Some fabulous updates for you this month, many relating to the CMS conference next summer in Liverpool, UK. Instead of including all the CMS Stream Calls as separate items, these have been collated in a single item for you. But our most important announcement is a stay of execution for those desperately beavering away to draft abstracts for the SCOS conference in Rome! The deadline for this has been extended to 31st January to allow you to enjoy all of your December ‘carne’ prior to submission if needs be.
Item 1: Many streams at CMS would love your submissions!
Item 2: SCOS Rome extends deadline to 31st January 2017
Item 3: C&O Special Issue:The Animal upcoming deadline of 20 March 2017
Item 4: Special Issue of Society and Business Review on Ethics and Relatedness of Writing
Item 5: New SCOS website imminent
If I have missed anything, or if you have a new item to include, please send me an email at the above address!
Critical Management Studies Conference July 3-5, Liverpool UK
Full details of streams are here: https://www.edgehill.ac.uk/…/conference-streams-call-papers/ and the submission deadline for all streams is 31st January 2017
Special mentions go to the following streams who have requested circulation to the SCOS mailing list:
No 30 Time, Changes and Leadership. Mairi Watson, Elisabeth Berg, Hala Mansour.
No. 33 Crises of meaning at the fringes of economy. Deborah Brewis, Anne-Marie Greene, Carolyn Hunter, Laura Mitchell
No. 37 Emotions, Objects and Meaning in Organizations
No. 50 Going beyond the impact agenda: sustaining the legacy of critical management research. Lindsay Hamilton, Mihaela Kelemen
As we draw closer to next year, fuller particulars are confirmed for SCOS 2017!
With the usual apologies for cross-postings, please see the call for papers for SCOS 2017 below including the extended abstract deadline of 30th January 2017.
Our keynote speaker is Antonio Strati and the registration fee is £375.
Our website is now live, at https://www2.le.ac.uk/conference/rome2017. All conference enquiries can be addressed to email@example.com
CARNE – Flesh and Organization
Call for papers for the 35th
Standing Conference on Organizational Symbolism
Universita’ degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza,
10th-13th July 2017
“Flesh, we believe – more than bodies – is at stake in our posthuman times, in the sense that it is flesh that is subject to increased control either in the laboratory or the marketplace and is caught up in processes of modification that seek to master and profit from it.” (Diamanti et al., 2009: 4)
The XXXV SCOS Roma conference theme of ‘Carne – Flesh and organization’ is inspired in no small part by our 2017 venue. One historical narrative of the culture of Ancient Rome tells us that its gladiatorial contests and damnatio ad bestias (being thrown to wild animals, usually lions) and the sacrifice of beasts themselves served a variety of different purposes. These included honouring the dead and making sacrifices to the gods; reminding those not involved in the warrior state’s military expansion of the violence, bloodshed and killing (carnage) carried out and experienced by Rome’s frontier armies; a confirmation of the power of the state and its ability to mete out justice; and the sheer entertainment of the spectacle. Whatever their function, however, these events seem to us to circuit very profoundly around the flesh and its vulnerabilities, with the horrific murder of thousands of men and animals taking place in what Hopkins (1983: #13) vividly describes as “a welter of blood”. But Rome is a triumph of the arts which celebrate the flesh as well; a culture of sensuous indulgence, carnal desires and bodily experiences.
Our theme also takes off from the longstanding use of the notion of flesh in academic investigations of the more or less porous boundaries between the self, others and the world around us. Flesh, these works suggest, is ontologically slippery and definitionally elusive. For Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1964), flesh reconnects the viewing and the visible, the touching and the touched, the body and the world. Perception itself is a fleshly – auditory, visual, gustatory, haptic, olfactory – activity. Moreover, as Antonio Strati (2007) points out in his discussion of the connections between practice-based learning and ‘sensible knowledge’ in organizations, when we perceive others, we always perceive them as fundamentally corporeal. Equally, the world acts upon our flesh, so that what or whom we touch, see, smell, taste and hear may touch, see, smell, taste and hear us. Elsewhere, Michel Foucault locates modern western scientia sexualis as having its origins in the earliest years of Christianity and its confessional regime which seeks to unearth “the important secrets of the flesh” (1977: 154) as the deepest truths of the human subject. In this reading, flesh is the natural body, always and irrevocably bound to sin and to death.
