concepts the text speculates on. Fugitive ideas are disorienting and unsettling; scrambled terms as conditions that inform and deform one another, throughout a process that remains incomplete. These are never fully defined productive modes, ongoing processes of being as becoming. An invitation to think and feel, with and through the reading, this text suggests a reconsideration of the way we approach the reproduction of self and sociality.

Rooted in negation, study and disidentification refuse a present dominated by racial capitalism3. Their (de)generative potential lies within the productive quality of that negativity —a ‘negative hope’ whose dissent is constructive. These conditions inspire imaginative and unimaginable strategies to shake off the coercive control that forces people to fit in and conform, and oppresses, punishes or marginalizes dissenting minorities that do not adhere to hegemonic normativities.

Philosopher Theodor Adorno once commented that ‘utopia is essentially in the determined negation of that which merely is, and by concretizing itself as something false, it always points at the same time to what should be.’4 Utopian image and behavior feed hopeful desire for utopian action, the participation and embodiment of what could be. Within this line of thought, José Esteban Muñoz refers to ‘concrete utopias as relational to historically situated struggles, a collectivity that is actualized or potential.’5 Concrete utopias are the hopes of a collective, a realm of educated hope. Muñoz therefore recalls that, for Marxist philosopher Ernst Bloch, ‘hope can be disappointed. But such disappointment needs to be risked if certain impasses are to be resisted.’6

Echoing, hacking and squatting study and disidentification as conditions, thinking with and through the work of Anna Tsing, Isabel Lorey and many others, this text speculates and expands upon portals into modes of production that deviate from dominant practices.

These processes are not necessarily about replacing the norm. Being more or less than themselves, these conditions are rather invested in displacement7 It takes time to (de)generate conditions at the level of perception; we cannot claim to be quite there, for there is no there to be reached. The movement of things has no beginning and no end; there is always already here. Study and disidentification describe modes of being and producing where incompleteness is accepted as certainty and uncertainty is assimilated as axiomatic. Elusive to description, their intersectional combination makes these strategies confusing and frustrating to reductive classification. In order to internalize them, we must insist on the negation of the present as it stands today and commit to the possibility of what it could be. We must, as one, embody the struggle of the dispossessed and divergent modes of production, thereby influencing and problematizing institutions and their infrastructures.


1.2. Negative Terms as Conditions. Sharing Individuation, Precarity and Selves

Precarity is the total instruction (regulation, valuation) of life. It is existence governed through precarization: individuation, privatization and financialization of time, space, body and sociality; the perennial quantification of everything. Professors Harney and Moten argue that in order for the process of precarization to occur, individuated bodies are first and foremost subjectified through the ascription of body onto flesh, a requirement enabling correction.8

Inside an infrastructure of resources such as academia, undisciplined and uneducated bodies are subject to regulation. Instruction is intended to fix and reform bodies assumed to be wrong or broken. It adjusts them so they can fit in, adapt and comply to perform within a codified society dominated through abstractions, or what the historian and political economist Moishe Postone calls ‘abstract dominations’ —‘the domination of people by abstract, quasi-independent structures of social relations, mediated by commodity determined labour... the impersonal, non-conscious, non-motivational, mediate form of necessity characteristic of capitalism.’9 Anything identified as uncivilized, inappropriate or unconventional before normative eyes is recognized as perverse, and thus subject to correction.

Dehumanizing realities are miscalled ‘crises’. We could also think of crises as alienating constructions of a shuddering delusional structure, the results of an unsustainable desire —perpetual extraction, exploitation and expansion. Uncertainty is still inherent to sociality, a common belonging to the precariousness of life, which is ‘dependent, never autonomous, never completely protectable and thus dependent on social networks, on sociality and care work. Precariousness is always relational and therefore shared with other precarious lives.’10 Governmental precarity, on the other hand, is identifiable as a governmental tool. Similar to fear, it is a constitutive condition of neoliberal policy-making.

