Hi Carmen,

So do you see agency as a continuum, with natural disasters, urban landscapes, and other non-living shapers of history on one end and humans on the other?

Claire

Hi Sara,

I was also pleased that we did this reading after “On Deep History and the Brain,” because integrating animals into the study of history requires interdisciplinarity including psychology and the natural sciences. What do you think about how both week’s readings position people in relation to other beings and forces?

(Also, I think you were a willing cat owner–you just were just not the only being exercising agency in the situation!)

Claire

Hi David,

Not knowing much about the domestication of dogs, I just kind of took Walker’s word for it that they partially domesticated themselves. You might already be aware of this, but cats fully domesticated themselves and in many senses are still wild due to not having been selectively bred the way that dogs have. Cats were “settlers of matters” while deciding to hang out in grain silos eating mice, and the farmers appreciated them for it.

Claire

Hi Melissa,

I also found Smail’s “ghost theories” concept particularly interesting and thinking about how the Biblical Deluge story has informed much of the way we conceive of ruptures in history is kind of inducing a “mind-blown” moment. I’m going to refer to your blog post in class because I think you have made some connections that will help answer the “who cares?” question about this week’s topic.

Claire

Hi David,

Does the Africanist perspective we read answer the “who cares” question?

Claire

Hi Kate,

I zero-ed in on the neurobiological aspects of this week’s reading, but I think the contingency aspect is perhaps even more important. What do you think about Smail’s discussion of psychotropic drugs and their effect on history in the last chapter?

Claire

Laura,

Thank you for the helpful interpretation in this post. I also very much enjoyed “Symptomatic Politics” and felt like she communicated the complex power relationships at hand in the banning of “the veil” without her writing being too dense to understand effectively.

Claire

Hi David,

I agree with you that gender is an important lens through which to look at history, but not the only one, and should be used in concert with other lenses. I think that Scott’s way of using gender as a lens also lends itself to being applied to the analysis of other power relationships.

Claire

source for that statistic

Hi Faith,

This is an infographic with the different types of headscarves Muslim women wear. Women who cover their faces or wear a full burqa are a minority; I believe when France banned the niqab in public places, there were around 2,000 who wore one in the whole country. France has banned ALL Muslim head coverings in schools, including the hijab, but in the discourse all types are called “the veil,” so this confuses things because it implies the use of the more conservative facial covering.

Claire