Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHooker, Claireen_AU
dc.contributor.authorKerridge, Ianen_AU
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-28T02:45:15Z
dc.date.available2022-04-28T02:45:15Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/28373
dc.description.abstractLittle and colleagues’ (1998) paper describing a key aspect of cancer patients’ experience, that of “liminality,” is remarkable for giving articulation to a very common and yet mostly overlooked aspect of patient experience. Little et. al. offered a formulation of liminality that deliberately set aside the concept’s more common use in analysing social rituals, in order to grasp at the interior experience that arises when failing bodily function and awareness of mortality are forced into someone’s consciousness, as occurs with a diagnosis of cancer. We set out the reasons as to why this analysis was so significant in 1998—but we also consider how the “liminality” described by Little and colleagues was (as they suggested) a feature of modernity, founded on what we term “the mirage of settlement.” We argue that this mirage is impossible to sustain in 2022 amid the many forms of un-settling that have characterized late modernity, including climate change and COVID-19. We argue that many people in developed nations now experience liminality as a result of the being forced into the consciousness of living in a continued state of coloniality. We thus rejoin the social aspects of liminality to the interior, Existential form described by Little et. al.en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.subjectCOVID-19en_AUI
dc.subjectCoronavirusen_AUI
dc.titleResponse - Liminality and the Mirage of Settlementen_AU
dc.typeArticleen_AU
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11673-021-10160-w


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

There are no files associated with this item.

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.