The precarious is not only isolated and marginal, but also fights against itself, striving for autonomy; it depends on heteronomy. A social domain is always defined by and dependent on a set of contested structural norms. This view emphasizes the heteronomy of individuals governed by ‘abstract dominations’ that are culturally inherited.

Forever present through gender, division of labor and non-remuneration of reproductive labor, precarity is connected to discriminatory reasoning. An example of the way governmental precarity has been structured and institutionalized can be found in the sexist origins of the US temp industry. In 1971, the temp industry is epitomized by Kelly Girl Services’ creation of ‘The Never-Never Girl’, a clear case of patriarchal capitalist logic behind precarity. With advertisements appearing in HR publications around the US, the industry established agency work and temping as a legitimate part of the economy, enabling the temping industry to sell the idea that all employees were disposable and could be replaced by hereafter disposable temps.11 In the context of cutting costs, this promoted the perception of the employee as a burden, a cost that could be minimized. Through a self-perpetuating process of precarization, subjects become exploitable objects. In this vision, only the product of labor has value. By outsourcing and individualizing economic ‘risks’ onto the lives of workers, the industry fostered a new cultural consensus about the world of work.

Kelly Girl, The Never-never Girl, 1971. “Never takes a vacation or holiday. Never asks for a raise. Never costs you a dime for slack time (when the work drops you drop her). Never has a cold, slipped disc or loose tooth (not on your time anyway!). Never costs you for unemployment taxes and social security payments (none of the paperwork either!). Never costs you for fringe benefits (they add up to 30% of every payroll dollar). Never fails to please (if your Kelly Girl employee doesn’t work out, you don’t pay).”

Hopeful negatives working alongside, with and through struggle and dispossession could displace fear and precarity, promoting a (de)generative undercommon sense,12 out of which world-making practices based on mutuality could flourish. Indeed, labor studies suggest ‘optimal social conditions for promoting ontological security are centrally about solidarity defined as a cooperative unity, mutual dependency and collective responsibility; while inversely, division, competition and individualism accord with conditions promoting existential anxiety.’13

Within the field of artistic production, the political power of a practice would then lay within the social relations that it activates. When reflecting on the individuation that precarity encompasses, it would be worth thinking of practices based on the kind of social relations they nourish or enable in order to exist. Said differently, speculative practices of sociality —sociality understood as intersectional trains of relational action based on open trust and mutual dependency— might counter individuation.

`Art is only political in the manner in which it observes the conditions of its own production; this means that it is aware of the production relationships within which it is generated and works towards emancipating these conditions.´14 The following artwork could be described as speculative practice engaged with institutional or infrastructural critique, in this case of academia. A friend to the idea was created in the context of an educational institution and through the consideration of the conditions of production of both the institution and the artwork within it.

The work was produced in conjunction with ‘The Kitchen Not the Restaurant’, a presentation format coined in 2003 and molded and sculpted ever since at the Dutch Art Institute (DAI). This module of the MA program offers individual students the possibility to present independent research and share updates, proposals, experiments and interests. Presentations have to comply with two conditions: they have to pose a question and cannot exceed twenty minutes. Particularities within the presentation space are hard to take into account as the location often changes. As part of the academic setting, a group of tutors and guests are invited to respond after each presentation.

A friend to the idea would resonate with the notion of transversal institutional —intersectional, speculative and/or (dis)identifying activity operating within, for and against the institution. Acknowledging the idea of being part of the historical and social conditions it is changing, it works toward the unsettling (de)generation of the instituted.

Envisioned by artist Isabelle Sully, this piece successfully operates through and within, for and against the institution. The piecewas performed at DAI in conjunction with the inaugural presentation for ‘The Kitchen Not the Restaurant’. As Sully states in the description on her website, ‘The task of commencing the program was allocated to Isabelle Sully on request from Gabriëlle Scheijpen, director of the school, contextually allowing for an exchange of places whereby the work was performed by Gabriëlle Scheijpen on request from Isabelle Sully, student of the school.’15 Here the artist not only flips hierarchical dynamics within academia, but also does so while nourishing a relationship of trust and mutual dependency. That morning, Scheijpen smoothly dissolved her role as director to perform following Sully’s instructions. The director’s actual speech gradually faded out and into the script the student had written. The rearrangement of social roles within the infrastructure hosting the work was outstanding.

