The Mundane Matters
The Mundane Matters
复制标题
世俗的事情
DOI：
10.1111/j.1749-5687.2011.00145_2.x
复制
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
C. Enloe
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Enloe
从定义上看，“日常”似乎无关紧要。关注谁做早餐如何增加我们的分析能力？监控洗衣店如何让我们更深入地了解因果关系？当然，在电梯里或会议开始之前，把重要性放在闲聊上是对宝贵的智力能量的浪费。每天都是例行公事。这似乎并不例外。缺乏决策能力。似乎是政治前的。
很长一段时间，我没有注意到日常生活。我和其他人的关系--父母、朋友、同事、面试者--取决于我的日常生活与他们的日常生活的某种融合。但在我进行正式分析时，我没有想到要把它们拼出来。我认为我的任务是揭示权力的运作和后果，而这些运作将通过从世俗中脱颖而出来表现出来。如果这在我试图理解马来西亚的种族政治（我最初的研究）时是正确的，我想，当我开始研究国际政治的原因和后果时，这将更加正确。
我错了
正是女权主义分析家们让我看清了自己的错误，以及我在国际政治动态中所缺失的东西，他们天真地认为日常生活是前政治的，分析上微不足道，因果上没有重量。
20世纪末最著名的女权主义理论宣言是，“个人的是政治的。它的倡导者呼吁女性（以及任何有足够勇气的男性）关注他们生活中的日常动态，以发现父权制社会制度惊人的可持续性的原因。我们逐渐了解到，这一呼吁将对理解因果关系的流动、政治文化的构建以及我们简单地称之为“国家”的那些行为者之间相互锁定的关系结构产生深远的影响。该网站的研究，…
By definition, the “everyday” appears inconsequential. How could paying attention to who makes breakfast add to our analytical powers? How could monitoring laundry take us deeper into causality? Surely, assigning weight to casual chats in the elevator or before meetings begin would be a waste of precious intellectual energy. The everyday is routine. It is what appears to be unexceptional. Devoid of decision making. Seemingly pre-political.
For an embarrassingly long time, I didn't pay attention to the everyday. I, of course, lived it. My relationships with others—parents, friends, colleagues, interviewees—depended on my everyday routines somehow meshing with theirs. But I didn't think to spell them out when I engaged in formal analytical efforts. I presumed that my task was to reveal the workings of—and consequences of—power, and that those workings would manifest themselves by standing out from the mundane. If this were true in my attempts to understand ethnic politics in Malaysia (my initial research), it would be, I imagined, all the more true when I began to investigate the causes and consequences of international politics.
I was wrong.
It was feminist analysts who opened my eyes to how wrong I was and what exactly I was missing in the dynamics of international politics by naively imagining that the everyday was pre-political, analytically trivial, and causally weightless.
The most famous late twentieth-century feminist theoretical pronouncement is, “The personal is political.” Its crafters were calling on women (and any men who had sufficient nerve) to look to the everyday dynamics in their lives to discover the causes of patriarchal social systems’ remarkable sustainability. This call would have profound implications, we gradually learned, for understanding the flows of causality, the constructions of political cultures and the inter-locked structures of relationships between those actors we so simplistically call “states.” The sites for research, …