'I wasn't angry, because I couldn't believe it was happening': affect and discourse in responses to 9/11

Solomon, T. (2012) 'I wasn't angry, because I couldn't believe it was happening': affect and discourse in responses to 9/11. Review of International Studies, 38(4), pp. 907-928. (doi: 10.1017/S0260210511000519)

Full text not currently available from Enlighten.

Abstract

While the recent interest in affects and emotions in world politics is encouraging, the crucial relationships between affect, emotion, and discourse have remained largely under-examined. This article offers a framework for understanding the relations between affect and discourse by drawing upon the theories of Jacques Lacan. Lacan conceptualises affect as an experience which lies beyond the realm of discourse, yet nevertheless has an effect upon discourse. Emotion results when affects are articulated within discourse as recognisable signifiers. In addition, Lacanian theory conceptualises affect and discourse as overlapping yet not as coextensive, allowing analyses to theoretically distinguish between discourses which become sites of affective investment for audiences and those that do not. Thus, analysing the mutual infusion of affect and discourse can shed light on why some discourses are more politically efficacious than others. The empirical import of these ideas is offered in an analysis of American affective reactions to 11 September 2001.

Item Type:Articles
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Solomon, Dr Ty
Authors: Solomon, T.
College/School:College of Social Sciences > School of Social and Political Sciences > Politics
Journal Name:Review of International Studies
Publisher:Cambridge University Press
ISSN:0260-2105
ISSN (Online):1469-9044

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record