I most recently saw Adriana in Verona, where I presented a paper and spoke to her about how this edited collection was progressing. As ever, she was supportive and encouraging, expressing her happiness and gratefulness at how the project was developing, humbly asking for feedback on her contributions and taking seriously the few substantive comments I had. As we walked back into town from the university, she bought me a gelato, and I asked about her politicization as a young person. Her earliest memories of being politically engaged involved the internal migration of southern Italians to the Northern industrial city of Turin during her teenage years in the 1960s and her activism resisting the racism that confronted them. Since then she has been involved in a number of political projects, most notably in Italian feminist movements and research groups in Padua and Rome and Diotima at the University of Verona; these were a major contributor to the development of Italian sexual difference theory, with its emphasis on an embodied, materialist approach to understanding sex / gender.11 As Olivia Guaraldo notes in this volume, these political experiences have profoundly influenced Cavarero’s work: they contributed to shaping an original combination of materiality and conceptuality; a theoretical concreteness always engaged in naming philosophically embodied singularities and their irrepressible vitality.12 It is not by chance that Cavarero’s current thought brings together two new conceptual devices to intervene in contemporary politics: first, the concept of pluriphony, which is neither the unpleasant noise of cacophony nor the pleasant noise of harmony, and is a way of articulating the vocalic sonority of a plurality of people; and second, the concept of surging democracy, which describes the pluralizing interaction present at the inaugural moments of political movements. In this way, Cavarero continues to furnish an “imaginary of hope,” which is a form of care for the world and for the singular, plural lives who both inhabit this world and constitute it, refusing their superfluity and manifesting an alternative in their everyday, spectacular sociality.13
Notes
1 1. Life, Politics, Contingency Summer School, University of Palermo, Erice, Italy, June 8–12, 2015.
2 2. Adriana Cavarero, Horrorism: Naming Contemporary Violence, trans. William McCuaig (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011).
3 3. Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 176.
4 4. See Cavarero and Elisabetta Bertolino, “Beyond Ontology and Sexual Difference: An Interview with the Italian Feminist Philosopher Adriana Cavarero,” differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 19, no. 1 (2017): 161, https://doi.org/10.1215/10407391-2007-019; and Ryan Dohoney, “An Antidote to Metaphysics: Adriana Cavarero’s Vocal Philosophy,” Women and Music: A Journal of Gender and Culture 15 (2011): 70–85, https://doi.org/10.1353/wam.2011.0002.
5 5. See Cavarero, For More than One Voice: Toward a Philosophy of Vocal Expression, trans. Paul A. Kottman (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2005), 7; and Cavarero, Konstantinos Thomaidis, and Ilaria Pinna, “Towards a Hopeful Plurality of Democracy: An Interview on Vocal Ontology with Adriana Cavarero,” Journal of Interdisciplinary Voice Studies 3, no. 1 (2018): 84, https://doi.org/10.1386/jivs.3.1.81_1.
6 6. Lorenzo Bernini, “Bad Inclinations: Cavarero, Queer Theories and the Drive,” in this volume.
7 7. Cavarero, Thomaidis, and Pinna, “Towards a Hopeful Plurality of Democracy,” 88.
8 8. Cavarero, Inclinations: A Critique of Rectitude, trans. Amanda Minervini and Adam Sitze (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2016).
9 9. Cavarero, Relating Narratives: Storytelling and Selfhood, trans. Paul A. Kottman (London and New York: Routledge, 2000), 89–90.
10 10. On public happiness, see Arendt, On Revolution (London: Faber & Faber, 2016), 123–24. See also Olivia Guaraldo, “Public Happiness: Revisiting an Arendtian Hypothesis,” Philosophy Today 62, no. 2 (Spring 2018): 397–418, https://doi.org/10.5840/philtoday201866218.
11 11. For more on this history, see Dohoney, “Antidote to Metaphysics,” 71.
12 12. Guaraldo, “Thinking Materialistically with Locke, Lonzi and Cavarero,” in this volume.
13 13. Cavarero, Thomaidis, and Pinna, “Towards a Hopeful Plurality of Democracy,” 88. For more on superfluity, see Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (London: Penguin, 2017), 599. For more on refusal, see Tina Marie Campt, “Black Visuality and the Practice of Refusal,” Women & Performance: A Journal of Feminist Theory 29, no. 1 (2019): 79–87, https://doi.org/10.1080/0740770X.2019.1573625; and Bonnie Honig, “How To Do Things with Inclination: Antigones, with Cavarero,” in this volume.
Adriana Cavarero, Feminisms, and an Ethics of Nonviolence
TIMOTHY J. HUZAR AND CLARE WOODFORD
The painting of the mother and child is held up as an example to be strategically exploited in order to make inclination a good point of departure, a point from which we might rethink the ontology of the vulnerable and constitutive relationality in the terms of a postural geometry that, far from displacing the human on the straight axis, displaces it according to a multiplicity of contextual, contingent and intermittent, and at times even random, directions. The maternal inclination, in as much as it is a posture linked to the scene of birth, can become the fundamental schematism, the founding gesture of a new postural geometry.
—ADRIANA CAVARERO, INCLINATION: A CRITIQUE OF RECTITUDE
Adriana Cavarero’s work is at the center of a feminist rethinking of relationality. It seeks to overcome the traditional blindness of philosophy and political thought to the real conditions of enfleshed bodies that relate to one another in love, in hate,