Contribution short abstract:

I reflect on how Harney and Moten’s notion of “study” as a distinctive intellectual and political practice neither simply exists “for or against” other forms of knowing called “theory” and “fieldwork”, but nonetheless scrambles some of their basic assumptions and aspirations.

Contribution long abstract:

I attend to Harney and Moten’s notion of “study” as a distinctive intellectual and political practice inspired by traditions of Black radicalism. I reflect on how study neither simply exists “for or against” other forms of knowing frequently called “theory” and “fieldwork”, but nonetheless scrambles some of their basic assumptions and aspirations. I try to make sense of the ways that study is neither simply solitary (uncommon) nor solidary (common) but instead arises from the something else Harney and Moten call the undercommons. I consider what study as a way of life might mean for these organized and institutionalized “fields” some of us exist at once inside and outside: namely, anthropology and the university. I wonder about the possibilities and limits of study in these fields insofar as they are structured by logics of white supremacy and anti-Blackness.