Beatriz Revelles Benavente University of Utrecht, the Netherlands

Re(con)figuring the ethico-onto-epistemologi- cal question of matter

Karen Barad, Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning Duke University Press: Durham, 2007, 524 + xiii pp. ISBN 978–0–8223–3917–5 Key Words: apparatus, diffractive, new materialism, methodology, quantum physics, language

Meeting the Universe Halfway is in order to challenge representation- an answer to the reflective method- alism, which has, for all fields men- ology found in representationalist tioned, unwanted consequences. In scholarship which has previously so doing, Barad joins the theory of characterised not just feminist stud- new materialism, which, though still ies but social and scientific studies in the process of being constructed in general, and which presumed (see Sheridan, 2002; Colebrook, the separate ontological existence, 2008; DeLanda, 2006), is part of a however mute or devoid of agency, wider movement in critical theory of the object which is being repre- away from theories associated with sented. The author’s aim is to con- the linguistic turn. New Materialism figure a ‘diffractive methodology is an epistemological/methodologi- […] to provide a transdisciplinary cal trend which has entered the aca- approach’ (25) which cuts across demic arena not as a contestation, ‘quantum physics, science studies, but as one of the theoretical frames the philosophy of physics, feminist of third wave feminism (Van der theory, critical race theory, postco- Tuin, 2009), which postulates affir- lonial theory, (post-) Marxist theory, mative readings instead of critical and poststructuralist theory’ (25). ones of past theories. This new methodology is necessary Karen Barad is a professor of

