Ecologies of possibility, as a debutante concept, is at risk of entering the concept ballroom and immediately treading on toes and making embarrassing faux pas. In order to save face and to be accepted onto the concept circuit, some considered engagement is going to have to take place with those who already know the score. I’m going to use this page to set out the daunting extent of concepts and thinkers that I’m going to have to give due consideration to before claiming ecologies of possibility as something usefully distinct.
Murray Bookchin and Social Ecology
Seems pretty obvious. I’ve read a little of Bookchin’s work and definitely want to learn more. I’m a huge fan of the marvellous Srsly Wrong podcast which has spent much time discussing Social Ecology and Bookchin. I need to delve deeper into the conceptual underpinnings of this and see if ecologies of possibility is doing anything helpfully different or complimentary.
Hauntology: Derrida and Fisher
There’s clearly things I’m saying about the presence of past possibilities and the effect they have on current social imaginaries that are very much in the ballpark of hauntology. Is ecologies of possibility just rehashing it? I love Mark Fisher’s work on this but haven’t really delved much into Derrida yet.
Bergson & Deleuze: The virtual and the actual
There’s a sophisticated take on possibility and its limitations as a concept that originates (I think) with Bergson and is developed by Deleuze. As far as I’m aware this presents a pretty hefty challenge to the way I want to talk about possibility. I want to think about possibility as something real, powerful and effective, but the carefully chosen language of ‘virtual and actual’ is – I think – used to avoid this sort of – in their view misplaced – take on possibility.
Bloch: Real Possibility
Hopefully Bloch will be able to back me up somewhat in the ontological-status-of-possibility boxing-ring. Bloch is definitely pugnaciously adamant about the reality of possibility and (as far as I’m aware) wasn’t very impressed by Bergson’s understanding of it.
Raymond Williams: Residual and Emergent Structures of Feeling
This again feels very close to something I’m trying to get across when talking about overlapping, intermeshing, polyvalent (etc. etc.) ecologies of possibility and the effect these have on people’s sense of the times and what their limitations are and what their scope for agency is. Certainly it’s pertinent to how I’m thinking about culture and people’s sense of what’s ‘mainstream’. Structures of Feeling is tricky to pin down as a concept (I say this confidently because I’ve seen multiple Raymond Williams scholars say as much), but this could also be a strength. I think a concept’s ‘evocativeness’ really helps to stimulate the theoretical imagination and Structures of Feeling is genuinely evocative.
Henri Lefebvre: What is possible?
Henri says:
“And so, staring us in the face, mundane and therefore generally unnoticed – whereas in the future it will be seen as a characteristic and scandalous trait of our era, the era of the decadent bourgeoisie – is this fact life is lagging behind what is possible, that it is retarded. What incredible backwardness… Once pointed out, the contrast becomes staggeringly obvious, blinding; it is to be found everywhere, whichever way we turn, and never ceases to amaze.”
Yes! This eye for the artificial limitations, the held-back-ness of day-to-day life, is very much what I’m trying to get at. I really hope we do arrive at the future where this shackling of possibility is widely regarded as a scandalous characteristic of a tragic era.
Ecologies of Possibility 
Leave a comment