Refiguring difference: Imaginative geographies and “connective dissonance” in three novels of the Iraq War

This article analyzes three contemporary novels that engage with the most recent Iraq war: Point Omega by Don DeLillo (2010), Gods without Men by Hari Kunzru (2011), and The Yellow Birds by Kevin Powers (2012). It argues that the novels produce a kind of “connective dissonance” that works to redress what Judith Butler has described as a dehumanizing “derealization of loss” in the context of Western media representations of the war on terror

Speaking for the Muslim world: popular memoir and the "War on Terror"

This essay analyses two prominent memoirs by authors from Muslim backgrounds who use their writing to critique Islamist extremism: Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (2006) and The Islamist by Ed Husain (2007). The memoirs respond to an increased demand for narratives about Islam in the post-9/11 global book market. Although they offer valuable insights, they problematically position themselves as gatekeepers to the so-called ‘Muslim world’, a sweeping term frequently used in news reportage to refer to vast and diverse swathes of the globe. By taking on this role, the texts reinforce precisely the kind of ‘us vs them’ identity binaries that they ostensibly seek to challenge, and which have frequently underpinned dominant discourse about the ‘War on Terror’. This reinforcement of binaries is partially enabled by the memoirs’ heavy reliance on a ‘coming-of-age’ narrative style (borrowed from the literary form of the Bildungsroman), which sometimes creates an equivalence between the attainment of personal maturity and the adoption of what the authors describe as Western values. Through a comparative reading of the memoirs, the essay aims to challenge these authors’ claims to speak for a monolithic ‘Muslim world’ in the context of the ‘War on Terror’

“[N]ew constellations for thinking about normativity”: Rethinking Butler’s “Frame” with reference to Dave Eggers’ What is the What

This article aims to critique Judith Butler’s recent use of the concept of the ‘frame’ in the context of the war on terror. While many of the questions that Butler raises about the ways in which violence is framed in the post-9/11 world are perspicacious, I argue that this conceptual reliance on framing actually stands in the way of her ability to answer them. Instead, it causes her to inadvertently exacerbate precisely the kind of framing process that she is ostensibly attempting to deconstruct. By making this argument, I do not mean to negate the ultimate goals of her project, nor the headway she makes towards them in other ways. Neither am I attempting to undercut her ideologically, by taking what some might interpret as a Badiouian position that rejects her as a proponent of a nihilistic ‘ethics of difference’.1 Rather, my aim is essentially to push her thinking further, holding her to account when she claims that her point is ‘not to paralyze judgement, but to insist that we must devise new constellations for thinking about normativity if we are to proceed in intellectually open and comprehensive ways to grasp and evaluate our world’. I suggest that Butler’s analysis of the frame does in fact involve a partial paralysis of judgement, which prevents these ‘new constellations for thinking about normativity’ from being as fully realised as they otherwise might be. With reference to Dave Eggers’ biographical novel, What Is the What (2006), a text that actively strives to challenge the media-driven post-9/11 framing of reality by telling the ‘real-life’ story of a marginalised figure, this article contends that literature can prompt its reader to think about the framing of contemporary reality in ways that may help more radical ‘new constellations’ to begin to emerge. I make this case in two parts. In the first, I analyse Butler’s understanding of the frame, showing why her approach to literature plays a key part in what is problematic about her theorisation. In the second, I explain how Eggers’ novel offers a more nuanced and radical approach to the process of framing post-9/11 reality; an approach that foregrounds the textuality of the frame and suggests that the reality it limns might be more open to interpretation than Butler’s analysis allows

“Dark Newnesses”: The failures of Joseph Anton

Salman Rushdie’s 2012 memoir, Joseph Anton, marks a turning point in his career. While his earlier work celebrated “cultural translation” and the emergence of “newness” into the world, this book expresses reservations. “The arrival of the new was not always linked to progress”, Rushdie writes, “Men found new ways of oppressing one another, too, new ways of unmaking their best achievements and sliding back towards that primal ooze; and men’s darkest innovations, as much as their brightest ones, confused their fellow men”. These “dark newnesses”, as he calls them, “were innovations that came into being in the name of a totalizing ideology, an absolute ruler, an unarguable dogma, or a god”. However, despite this turn towards a more binary worldview, the complexity of Rushdie’s earlier writing refuses to be completely stifled, and this article argues that Joseph Anton is ultimately unable to persuasively follow through on its rhetoric of a world simplistically torn between newnesses “bright” and “dark”. Although frequently relying on binary language, it is precisely the memoir’s patent failure to convincingly represent the world in such starkly simplistic terms that, inadvertently, renders it valuable in foregrounding the nuances of post-9/11 identity politics that its author ostensibly seeks to deny

