This paper is a call for educators to respond to the problematics that arise from reducing the Earth to a resource for human activities. The concept of ‘Anthropocene’ is a burning invitation to rethink education by putting the human to its place. We therefore argue for a spatial-embodied conceptualization of learning, which involves the more-than-human and nonrepresentational. In this effort, we use Latour’s concept of ‘geostory’ to problematize the prevailing anthropocentrism in education. We discuss the power of experimentation by introducing (...) a learning experiment that took place at a pop-up greenhouse in Helsinki. The idea was to encourage upper secondary geography students to playfully discard their human perspective and study the city from the viewpoint of plants: to probe the presumed human/nature divide through brief but moving encounters with ‘others’. We argue that through affective encounters with nonhuman others, the Earth speaks: it tells stories with us. If humans let themselves be addressed by these encounters, geostories can temporarily re-place human-centred narrative storytelling practices (histories), voiced by the modernist ‘I’, and generate alternative forms of knowledge that emerge from our belonging together. These stories emerging from geographical experimentation entail potential to cultivate both knowing and care that exceed the human. (shrink)

In recent years, the concept of debility has gained a lot of attention. In critical theory and in the critical medical humanities, the concept has come to refer specifically to the general ill-health of ordinary lives under neoliberal capitalism; as such, it has triggered a surge of interest in large-scale affective assemblages that incapacitate multitudes of bodies. This article proposes _neoliberal misfit_ as a conceptual tool to remedy the dissolution of subjectivity in these discussions. Pushing back against Jasbir Puar specifically, (...) it argues that processes of debilitation produce a particular type of subject formation often ignored in this body of work. The article does so by distinguishing this subject formation in three contemporary illness narratives that dramatize encounters between ill bodies and accelerating rhythms, competitive atmospheres, and mobile attachments, respectively. Ultimately, the aim is to help the critical medical humanities capture how neoliberal environments affect the self-perception of people suffering from ill-health. (shrink)

Concentrating on the way in which new materialist authors like Jane Bennett have read and appropriated the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze, this essay has two major objectives: first, it aims to point out the shortcomings of the new materialism's concept of the political. Second, it seeks to investigate the differences and affinities between neomaterialist thought and Deleuze's philosophy. While Deleuze's focus on material becomings and concrete assemblages certainly lends itself to being utilised by neomaterialist authors, what many of these authors (...) tend to ignore is the Marxian influence in Deleuze's thinking. It would be misleading, then, to see Deleuze as a new materialist avant la lettre, thereby implying that he categorically dismissed the ‘old’ materialism. Rather, what is unique about Deleuze's philosophy is its combination of a Marxist understanding of modes of production and their material conditions with a social ontology – inspired, among others, by Spinoza and Tarde – that emphasises the complex intermingling of human and non-human actors. (shrink)