Search results

Michael Brown argues that what unites the human and social sciences is their evolving character, made explicit in the concepts of “reflexivity,” “course of activity,” and “theorizing.” Once the social sciences are taken as a whole, the notion of “sociality” will allow to grasp society as ever changing, as a becoming. I shall examine the notion of sociality in the literary criticism of Lukács, Goldmann, and Adorno, three authors who consider the essay as the adequate open form of critique in times of rapid social change. Originally adopted by the young Lukács, the essay tended to be abandoned by him when elaborating the concept of critical or socialist realism as a repository of timeless cultural values. In his studies in the European realist or the soviet novel, for example, on Balzac, Stendhal, Thomas Mann, or Solzhenitsyn, the dialectical concept of social totality becomes a sum of orientations, presenting the individual writer with the moral task to choose “progress” and discard “negativity.” The social is thus narrowed to individual choice. Different from Lukács, Goldmann's literary theory defines cultural production as a matter of the social group, the transindividual subject. Goldmann was deeply marked by Lukács's early writings from which he gained notably the notion of tragedy and the concept of maximum possible consciousness—the world vision of a social group which structures the work of a writer. Cultural creation is resistance to capitalist society, as evident in the literature of absence, Malraux's novels, and the nouveau roman. In the writings of Adorno the social is lodged within the avant-garde, provided that one takes its means and procedures literally, e.g., the writings of Kafka. By formal innovation—among others the adoption of the essay, the small form, the fragment—art exercises criticism of the ongoing rationalization process and preserves the possibility of change (p. 319).

This article considers the ethical and political significance of mindfulness by treating it as a pedagogy – that is, as a way of cultivating particular human capacities in response to a specific situation. It puts forward an approach for evaluating its implications not by recourse to a predetermined moral meter, but by locating it within specific historical and geographical contexts as mediated biographically by individual teachers.

Drawing on Edward Said's concept of “traveling theory”, this article proposes an approach called “travelling pedagogy” that sensitises the researcher to how the interplay of temporal, spatial, and biographical factors shape reiterations of any pedagogy. It then uses this conceptual framework to explore how mindfulness has been taught by three of its prominent proponents: Thich Nhat Hanh, Jon Kabat-Zinn, and bell hooks.

The exploration of how mindfulness has been taught by the three prominent teachers featured in this article demonstrates how its ethico-political implications transform under varied conditions of urgency faced by these teachers, respectively: war and militarisation; scientific legitimacy; racialised and gendered capitalism. This points to how a historical approach might add nuance to the discussions and debates on mindfulness beyond overgeneralised hype on the one hand, and sweeping “McMindfulness” critiques on the other.

This article proposes a new conceptual framework for evaluating the ethical and political significance of mindfulness – and indeed any form of pedagogy – by tracking it at the nexus of history, geography, and biography. By conceiving of mindfulness as a travelling pedagogy, it also counsels a more worldly consideration of its implications beyond beatific celebration and patrician contempt.