Research that matters

Chapter 2 places great emphasis on giving a clear definition of care and explaining its applications to animals. Care is informed “by ideas about who animals are and how they should be treated” (49). Moving past the basic needs of sustenance and veterinary care, there is care that includes mental enrichment and socialization. To this requires animals to be engaged with as subjects rather than property. This links ideas around autonomy, consciousness, and agency to the state of being for animals and direction in regards to care. How can an animals agency be determined? Is there a way to offer fufillment to an animal and can that be measured?
The idea of caring for an animal in a way that claims that have the ability to utilize agency or craft desires is a very interesting one. I think that the ways in which the lines between desires and beingness are blurred creates a new opportunity to move past humanism. Though this does not apply directly to the text, there are pre-existing ideas around who is human and deserving of certain rights, care, considerations, and who is not. If Black people are not human, if disabled people are not human, or if they exist in some middle ground, through this understanding of property vs. subject we can reject the idea of humanity as a condition of a happy, fulfilling life.

My favorite part of this reading was my ability to cocreate knowledge with Lara. This is a very complicated text. One that places a great responsibility on the audience to engage with, navigate, and theorize alongside the writing. It is this task that I believe helps me to best understand the spatio-temporal compressions and expansions Lara claims are an essential part of queer freedom : black sovereignty. This text does not seek to practice strict chronological and tangential explanations of themes. Instead it embodies the theories it presents.
Thinking about the liminality of colonization, I can apply these concepts of spatio-temporality. I ask myself, how does the colonization of the past affect the present day? Furthermore, can colonization have a set start and end date and how do I limit liberation by delegating colonization as an act that happened in the past rather than a past-present-future activity?

In Elan Abrell’s “Saving Animals,” the author offers valuable insights into animal sanctuaries and their caregivers as models for moving away from the objectification of animals and towards recognizing their subjectivity. I appreciate the effort of Abrell’s presenting sanctuaries’ perspective on the “suffering and exploitation of animals at the hands of humans” (7). He presents a comprehensive ethnographic record of the perspective of animal activists, who prioritize the well-being of animals over that of humans. While critics may characterize them as misanthropes, their approach offers a different perspective on the suffering and exploitation of animals at the hands of humans.

However, I argue that treating animals as humans could potentially blur the lines of humanity. It is counterintuitive (and ironic) to apply human mindsets and ethics, generated by humans, to animals, as it assumes that animals share human sensibilities. As Abrell points out on page 75, people often think they know what animals want, but they fail to recognize that animals have different sensibilities. While all should applaud reducing animal brutality in the agricultural industry, enforcing human values upon other species and treating them under an artificial system may not be as effective or ethical as caregivers envision their work to be, especially since there exists no proven interspecies sensibility. Thus, acting according to the idea of treating animals like humans and declaring humanity as a set of moral guidelines that is universally adhered to could be seen as hypocritical, ignorant, and/or arrogant on the human part. This is particularly concerning when both natural and human resources are directed away from supporting the lives of people in severe illness and insecurity.

While efforts to reduce animal brutality are necessary, it is crucial to recognize the differences between humans and animals and to develop strategies that acknowledge those differences.

This ethnography mentions the dichotomy of attitudes/treatment of animals between industrial farms vs. sanctuaries. Did Abrell ever research within zoos? I am curious as they straddle conservation and consumption efforts. Similarly, zoos place animals in a weird human-animal/property continuum.They also do the mundane care work as well as treat injury and try to keep animals happy. I am curious to the views of animals within this sphere.

I am responsible for leading the class discussion on Chapter 2 on Wednesday so I will give a brief overview of Abrell’s Saving animals: multi species ecologies of rescue and care introduction with regard to the major themes of rights and property. By investigating animal sanctuaries to explore the dynamics between humans and other species, the author experiences “interspecies power dynamics” that are influenced by cultural, political, and economic norms (14). I liked her discussion of how social norms and the way that human and animal protections evolve affect “property rights attached to animals and how sanctuaries endeavor to transform them to sanctuary animals’ benefit” (17).

