This article moves across the wide spectrum of feminist interpretations of Hegel, starting with Carla Lonzi and revisiting the queer analysis of Judith Butler, in order to re-interpret the famous figure of “Unhappy Consciousness.” From a feminist perspective, these passages in Phenomenology of Spirit should be read as a re-evaluation of the care and reproductive labour, which the Subject experiences as miserably repetitive and mundane, at the stage of dialectics focused on symbolic realm of recognition. The dialectics of the weak can be established based on an in-depth re-evaluation of the material, life maintaining activities traditionally neglected in the discussions of Hegel’s legacy. Here these marginalized elements of the Subject’s lived experience are taken into account, thus allowing the introduction of the Housewife into the dialectical process.

The Hegelian dialectics, inherited by Lacan, assume a division between the Subject and historical time, or, assuming a Symbolic system that is mediated by the phallic law, that only re-produces subjugated subjectivities, without a chance to create something new or be in touch with any chaos outside this phallogocentric system. So, echoing the 1977 essay by Italian feminist Carla Lonzi: “let’s spit on Hegel” – maybe with Lygia Clark’s Anthropophagic Slobber. [...] Guided by Clark’s chaotic vibration, we can think through what happens to the body in/of the world and to the world with/of bodies through the potency of a subjective full/void that vibrates independently from any Other. In chaos we avoid the total reign of language and identity as well as materialist biological reductionism of experience. We meet chaos in the frontier of the vibrating ‘full-void’ of bodies.

In the preceding chapter we have been on the trail of the muse of critique, discovering how resilient it is, how desired and pursued even by thinkers of the present who reject any hermeneutics of the subject but still seem to be receptive to critique’s gentle indocility. In the process, a theme has emerged that now requires proper attention, and that is the contact between literature and philosophy. The keyword for this chapter, “Theory” is a name for the shaping force of that contact. “Theory” with a capital letter is understood as a stage in literary criticism delimited in time, while “theory” with lower case letter, is understood as an approach to texts that, as Raymond Williams advised in Chapter 1 of this book, moves beyond their governamentality. The chapter traces the degree to which critique depends on the question of the contact between literature and philosophy through the example of Fredric Jameson, a pioneer of that transformation of criticism that in American academia gave rise to the new discourse of “theory.” The chapter approaches Jameson through the resources of Walter Benjamin, Aby Warburg, and Carla Lonzi.

ABSTRACT This article historicises Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan Series novels in terms of 1970s feminism. The novels provide a phenomenological account of the development of the autonomist Italian left in the 1970s, but unlike most histories of this process, they centre the gendered contradictions within that political milieu. This narrative arc demands to be contextualised with the ideas of Italian feminists Carla Lonzi, Mariarosa dalla Costa, and the major Anglophone thinkers of Marxist Feminism. The Neapolitan Series investigates the feminist potential of relationships among women, even women who have no political consciousness in the common sense of the term, a potential that is illuminated by contrast with the oppressive effect of the most ardent and sophisticated male Marxists. What is crucial however, and this is at the heart of this article, is the fact that Ferrante stages this skewering of male proletarian rebels amid the finely wrought depictions of the capitalist immiseration of working-class women’s lives and the inanity of bourgeois feminism. In short, this essay uses Ferrante (and her sensational popularity) as a way of thinking about the current revival of interest in 1970s feminism as an expression of the desire to reconcile the central tenets of Radical and Marxist Feminisms.

In 1970, the Italian feminist Carla Lonzi published her now-classic polemic urging women to “spit on Hegel”. Disregarding her advice, many subsequent feminist theorists and philosophers have engaged substantially with Hegel's thought, and a wide variety of feminist readings of Hegel have sprung up. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of these different feminist criticisms and interpretations of Hegel. In introducing these various interpretations, I will show how they reflect a range of divergent feminist approaches to the history of philosophy as a whole. My aim is not only to describe but also to evaluate these approaches, with respect to their capacity to generate insightful and productive readings of Hegel's philosophy. I shall argue that what I will call the “essentialist” feminist approach to Hegel is the most fruitful, doing most to illuminate the contours of his thought and to open up new and creative ways of reading his works.To anticipate, in surveying the various feminist interpretations of Hegel, I will classify them as reflecting four different types of feminist approach to the history of philosophy. The first, “extensionist” approach draws upon the history of philosophy for conceptual resources to understand and explain women's social situation. The second approach is more critical, tracing the pervasiveness of “masculinist” assumptions and biases in the history of philosophy. To call views “masculinist” is to say that they uphold systematic and hierarchical contrasts between masculinity and femininity, contrasts which need not be explicit but may be sustained through contrasts between other ostensibly neutral concepts which actually have tacit gender connotations. This critical approach generates an overwhelmingly negative picture of the philosophical tradition. The third, “essentialist” approach complicates this picture, recovering and highlighting the strands within historical texts which revalorise concepts or items that are given feminine connotations. These often overlooked strands oppose the dominant masculinist tendencies in texts by assigning equal importance and value to “symbolically feminine” concepts. However, proponents of the fourth, “deconstructive” approach object that essentialist readings of philosophical texts accept and reinforce patterns of gender symbolism which feminists ought to challenge. Deconstructive feminists seek to expose and exacerbate the instability within these patterns of gender symbolism by tracing how philosophical texts continuously undermine the gender contrasts present within them.

