REPLACEMENT AND REPLACEABILITY
6–7 December 2018 | Universidade Católica Portuguesa – Lisbon
We are happy to announce that the deadline for handing in abstracts concerning the call below has been extended. The earlier deadline was June 15th 2018. This has now been changed to June 30th 2018. We are looking forward to your proposals, and would still like to encourage you to hand in your abstracts as soon as possible because that would help us with some of the logistics. For more information concerning the event, go to replacementconference.wordpress.com. Should any questions arise, you can reach us at email@example.com.
Call for Papers
We call for papers for the 8th Graduate Conference in Culture Studies. This edition will be on the theme of Replacement and Replaceability and takes place in Lisbon on the 6th and 7th of December 2018. The conference is organized by The Lisbon Consortium in conjunction with the Research Centre for Communication and Culture at the Universidade Católica Portuguesa.
We aim to discuss the ways in which the concept of ‘replacement’ can be understood and productively used for the study of contemporary culture. Replacement has been one of the central concepts in the study of culture for quite some time, and, at the risk of overstating this claim, one could say that replacement is a concern in all fields of knowledge dealing with the study of culture today. It is, however, rarely the central focus in academic discussion and this event aims to contribute to a more detailed analysis of the uses, misuses, and usefulness of this particular concept for the study of cultural objects.
Hearing the words replacement and replaceability, one naturally wonders: Who or what is being replaced? Who is doing the replacing? What counts as replaceable? Is there a logic of replacement? What happens when bodies are deemed replaceable for other bodies? Or for machines? How does replacement communicate with other, related, concepts, such as translation, repetition, reiteration, quotation, citation, metaphor, metonymy, synechdoche, and displacement? And how does it acquire meaning in connection to other concepts like false-consciousness, workforce, precariousness, simulacrum, spectacle, and ideology? How can replacement or replaceability be made useful for the study of cultural objects? Which objects warrant their use? It is on these and related questions that we invite abstracts to be presented at our conference.
Ideas for proposals
|– Replacement, technology and labor.
– Replacement and the body.
– Replacement and disability.
– Replacement and the queer body.
– Replacement and colonialism.
– Replacement and representation.
– Replacement and translation.
– Replacement and biopower.
|– Replacement and the digital.
– Replacement by AI.
– Replacement and recognition.
– Replacement and knowledge production.
– Replacement and simulacrum.
– Replacement and death.
– Replacement and the archive.
– Replacement and documentation.
Theoretical understandings of power tend to highlight the importance of controlled reproduction of human beings, or subjects, in order for power to function. One may think of a wide-ranging number of theorists here, from Karl Marx, through Louis Althusser, and on to Michel Foucault. In the study of bureaucratic modes of power exertion, documents can function as the irreplaceable expression of an identity or a right, as in the cases of identity cards, passports, and diplomas.
In translation studies, the notion of translation as a specific act of replacement is of central concern. In media theory and the study of visual culture, the notion of representation can be understood as a moment in which the image replaces the ‘original.’ In literary studies, concepts such as metaphor and metonymy are examples of replacing one word for another, a procedure considered essential to the production of meaning through language.
In Lacanian psychoanalysis, the mirror-stage functions as a scene in which the physical body is temporarily replaced by an imaginary double. Feminist- and queer theorists have often critiqued heterosexist and heteronormative approaches to otherness as failed, or attempted copies of heterosexual male life. In posthumanist discourses, the very notion of the human undergoes a moment of replacement by some kind of being that is no longer fully human and all too often celebrated as beyond the human in a teleological way. And post- and de-colonial theorists have read colonial activities of ‘Western powers’ as forced replacements of one culture for another.