Can phenomenological approaches to experience allow me to attend to not just the human experience but also the material discursive forces that are a part of the shifting, moving network of agents at work in a phenomenon? Focusing on the material structures of experience means not asking what materiality is, but rather asking what it is doing in the context of an intra-active phenomena. In this article, I consider what possibilities for data gathering and analysis are opened if I think the Husserlian concept of encounters with the world within a feminist new materialist framework, and find the tensions provocative.
AlaimoS. (2010). Bodily natures: Science, environment, and the material self. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
2.
AlaimoS.HekmanS. (2008a). Introduction: Emerging model of materiality in feminist theory. In AlaimoS.HekmanS. J. (Eds.), Material feminisms (pp. 1-22). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
3.
AlaimoS.HekmanS. (2008b). Material feminisms. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
4.
AlcoffL. M. (2000). Phenomenology, post-structuralism, and feminist theory on the concept of experience. In FischerL.EmbreeL. (Eds.), Feminist phenomenology (pp. 39-56). London, England: Kluwer Academic.
5.
Al-SajiA. (2010). Bodies and sensings: On the uses of Husserlian phenomenology for feminist theory. Continental Philosophy Review, 43, 13-37. doi:10.1007/s11007-010-9135-8
6.
BaradK. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28, 801-831. doi:10.1086/345321
7.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
8.
BennettJ. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
9.
ButlerJ. (1988). Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory. Theatre Journal, 40(4), 519–531.
10.
CooleD. (2005). Rethinking agency: A phenomenological approach to embodiment and agentic capacities. Political Studies, 53, 124-142. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00520.x
11.
FreemanM.VagleM. D. (2013). Grafting the intentional relation of hermeneutics and phenomenology in linguisticality. Qualitative Inquiry, 19, 725-735. doi:10.1177/1077800413500933
12.
GuentherL. (2013). Solitary confinement: Social death and its afterlives. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
13.
JacksonA. Y. (2004). Performativity identified. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 673-690. doi:10.1177/1077800403257673
14.
MannB. (2009). Iris Marion Young: Between phenomenology and structural injustice. In FergusonA.NagelM. (Eds.), Dancing with Iris: The philosophy of Iris Marion Young (pp. 79-91). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
15.
MannB. (2014). Imaginary. In MannB. (Ed.), Sovereign masculinity: Gender lessons from the war on terror (pp. 96-162). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
16.
MartinezJ. M. (2014). Culture, communication, and Latina feminist philosophy: Toward a critical phenomenology of culture. Hypatia, 29, 221-236. doi:10.1111/hypa.12061
17.
MazzeiL. A.JacksonA. Y. (2012). Complicating voice in a refusal to “let participants speak for themselves.”Qualitative Inquiry, 18, 745-751. doi:10.1177/1077800412453017
18.
McGregork. (2018). Material flows: patriarchal structures and the menstruating teacher, Gender and Education. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2018.1451624
19.
MolA. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
20.
RosiekJ. L. (2017). Agential realism and educational ethnography: Guidance for application from Karen Barad’s new materialism and Charles Sanders Peirce’s material semiotics. In BeachD.Marques da SilvaS.BagleyC. (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of ethnography of education (pp. 403-422). London, England: John Wiley.
21.
SimmsE.StawarskaB. (2013). Introduction: Concepts and methods in interdisciplinary feminist phenomenology. Janus Head: Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature, Continental Philosophy, Phenomenological Psychology, and the Arts, 13, 6-16. Retrieved from http://www.janushead.org/13-1/SimmsStawarska.pdf
22.
St. PierreE. A. (2016). The empirical and the new empiricisms. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 16, 111-124. doi:10.1177/1532708616636147
23.
St. PierreE. A.JacksonA. Y.MazzeiL. A. (2016). New empiricisms and new materialisms: Conditions for new inquiry. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 16, 99-110. doi:10.1177/1532708616638694
24.
TaguchiH. L. (2012). A diffractive and Deleuzian approach to analysing interview data. Feminist Theory, 13, 265-281. doi:10.1177/1464700112456001
25.
VagleM. D.ClementsC. H.CoffeeA. C. (2017). Analytic productions in post-intentional phenomenological research. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 17, 421-441. doi:10.1177/1532708616643983
26.
VagleM. D.HofsessB. A. (2016). Entangling a post-reflexivity through post-intentional phenomenology. Qualitative Inquiry, 22, 334-344. doi:10.1177/1077800415615617