The script unpacks how governmental precarity (regulation and reform) permeates educational institutions, arguing that there is an orchestrated production of a ‘culture of compliance’ among the individuals that make up the university. In this regard, exemplary of the contradiction we inhabit, DAI —an academic institution for critical art and emancipated thinking— has to comply with these regulations and, in combination with the very dynamics it sets for itself, ends up faithfully perpetuating the consequences of the conditions it criticizes, namely relentless self-exploitation, precarization and exhaustion.

Image 2. Isabelle Sully, A friend to the idea, 2016. Photo courtesy of the artist.

Isabelle Sully, A friend to the idea, 2016. Photo courtesy of the artist.

‘Grasping education as a practice that can bring about change means that we must also consider ways to negotiate and transform the sayable and thinkable, challenging dominant ways of thinking and acting within the vast and amorphous arenas of struggle within civil society.’16 Scheijpen reads sitting on a chair, interchangeably stopping to stretch, as indicated in the carefully curated script. Using form as content and vice versa, A friend to the idea scrambles infrastructural dynamics that are seemingly set in stone, making the unimaginable possible and radiating a notable transversal intersectionality. Within this piece, Sully distributes her work through diverse endeavors and disciplines, cutting through the various productive territories she navigates.


1.3.Negative Terms as Conditions. Study

Through governmental precarity, ontological aspects of subjectivity (its potentiality, vulnerability, temporality, inclination to change) are seized upon and economized. Negativity entails the potential to displace these effects. Georges Bataille suggests negativity as a transformational force.17 The writer and anthropologist connects the forces of becoming and the power of affirmation with negativity. The things we refuse —our negative choices— define who we are as much as the things we agree with and participate in.

When thinking about negativity as a transformational force, the negation of the way we were taught to think (particularly about the competitive goal-driven way we relate to one another) seems to be implicit in the notion of study, which can be understood as a ethic informing how to be and organize together. Study, as collective self-development, recognizes improvisation as part of a methodology. It lends itself to ever-mutating ambitions of what it is incapable of envisioning, leaning on the unimaginable as a potentiality. Through speculative negation, in relations of mutual dependency on hope, study groups in disidentification promote sets of complicities. These are in themselves productive modes of cutting through modern logics of competition and profitability.

Study is shared suffering and struggling, dancing and laughing; a productive mode enabling sociality in selflessness, participatory through a different way of perceiving the fact of being in space. The notion of study (re)claims an academia with and without, for and against academia. The concept advocates for decentered dissonant practices as mediated theories respected inside and outside the institutional frame. Undercommons study groups are learning and playing, helping and supporting each other despite, because of and against crushing adversity. Study, as the need to break through dynamics of oppression, as a performative process that negates attention to competitive reason, is the desire to spend time on and with others, in love with the possibility of a world that is not yet here, for it is always becoming, always happening, a world of potentiality shaped around hope, trust and communality.


1.4.Negative Terms as Conditions. Disidentification

As a transformative performative process, disidentification is a world-making strategy assisting survival. Emerging from queer theory and queer studies —where queer is used to describe non-normative identities and politics— disidentification is a strategy of affirmation and negation at the same time. It is neither strict opposition to dominant ideology nor plain assimilation. It includes multiple processes of identifying with and against, to transform a cultural logic from within. Disidentification is a practice of subject formation cutting through fixed labels, producing and distributing identities that defy reductive compartmentalization.