Cherríe Moraga (2015: 19), on the other hand, identifies a theory in the flesh as “one where the physical realities of our lives – our skin color, the land or concrete we grew up on, our sexual longings – all fuse to create a politic born out of necessity”. In a very different feminist analysis, Judith Butler (1990: 96, 33) defines gender as the “styles of the flesh” which “congeal over time”; whereas Vicki Kirby (1997) takes her and other feminist poststructuralists to task in Telling Flesh for their overstatement of the cultural inscription of the body, and argues that “once you are seriously displacing the nature/language opposition, you have to be arguing that nature, far from being written on, and insofar as it cannot be said to ‘lack language’, ‘must be articulate’ (page 90).
Elspeth Probyn (2001), on the other hand, provides a dazzling array of ways to understand skin both materially, metonymically and metaphorically – it protects and is vulnerable, it can be bruised and breached, it is porous, it expands and retracts, it devours and is devoured, it has colour, texture and sensation.
‘Carne – Flesh and organization’ also resonates with themes of SCOS conferences past, like organizational wellness (Cambridge, 2003), excess and organization (Stockholm, 2005) and the animal (Uppsala, 2016). But organization studies scholars have perhaps been somewhat neglectful of flesh in our various endeavours; whilst for the last three decades or so we have paid a great deal of attention to the body, we have largely overlooked flesh. Yet, as our opening epigraph implies, flesh can be connected to organization/s and organizing in manifold different ways. Possible contributions to SCOS XXXV could therefore include but are certainly not limited to:
· The pleasures of the flesh: carnality, sensuality, excess and indulgence in, of and as provided by organizations (and their opposites).
· ‘Fleshworkers’ – cosmetic surgeons, masseuses, cosmetic surgeons, tattooists, make-up artists, slaughterhouse workers, morticians, laboratory scientists etc. – and the markets for their services.
· The resurging significance of the provenance of meat and fish in western eating habits and its cultural, symbolic and economic implications.
· Vegetarianism, veganism, ‘clean’ and raw food diets, the markets around and commodification of these practices.
· Researching the flesh, bodily, sensory, fleshly, aesthetic or sensible knowing and/ or methods, the ethics of fleshly research. Organizing (and researching) in meatspace and virtual space, ‘in the flesh’ and online.
· Bodily changes, wounding, scarring and dysmorphia in organizations.
· Flesh-eaters and the undead: cannibals, vampires and zombies as organizational metaphors.
· The organization of organ donation and the global black market in body parts.
· The global meat industry and its manifold discontents: eg, the certification and marketing of halal meat, the UK horse meat scandal.
· (Re)incarnation and incorporation in and of organizations.
· Pro-ana, pro-mia and fat acceptance organizations.
· Psychoanalytical and psychological perspectives on the organized, the organization and processes of organizing.
· Organizational metaphors of the flesh: eg, the ‘lean organization’, a ‘meaty question’, ‘fleshing out an argument’, a ‘meat market’, ‘dead meat’ etc.
· The use of animal skin for clothing and furnishings and the complex global differences of necessity versus excess.
· The ethics and politics of organizing as understood through Agamben’s zoë (bare life) and bios (qualified life) … and so on.
Open stream and workshops
SCOS 2017 will also have an open stream allowing for the presentation of papers of more general interest to the SCOS community; and we are open to suggestions for workshops or similar events in line with the proposed theme. Outlines of workshops should be the same length as a paper abstract and should indicate resources needed, number of participants, time required, approach to be taken and objectives. Please identify ‘Open stream’ or ‘Workshop’ on your abstract as appropriate.
Conference organizing team
Ilaria Boncori (University of Essex), Jo Brewis (University of Leicester), Mauro Gatti (Universita’ degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza), Edoardo Mollona (Universita’ di Bologna), Luigi Maria Sicca (University of Naples) and Charlie Smith (University of Leicester).
Abstracts of no more than 500 words should be submitted as e-mail attachments (all common formats accepted) by Monday 30th January 2017 (please note the extended deadline) to the organizers at firstname.lastname@example.org. Informal enquiries can be submitted to the same address.
Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, New York: Routledge, Chapman and Hall.
Foucault, M. (1977) ‘Power and sex’, Telos, 32: 152-161.
Hart, L. (1998) Between the Body and the Flesh: Performing Sadomasochism, Columbia University Press: New York.
Hopkins, K. (1983) ‘Murderous games: gladiatorial contests in Ancient Rome’, History Today, 33 (6). Online. Available here.
Kirby, V. (1997) Telling Flesh: The Substance of the Corporeal, New York and London: Routledge.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962) Phenomenology of Perception, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Moraga, C. (2015) ‘Introduction. Entering the lives of others: theory in the flesh’. In C. Moraga and G. Anzaldúa (eds) This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, fourth edition, Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, p. 19.
Probyn, E. (2001) ‘Eating skin’, in S. Ahmed and J. Stacey (eds) Thinking Through the Skin, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 87-103.
