Dossier

Much current critical debate focuses on issues of racialization or sexuality or both. In many cases, critics seek to dismantle prevailing discourses in order to open up new ways of viewing the issues, new modes of legibility. But what about critical work that looks at the illegibility of racialization and sexuality? Is such work itself “legible” in today’s academy? This dossier features three critics who look at illegibility from a psychoanalytic perspective.

Contributors: Denise Davis, Lee Edelman, Matthew Helm, Xandra Ibarra, David Marriott, Jennifer C. Nash, Samantha Pinto, Iván A. Ramos, Kriss Ravetto-Biagioli, Ellen Rooney, Selamawit D. Terrefe, Elizabeth Weed, Elizabeth A. Wilson