An Aesthetics of Disturbance in the Congo: from Adjunct Aesthetes to Artisanal Miners

In this essay, I explore two interconnected figures of aesthetics and poverty. The first figure is aesthetics poverty, meaning the (a) literal (relative) poverty of the majority precariously-employed scholars in what has been called the “ghettoization of aesthetics” within academic philosophy, and (b) figurative poverty of the discipline in terms of its tendency to focus narrowly on pleasurable and individual phenomena to the neglect of disturbing and community phenomena. The second figure is poverty aesthetics, meaning (a) aesthetic values and practices associated with the absolute poverty of aesthetic practitioners, such as the “artisanal miners” of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), (b) the tendency to suppress, make-invisible, or “anesthetize” those aesthetics (in the sense of the negation of aesthesis qua “sense-perception”). The connection between these two figures is not only that enslaved and child labor in the DRC is necessary to power the devices on which scholars do their aesthetics research, but also that attempting to counter this anesthesia risks “professional suicide” (as in the numerous censorings and firings of U.S. scholarly critics of Israel's genocide of Palestine). Rolling those dice once more, I dig deep into Siddartha Kara’s Pulitzer Prize-finalist Cobalt Red: How the Blood of the Congo Powers Our Lives, unearthing the unifying figure of this investigation: “aesthetics of disturbance,” defined as a muddied offloading of the global northerners’ psychological turmoil onto global southerners, the cost of which includes the latter’s individual misery and political chaos. Thus, aesthetic scholars are ethically-politically obligated to help re-aestheticize the artisanal miners of the DRC, thereby proving ourselves worthy of the financial compensation to keep such research going.