Graduate Journal of Social Sicence June 2010, Vol. 7, Issue 1 © 2010 by Graduate Journal of Social Science. All Rights Reserved. ISSN: 1572-3763 84 GJSS Vol 7, Issue 1 feminist studies, philosophy, and the foundational separation be- history of consciousness at the tween ‘object of observation’ and University of California, Santa Cruz. ‘observer’ because this division as- She has a Ph.D. in theoretical par- sumes the object as passive and ticle physics, which forms the back- the observer as active. Her ontol- ground to this book. Her previous ogy describes the world by means work, and particularly her 2003 ar- of ‘apparatuses’ in which both ob- ticle, ‘Posthumanist Performativity: ject and observer, human and non- Toward an understanding of how human, are connected. As such, the matter comes to matter’, paves the differences that matter are provided way for this book. Drawing mainly by the boundaries of the apparatus on Bohr’s philosophy of physics, as (140 & 148), and not just by the re- well as the work of other major theo- searcher: ‘apparatuses are specific reticians such as Foucault, Butler, material reconfigurings of the world Haraway, and Fernandes (among that do not merely emerge in time others), she develops a new ‘ethico- but iteratively reconfigure spacet- onto-epistemological’ (185) theory imematter as part of the ongoing dy- called ‘agential realism’, which is ex- namism of becoming’ (142). This is plained throughout the book, but in why specific intra-actions (different more detail and with practical appli- relations produced within the appa- cation in chapter six. Her list of ref- ratus) matter, the materialization of erences not only demonstrates her reality depends on all the entangle- balanced reading of current theo- ments and is how the world acquires retical debates relevant to her agen- its meaning (333). tial realist account, but could also The structure of the book is very be considered essential reading for complicated since the author moves any new materialist researcher. back and forth in order to produce Meeting the universe halfway more complex explanations, al- enters the academic arena in the though each chapter can be under- ‘transitional’ period from second- stood by itself since the paramount to third-wave epistemologies, of- concepts are repeated throughout fering an agential realist ontology the book. The last two chapters are which can help feminist studies to devoted to the entanglement of the demonstrate the ‘entangled’ state philosophy of physics with social or complexity of ‘matter’. ‘Agential theories and, as such, are the more realism’, the term that Karen Barad complicated ones for an audience uses for her new ontology, is meant which is not familiar with quantum to provide sensitive descriptions of physics. The first chapter presents ‘material-discursive practices’ which the problem of the present theory promote differences that matter. and methodology, while the second That is to say, this ontology rejects one moves to her solution to this Review: Revelles Benavente 85 problem: a diffractive methodology subjectivities and identities (35). which is very precisely explained Making the methodology part of the in contrast to the reflective method object of investigation involves an throughout an intra-active, yet bina- awareness and inclusion of the dif- ry, table (89-90). ferent effects of instruments in an Diffraction is understood by Barad investigation in both human and so- as ‘a material-discursive phenom- cial sciences. enon that makes the effects of dif- In this book repetition does not ferent differences evident’, ‘a way of become synonymous to fixity of con- understanding the world from within cepts. The book can be considered and as part of it’ (88). It is a ‘physi- a perfect materialization of Barad’s cal phenomenon’ (91) which entails own theory; concepts are entangled a commitment by the researcher to everywhere and their definitions are understanding ‘which differences not entirely stable. For example, matter, how they matter, and for the elements intra-acting are some- whom’ (90). The researcher is re- times described as ‘agencies’ (333) sponsible for the different practices and sometimes as ‘components’ which construct different under- (269). In addition, the many neolo- standings of the world. Drawing on gisms required to describe the ap- Haraway’s work with technoscience paratus (such as ‘intra-action’), can (94), Barad proposes a reading of further complicate reading of this different theories which, instead of book. Though these difficulties are opposing them, engages them with to some extent resolved after read- one another (92-3). That is to say, ing the whole book, they can cause the researcher engages with dif- reader to have doubts about what ferent theories realizing affirmative is meant by ‘phenomena’, ‘appara- readings of them in order to provide tuses’ and ‘agential cuts’. In other more sensible accounts of the world. words, reading and re-reading of Instead of looking at differences, the entire book is beneficial for un- she wants the researcher to explore derstanding Barad’s ideas in their boundaries since they are what pro- full complexity. Ideally, clearness vides meaning. This methodology goes hand in hand with conciseness proves to be not only an analytical - something which is occasionally tool of critical engagement (as tradi- missing in this book. tional methodologies are), but also To conclude I would like to turn part of the ‘phenomenon’, or object towards one of the most controver- of investigation, since instruments sial aspects of Barad’s work which of investigation produce differences she tries to clarify throughout this that matter in the results. It helps book: her take on language. This is- to explain power relationships and sue has created a strong debate be- how they are entangled in bodies, tween some new materialists who 86 GJSS Vol 7, Issue 1 follow Barad’s agential realism and ism’. European Journal of Wom- some poststructuralists in feminist en’s Studies 15(1): 23-39 epistemology (see Ahmed 2008). It Barad, K. 2003. Post-humanist Perfor- is true that strong negative attributes mativity: Toward an Understand- attached to Language (with a capital ing of How Matter Comes to Mat- ter. Signs: Journal of Women in L) pervade her work. However, this Culture and Society. 28(3): 801- is focused on the erroneous con- 33. ception of language as a mediator Colebrook, C. 2008. On Not Becom- by representationalism (470, n. 41). ing Man: The Materialist Politics Instead, language is seen here as of Unactualized Potential. Stacy part of the apparatus (205); it is an- Alaimo and Susan Hekman (eds.), other entangled agency as impor- Material Feminisms. Bloomington tant as the rest in configuring the and Indianapolis: Indiana Univer- phenomena itself since matter and sity, pp. 52-84. meaning are always inseparable (as DeLanda, M. 2006. A New Philosophy highlighted by the subtitle of this vol- of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London ume). Thus, matter is made out and and New York: Continuum. understood through language and Sheridan, S. 2002: Words and Things: so is language for matter. Some Feminist Debates on Cul- This book is valuable not only for ture and Materialism. Australian understanding new materialist the- Feminist Studies. 17(37): 23-30 ory in general, but also for rethink- Van der Tuin, I. 2009: Jumping Genera- ing perceptions of dichotomies such tions: On Second- and Third-Wave as nature/culture, subject/object or Feminist Epistemology.” Austra- reality/representation. In addition, lian Feminist Studies 24(59): 17- it provides us with a new ontology 31. based on previous social and sci- entific theories. It is a move towards the present new paradigm which al- lows us to leave infinite paradoxical dichotomies which often (and es- pecially in posthumanist accounts) have stopped feminism, and social movements in general, in their politi- cal fight.

References:

Ahmed, S. 2008: Open Forum Imagi- nary Prohibitions: Some Prelimi- nary Remarks on the Founding Gestures of the ‘New Material-