The not-yet - Revision history

Hd-onions at 09:07, 12 April 2022

2022-04-12T09:07:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:07, 12 April 2022
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<span class="author">Frans-Willem Korsten</span>		<span class="author">Frans-Willem Korsten</span>

	''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br>		<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for.</div>

	It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of <br>a ‘transformative practice’.		It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of <br>a ‘transformative practice’.

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-11T08:09:07Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:09, 11 April 2022
Line 29:		Line 29:
	of making a work of art that would manifest an alternative reality, they decided to focus on the existing present. Obviously, this did not imply that they accepted everything the present had to offer. In fact, some of the contributors found out that the meat industry was even more abysmal than they had previously thought. For all participants, the project consisted of a collective pedagogical endeavour: <br>a process of learning together, sharing knowledge, and considering different forms of imagining futures that would do justice to both the present and the future.</div>		of making a work of art that would manifest an alternative reality, they decided to focus on the existing present. Obviously, this did not imply that they accepted everything the present had to offer. In fact, some of the contributors found out that the meat industry was even more abysmal than they had previously thought. For all participants, the project consisted of a collective pedagogical endeavour: <br>a process of learning together, sharing knowledge, and considering different forms of imagining futures that would do justice to both the present and the future.</div>

	In this light, Donna Haraway’s ''A Cyborg Manifesto'' from 1985 still holds its force. In this manifesto, Haraway proposed an alternative future. The distinction between manifesto and utopia is pivotal here, in terms of function, style, and aim. The manifesto provoked its readers not so much to think of possible futures but to conceive of a better future as a possibility in the present. Like Marx and Engels, Haraway insisted ‘that possibilities for better worlds are born inside not outside the present relations of domination’.<ref>Kathi Weeks, ‘The Critical Manifesto: Marx and Engels, Haraway, and Utopian Politics’, ''Utopian Studies'' 24, no. 2 (2013), pp. 216–31, p. 225.</ref> This is why the potential of a collective that Haraway provocatively located in the cyborg is ‘fully implicated in the world’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s’, ''Socialist Review'' 80 (1985), pp. 65–107, p. 95.</ref> Or, again, instead of fleeing towards the future on the basis of a fictive blueprint, real improvement is only possible if people consciously ‘inhabit the despised place’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘Nature, Politics, and Possibilities: A Debate and Discussion with David Harvey and Donna Haraway’, ''Environment and Planning D: Society and Space'' 13 (1995), pp. 507–27, p. 514.</ref> Or, it is within an existing mode of production where the potential for a better world lingers, not as an ideal but within the material givens of that very world, and in the nigh inexhaustible potential embodied in life as ''zoë'' (<mark class="c2">zoöp</mark> and <mark class="c4">zoönomy</mark>).		In this light, Donna Haraway’s ''A Cyborg Manifesto'' from 1985 still holds its force. In this manifesto, Haraway proposed an alternative future. The distinction between manifesto and utopia is pivotal here, in terms of function, style, and aim. The manifesto provoked its readers not so much to think of possible futures but to conceive of a better future as a possibility in the present. Like Marx and Engels, Haraway insisted ‘that possibilities for better worlds are born inside not outside the present relations of domination’.<ref>Kathi Weeks, ‘The Critical Manifesto: Marx and Engels, Haraway, and Utopian Politics’, ''Utopian Studies'' 24, no. 2 (2013), pp. 216–31, p. 225.</ref> This is why the potential of a collective that Haraway provocatively located in the cyborg is ‘fully implicated in the world’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s’, ''Socialist Review'' 80 (1985), pp. 65–107, p. 95.</ref> Or, again, instead of fleeing towards the future on the basis of a fictive blueprint, real improvement is only possible if people consciously ‘inhabit the despised place’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘Nature, Politics, and Possibilities: <br>
			A Debate and Discussion with David Harvey and Donna Haraway’, ''Environment and Planning D: Society and Space'' 13 (1995), pp. 507–27, p. 514.</ref> Or, it is within an existing mode of production where the potential for a better world lingers, not as an ideal but within the material givens of that very world, and in the nigh inexhaustible potential embodied in life as ''zoë'' (<mark class="c2">zoöp</mark> and <mark class="c4">zoönomy</mark>).

