L’art de la composition florale, l’ikebana, se présente à l’observateur comme une installation éphémère dans un espace d’intenses circulations. Il se produit une relation dialogique toujours changeante entre des « Je » et des « Tu » — un « Je » et un « Tu » — et la « présence » d’un « entre », un « figural » sans figuration. Quand le « Je » est le maître Sôfû Teshigahara et le « Tu » son fils, le (...) cinéaste Hiroshi Teshigahara, l’installation entraîne la réalisation d’un film, Ikebana, tributaire des complexités liées à l’outil cinématographique — mouvements de la caméra, zooms. Le film achevé, permanent, est-il alors un « Cela », un objet fini, voire obsolète, ou peut-il rester un « Je » vivant susceptible de solliciter de nouveaux « Tu », dans une expérience de « pure vitalité »? The art of floral composition, the ikebana, presents itself to the observer like an ephemeral installation in a space of intense circulations. There is an ever-changing dialogical relationship between “I” and “You”—an “I” and a “You” —and the “presence” of an “in between”, a “figural” without figuration. When the “I” is the master Sôfû Teshigahara and the “You” his son, the filmmaker Hiroshi Teshigahara, the installation involves the making of a film, Ikebana, and the complexities related to the cinematographic tool—movements of the camera, zooms. Is the finished, permanent film then a “That”, a finite or even obsolete object, or can it remain a living “I” capable of soliciting new “You” in an experience of “pure vitality”? (shrink)

This book is framed as a dialogue, between Hugo Letiche's iconoclastic appeals to demontrate (as in a demo) for pedagogy/philosophy/politics of (re-)territoralization (as in the demos), and Jacques Rancière's call for dissensus and a new sensibility (le partage du sensible) that may lead to critical democratization. Writing here are: Asmund Born, Damian O'Doherty, Joanna Latimer, Hugo letiche, Geoff Lightfoot, Simon Lilley, Alphonso Lingis, Stephen Linstead, Garance Maréchal, Jean-Luc Moriceau, Rolland Munro, Rukmini Bhaya Nair, Peter pelzer, Yvon Pesqueux, Burkard Sievers, (...) Isabelle Stengers, and Niels Thyge Thygesen. The authors explore learning and education, research and investigation, writing and practice, in the context of organization and of organizing. They champion, affect, hope, poetic narrative, slow science, justice, the commons, engagement and fairness. (shrink)

This paper centers on a case study of CSR performativity during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the extant CSR literature, CSR performativity has focused on “walking the talk” and/or “talking the walk,” wherein narrative and action around CSR are typically treated as two different things with their relationships questioned. We focus on what has been called “t(w)alking” wherein speech is understood to be performative and wherein speech acts and CSR are merged, becoming one and the same thing. Performativity then entails what (...) is (and what is not) said, whereby CSR involves taking responsibility for speech and/or silences. Our thesis is that the COVID-19 pandemic led to the “presenting” of CSR as performativity, in the presence of Levinas' Other, as noble (speech) acts. We examine what became of CSR performativity in a for-profit medical services provider when the COVID-19 pandemic turned fatal for its main client group: the infirm elderly. The performativity of the statement: “The elderly and their carers must be protected” turned out to be crucial and set the stage for the provider's emergency action. Following on insights derived from Nietzsche and Levinas, and more specifically from their views on the particularity of ethical action, we find that CSR morphed into ethical performativity in the case study at hand. Against the backdrop of the views of these thinkers, the research potential of the performativity of “t(w)alking” in future CSR studies emerges and is critically discussed. (shrink)

Stephen Miller attempts to confute the idea that capitalist accumulation characterised the agriculture of the Île-de-France prior to the Revolution. Instead he tries to assimilate the agriculture of the north into theAnnalesmodel of neo-Malthusian agricultural cycles and Chayanovian subsistence economy which is supposedly characteristic of the Midi. I argue instead that the notion of a northern capitalist agriculture is rooted not only in the extensive modern research of Moriceau but in the political-economic writings of Turgot and Marx which have (...) been largely ignored. Accumulation in the sense of the growth of fixed and variable capital and emerging technological progress characterised northern agriculture. The persistence of small producers which Miller sees as an index of unchanging stasis might better be investigated in terms of the evolution over time of a reservoir of wage labour for larger-scale enterprises as pointed out by Kautsky. (shrink)