In this reading, Angela Garcia explores how addiction, poverty, and healthcare are all interconnected in New Mexico. She does this by bringing a more nuanced understanding to this topic, extending it as a systemic issue and not an individual problem. She does so by tying in how forces such as colonialism, poverty, and other social/economic forces all play a role in the issue of heroism. I thought this was a very powerful way to present the topic and her emphasis on the idea of dispossession made me think about a lot of the themes she aimed to describe. Dispossession is the loss of land and identity by rural communities, specifically as she describes in Rio Grande valley. She explains that dispossession creates a feeling of hopeless and lack of control in these communities that drives civilians to greater heroin usage. 

As far as her ethnographic methods, I thought it was really interesting that she worked in the clinics to become closer to her subject content. It does raise questions in terms of what the clinic allowed her to see and makes me wonder if her intentions with her study were made clear to all parties involved. 

In this reading, Ana-Marine Lara gives us a unique look into the intersection of being Black and queer and how they present themselves in the context of Caribbean spiritual practices. It was really interesting to see that these cultural practices allow these marginalized groups to reclaim a voice for themselves and connect with their heritage. It provided me an interesting example of how traditional practices, when interpreted in flexible ways, could be used to fill roles that modern society has neglected. For example, in the instance of this book, traditional spiritualism filled the gap in modern society as being a way for marginalized groups to finally feel empowered. 

One specific of the reading I wanted to touch on is the concept of a body-land. A body-land is essentially the tie that exists between ones body and the land it is identified with. With examples of this where colonialism and liberation Christian’s struggle to erase indigenous identities as there is a deeper body-land connection, I thought this concept really hit home to me. 

In the reading, Abrell talks about the relationship between humans and other animals in the realm of animal rescue/care. I thought that this reading was a really interesting look at ethical practices with animals, explaining the potential humans have to both help and hurt animals in our good intentions to save them. Abrell’s central argument does not waste time examining individual cases but instead delves into the systemic issues of animal exploitation that need to be addressed. Some examples she brings up that I thought were interesting include wildlife rehabilitation, animal sanctuaries, and animal shelters. The idea of “compassionate conservation” is one that I would love to hear other students’ thoughts on. This idea challenges how traditional conservation efforts look at and priority the saving of species over individual animals. 

Reading Angela’s discussion post I also found the bestia sacer case pretty interesting and would like to include it in my own response: Abrell’s analysis of Bestia Sacer definitely highlights that there are challenges to conservation efforts by their very nature and that it is important to consider unintended consequences of our efforts. 

Elan Abrell’s ethnography explores U.S. animal sanctuaries, animal rights, and animal autonomy. I found his ethnography interesting because it expands the traditional definition of anthropology is the study of what makes us human to the study of what makes living creatures have rights and/or autonomy. Abrell applies human-centered concepts such as property and wellbeing to the animals he observed during his fieldwork. I found the concept of bestia sacer, or categorizing animals as property, the most interesting. Most sanctuaries want the animals they take care of to live happily and independently. However, the irony is those same sanctuaries take animals as property to care for them. People often see sanctuaries as an ethical alternative to zoos. However, Abrell’s exploration of sanctuaries as facilitators of bestia sacer complicate that argument. Some sanctuary animals that Abrell observed were able to claim autonomy. For example, Maui, a female cockatoo, was able to assert who she wanted to take care of her and when she needed care. Her caregivers accommodate her demands. Despite her captivity, Maui was still able to claim autonomy.

I thought Abrell’s mixed use of focused third-person POV from caretakers’ perspectives and his first-person perspective as a volunteer at sanctuaries and shelters was effective. His mixing of these POVs allowed me to see how he as a volunteer perceived animal autonomy vs. captivity and how animal caretakers perceived that balance. My question for him is how did he select the two sites he conducted his fieldwork. Did he select them because of a pre-existing relationship with them, because of convenience, because of location, etc.? His site selection influences the narrative he tells in his ethnography.

In her introduction, Lara frames Black decolonization, queer freedom, and Black sovereignty as the same meaning. I thought this was interesting because, although these three terms are similar, they exist separately and are used differently among many narratives of abolition and reform. I found it even more interesting that she umbrellas these three terms under “queer” which was a word that I did not necessarily associate with this topic. Lara intertwines spirituality amongst these themes which makes me think of her anthropology background and how she calls for an in-depth understanding of relationships beyond person to person. With land, memory, and even war, Lara challenges us to grasp the entirety of relational branching beyond ourselves in order to tackle the complex task of decolonization. I thought this was very effective in setting up her ethnography because it emphasized the importance of observing and examining relationships as well as the historical context.