	<span class="page-break"> </span>		<span class="page-break"> </span>

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-10T16:27:10Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:27, 10 April 2022
Line 29:		Line 29:
	of making a work of art that would manifest an alternative reality, they decided to focus on the existing present. Obviously, this did not imply that they accepted everything the present had to offer. In fact, some of the contributors found out that the meat industry was even more abysmal than they had previously thought. For all participants, the project consisted of a collective pedagogical endeavour: <br>a process of learning together, sharing knowledge, and considering different forms of imagining futures that would do justice to both the present and the future.</div>		of making a work of art that would manifest an alternative reality, they decided to focus on the existing present. Obviously, this did not imply that they accepted everything the present had to offer. In fact, some of the contributors found out that the meat industry was even more abysmal than they had previously thought. For all participants, the project consisted of a collective pedagogical endeavour: <br>a process of learning together, sharing knowledge, and considering different forms of imagining futures that would do justice to both the present and the future.</div>

	In this light, Donna Haraway’s ''A Cyborg Manifesto'' from 1985 still holds its force. In this manifesto, Haraway proposed an alternative future. The distinction between manifesto and utopia is pivotal here, in terms of function, style, and aim. The manifesto provoked its readers not so much to think of possible futures but to conceive of a better future as a possibility in the present. Like Marx and Engels, Haraway insisted ‘that possibilities for better worlds are born inside not outside the present relations of domination’.<ref>Kathi Weeks, ‘The Critical Manifesto: Marx and Engels, Haraway, and Utopian Politics’, ''Utopian Studies'' 24, no. 2 (2013), pp. 216–31, p. 225.</ref> This is why the potential of a collective that Haraway provocatively located in the cyborg is ‘fully implicated in the world’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s’, ''Socialist Review'' 80 (1985), pp. 65–107, p. 95.</ref> Or, again, instead of fleeing towards the future on the basis of a fictive blueprint, real improvement is only possible if people consciously ‘inhabit the despised place’.<ref>~~<span id="donna-haraway-nature-politics-and-possibilities-a-debate-and-discussion-with-david-harvey-and-donna-haraway-environment-and-planning-d-society-and-space-13-1995-pp.-50727-p.-514."></span>~~		In this light, Donna Haraway’s ''A Cyborg Manifesto'' from 1985 still holds its force. In this manifesto, Haraway proposed an alternative future. The distinction between manifesto and utopia is pivotal here, in terms of function, style, and aim. The manifesto provoked its readers not so much to think of possible futures but to conceive of a better future as a possibility in the present. Like Marx and Engels, Haraway insisted ‘that possibilities for better worlds are born inside not outside the present relations of domination’.<ref>Kathi Weeks, ‘The Critical Manifesto: Marx and Engels, Haraway, and Utopian Politics’, ''Utopian Studies'' 24, no. 2 (2013), pp. 216–31, p. 225.</ref> This is why the potential of a collective that Haraway provocatively located in the cyborg is ‘fully implicated in the world’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s’, ''Socialist Review'' 80 (1985), pp. 65–107, p. 95.</ref> Or, again, instead of fleeing towards the future on the basis of a fictive blueprint, real improvement is only possible if people consciously ‘inhabit the despised place’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘Nature, Politics, and Possibilities: A Debate and Discussion with David Harvey and Donna Haraway’, ''Environment and Planning D: Society and Space'' 13 (1995), pp. 507–27, p. 514.</ref> Or, it is within an existing mode of production where the potential for a better world lingers, not as an ideal but within the material givens of that very world, and in the nigh inexhaustible potential embodied in life as ''zoë'' (<mark class="c2">zoöp</mark> and <mark class="c4">zoönomy</mark>).
	Donna Haraway, ‘Nature, Politics, and Possibilities: A Debate and Discussion with David Harvey and Donna Haraway’, ''Environment and Planning D: Society and Space'' 13 (1995), pp. 507–27, p. 514.
	</ref> Or, it is within an existing mode of production where the potential for a better world lingers, not as an ideal but within the material givens of that very world, and in the nigh inexhaustible potential embodied in life as ''zoë'' (<mark class="c2">zoöp</mark> and <mark class="c4">zoönomy</mark>).

	<span class="page-break"> </span>		<span class="page-break"> </span>

Hd-onions at 15:00, 10 April 2022

2022-04-10T15:00:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:00, 10 April 2022
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<span class="author">Frans-Willem Korsten</span>		<span class="author">Frans-Willem Korsten</span>

	~~<div class="no-indent">~~''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br~~></div~~>		''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br>

	It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of <br>a ‘transformative practice’.		It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of <br>a ‘transformative practice’.

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-08T11:14:40Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:14, 8 April 2022
Line 27:		Line 27:
	<div class="no-indent">		<div class="no-indent">
	When the Meat Free City collective accepted its task <br>		When the Meat Free City collective accepted its task <br>
	of making a work of art that would manifest an alternative reality, they decided to focus on the existing present. Obviously, this did not imply that they accepted everything the present had to offer. In fact, some of the contributors found out that the meat industry was even more abysmal than they had previously thought. For all participants, the project consisted of a collective pedagogical endeavour: a process of learning together, sharing knowledge, and considering different forms of imagining futures that would do justice to both the present and the future.</div>		of making a work of art that would manifest an alternative reality, they decided to focus on the existing present. Obviously, this did not imply that they accepted everything the present had to offer. In fact, some of the contributors found out that the meat industry was even more abysmal than they had previously thought. For all participants, the project consisted of a collective pedagogical endeavour: <br>a process of learning together, sharing knowledge, and considering different forms of imagining futures that would do justice to both the present and the future.</div>