Unsettling binaries and categories, disidentification ‘is meant to be descriptive of the survival strategies the minority subject practices in order to negotiate a phobic majoritarian public sphere that continuously elides or punishes the existence of subjects who do not conform to the phantasm of normative citizenships.’18 Professor José Esteban Muñoz has perhaps advanced this concept more than any other queer theorist:

Disidentification is about recycling and rethinking encoded meaning. The process of disidentification scrambles and reconstructs the encoded message of a cultural text in a fashion that both exposes the encoded message’s universalizing and exclusionary machinations and recircuits its workings to account for, include, and empower minority identities and identifications. Thus, disidentification is a step further than cracking open the code of the majority; it proceeds to use this code as raw material for representing a disempowered politics or positionality that has been rendered unthinkable by the dominant culture.19

Muñoz theorizes disidentification by analyzing the political performances of queers of color. Just as with study, we fail to fully define disidentification insofar as it is more and less than itself. It is an intersectional degenerative mode that regenerates through decoding and recycling conventions and institutions. The negativity of disidentification comes from its ‘queerness,’ understood, as Muñoz argues, as ‘the rejection of a here and now and an insistence on the potentiality or concrete possibility for another world.’20

Disidentification could be understood as multiple ways towards fluid states of unsettling divergence. Like study, disidentification takes time and space to displace real abstractions, deliberately disrupting conventions. Both enact an active refusal that grows from the negation to conform. Together, these terms evoke strategies for collaboration through contamination, an idea articulated by Anna Tsing in The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins. Tsing notes how we are contaminated by our encounters; they change who we are as we make way for others. Furthermore, it is in contamination that diversity is created: ‘we are mixed up with others before we even begin any new collaboration.’21 In that view, collaboration through contamination resonates with the combination of study and disidentification.


1.5.Negative Terms as Conditions. How do negative terms relate to themselves?

Academia is often a workplace for instruction in conventions where work and workers are individuated. It is a place for professionalization, soaked in logics of competition and profit, with little space for speculative practices, study and/or collective disidentifications. It is an endangered infrastructure under the relentless threat of colonization by governmental precarity via regulation and reform. From this point of view, study and disidentification,as conditions of productionevoking Tsing’s sense of contamination through collaboration, displace capitalist desire.

The position of Pitchaya Ngamcharoen in the performance Who moves who doesn’t? could be useful in the continuous definition of conditions. Presented within the framework of DAI’s graduation show at State of Concept (Athens), this piece brings up questions of territory and deterritorialization through the politics of smell. It touches on territory and identity, disidentificatory practices and the phenomenology of queerness through the notion of orientation.

Three performers sit on the floor, carefully positioned throughout the space. Three table lamps point at the space directly in front of each performer, where electric or gas cooker stations are arranged along with a metal pot or ceramic container and various aromatic herbs and spices. We can hear water boiling inside the metal vessel in which it is contained. An audio plays Pitchaya’s determined voice, talking about the subjects of smell and orientation, speculating on identity and territory; abstract constructs. She throws some herbs in the water and lights up a cigarette. The dimmed-down lights make the scented smoke and steam readily visible, traveling throughout the space, conquering our senses.

Slowly, the other two performers join Pitchaya in the improvisatory ritual. While the narrator continues, she knows she is no longer alone. ‘Identities are never unified and never singular, but multiply constructed across differences… and are constantly in the process of change and transformation.’22 The different scents flow and suggest themselves, contaminating the room, entangling and (de)forming one another. We look on in silent intoxication. In her response, scholar Hypatia Vourloumis noted how ‘smell is transgression, elemental transgression but also ephemeral evidence, it defines.’ Defining identity marks out fluid limits, borders in constant transformation through encounter, by definition collective and within the realm of difference.

Boiling herbs, burning spices, the act of (de)territorialization is performed through everyday acts. There is a sense of communality within the piece’s intersectionality, showing different regimes of practice and collectivity, individuating and collectivizing, in very different ways. Deliberately pointing at collaboration in re-naturalized uncertainty, perhaps this work could be said to evoke those territories of educated hope described by Bloch, those concrete utopias, the hopes of a collective.

