Emma Rodman

In this paper, I challenge our thinking about affect, and its relationship to politics, agency, and action, through a close reading of the concept of alienation in the fiction of Harlem Renaissance thinker Nella Larsen. Larsen’s phenomenological account of the experience of alienation offers two novel perspectives on the relation between “negative” affect and politics. First, it offers a framework of non-sovereign political action which makes a rad-ical claim: politics is not the way we get free from such feelings but is, in fact, the product of their existence. Our efforts to overcome or elide painful feelings can unexpectedly pull us out into the world and drive our worldly political projects. Second, it makes a methodological case for theorizing affect from the ground up, “staying with the trouble” of our feelings rather than seeking grand interpretive theory which pathologizes, diagnoses, and seeks to cure.

While recent scholarship has argued for the utility of W. E. B. Du Bois’s thought for democratic theory, his career-long emphasis on the problem of social equality—and the solution of self-conscious manhood—has gone largely unnoticed. In this article, I argue that while Du Bois’s emphasis on social equality powerfully situates racial oppression as a social and epistemic problem, his solution of self-conscious manhood paradoxically reproduces the very conditions of social inequality he seeks to combat. Open to people of all races, genders, and classes, the path of self-conscious manhood consists in radical truth-telling, a free anarchy of the spirit, a will to strive and act, and the purity of isolation. However, through a close reading of Du Bois’s biographies, editorials, and fiction, I show that self-conscious manhood centers an exclusionary and atomized ethic of self-creation rather than producing a democratic political and social order.

Political theory as a discipline has long been skeptical of computational methods. In this paper, I argue that it is time for theory to make a perspectival shift on these methods. Specifically, we should consider integrating recently developed generative large language models like GPT-4 as tools to support our creative work as theorists. Ultimately, I suggest that political theorists should embrace this technology as a method of supporting our capacity for creativity—but that we should do so in a way that is mindful of the content and value of theorizing, the technical constraints of the models, and the ethical questions that the technology raises.