Commentary on 2018 Roepke Lecture “Economic Geography and Ethical Action in the Anthropocene”
这篇评论分析了吉布森-格雷厄姆等人的罗普克讲座，探讨其如何通过批判和重建父权知识，推动女性主义经济地理学的发展，并挑战资本主义空间的内在逻辑。
CommentaryGibson-Graham et al.’s Roepke Lecture continues a three-decade collaboration that realizes a feminist agenda of challenging patriarchal knowledges through both critique and rebuilding. This body of work entails both vital substantive contributions and also a deeply ethical critique of academic knowledge production that has historically venerated the I while obscuring the always collective practices of building understanding. In its place, Katherine Gibson’s lecture is written as a we always in explicit conversation with her coauthors and collaborators, Julie Graham, Jenny Cameron, Stephen Healy, and Joanne McNeill. Gibson-Graham et al.’s work is liberatory for many economic geographers, both in the manner of its making and in its substance: creating the conditions of possibility for a feminist and more than humanist economic geography.Throughout their career, J. K. Gibson-Graham engaged the double call of feminist analysis: first by building a critique of masculinist disciplinary knowledge and second by offering affirmative analyses of creative alternatives (Grosz 1990 Grosz, E. 1990. Contemporary theories of power and subjectivity. Feminist knowledge: Critique and construct, ed. S. Gunew, 59–120. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]). Their arguments for taking back the economy began by challenging the closures embedded in masculinist and capitalocentrist economic theory. In critiquing the discourse of globalization that dominated economic geography in the 1990s, they pointed to an effective distancing of the economy from politics through the erasure of marginalized subjects, including women, people of color, the histories of majority world places, and the lives of those experiencing impoverishment (Gibson-Graham 1996 Gibson-Graham, J. K. 1996. The end of capitalism (as we knew it): A feminist critique of political-economy. Oxford: Blackwell. [Google Scholar]). Gibson-Graham’s body of work consistently challenges the idea that capitalist space is determined by its own internal logics and that it could actually be impervious to both everyday politics and to planetary politics.