EDITORIAL

Mobilities

Chris Healy1, Katrina Schlunke2

1 School of Culture and Communication, University of Melbourne, Parkville VIC 3010, Australia

2 Department of Gender and Cultural Studies, School of Philopsophical and History Inquiry, University of Sydney NSW 2006, Australia

Cultural Studies Review, Vol. 23, No. 1, March 2017

© 2017 by the author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.

Citation: Healy, C. & Schlunke, K. 2017. Mobilities. Cultural Studies Review, 23:01, 01-02. http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/csr.v23i1.5493

ISSN 1837-8692 | Published by UTS ePRESS | http://csrj.epress.lib.uts.edu.au

Corresponding author: Chris Healy, School of Culture and Communication, University of Melbourne, Parkville VIC 3010, Australia. clhealy@unimelb.edu.au

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/csr.v23i1.5493

Article History: Received 15/03/2017; Revised 20/03/2017; Accepted 30/03/2017; Published 15/05/2017

This issue of Cultural Studies Review features a number of outstanding essays and a special section concerned with ‘Media, Mobilities and Identity in East and Southeast Asia’. Ben Highmore’s essay is a future directed and poetic evocation of a more peripatetic cultural studies. Although he re-stages the serendipity of wandering, Highmore also wants to return to familiar places. The ‘Birmingham’ of this piece is one that he hopes is foreign and unfinished. It’s a compelling exploration because it addresses a need to locate collective resources that might help build emotional and practical bulwarks against instrumentality. It’s also an essay arising from an engagement with everydayness which hopes to explore how that particularity might connect with other imaginaries and open up forms of generality and connection. In this sense, the resonance of peripatetic calls up the non-institutionalised meanderings of activists, non-human actants and the precariat that also enliven cultural studies.

The research that underpins Jessica Kean’s article began from a focus on the ‘practices, politics and philosophies’ of non-monogamy. Here she seeks to supplement that initial interest by turning her attention to what Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick describes as the ‘texture’; the materialised encounters with particular worlds and the stories we tell, of being in the world. In this light, non-monogamous relationships seem less about the absence of monogamy or challenges to the normative structures of monogamy or even movement between an ensemble of people, but rather a broader and richer palate of everyday experience that’s fractured and unified in surprising ways. Her emphasis on texture rather than the more-than-single, or perhaps the ‘more-than-single’ as one part of non-monogamy provides a far more materialising and emplacing idea of non-monogamy.

Elspeth Probyn’s essay, ‘How to Represent a Fish?’ is, in her own words, a ‘thought experiment’. For some readers, this will seem like a classical essay in cultural studies that pluralises and relativises fish, foregrounds questions of epistemology and representation, explores the more-than-human and ponders various conceptualisations of specific fish-in-ecologies. While those concerns are addressed in the piece, there is also a constant and understandably urgent interest in sustainability. It seems to us that the implicit and challenging question posed by the article is this: if the cultural imaginary of the ocean as a clean and free space offering unlimited opportunities for pleasurable and profitable exploitation is instead a domain under severe threat from the despoliation of both extraction and pollution, how can cultural studies produce new and specific knowledges and ways of working with other disciplines that might make a difference?

With a special section on media and mobilities, it’s hard to resist the temptation to offer editorial remarks on Trump and Brexit as what, in Anglophone media, appear like the two most immediate and politically relevant cultural manifestations of such issues. But the essays that are ably introduced by Dan Edwards, Louis Ho and Seokhun Choi make a strong case for thinking about East and Southeast Asia as offering insights on longer term questions of mobility and cultures.

As always there’s also a fine set of reviews here. We invite you to share Sue Kneebone’s nuanced appreciation of the Wanarn painters and consider the many histories of suicide alongside Rob Cover. Åse Ottosson makes us consider the ways in which Aboriginal voice is creating unique forms of relatedness while T.E. Woronov explores the new order of political consciousness emerging from ‘subaltern China’ and Jennifer Mae Hamilton re-examines the claim to make ‘kin’ rather than babies in a multi-species time.

Enjoy!

DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. FUNDING The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.