Lonely Stardust: Two Plays, a Speech, and Eight Essays by Andrea Hairston (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Andrea Hairston, Lonely Stardust: Two Plays, a Speech, and Eight Essays. Seattle: Aqueduct Press, 2014. 344pp. US$16.89 (pbk).Andrea Hairston's collection compiles her plays Hummingbird Flying Backward and Lonely Stardust with her Guest of Honour Speech at WisCon 36 and her essays on recent sf films like Source Code (Jones US/Canada 2011), Strange Days (Bigelow US 1995), WALL-E (Stanton US 2008), King Kong (Jackson NZ/US/Germany 2005), District 9 (Blomkamp South Africa/Canada/US/ New Zealand 2009) and Pan's Labyrinth (del Toro Mexico/Spain/USA 2006), and on Octavia E. Butler's oeuvre. Employing a hybrid mixture of voices, registers and sources, Hairston's essays cover a wide-ranging archive that draws illuminating transdisciplinary connections across the fields of literature, film, performance, theatre, popular criticism and scholarly critique. While her plays at times reflect a bit too much of an underlying academic orientation (an aesthetic expression overly intertwined with and explicitly reflective of critical discourse and theory), taken together with her speech and in conversation with these essays they work to help flesh out a larger, more complex mixture of aesthetic and critical discourses that provides valuable insight into the films and literature Hairston analyses, as well as her own creative process and aims.On the surface, Hairston's book might be mistaken for a collection of disparate works that do not quite cohere into a whole, particularly given the inclusion of her plays and speech after her essays and the broad, unruly scope of varied works that they cover. It is not difficult to imagine defenders of academic (and sf ) orthodoxy chafing at the heretical mixture of scholarly, poetic and autobiographical voices alongside irreverent, humorous, informal registers. This intermingling occurs not just across the various pieces but within them as well. Hairston freely mixes critical analysis and autobiography with poetic 'riffing' on the fascist tendencies of the 'American Capitalist Wasteland', while throwing films like WALL-E and Metropolis (Lang Germany 1927) up against the antirealist theatre of Capek 's R.U.R. and Brecht's estrangement techniques in a queer Marxist reading of WALL-E - or Brecht's The Good Person of Setzuan and performance artist Sarah Jones's one-woman show, Waking the American Dream, up against Strange Days.In many ways, though, it is the brief essay 'Heretical Connectedness' that is key to this complex, wide-ranging collection. The essay is Hairston's shortest here and, perhaps at first glance, the most difficult to contextualise among the other texts in the book. Where Hairston's other essays focus in-depth feminist and critical race theory analyses on sf films and on Butler's fiction, 'Heretical Connectedness' mounts a science-oriented defence of Lynn Margulis's science treatise, Symbiotic Planet (A New Look at Evolution), and the Gaia theory of symbiosis and mutualism that it forwards. At the core of Hairston's politicoaesthetic project is precisely the kind of symbiotic mutualism for which Margulis argues. And as the title of this short but packed piece implies, embracing such a symbiotic approach, both in science and aesthetics, is heretical. This is not just because such an embracing runs against the grain of compartmentalisation and specialisation but because of the disavowed connectedness it reveals in systems of interlocking oppressions. The title of 'Heretical Connectedness', then, is actually redundant. For - as Hairston argues through analyses of films, plays, novels, critical receptions of aesthetic works, and even moments of interaction with others in her own life, in the context of an empire of 'American Capitalist Wasteland' and white male heteronormativity that is 'invisified' through universalist mechanisms of normalisation which seek to disavow and erase difference and connection - connectedness is heretical.And this is the book 's real aim and organising principle: to mount a heretical, estranging argument for symbiotic connectedness that, as Hairston repeats in different contexts, reveals by concealing. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».