A Manolo y Maruchi 2 Index Acknowledgments …………………………………………………………... 9 Introduction 1. Research topic, objectives and research questions…………………… 11 2. Research motivations…………………………………………………….. 14 3. Methodological strategies ………………………………………………. 15 4. Structure of the thesis…………………………………………………… 17 Chapter 1. Drawing cartographies, building epistemologies 1.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………. 22 1.2. Feminist (in)visible alliances: the importance of methodological bridges between the Humanities and the Social Sciences…………………………………. 24 1.2.1. Writing a scholarly piece in between the Social Sciences and the Humanities………………………………………………………… 25 1.2.2. Conceptual and political benefits of such a methodological bridge… 27 1.3. From post-modernist paradoxes for literary studies to post-humanist and post- colonial contributions: mapping literary theory………………………………….. 28 1.4. Literature and feminism: an overview………………………………………… 33 1.5. Entangling literature, technology and feminism ………..…………………… 37 1.5.1. Cyberfeminism: going political through the social net……………. 39 3 1.5.2. Feminist Science and Technology Studies: How might we theorize bodies as lived and/or as socially situated? ……………………………………….. 41 1.5.3. Third wave feminism: reinforcing dichotomies? …………………….. 43 1.6. New materialism: third wave feminist epistemology…………………………… 45 1.6.1. New materialist conversations: engaging with the critiques. ………. 46 1.6.2. Putting new materialism to work: implications for the relation between Toni Morrison and Facebook. ……………………………………………… 49 1.7. Conclusions………………………………………………………………… 51 Chapter 2. Diffractive methodology: relating gendered fluxes 2.1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………. 53 2.2. Diffractive methodology……………………………………………………….. 54 2.3. Objective and research questions……………………………………………….. 56 2.4. Selecting the participants ……………………………………………………….. 57 2.4.1. Toni Morrison: performing feminist politics in the information society 58 2.4.2. Social Networking Sites: the case of Facebook………………………… 59 2.4.3. The intra-action between Toni Morrison and her Facebook page……… 60 2.5. The research process: the division of the methodology in this thesis …………. 62 2.5.1. Apparatus (chapter three)……………………………………………… 63 2.5.1.1. Methods used in this level ………………………………….. 65 2.5.2. Event (chapter four)…………………………………………………… 70 4 2.5.2.1. Methods used in this level…………………………………… 72 2.5.3. Phenomenon (chapter five)……………………………………………. 73 2.5.3.1. Methods used in this level …………………………………… 74 2.6. Conclusions………………………………………………………………… 75 Chapter 3. Approaching gender through feelings: researching on Toni Morrison’s Facebook page as apparatus 3.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 77 3.2. Gender: a new materialist approach………………………………………… 78 3.2.1. Gen(d)ering trouble: sexual difference and multiplicity…….…… 78 3.2.2. Relating selves: gender as a processual ontology………………… 82 3.3. Gender and race: affected intra-action……………………………………… 83 3.4. Creating boundaries: the debate on feelings as apparatus…………………... 84 3.4.1. Understanding the debate: context matters. Facebook as the intra-action between space and time………………………………………………… 92 3.4.2. Technologies of subjectivation: flow of the conversation, social conflicts, theories of gender……………………………………………………….. 95 3.4.3. Subject formation: presenting all the debates…………………….. 96 3.4.3.1. The analysis of the debates …………………………….. 97 3.4.3.2. Visualization of the relations ………………………. 142 5 3.5. Gender: a processual ontology of feminist new materialist politics in Morrison‘s official facebook page……………………………………………………………. 152 3.6. Conclusions………………………………………………………………… 155 Chapter 4. New materialist politics: understanding the political in Morrison’s work as an event 4.1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………….. 156 4.2. Feminist politics: new materialism …………………………………………. 157 4.2.1. Affinities instead of identities: enacting epistemological communities 158 4.2.2. From inter-sectionality to intra-relationality...................................... 161 4.2.3. Social networking and gender: a multiple space for agency ……… 164 4.3. Close reading of the novels: (un)doing otherness ……………………….. 165 4.3.1. The bluest eye ………………………………………………….. 166 4.3.2. Sula …………………………………………………………….. 170 4.3.3. Song of Solomon ………………………………………………….. 177 4.3.4. Tar Baby ………………………………………………………….. 179 4.3.5. Beloved …………………………………………………………… 189 4.3.6. Jazz ……………………………………………………………………….. 194 4.3.7. Paradise ……………………………………………………….. 201 4.3.8. Love ………………………………………………………………. 208 4.3.9. A mercy …………………………………………………………. 213 6 4.3.10. Home …………………………………………………………….. 218 4.4. The subject in the event: Toni Morrison‘s politics ……………………….. 