Academic “Dirty Work”
- 14 July 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Brill in Society & Animals
- Vol. 23 (3), 211-230
- https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-12341312
Abstract
Human-Animal Studies (has) is an innovative field, tarnished by its politicized mixed-species subject matter. This paper considers how nonhuman animal scholars may also be tainted, for different reasons and to varying degrees, because of the academic “dirty work” they perform within has. As the field matures, tensions are emerging among this disparate scholarly group. These tensions are associated with the rise of Critical Animal Studies (cas), the extent to which animal scholars should engage in emancipatory-type scholarship and the appearance of the “animal as such–animal as constructed” axis within has. This paper draws on these intrafield tensions to form a potential framework that maps scholarly labor within has. As scholars begin to debate what counts as “good” and “bad” human-animal scholarship, this may engender the appearance of academic-moral havens. It is suggested that such enclaves may partly mitigate the personal challenges and professional stigma of working in a tarnished academic field. Human-Animal Studies (has) is an innovative field, tarnished by its politicized mixed-species subject matter. This paper considers how nonhuman animal scholars may also be tainted, for different reasons and to varying degrees, because of the academic “dirty work” they perform within has. As the field matures, tensions are emerging among this disparate scholarly group. These tensions are associated with the rise of Critical Animal Studies (cas), the extent to which animal scholars should engage in emancipatory-type scholarship and the appearance of the “animal as such–animal as constructed” axis within has. This paper draws on these intrafield tensions to form a potential framework that maps scholarly labor within has. As scholars begin to debate what counts as “good” and “bad” human-animal scholarship, this may engender the appearance of academic-moral havens. It is suggested that such enclaves may partly mitigate the personal challenges and professional stigma of working in a tarnished academic field.Keywords
This publication has 45 references indexed in Scilit:
- Disciplining animals: sentience, production, and critiqueInternational Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 2004
- "How Can You Do It?": Dirty Work and the Challenge of Constructing a Positive IdentityAcademy of Management Review, 1999
- The new social sciences: cracks in the disciplinary wallsInternational Social Science Journal, 1997
- GOING INTO THE CLOSET WITH SCIENCEJournal of Contemporary Ethnography, 1991
- GOOD PEOPLE DOING DIRTY WORK: A STUDY OF SOCIAL ISOLATION*Symbolic Interaction, 1984
- Status and Status Strain in the ProfessionsAmerican Journal of Sociology, 1981
- The Zoological Connection: Animal-Related Human BehaviorSocial Forces, 1979
- Specialization and Prestige in the Legal Profession: The Structure of DeferenceAmerican Bar Foundation Research Journal, 1977
- AccountsAmerican Sociological Review, 1968
- Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of DelinquencyAmerican Sociological Review, 1957