Another comment I had was that she had many references even in her introduction! Her references were almost half the page which helped me to take her credibility. I never realized how important it was to provide these resources until I was reading the introduction.

Since the beginning of time, we have come to recognize the progression of people’s different sexualities and the positive change in norms presented towards races. However, this only applies to the United States, whereas many other third world developing countries face struggles in order to retain the same freedom countries like the United States possess. In Anna-Maurie Lara’s Queer Freedom: Black Sovereignty, we acknowledge how a great nation like the Dominican Republic isn’t nearly as loose in terms of policy and ideology, rather is defensive of the growth of modern norms presented by minority groups.  “Many, in particular the rayanos (border residents) and laborers who work in the binational or multinational free trade zones, know that the border is porous and the movement of people is uncontainable—as are friendships, love, and sex.” I find this quote very important as it lists the specific attributes that cultivate a society that doesn’t have the strongest backbone, and helps us realize the true meaning of a group, and how colonization is nothing more than the destruction of habitats and livelihoods. Anna-Maurie’s ethnography style is one I find appealing, considering the fact that her roots aren’t far from her studies, allowing for background information to go hand in hand with the facts that communities are dealt with. Overall, this is a piece that is unique to previous ethnographic styles, however allows for the inclusivity of different language forms and interpretations.

According to Ana-Maurine Lara’s “Queer Freedom: Black Sovereignty,” people are disciplined into gendered, racialized, and sexualized norms. This discipline affects the body-land differently based on racial imaginaries. The concept of body-land is not just the physical mass of one’s body, but rather a being that is co-constituted by nature. Recognizing this concept can help us better understand the complex relationships between our bodies, nature, and society.

I find it especially relevant in “Body-Land” that for Queer : Indigenous peoples across the Americas, their survival is constantly threatened by various destructive forces that destroy body-lands. These forces include/are called as colonization, globalization, neoliberalism, nation-states, militarization, space programs, etc. The chapter also discusses the concept of sovereignty in three modes: as a mode of ecological interdependence, as a mode of anti-imperialist resistance, and as the rights of the poor against the impositions of the wealthy elites.

I like a quote in page 80 where Lara quotes Naina-Lula, “Who controls the seeds controls the people because we ourselves are seeds.” In the context of the chapter, the quote highlights the importance of sovereignty over one’s own body-land. Just as controlling the seeds allows one to control the people, having sovereignty over one’s body-land allows one to have control over their own being and relationship with nature. It is also a way to resist the forces, as mentioned before, that seek to destroy them.

I found it most interesting that Dr. Lara points out the inability for US-readers to fully ‘immerse’ ourselves into the contents of the ofrenda, even if the reader is also queer and Black. Outside of the text itself, I guess it partially makes me question how much an author’s location of life and education matters in their research work: with Dr. Lara’s style of writing and investigation, does being a native of the DR inherently make her better suited to analyze Black sovereignty and queer freedom in the body-lands of Afrolatine existence.

A quote I thought particularly poignant (and why) was:

“To have a body-land means that colonization transits differently among us. Crossing different racial imaginaries disciplines our body-lands differently” (page 64) I think this connects back to what Dr. Lara says in the introduction: the queer : Black experience of the USian will never be the same as that of a queer : Black Dominican raised in the DR which will never be the same as the queer : native/indigenous in Mexico, for example. Because even though all of these lands and bodies experienced colonization and racialization, each country/space experienced it and experiences its aftermaths in very different ways depending on the geopolitical status of the country as a US/western/Global North ally or as a firm member of the Global South.

In ending my thoughts on Dr. Lara’s writing, I found it to be incredibly dense and at times confusing. However, the thought and care of the writing was lyrical and flowing: even if I could not understand fully a point she was making, the evocation of themes allowed for me to connect pieces together of her overall argument.

