Through my investigation, I expose the multiple layers of Kurdish cinema constructed by Kurdish films and directors, by academics working on Kurdish cinema, by Kurdish institutions, and by... Show moreThrough my investigation, I expose the multiple layers of Kurdish cinema constructed by Kurdish films and directors, by academics working on Kurdish cinema, by Kurdish institutions, and by contemporary artists. By employing a content analysis of films in Kurdish languages, identifying Kurdish directors as agents of history making, and investigating attempts to institutionalize Kurdish cinema, I address the Kurdish presupposition of equality to act in an aesthetic regime of art. I structure my research under three chapters: ‘A Foundation of Kurdish National Cinema’, ‘A Re-interpretation of Kurdish Trauma’, and ‘An Aesthetic Regime of Kurdishness’. Based on the detailed discussion, across these three chapters, of national cinema, the art of the un-representable, and digital revolution, I aim to reveal the necessity of exploring the aesthetics regime of Kurdishness in audio-visual terms, in order to articulate the subjectification processes leading to an ethical community in the name of Rancièrian democratic politics.I posit cinema as a home for the communicative act that will empower speech and thought for the Kurdish social body. It does so by folding the future into the present through an aesthetic regime of imperfect, mobile audio-visual assemblages. Show less
The last ten years has seen the rise of populist forces across the globe from both the right and the left. While often read in the context of the perceived rise of, and reactions to populist and... Show moreThe last ten years has seen the rise of populist forces across the globe from both the right and the left. While often read in the context of the perceived rise of, and reactions to populist and potentially violent Islam, this analysis is excessively focused on observations of the right, and ignores similarities between the populist right and the populist left. By way of an alternative, this article draws together political theology, original ethnography and observations of contemporary politics in the United Kingdom (and to a lesser extent the United States and Canada) to offer a broader lens involving: the rise of liberalism, the consequent construction of politics as technocratic management, and the neglect and resultant disillusionment of ordinary people. In particular, the paper draws on my recent research on the role of myths of solidarity in developing civic engagement. It argues that myths of solidarity have been undermined by the rise of liberalism, and that restoring such myths to the center of contemporary politics is vital to challenging the myths of division that fuel populist politics. Finally, it explores possibilities for restoring myths to the center of contemporary politics, suggesting that while avenues for such reform are emerging, politics as technocratic management remains the dominant paradigm. Show less