Strati, A. (2007) ‘Sensible knowledge and practice-based learning’, Management Learning, 38 (1): 61-77.
You may remember we had a little conference, in the summer, in beautiful Uppsala? If you liked that, you’ll love this!
The Special Issue on the same theme!
Full CfP available at:
Relatedness and the Ethics of Writing Organization (Special Issue)
Jean-Luc Moriceau, Institut Mines-Télécom/Télécom Business School/ETHOS, France
Robert Earhart, American University of Paris, France
In this Special Issue we invite authors to explore why it is epistemologically and ethically desirable to describe organization poetically. In an industrialized society that is increasingly in panic and defined by political conflict, the ethics of relatedness are not just epistemologically an issue but also ethically one. Relatedness and responsibility — and especially as motivated by the heritage of Levinas — remain a crucial impulse for an ethical society and within that society, ethical research. Researching organization needs to understand relatedness and not to define it out of existence. Research that denies relatedness, we submit, only strengthens the political-economic-organizational crises of our times.
Organizational research has long been identified with a reductionist, analytic form of research. For instance, the ‘empirical analytical’ tradition sees no role for the researcher’s affect in research. But the repression of affect makes access to motivation, creativity and the sources of innovation nearly impossible. As Graham Harman (2016) expresses it, ‘undermining’ (i.e. the reduction of the organization into its elements and the mapping of the relations between those elements) and ‘overmining’ (i.e. identifying the organization with transcendental truths, first principles and metaphysical principles) both fundamentally hinder researcher/researched interaction.
Organizational researchers usually write themselves out of their research, research processes are disconnected to their manifold contexts. The absence of relatedness prevents engagement, care and deep learning. Separation and distance preclude the challenging of one’s presuppositions and thought.
Thus we ask: What relational epistemology and research practices are needed to do justice to human relatedness in creating and maintaining sustainable organizations? How does one include affect, relatedness and care for others? How does one write texts that preserve relation, presence and responsibility? What ethics of organizational research and writing embody practical responsibility for a more just and cohesive society?
To give but a few examples:
· Lingis (2016) recounts personal situations in which many of us would consider him as a victim, but relationally on his position and invites the reader to reconsider one’s conception of justice.
· Veissière (2009, 2010) as a researcher on the streets of Bahia, feels as a ‘pimp’ taking advantage of his researchees’ vulnerability. He even comes to the realization that his way of trying to aid could be detrimental due to his academic habit of distancing. Deeper connection leads him to revise his descriptions and theories.
· Stewart (1991) makes the case for contaminated knowledge, in which researchers fully engage themselves inthe group studied and include their own experience and their affect in their reflections.
· Brosseau (2015) writes from a refugee position, and feels the need to research poetic writing in order to relate more authentically to society.
We invite contributions inspired and/or guided by this tradition of reflection.
Submissions to this journal are through the ScholarOne submission system here: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/sabr
Please visit the author guidelines for the journal:http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/…/…/author_guidelines.htm…, which gives full details. Please ensure you select this Special Issue from the relevant drop down menu.
Should you have any queries please contact the Guest Editor, Jean-Luc Moriceau, at email@example.com the Publisher, Lizzy Seal at firstname.lastname@example.org
The deadline for full papers to be submitted will be 31st January 2017.
Brosseau Mathieu (2015). Data Transport. Paris, Les éditions de l’Ogre.
Harman, G (2016) Immaterialism London: Polity.
Lingis, A. (2016). Justice. In H. Letiche, G. Lightfoot, & J.-L. Moriceau, Demo(s) Philosophy, pedagogy, politics. Rotterdam, Sense Publishers.
Stewart, K. (1991). On the Politics of Cultural Theory: A Case for “Contaminated” Cultural Critique’. Social Research, 58(2), 395–412.
Veissiere, S. P. L. (2009). Notes and Queries for an Activist Street Anthropology: Street Resistance, Gringopolítica, and the Questfor Subaltern Visions in Salvador da Bahia, Brazil. In D. Kapoor & S. Jordan, Education, Participatory Action Reserach and Social Change. International Perspectives (pp. 209–222). New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
Veissiere, S. P. L. (2010). Making a Living: The Gringo Ethnographer as Pimp of the Suffering in the Late Capitalist Night. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 10(1), 29–39. http://doi.org/10.1177/1532708609351152
Some of you may have been wondering what is going on with the SCOS website. I can let you all know that our team have been working really hard to bring you a new website, which will also feature our newsletters in future! To integrate with our facebook group there will also be a blog feature through which the board will find new and exciting ways to communicate (probably, or we might resort to carrier pigeon – after all, this is SCOS). We are currently working out the bugs. Watch this space!