Photo by Ranjit Kandalgaonkar.jpg

Pitchaya Ngamcharoen, Who moves and who doesn’t?, 2018. Credits to Ranjit Kandalgaonkar.

Suddenly the audio stops. Pitchaya thanks the audience and somebody switches on the lights. There is a silence as the audience adjusts and the routine yet heartfelt applause ensues; but it is not over. One line has stayed with me, ‘when the necessity of violence is over —the necessity of violence is over— the hero cleans up to return to society.’ Repetition, as the applause fades out the audio starts again and several performers emerge from the audience and engage in maintenance work. They clean the floor and carefully, with a great amount of focus, clean Pitchaya, who has spread spices all over her body. Spontaneously, moved by the scene unfolding before them, several members of the audience join in to lend a hand.

Undertaking an unsettling collective process of disidentification and self-(de)generation promotes a sense of fluid belonging that grows into singularized, un-individualized empowerment. Perhaps in this way we could engage with the contradiction that we are and inhabit, perpetually aligned with pluriversal frequencies of difference, celebrating and sharing thought/feeling 23 with and through multi-species struggle, comfortable with the baffling uncertainty of constant change and the impossibility of no change. Collaboration through contamination motivates transversal institutional performative processes, study groups and disidentificatory speculative practices capable of cutting through ‘abstract dominations.’ These conditions could help mediate antagonisms that polarise theory and practice, history and nature, self and other. These abstract practicesconstitute an active participation in the movement of things towards and beyond what might still be thought of as impossible, useless, wild, disorienting or chaotic.


Arturo, E. (2016), “Sentipensar con la Tierra: Las Luchas Territoriales y la Dimensión Ontológica de las Epistemologías del Sur”, Revista de Antropología Iberoamericana.

Benjamin, W, (1934) The Author as Producer (Address delivered at the Institute for the Study of Fascism) Paris. (London, New Left Review 1/62, July-August 1970)

Bhattacharyya, G. (2018), Rethinking Racial Capitalism: Questions of Reproduction and Survival, Maryland, Rowman & Littlefield (ed.).

Bloch, E y Adorno, T (1988), “Something is missing: A Discussion between Ernst and Theodor W. Adorno on the Contradictions of Utopian Longing” en Bloch, E., The Utopian Function of Art: Selected Essay, trans. Zipes, J and Mecklenburg, F., Massachusetts, MIT Press.

George, T, (2016), State of Power: Democracy, Sovereignty and Resistance, Amsterdam, Transnational Institute.

hooks, b. (2003), Teaching Community. A pedagogy of Hope, New York/London, Routledge.

Kunst, B. (2015), Artist at Work: Proximity of Art and Capitalism, London, Zero Books.

Lorey, I. (2015), “Constituent Immunisation. Paths Towards the Common”, Open! January 2015 Commonist Aesthetics, Open!,

Postone, M. (1993), Time, Labour, and Social Domination, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Moten, F. y Harney, S. (2017), “A Total Education, en How Institutions Think: Between Contemporary Art and Curatorial Discourse. O'Neill, P, Steeds, L and Wilson, M, (ed.), Massachusetts, MIT Press.

Moten, F. y Harney, S. (2013), The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning & Black Study, London, Minor Compositions.

Muñoz, J. (2009), Cruising Utopia. The Then and There of Queer Futurity, New York, NYU Press.

Muñoz, J. (1999), Disidentifications: Queers of Color and the Performance of Politics, Minnesota, University of Minnesota Press.

Neilson, D. (2015), Class, precarity and anxiety under neoliberal global capitalism: From denial to resistance, ciudad, Theory & Psychology.

Ngamcharoen, P. (2018), Who Moves and Who Doesn’t?

Sully, I. (2016), A friend to the Idea.

Tsing, L. A. (2015), The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins, Princeton, Princeton University Press.