	In this light, Donna Haraway’s ''A Cyborg Manifesto'' from 1985 still holds its force. In this manifesto, Haraway proposed an alternative future. The distinction between manifesto and utopia is pivotal here, in terms of function, style, and aim. The manifesto provoked its readers not so much to think of possible futures but to conceive of a better future as a possibility in the present. Like Marx and Engels, Haraway insisted ‘that possibilities for better worlds are born inside not outside the present relations of domination’.<ref>Kathi Weeks, ‘The Critical Manifesto: Marx and Engels, Haraway, and Utopian Politics’, ''Utopian Studies'' 24, no. 2 (2013), pp. 216–31, p. 225.</ref> This is why the potential of a collective that Haraway provocatively located in the cyborg is ‘fully implicated in the world’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s’, ''Socialist Review'' 80 (1985), pp. 65–107, p. 95.</ref> Or, again, instead of fleeing towards the future on the basis of a fictive blueprint, real improvement is only possible if people consciously ‘inhabit the despised place’.<ref><span id="donna-haraway-nature-politics-and-possibilities-a-debate-and-discussion-with-david-harvey-and-donna-haraway-environment-and-planning-d-society-and-space-13-1995-pp.-50727-p.-514."></span>		In this light, Donna Haraway’s ''A Cyborg Manifesto'' from 1985 still holds its force. In this manifesto, Haraway proposed an alternative future. The distinction between manifesto and utopia is pivotal here, in terms of function, style, and aim. The manifesto provoked its readers not so much to think of possible futures but to conceive of a better future as a possibility in the present. Like Marx and Engels, Haraway insisted ‘that possibilities for better worlds are born inside not outside the present relations of domination’.<ref>Kathi Weeks, ‘The Critical Manifesto: Marx and Engels, Haraway, and Utopian Politics’, ''Utopian Studies'' 24, no. 2 (2013), pp. 216–31, p. 225.</ref> This is why the potential of a collective that Haraway provocatively located in the cyborg is ‘fully implicated in the world’.<ref>Donna Haraway, ‘A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s’, ''Socialist Review'' 80 (1985), pp. 65–107, p. 95.</ref> Or, again, instead of fleeing towards the future on the basis of a fictive blueprint, real improvement is only possible if people consciously ‘inhabit the despised place’.<ref><span id="donna-haraway-nature-politics-and-possibilities-a-debate-and-discussion-with-david-harvey-and-donna-haraway-environment-and-planning-d-society-and-space-13-1995-pp.-50727-p.-514."></span>

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-08T11:13:07Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:13, 8 April 2022
Line 4:		Line 4:
	<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br></div>		<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br></div>

	It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.		It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of <br>a ‘transformative practice’.

	===1. making a case for an alternative future===		===1. making a case for an alternative future===

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-08T11:11:21Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:11, 8 April 2022
Line 4:		Line 4:
	<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br></div>		<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br></div>

	It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref~~><br~~>If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.		It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.

	===1. making a case for an alternative future===		===1. making a case for an alternative future===

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-08T11:09:23Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:09, 8 April 2022
Line 3:		Line 3:

	<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br></div>		<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br></div>
	It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> <br>
	If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.		It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref><br>If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.

	===1. making a case for an alternative future===		===1. making a case for an alternative future===

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-08T11:00:04Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:00, 8 April 2022
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<span class="author">Frans-Willem Korsten</span>		<span class="author">Frans-Willem Korsten</span>

	<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br>		<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br></div>
	It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> <br>		It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> <br>
	If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.~~</div>~~		If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.

	===1. making a case for an alternative future===		===1. making a case for an alternative future===

Hd-onions: /* the not-yet */

2022-04-08T10:58:21Z

the not-yet

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:58, 8 April 2022
Line 3:		Line 3:

	<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br>		<div class="no-indent">''The not-yet'' is an intentionally anti-utopian attitude and mode of practice that anticipates future developments by realizing the potential in and of the ‘now’. As philosopher Hans Achterhuis noted, all utopian projects in a sense reject the present, or consider it as something to be destroyed in order to make way for the new.<ref>Hans Achterhuis, ''Utopie'' (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2006); ''Koning van Utopia: Nieuw licht op het utopisch denken'' (Rotterdam: Lemniscaat, 2016).</ref> The not-yet, instead, suggests that a future is already here, as a potential to be found and cared for. <br>
	It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.</div>		It considers ‘an effort to collectively inhabit alternative imaginaries’. Instead of destroying the present, it aims to interrupt present conditions in order to ''learn''.<ref>Cf. Jeanne van Heeswijk, Maria Hlavajova and Rachael Rakes, eds., ''Toward the Not-yet: Art as Public Practice'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2021), p. 14.</ref> <br>
			If anything, the not-yet is a matter of a ‘transformative practice’.</div>

	===1. making a case for an alternative future===		===1. making a case for an alternative future===