Lecture on Heidegger’s ’29/30 Course

For those that might be interested, I recorded a (longish) lecture on Heidegger’s Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics for my students while I am at SPEP this week. It is largely improvised and it was odd to lecture without the dialogue with students in front of me that I’m used to. But I try to pull together its three parts (the preliminary section on philosophizing, Part I on boredom, and Part II on different beings’ relation to the world). Perhaps an excess of um’s and uh’s as I got mentally tired two hours in, but I work through important quotations in the book. To me, the opening section and the performance of the lectures (philosophy is philosophizing; the sections on boredom, I’m convinced, are meant to bring you existentially face to face with that attunement, etc.). I also try to think out my own thesis that Heidegger’s three’s (three types of philosophy, three types of boredom, and three types of beings) are really about two’s where he can’t make the middle term stick.

More Book Reviews up at Antipode open site


Moriel Ram (University College London) on Camillo Boano’s The Ethics of a Potential Urbanism: Critical Encounters Between Giorgio Agamben and Architecture, a book that presents Agamben’s work as a “concrete platform for the conceptual experiment to rethink the notion of potentiality and to re-examine how political theory can challenge our notions of the built environment”.

Nathan Poirier (Canisius College) on Harvey Neo and Jody Emel’s Geographies of Meat: Politics, Economy, and Culture – “both highly revered and highly tabooed … [meat is a] complex and sensitive issue … intertwined with culture, societies, politics, religion, and identity … The book expands on critical animal geographies by focusing on farmed animals … [extending and applying] concepts from anarchist geography”.

Jonathan Everts (Universität Bonn) on Steve Hinchliffe, Nick Bingham, John Allen and Simon Carter’s Pathological Lives: Disease, Space, and Biopolitics, which is “novel … ingenious …  the most thorough, detailed, and accessible treatment of the whole issue [of emerging diseases and attempts to counter them]”.

Mel Nowicki (Royal Holloway, University of London) on Alexander Vasudevan’s The Autonomous City: A History of Urban Squatting – sensitive to both its possibilities and limits, this is a “unique and detailed historical account of squatting …  highlight[ing] the ways in which squatters have, throughout modern history, and in a range of contexts, fought to secure and maintain a ‘right to the city’ … ”.

Derek Ford (DePauw University) on Andy Merrifield’s The Amateur: The Pleasures of Doing What You Love, “a terribly frustrating book … [written by] an intriguing and clear writer who moves seamlessly across disciplinary divides, keeping the content socially relevant, abstaining from asinine and arcane academic debates”.

Troy Vettese (New York University) on Sunaura Taylor’s Beasts of Burden: Animal and Disability Liberation – “a sincere and eloquent attempt to rethink humanity’s relationship to animals through the prism of disability studies … [a] brave and rare … intellectual contribution”.

Bianca Beauchemin (University of California, Los Angeles) on Brittney Cooper’s Beyond Respectability: The Intellectual Thought of Race Women, a book that “seeks to map a genealogy and geography of black women’s knowledge production … blurs the seemingly mutually exclusive categories of thinker and activist, and traces the progression of black women’s intellectual contributions … re-mapping the intellectual landscape of the US”.

Heather McLean (University of Glasgow) on Dia Da Costa’s Politicizing Creative Economy: Activism and a Hunger Called Theater, which “provides powerful analytic tools to interrogate the ways activists … work within and against the complicities and potentialities of neoliberal creative economy discourse and practice … simultaneously surviving, critiquing, and reproducing … ‘economies of death, displacement, and divisiveness’ … [the book] points to generative lines of flight at a time when critical research can pave over possibilities”.


Amin and Thrift’s Seeing Like a City reviewed at Society and Space

By Michele Lancione here. He writes:

Amin and Thrift’s contribution is an important one because it pushes urban scholars out of their comfort zones, even more so than their 2002 Cities did. Seeing Like a City invites the reader to tackle fundamental urban questions—of epistemology, economy, and marginality—from a radically new perspective: one attentive to the (un)makings of infrastructural life and its immanent potential. The book is not easily digested nor comfortable, but that is a small price to pay for a contribution that offers a rare opportunity to reimagine what urban studies and politics can and should be.