Biopolítica de uns, biopotência de outros e biofuturo em Maddaddão, de Margaret Atwood
Thinking about the future against what the matrix of colonial power plans/planned is to think about multiplicities, freedoms and the deconstruction of ideas that capture subjectivities, building plural and diverse futures. The work of the writer Margaret Atwood (1939, Ottawa, Canada) is important fo...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | tesis de maestría |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal da Paraíba (UFPB) |
| Repositorio: | Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UFPB |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.ufpb.br:123456789/22405 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://repositorio.ufpb.br/jspui/handle/123456789/22405 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Margaret Atwood História Biofuturo MaddAddão History Biofuture MaddAddam CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::HISTORIA |
| Sumario: | Thinking about the future against what the matrix of colonial power plans/planned is to think about multiplicities, freedoms and the deconstruction of ideas that capture subjectivities, building plural and diverse futures. The work of the writer Margaret Atwood (1939, Ottawa, Canada) is important for this discussion, as in her MaddAddam trilogy (2003, 2010, 2013), as well as in all her written production, she decolonizes the discourses and practices, including the multiple experiences, powers, potencies and manipulations. It directs us to (re)signify the idea/concept/speech of the future, considering that this has been, throughout human history, seen as something too invisible or too grand to be achieved and, therefore, only expected, desired. Knowing the trajectory of Margaret Atwood makes it possible to know about her desires for social change, as she criticizes what is already established as normal and presents new worlds in literature, created by her interpretations of the experiences lived by her and others to open wide, in the present, the pains produced by projects of the past, with the intention of creating open futures and not ends of the world. Therefore, authors like Mignolo (2008; 2017), Walsh (2005), Minois, (2016), Silva (2011), Krenak (2019; 2020); Heilbronter (1963), Gaddis (2003), Freitas (2018), Berardi (2019), Attalli (2008) are essentials. Disobeying a northern epistemology that regulates and plans academic minds and discourses, I think of the union between history and the future as a possible and necessary path for the construction of a biofuture that understands futures, subjectivities and lives as worthy of being lived and experienced, beyond biopolitical commands (FOUCAULT, 1987, 1999, 2008a, 2008b; AGAMBEM, 2004; PELBART, 2011), as becoming, (bio)potency, crowd, place of escape, good meetings (DELEUZE, 1992; HARDT and NEGRI , 2005). Biofuturating is believing in worlds, creating new paths, postponing the ends of so many others. |
|---|