Horrorism By Cavarero Summary
We become aware of our uniqueness in relationality with others.
Cavarero engaged closely with the theme of vulnerability in her book Horrorism. Here Cavarero talks of vulnerability referring often to the Latin term of vulnus. We are inevitably exposed to each other in our vulnerability. For Cavarero, we can choose to act towards the others with care or by inflicting wounds. We can say that if one speaks as a subject constituted by language and norms, one speaks as a cut subject, separated from one’s uniqueness and body and from the others. From such a position, it is easy to react by inflicting wounds, with disregard for vulnerability, because the subject is cut and separated from oneself and others
Whereas, if one speaks in one’s voice, one is exposed to oneself and others, one is aware of one’s vulnerability and that of others. Such an awareness, pushes towards responding to the vulnus with care and attending to the other with care. Thus, the voice as awareness of singularity, corporeality and vulnerability, leads to an ethical response to vulnerability and, therefore, to choose care. …show more content…
Cavarero is not trying to make of the subject a better normative and sovereign subject, but she is only emphasising the non-sovereign and non-normative aspects of being. The focus on who someone is in Cavarero, rather than the what of identity and subjectivity, indicates that it is possible to make use of a different type of agency, other than that of sovereignty, that does not require to master others, and moreover, can suspend – even if for shortly – the sovereign frame. The who – on which both Arendt and Cavarero focus – excludes the sovereign subject because there is no substance, it is impossible to say who someone is. The who-ness is only manifested or revealed through the voice or action and in a condition of relationality and
Cavarero engaged closely with the theme of vulnerability in her book Horrorism. Here Cavarero talks of vulnerability referring often to the Latin term of vulnus. We are inevitably exposed to each other in our vulnerability. For Cavarero, we can choose to act towards the others with care or by inflicting wounds. We can say that if one speaks as a subject constituted by language and norms, one speaks as a cut subject, separated from one’s uniqueness and body and from the others. From such a position, it is easy to react by inflicting wounds, with disregard for vulnerability, because the subject is cut and separated from oneself and others
Whereas, if one speaks in one’s voice, one is exposed to oneself and others, one is aware of one’s vulnerability and that of others. Such an awareness, pushes towards responding to the vulnus with care and attending to the other with care. Thus, the voice as awareness of singularity, corporeality and vulnerability, leads to an ethical response to vulnerability and, therefore, to choose care. …show more content…
Cavarero is not trying to make of the subject a better normative and sovereign subject, but she is only emphasising the non-sovereign and non-normative aspects of being. The focus on who someone is in Cavarero, rather than the what of identity and subjectivity, indicates that it is possible to make use of a different type of agency, other than that of sovereignty, that does not require to master others, and moreover, can suspend – even if for shortly – the sovereign frame. The who – on which both Arendt and Cavarero focus – excludes the sovereign subject because there is no substance, it is impossible to say who someone is. The who-ness is only manifested or revealed through the voice or action and in a condition of relationality and