Lines that do not speak: Multispecies hospitality and bug-writing | Intellect Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Hospitality & Society
  4. Volume 12, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 12, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 2042-7913
  • E-ISSN: 2042-7921

Abstract

The article, situated at the crossroads of hospitality studies, human–animal studies and writing studies, offers a more-than-human perspective on hospitality by exploring the book (2018) by Chinese book designer and artist Zhu Yingchun and its crafting process. In existing scholarship, hospitality has been mainly considered in anthropocentric terms. The article suggests that the multispecies relations that unfolded between the artist, his garden and bugs not only unsettle and disrupt this anthropocentric bias but also complicate the predominant dyadic understanding of hospitality: their hospitable entanglement needs to be analysed as a triadic configuration, where there are no fixed positions, but each member may in its turn be placed in the position of the host/guest/third. Ultimately, the paradox of the hospitality offered by the artist to the bugs is that he was only possible to welcome their visitation by endangering the life or well-being of his other guests, the plants. The article also highlights the non-phonemic, material and performative ‘asemic’ aspects of writing by considering writing in terms of traces and lines and argues that bug-writing has great theoretical potential for liberating the notion of writing from its anthropo-, phono- and logocentric subordination.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • The Kone Foundation (Award 202009490)
© 2022 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/hosp_00056_1
2022-09-01
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barad, K.. ( 2007), Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning, Durham, NC:: Duke University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Barad, K.. ( 2010;), ‘ Quantum entanglements and hauntological relations of inheritance: Dis/continuities, spacetime enfoldings, and justice-to-come. ’, Derrida Today, 3:2, pp. 240–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bateson, G.. ( [1972] 2000), Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology, Chicago, IL:: Chicago University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bell, D.. ( 2007a;), ‘ Hospitality and urban regeneration. ’, in C. Lashley,, P. A. Lynch, and A. Morrison. (eds), Hospitality: A Social Lens, Oxford:: Elsevier;, pp. 89–100.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bell, D.. ( 2007b;), ‘ The hospitable city: Social relations in commercial spaces. ’, Progress in Human Geography, 31:7, pp. 7–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Benali, A., and Ren, C. B.. ( 2019;), ‘ Lice work: Non-human trajectories in volunteer tourism. ’, Tourist Studies, 19:2, pp. 238–57.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bennett, J.. ( 2010), Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things, Durham, NC:: Duke University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Berking, H.. ( 1999), Sociology of Giving (trans. P. Camiller.), London:: Sage;.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Callon, M.. ( 1986;), ‘ Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. ’, in J. Law. (ed.), Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?, London:: Routledge;, pp. 196–223.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Carter, B., and Charles, N.. ( 2018;), ‘ The animal challenge to sociology. ’, European Journal of Social Theory, 21:1, pp. 79–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Dashper, K.. ( 2020a;), ‘ Holidays with my horse: Human–horse relationships and multispecies tourism experiences. ’, Tourism Management Perspectives, 34, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100678. Accessed 30 July 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Dashper, K.. ( 2020b;), ‘ More-than-human emotions: Multispecies emotional labour in the tourism industry. ’, Gender, Work & Organization, 27:1, pp. 24–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. DeMello, M.. ( 2012), Animals and Society: An Introduction to Human–Animal Studies, New York:: Columbia University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Derrida, J.. ( 1988), Of Grammatology (trans. G. C. Spivak.), Baltimore, MD and London:: Johns Hopkins University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Derrida, J.. ( 1995), The Gift of Death (trans. D. Wills.), Chicago, IL and London:: Chicago University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Derrida, J.. ( 2000a;), ‘ Foreigner question: Coming from abroad/from the foreigner. ’, in A. Dufourmantelle, and J. Derrida. (eds), Of Hospitality (trans. R. Bowlby.), Stanford, CA:: Stanford University Press;, pp. 3–72.