The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
INVOKING AFFECT: Cultural theory and the ontological turn
Abstract
This article interrogates the contemporary emergence of affect as critical object and perspective through which to understand the social world and our place within it. Emphasising the unexpected, the singular or the quirky over the generally applicable, the turn to affect builds on important work in cultural studies on the pitfalls of writing the body out of theory. More importantly for this article, the contemporary interest in affect evidences a dissatisfaction with poststructuralist approaches to power, framed as hegemonic in their negativity and insistence of social structures rather than interpersonal relationships as formative of the subject. The article focuses on the recent contributions of Brain Massumi and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick in particular, unpacking their celebration of the difference that affect makes. The author's critique of the affective turn focuses on both the illusion of choice that it offers the cultural critic, and its rewriting of the recent history of cultural theory to position affect as ‘the new cutting edge’. While affect may constitute a valuable critical focus in context, it frequently emerges through a circular logic designed to persuade ‘paranoid theorists’ into a more productive frame of mind - for who would not prefer affective freedom to social determinism? Yet it remains unclear what role affect may have once this rhetoric has worked its persuasive magic. In addition, and more worryingly, affective rewriting flattens out poststructuralist inquiry by ignoring the counter-hegemonic contributions of postcolonial and feminist theorists, only thereby positioning affect as ‘the answer’ to contemporary problems of cultural theory.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment.
Brewer, R. M., & Collins, P. H. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074808 · Cited by 19,445
Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity
Sedgwick, E. K. (2003) · doi:10.1215/9780822384786 · Cited by 2,464
Cited by
In the Social Factory?: Immaterial Labour, Precariousness and Cultural Work
Gill, R., & Pratt, A. (2008) · Theory, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0263276408097794 · Cited by 1,361
Blackman, L., Cromby, J., Hook, D., Papadopoulos, D., & Walkerdine, V. (2008) · Subjectivity · doi:10.1057/sub.2008.8 · Cited by 289
Metadata
- Authors
- Hemmings, C.
- Venue
- Cultural Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 548-567
- ISSN
- 0950-2386 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4348
- OpenAlex
- W2002486512
- Cited by
- 782
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 143.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: INVOKING AFFECT: Cultural theory and the ontological turn. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/09502380500365473
- The paper
- Hemmings, C. (2005). INVOKING AFFECT: Cultural theory and the ontological turn. Cultural Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380500365473
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.