Despite recent advances in autonomous driving systems, accidents such as the fatal Uber crash in 2018 show these systems are still susceptible to edge cases. Such systems must be thoroughly tested and validated before being deployed in the real world to avoid such events. Testing in open-world scenarios can be difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. These challenges can be addressed by using driving simulators such as CARLA instead. A key part of such tests is adversarial testing, in which the goal is to find scenarios that lead to failures of the given system. While several independent efforts in testing have been made, a well-established testing framework that enables adversarial testing has yet to be made available for CARLA. We therefore propose ANTI-CARLA, an automated testing framework in CARLA for simulating adversarial weather conditions (e.g., heavy rain) and sensor faults (e.g., camera occlusion) that fail the system. The operating conditions in which a given system should be tested are specified in a scenario description language. The framework offers an efficient search mechanism that searches for adversarial operating conditions that will fail the tested system. In this way, ANTI-CARLA extends the CARLA simulator with the capability of performing adversarial testing on any given driving pipeline. We use ANTI-CARLA to test the driving pipeline trained with Learning By Cheating (LBC) approach. The simulation results demonstrate that ANTI-CARLA can effectively and automatically find a range of failure cases despite LBC reaching an accuracy of 100% in the CARLA benchmark.

Despite recent advances in autonomous driving systems, accidents such as the fatal Uber crash in 2018 show these systems are still susceptible to edge cases. Such systems must be thoroughly tested and validated before being deployed in the real world to avoid such events. Testing in open-world scenarios can be difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. These challenges can be addressed by using driving simulators such as CARLA instead. A key part of such tests is adversarial testing, in which the goal is to find scenarios that lead to failures of the given system. While several independent efforts in testing have been made, a well-established testing framework that enables adversarial testing has yet to be made available for CARLA. We therefore propose ANTI-CARLA, an automated testing framework in CARLA for simulating adversarial weather conditions (e.g., heavy rain) and sensor faults (e.g., camera occlusion) that fail the system. The operating conditions in which a given system should be tested are specified in a scenario description language. The framework offers an efficient search mechanism that searches for adversarial operating conditions that will fail the tested system. In this way, ANTI-CARLA extends the CARLA simulator with the capability of performing adversarial testing on any given driving pipeline. We use ANTI-CARLA to test the driving pipeline trained with Learning By Cheating (LBC) approach. The simulation results demonstrate that ANTI-CARLA can effectively and automatically find a range of failure cases despite LBC reaching an accuracy of 100% in the CARLA benchmark.

A woman wearing a holster with two pistols appears to be watching for rattlesnakes displaced on her property in the wake of Hurricane Carla, 1961.

This chapter includes the full text of the play Carla and Lewis, by Shonni Enelow. Two punk butterflies named Carla and Lewis land in the East Village apartment of curator Elsa Turner, who has conceived an interactive art installation that will speak to the human face of climate change. What she doesn’t realize is that the mud of Bangladesh, which she imagines to be so far away, is in fact soaking her apartment walls and creating its own acrimonious ecosystem right under her nose. Carla and Lewis, who don’t play by the rules of humanness, eventually force her to see the mud for what it is, transforming her world, and the theatre, with their audacious, disobedient, co-evolutionary mutations.Keywordsart installationBangladeshclimate changepunk butterfliesrefugee

ABSTRACTThis article reads Carla Lonzi’s collective self-portrait Autoritratto (1969) through the interpretive lens of interruption. I identify interruption as a critical and unexplored stylistic feature and formal strategy that is fundamental to the text’s nascent feminist sensibilities and praxis, and to the alternate personal history it imagines. Interruption functions as a structuring principle and mode of critique that is generative rather than destructive: by interrupting the content of audio interviews and re-staging her experiences textually, Lonzi creates a space where the acts of listening and dialoguing are revealed as essential to creative expression and auto-narration. Although the text predates Lonzi’s radical feminist writings, it engages with gestures central to Italian second-wave feminist discourses: namely, the personal and communicative goals of autocoscienza. In part, this article addresses how the social and historical critiques within Lonzi’s feminism find earlier expression in the narrative techniques and ambivalent self-assertion in Autoritratto.