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Derrida, J.. ( 2000b;), ‘ The deconstruction of actuality. ’, in Negotiations: Interventions and Interviews 1971–2001 (ed., trans. and intro. E. Rottenberg.), Stanford, CA:: Stanford University Press;, pp. 94–95.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Derrida, J.. ( 2006), Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning and the New International (trans. P. Kamuf.), New York and London:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Derrida, J.. ( 2008), The Animal that Therefore I Am (ed. M.-L. Mallet., trans. D. Willis.), New York:: Fordham University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Derrida, J.. ( 2009), The Beast & the Sovereign (trans. G. Bennington.), Chicago, IL and London:: Chicago University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Despret, V.. ( 2016), What Would the Animals Say If We Asked the Right Questions?, Minneapolis, MN:: University of Minnesota Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Duras, M.. ( 2011), Writing (trans. M. Polizzotti.), Minneapolis, MN and London:: University of Minnesota Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Fisher, J.. ( 1991;), ‘ Disambiguating anthropomorphism: An interdisciplinary study. ’, in P. P. G. Bateson, and P. H. Klopfer. (eds), Perspectives in Ethology, vol. 9, New York:: Plenum Publishing Cooperation;, pp. 49–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Gaze, T.,, Jacobson, M., and van Gerven Oei, V. W. J.. ( 2013;), ‘ Preface. ’, in T. Gaze, and M. Jacobson. (eds), An Anthology of Asemic Handwriting, The Hague and Tirana:: Punctum Books;, pp. 5–9.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Ginn, F.. ( 2013;), ‘ Sticky lives: Slugs, detachment and more-than-human ethics in the garden. ’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 39:4, pp. 532–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Haraway, D.. ( 2008), When Species Meet, Minneapolis, MN:: University of Minnesota Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Höckert, E.. ( 2018), Negotiating Hospitality: Ethics of Tourism Development in the Nicaraguan Highlands, Abingdon and New York:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Höckert, E.. ( 2020;), ‘ On scientific fabulation: Storytelling in the more-than-human-world. ’, in A. Valtonen,, O. Rantala, and P. Farah. (eds), Ethics and Politics of Space for the Anthropocene, Cheltenham:: Edward Elgar Publishing;, pp. 51–70.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Hodder, I.. ( 2012), Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships between Humans and Things, Chichester:: Wiley-Blackwell;.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Houston, S.. ( 2018a;), ‘ Writing that isn’t: Pseudo-scripts in comparative view. ’, L’Homme: Revue française d’anthropologie, 227–228, pp. 21–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Houston, S.. ( 2018b;), ‘ Maya creatures III: Mosquitoes and maddening noise. ’, Maya Decipherment, https://mayadecipherment.com/2018/05/20/mosquitos-and-maddening-noise/. Accessed 30 July 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Ingold, T.. ( 2007), Lines: A Brief History, London and New York:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Ingold, T.. ( 2013), Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture, London:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Ingold, T.. ( 2015), The Life of Lines, London and New York:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Irigaray, L.. ( 2004;), ‘ Animal compassion. ’, in M. Calarco, and P. Atterton. (eds), Animal Philosophy: Essential Readings in Continental Thought, London:: Continuum;, pp. 192–202.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Kakoliris, G.. ( 2016;), ‘ Hospitality and non-human beings: Jacques Derrida’s reading of D. H. Lawrence’s poem “Snake”. ’, Hospitality & Society, 6:3, pp. 243–55.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Karlsson, F.. ( 2011;), ‘ Critical anthropomorphism and animal ethics. ’, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25, pp. 707–20.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Kokkonen, T.. ( 2014;), ‘ Kun emme tiedä. Keskustelemassa “meitä” uusiksi: lajienväliset esitykset ja esitystaiteen rooli ekokriisin aikakaudella. ’ (‘When we do not know: Renegoatiating “us”: Interspecies performances and the role of performance art in the time of ecological crisis’) , in K. Lummaa, and L. Rojola. (eds), Posthumanismi, Turku:: Eetos;, pp. 179–209.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Latour, B.. ( 1999), Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, Cambridge, MA:: Harvard University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Leep, M.. ( 2018;), ‘ Stray dogs, posthumanism and cosmopolitan belongingness: Interspecies hospitality in times of war. ’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 47:1, pp. 45–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Lemelin, R. H.. ( 2012), The Management of Insects in Recreation and Tourism, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Lynch, P.,, Germann Molz, J.,, McIntosh, A., and Lugosi, P.. ( 2011;), ‘ Theorizing hospitality. ’, Hospitality & Society, 1:1, pp. 3–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Onali, A.. ( 2021;), ‘ I love plastics: A diffractive material–cultural analysis of human–plastic relationships in Finnish cultural landscape based on Yle’s plastic awareness campaign. ’, master’s thesis, Tampere:: Faculty of Information Technology and Communication Sciences, Tampere University;, https://trepo.tuni.