*CFP* "RADICAL VENTRILOQUISM: ACTS OF SPEAKING THROUGH AND SPEAKING FOR", CONFERENCE STREAM

Radical ventriloquism: Acts of speaking through and speaking for

Organisers: Lee Campbell and Christabel Harley

Conference stream as part of London critical thought conference, 

Goldsmiths, London

July 2019

'[V]entriloqual relationships can be utilized as a metaphor, perhaps a paradigm, for generating ideas and organising phenomena of key philosophical interest [...]. In an unbridled, personal anthropomorphism we speak for things, as if things were speaking to us, reading their meanings for us, in voices of their own which, are, at the same time, of course, only our altered voices dislocated. The ventriloquist’s audience becomes part of the total context of the act – a kind of witness and judge of the ventriloquist’s performance.' (Goldblatt, 2006)

Ventriloquism, in its most common usage, refers to a form of popular entertainment consisting of performers giving voice to inanimate objects through a careful interplay between what is heard and what is seen. The beginnings of ventriloquism can be cited in the jester’s sceptre. The jester gained power by not using his own voice. He spoke through the voice of his sceptre—a miniature representation of his own face. Similarly, ventriloquists speak through their puppets as a way of “distancing” themselves from criticism.

This stream explores expanded forms of ventriloquism and asks: ‘What may constitute a radical ventriloquism?’ and explores the possibilities of ‘radical ventriloquism’ and its potential as useful and applicable to enabling important discussions about what it may mean to ‘speak through’ and ‘speak for’ others/objects/things across a range of artistic/creative disciplines. Whilst recognising that ‘in Nietzsche’, as suggests David Goldblatt, ‘the artist allows certain forces which he designates at will, to move and speak through him.’, we particularly welcome submissions from individuals and groups from beyond arts and humanities. We are most interested to explore how, for example, a scientist would conceptualise ‘radical ventriloquism’?

Leading on from the previous quote, Goldblatt, in Art and ventriloquism usefully goes on to remind us that, ‘in Foucault, while certain persons speak for things (art and nature), persons also speak for other persons, those muted in the social Diaspora such as the mad, the poor, the sick, and the imprisoned.’ Disability is often presented and represented by abled-bodied medics and others. This aligns with Linda Alcoff’s assertion in The Problem of Speaking for Others (1992) that ‘privileged authors who speak on behalf of the oppressed is becoming increasingly criticized by members of those oppressed groups themselves’. In response, we invite papers that theorise, articulate and demonstrate how radical ventriloquism nudges at these crucial debates: ethics/politics of representation / giving voice to those ‘marginalised’.

We encourage submissions which question who gets to (and who should) speak for whom. We are most interested in receiving submissions that reflect upon how radical ventriloquism may be understood in critical pedagogy terms in relation to, for example, decolonizing the curriculum. 

What does it mean for a white person to be lecturing on postcolonial theory, a white man teaching feminism, or, as Calvin Thomas explores in Straight with a Twist (1999), a straight man lecturing on queer theory?

Complete call for papers.

Please send 250 word submissions to paper-subs@londoncritical.org. by March 25th 2019