223 4.5. Affecting feminist politics ………………………………………………… 240 4.6. Conclusions …………………………………………………………… 248 Chapter 5. Digitally engaging the literary: a new materialist conception of Toni Morrison’s literature. 5.1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 249 5.2. Affecting communication through social networking sites……………… 250 5.2.1. Passing through Facebook: neither windows, nor walls……….. 250 5.2.2. Digitalizing new materialisms…………………………………... 253 5.3. Feminist digital communication: encountering politics………………….. 255 5.4. Literary communication: en-mousing the pen…………………………….. 258 5.5. Communication matters: processing language……………………………. 261 5.6. Affecting language: the literary communicative process………………….. 274 5.7. Conclusions………………………………………………………………. 278 Chapter 6. Differing diffractive methodologies: diffracting different objects 6.1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………… 280 6.2. Queering causality: methodology as the object of study ………………… 281 7 6.3. Intra-action: relatings instead of relations …………………………………. 283 6.4. The researcher in the research: a must ……………………………………… 285 6.5. Starting with the novels: intra-acting queer causality ……………………… 287 6.5.1. Approaching the novels: materializing meaning through boundary making ……………………………………………………… …. 288 6.5.2. Diffracting novels and Facebook page: engendering politics ………. 293 6.5. The iterativeness of the apparatus: the entanglement between methodology and digital-literary communication……………………………………………………. 294 6.6. Conclusions ………………………………………………………………… 298 Processing conclusions 1. Main contributions …………………………………………………………… 300 2. Answering the research questions …………………………………………. 302 3. Limitations and future lines of research……………………………………. 308 4. Additional remarks ………………………………………………………. 30 Bibliographical references …………………………………………………… 309 8 Acknowledgements Once upon a time, in Santa Cruz (California) there was a lonely fish in a fish tank. Vincent, Ann and Pierce move the fish from the small one to the big one where many different fish were swimming in company. They did not know if the lonely fish was going to make it in the new fish tank, he could have been a cannibal fish and eat the rest, or could have not made it because he was used to the solitude. But they felt it was necessary and whole process to move him started that day and many different risks were taken. Vincent called that adventure “the fish who moved from Texas to Hawai”. A special thanks to them and Signe, for making my stay at USCS a perfect dream in this hard process. Now, looking back it seems that my thesis and I have taken all those risks and uncertain about our future, the only thing that we can do know is thanking all the people who have accompanied, helped and encouraged us to move from Huéscar to Barcelona, passing by Santa Cruz. After almost three years, I cannot retrieve when did this thesis start, or what was the activating motor, but for sure, this thesis has changed locations, nature, and materialize differently. Perhaps, a temptative beginning can be situated in Granada, when I was finishing my undergraduate degree. Adelina, who was my teacher of English Literature (and one of my thesis directors) encouraged me to do the GEMMA Master. She trusted in my ability as a researcher, and she pushed me into this academic life supporting me no matter what. During this master, lots of people watched my back and helped me in this difficult path, but one stands over the rest, Iris van der Tuin, she also knew from the very beginning that I was going to be a researcher and keeps on helping me nowadays. Then, the thesis started to happen, and I came to Barcelona to the IN3 with a helpful scholarship that allowed me to go on with my projects. Here I found my other thesis director, Mila. In spite of all the difficulties that we saw at the beginning, she never gave up and we have been translated each other to make of the thesis a pure hybrid for many different fields. The IN3 gave me academic and financial support, an incredible research team, GENTIC, and my PhD colleagues gave me time to relax and share fears, especially Ola, Niko, Krizia and Lidia. It also allowed me to meet Asun, who has treated me always like her daughter and Júlia and Eric who have always helped with a smile. 9 But the “green cube” was much more than that. There I found my best friend and the best colleague: Ana Rodera and Ana González. They never hesitated when drawing schemes in napkins was required, when circles with bic pens were necessary, and even more when only sitting in the stairs was a must. Besides, Ana González has taught me that the personal is always political and has been a mentor and a shoulder without ever asking anything in return. However, as for the fish, the location also mattered. I need to thank Huéscar for being one of the three retiring places when things were getting dark. And there