[1] hooks, b. (2003), Teaching Community. A pedagogy of Hope, New York/London, Routledge.

[2] Vishmidt, M. (2012), Beneath the Atelier, the Desert: Critique, Institutional and Infrastructural, Utrecht, BAK, basis voor actuele kunst.

[3] Bhattacharyya, G. (2018), Rethinking Racial Capitalism: Questions of Reproduction and Survival, Maryland, Rowman & Littlefield.

[4] Bloch, E. y Adorno, T. (1988), “Something is missing: A Discussion between Ernst and Theodor W. Adorno on the Contradictions of Utopian Longing” en Bloch, E., The Utopian Function of Art: Selected Essay, trans. Zipes, J and Mecklenburg, F, MIT Press.

[5] Muñoz, J. E, (2009), Cruising Utopia. The Then and There of Queer Futurity, New York, NYU Press, p. 3.

[6] Ibid p. 9.

[7] ‘A partial education begins with a frank perversion of a frankly Maoist formulation. His formulation is that one becomes two; ours is that one becomes more and less than that... A partial education is never ready, never started or finished … is incomplete education undertaken by we who are incomplete… Its concern is not with replacement but with displacement.’ Harney, S & Moten, F. (2017) “A Total Education”, en How Institutions Think: Between Contemporary Art and Curatorial Discourse, O'Neill, P, Steeds, L and Wilson, M, (Ed.), Masachussets, MIT Press.

[8] ‘The ascription of body, the imposition of bounded and enclosed self-possession, of a discrete self-subject to ownership, of ownership activated and confirmed either in theft or trade, might be said to be the first reform, the first improvement, insofar as it is the condition of possibility of reform, or improvement.’ Ibid.

[9] Postone, M. (1993), Time, Labour, and Social Domination, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 126-127.

[10] Lorey, I. (2015), “Constituent Immunisation. Paths Towards the Common”en Open! Commonist Aesthetics, January 2015,

[11] George, T. (2016), State of Power: Democracy, Sovereignty and Resistance, Transnational Institute, p. 137.

[12] ‘the undercommons is not a realm where we rebel, and we create critique; it is not a place where we “take arms against a sea of troubles/and by opposing end them.” The undercommons is a space and time which is always here. Our goal —and the “we” is always the right mode of address here— is not to end the troubles but to end the world that created those particular troubles as the ones that must be opposed.’ Moten and Harney invite us to refuse the logic that stages refusal as inactivity, as the absence of a plan and as a mode of stalling real politics. Moten, F. y Harney, S., (2013) The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning & Black Study, London, Minor Compositions.

[13] Neilson, D. (2015), Class, precarity and anxiety under neoliberal global capitalism: From denial to resistance, Theory & Psychology, pp. 1-18.

[14] Benjamin, W. (1934), The Author as Producer (Address delivered at the Institute for the Study of Fascism), Paris.


[16] Sully, I. (2016) A friend to the idea.

[17] Kunst, B., (2015) Artist at Work: Proximity of Art and Capitalism, London, Zero Books, p. 20.

[18] Muñoz, J. (1999), Disidentifications: Queers of Color and the Performance of Politics, University of Minnesota Press, p. 4.

[19] Ibid. 31.

[20] J. (2009), Cruising Utopia. The Then and There of Queer Futurity, New York, NYU Press, p. 1.

[21] Tsing, L. A. (2015), The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins, Princeton University Press,pp. 27-29.

[22] From Who Moves and Who Doesn’t?, script. (2018) Ngamcharoen, P.

[23] Arturo, E. (2016), “Sentipensar con la Tierra: Las Luchas Territoriales y la Dimensión Ontológica de las Epistemologías del Sur”, Revista de Antropología Iberoamericana.

Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.

Licencia de Creative Commons
Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional.


Re-visiones - ISSN 2143-0040
HAR2013-43016-P I+D Visualidades críticas, reescritura de las narrativas a través de las imágenes