In this work of creative nonfiction, the researcher explores the political and philosophical implications of the case brought before the Supreme Court for the writ of Habeas Corpus to be extended to two chimpanzees. She connects the framing of this case, and its multiple failures across various levels of the US judicial system, to the way we popularly and philsophically understand personhood and animals. To do this, she explores assertions of both biologists and animal studies researchers as well as popular representations of animals in Hollywood cinema.
Issue
27Pagination
5 - 7Publisher
The Lifted BrowPlace of publication
Melbourne, Vic .ISSN
1835-5668Language
engResearch statement
Animal and critical animal studies are burgeoning fields of research that investigate the sociological, environmental, economic and affective relationships between the troublingly separated categories of 'human' and 'animal'. Some researchers in these fields focus on 'finding ways to tell, picture and follow the lives of animals in the global context of habitat loss, extinction and the animal industrial complex driven by capitalism' (Turner and Sellbach 2018 p.2). Others are concerned with the intersection of human/animal experience and the way each category necessarily constructs and reveals the other. Research in animal studies occurs across multiple modalities including science, humanities, and creative arts. Critical animal studies also emphasizes the connections between research and activism. In the creative arts, this means bringing the concepts and questions raised by animal studies into conversation with popular discourse around food politics, the utility of animal bodies in late capitalism including labour and kinship, and broader notions of personhood and agency. The two works in this portfolio the use the conceit of creative nonfiction and personal essay to 'do' animal studies for a general non-academic audience.
Doyle, B., 2015. What if the animal said no?. Lifted Brow, The, (27), pp.5-7.
In this work of creative nonfiction, the researcher explores the political and philosophical implications of the case brought before the Supreme Court for the writ of Habeas Corpus to be extended to two chimpanzees. She connects the framing of this case, and its multiple failures across various levels of the US judicial system, to the way we popularly and philsophically understand personhood and animals. To do this, she explores assertions of both biologists and animal studies researchers as well as popular representations of animals in Hollywood cinema.Publication classification
JO3.1 Original Creative Works ? Textual Work