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/125130/OnaliAlma.pdf;jsessionid=0A8CC48BF7402683524A36FEA2124D59?sequence=2. Accessed 7 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Parikka, J.. ( 2010), Insect Media: An Archaeology of Animals and Technology, Minneapolis, MN:: University of Minnesota Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Pyyhtinen, O.. ( 2014), The Gift and Its Paradoxes, London and New York:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Pyyhtinen, O.. ( 2015), More-Than-Human Sociology: A New Sociological Imagination, Basingstoke and New York:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Pyyhtinen, O.. ( 2020;), ‘ Friends of relational sociology? The relational current as a space of hospitality. ’, Digithum, 26, pp. 1–12, https://www.raco.cat/index.php/Digithum/article/view/n26-pyyhtinen/470881. Accessed 17 January 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Pyyhtinen, O., and Tamminen, S.. ( 2011;), ‘ We have never been only human: Foucault and Latour on the question of the Anthropos. ’, Anthropological Theory, 11:2, pp. 135–52.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Regan, T.. ( 1985), The Case for Animal Rights, Berkeley, CA:: University of California Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Sayers, J.. ( 2016;), ‘ A report to an academy: On carnophallogocentrism, pigs and meat-writing. ’, Organization, 23:3, pp. 370–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Schwenger, P.. ( 2019), Asemic: The Art of Writing, Minneapolis, MN:: University of Minnesota Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Selwyn, T.. ( 2000;), ‘ An anthropology of hospitality. ’, in C. Lashley, and A. Morrison. (eds), In Search of Hospitality: Theoretical Perspectives and Debates, Oxford:: Butterworth-Heinemann;, pp. 18–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Serres, M.. ( 2011), Malfeasance: Appropriation through Pollution? (trans. A.-M. Feenberg-Dibon.), Stanford, CA:: Stanford University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Shildrick, M.. ( 2022), Visceral Prostheses: Somatechnics and Posthuman Embodiment, London:: Bloomsbury;.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Simmel, G.. ( [1908] 1992), Soziologie, Georg Simmel Gesamtausgabe Band 11, Frankfurt am Main:: Suhrkamp;.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Spivak, G. C.. ( 1988;), ‘ Translator’s preface. ’, in J. Derrida. (ed.), Of Grammatology (trans. G. C. Spivak.), Baltimore, MD and London:: Johns Hopkins University Press;, pp. ix–lxxxvii.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Taylor, N., and Twine, R.. (eds) ( 2015), The Rise of Critical Animal Studies: From the Margins to the Centre, London and New York:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Taylor, P. W.. ( 1996), Respect for Nature, Princeton, NJ:: Princeton University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. The Language of Bugs ( 2018), Suffolk:: CC Art Books;.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Valtonen, A.,, Salmela, T., and Rantala, O.. ( 2020;), ‘ Living with mosquitoes. ’, Annals of Tourism Research, 83, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102945. Accessed 30 July 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Veijola, S.,, Germann Molz, J.,, Pyyhtinen, O.,, Höckert, E., and Grit, A.. ( 2014), Disruptive Tourism and Its Untidy Guests: Alternative Ontologies for Future Hospitalities, Basingstoke and New York:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Whatmore, S.. ( 2002), Hybrid Geographies: Natures Cultures Spaces, London:: Sage;.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Whitehead, A. N.. ( 1938), Science and the Modern World, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Wilkie, R.. ( 2015;), ‘ Multispecies scholarship and encounters: Changing assumptions at the human–animal nexus. ’, Sociology, 49:2, pp. 323–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Zhu, Y.. ( 2018), The Birth of the Language of Bugs (trans. C. Yu.), Suffolk:: CC Art Books;.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Pyyhtinen, Olli. ( 2022;), ‘ Lines that do not speak: Multispecies hospitality and bug-writing. ’, Hospitality & Society, 12:3, pp. 343–59, https://doi.org/10.1386/hosp_00056_1
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/hosp_00056_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): art; asemic writing; human–animal relations; insects; line; trace; triad; visitation

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error