Anna-Maurine creatively uses the word “body-land” to emphasize the connection between the body and land and its meaning regarding indigeneity, queerness, and black sovereignty. She uses colons to connect different layers of meanings of body-land to articulate how inseparable the two pieces are at every level. In the discussion about black sovereignty, Anna-Maurine describes the tension between the state government that wants to use the tracts of land for national park construction and the indigenous people who want their lands to plant crops, live, and honor their existence. The author emphasizes the caveat that it is dangerous to think of indigenous people as vestigial or beyond the hope of reparation because it is an inaccurate account of the reality that reduces indigenous people to a special topic that rarely receives attention. Instead of using the deficit and passive perspective, Anna-Maurine focuses on indigenous people’s spiritual autonomy and its supported black sovereignty, which is a fight against colonialism and liberation Christianity logic. The author describes how the spiritual leader groups people together to fight off the government troops sent to take their lands. At the end of the chapter body-land, Anna Maurine delineates the apparently illogical interview data about how indigenous people identify themselves with negras or indios to show that indigenous people can be connected without blood and how lands connect with the identity, which in this case, is indigeneity.  

I find this piece hard to read because it is a creative endeavor to introduce an ethnography project that might not be otherwise well articulated. Also, the author connects her research with many news and research that are listed in the footnotes. However, I cannot fully understand many of those sources in Spanish. I think the author is disrupting the regular logic that fails to describe the interdependence between people, nature, identity, and power. This way of writing is similar to Tsing’s “The Mushroom at The End of The World.” I feel like the author is talking about something substantial and important that is drastically different from everyday experiences. I can feel the degree of difference from her creative account, but I can capture little content without living experiences in North American indigenous areas. 

Ana-Maurine Lara’s ethnography on queer, black, and indigenous life in the Dominican Republic was different from the ethnographies we’ve read before in that Lara writes in a more poetic and literary style. Her use of footnotes also differs from other ethnographies in that she uses them in more expansive ways beyond citing her sources. She uses them to provide context to the places and concepts she discusses and to also provide the original Spanish transcripts of her interviews. 

Lara’s methods are innovative in that her ethnography almost plays a supporting role to the work of her forebearers such as Audre Lorde. She weaves in her ethnographic evidence amidst a framework of theoretical concepts such as the body-land, zambo consciousness, and decolonization.

Lara’s ethnography is also an ofrenda, or offering, to queer black life and decolonization. She relates Black decolonization and queer freedom as two necessities that must be accomplished in tandem with each other. Lara argues that Black decolonization and queer freedom parallel each other because decolonization resists the settler-colonial state and queerness resists heteronormativity. Lara uses an intersectional analysis to assert that queer, black, and indigenous life are related in that they resist systems of power. A quote that stuck out to me is: “The arrivant state is starving the community into submission” (Lara, 78). I noted this quote because it summarizes Lara’s argument throughout the chapters that queer, Black, and indigenous peoples must stand in solidarity with each other to resist this submission.

I think the concept of an arrivant state is particularly insightful as it highlights the intersection of colonialism, indigeneity, and violence. It is a state of affairs that exists in the United States, but we fail to consider these intersections of systems, history, and violence on communities. She also intertwines aspects of different languages and cultures to invite and immerse the reader into this reading/ceremony (i.e. Spanish subjunctive tense utilized in English). Similarly, in “Body-Lands,” Lara utilizes the concept of body-lands to highlight the diversity of systems, identities, ontologies, and more. As in the case of Doña Dulce, she highlights the intersection of ecology, identity, politics, and spirituality amongst the campesinas. She mentioned Kimberlé Crenshaw, and upon reading the ethnography, I can see the impact of considering the different intersections between systems and identities.

I found the content very interesting, but I noticed the differences in the style of writing compared to other ethnographies. As you mentioned in course announcement, there is a unique style to Lara’s writing. In the Opening Ceremony, the footnotes are reminiscent of a traditional ethnography. Utilizing quotes and relevant background, the footnotes provide a lot of necessary information in a more technical style. This is contrary to her actual writing style which has a lot of artistic style elements including anaphora and imagery.

For me, the most profound idea was that of the arrivant state. As someone who has done a lot of reading on colonialism and settler colonialism, I was pondering the idea of such complexity, but it was nice to have a concrete word to identify this multitude of intersections and complexities.