Status Competition and Peer Relationships in Childhood

Status competition is the contest or rivalry between two or more individuals over the pursuit of influence, deference, attention, and associated resources. Peer relationships are associations between two or more individuals that may vary in closeness and duration and which reflect and sometimes lead to the creation of friendships, partnerships, allegiances, and group membership

The impact of an offsite production approach on mechanical and electrical projects: evidence from the UK

This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by IGLC in the Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Lille, France, 26th June -2nd Jul 2023, available online: https://doi.org/10.24928/2023/0165 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.Previous studies have reviewed the impact of offsite production on the delivery of construction projects, however, there have been limited studies examining the specific impact of offsite on mechanical and electrical installations (M&E). Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the impact of offsite production in the delivery of mechanical and electrical installations for construction projects. In this study, a mixed method was adopted, using quantitative data obtained through a questionnaire survey and qualitative data through case study interviews. In total, primary data was collected from 36 questionnaire responses, and 3 case studies that involved 12 in-depth interviews. This study shows that offsite production has a positive impact on construction project performance indicators for M&E installations regarding factors such as time, quality, health and safety, sustainability, logistics, and collaboration. However, the study showed no general conclusion as to the cost saving impact of offsite construction on the outcomes of projects. Nevertheless, the study established that the offsite approach offers the client more confidence relating to cost certainty. Recommendations from this study are that offsite production should be selected based on its impact on project performance indicators rather than cost alone. The study argued that the offsite production method should be explored as much as possible when maximal benefits are sought; however, it should not be utilised simply for the sake of it but on a case-by-case basis

The dynamics of men’s cooperation and social status in a small-scale society

We propose that networks of cooperation and allocation of social status co-emerge in human groups. We substantiate this hypothesis with one of the first longitudinal studies of cooperation in a preindustrial society, spanning 8 years. Using longitudinal social network analysis of cooperation among men, we find large effects of kinship, reciprocity and transitivity in the nomination of cooperation partners over time. Independent of these effects, we show that (i) higher-status individuals gain more cooperation partners, and (ii) individuals gain status by cooperating with individuals of higher status than themselves. We posit that human hierarchies are more egalitarian relative to other primates species, owing in part to greater interdependence between cooperation and status hierarchy

On the dynamics of social hierarchy: A longitudinal investigation of the rise and fall of prestige, dominance, and social rank in naturalistic task groups

The pursuit of social rank pervades all human societies and the position that an individual occupies within a hierarchy has important effects on their social and reproductive success. Whilst recent research has indicated that there are two distinct routes to rank attainment—dominance (through the induction of fear) and prestige (through respect and admiration)—this empirical evidence has generally provided only a cross-sectional snapshot of how the two processes operate in human hierarchy. Whether dominance and prestige are potentially viable long-term strategies, rather than more effective short-term tactics, for acquiring rank in groups remains an open question. The current research addresses this gap by examining the temporal dynamics between prestige, dominance and social rank using a dynamic, evolutionary approach to understanding human social hierarchy, and thus supplies the first longitudinal empirical assessment of these variables’ relationships. Using naturalistic student project groups comprised of 3-5 teammates, the present research tracks the temporal relationships between prestige, dominance and social rank— provided through round-robin teammate-ratings—from the initial formation of collaborative task groups through to the end of a 16-week long academic semester. Results indicate that, whilst dominance and prestige both promoted social rank in unacquainted groups initially and were distinct processes throughout the period examined, only prestige had a positive effect on social rank over time. Further results reveal that the temporal relationship between prestige and social rank was bidirectional, such that acquiring social rank further perpetuates future prestige. Overall, findings present a framework for the longitudinal distinction between prestige and dominance