Daphne Vetulani

Elle van Rooyen

Luana Moreno Sampaio Guimarães

Marie Denzler

In “Speculation: The Inherent Knowledge of Nuance”, Denzler, Moreno Sampaio Guimarães, van Rooyen and Vetulani form a response to Van der Tuin and Verhoeff’s entry on “speculation” in Critical Concepts for the Creative Humanities (2022) from the perspective of four different disciplines. The essay explores how speculation is seen, applied and can be of use in the fields of History, Linguistics, Film studies, and Literature. Here, overlap is found in the way speculation appears in both creation and product in these academic fields, but this is also relevant for creative practice: the application of speculation in creative practice is highlighted as a way of being innovative by speculating. 

In the non-academic world ‘speculation’ usually has a rather negative connotation. It is oftentimes associated with unfounded statements, wild accusations, and rumours (n.d, 2024). However, as in most parts of society the concept requires a more nuanced analysis that ventures beyond the perspectives of positive and negative. It is by raising questions of how nuanced the concept is and how a multidisciplinary perspective broadens its definition, that one understands its importance. This paper explains how ‘speculation’ can be defined as a vital part of creative disciplines within the humanities. It becomes important to state that the arguments in this essay serve as a communicative reflection and response to the book Critical Concepts for the Creative Humanities (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022). Therefore, this essay shows the multiple ways in which the different fields of History, Linguistics, Film studies, and Literature within academia utilise speculation in their own research to reach new conclusions. 

According to Iris Van der Tuin and Nanna Verhoeff (2022, 178), speculation has multiple meanings. On page 178, they argue how ‘speculation’ is not just a tool for creation and a process of imagination, as one would assume, but it is also a valuable way to free oneself from biases and prejudices embedded within a person’s own theoretical frameworks. They state that ‘to speculate’ means to “reach into the future […] but doing so from a framework that is before or outside the speculation that it produces” (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022, 178). Speculation opens up the possibility to become aware of one’s position within the present and the influence of one’s surroundings, thus enabling an individual to challenge their own preconceived notions (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022, 178). Because of this, the method of speculation has the ability to deconstruct bias and theoretical frameworks, which is precisely why speculation is relevant to a manifold number of disciplines within the humanities. Additionally, having discussed the overall arguments composed by the authors, and how they argue that speculation is a creative method that responds to an issue in the present, it becomes relevant to reflect on how this method is an introspective process (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022, 178). By speculating on a possible outcome, the importance of the “here and now” is acknowledged and composes a deeply nuanced perspective.

Furthermore, in creative processes, speculation is present at every level. It is not just found in the result, but it is the method. An example is that a painter may speculate what something looks like through painting, or a writer can speculate what the consequences of a presented problem are. Any piece of art tries to approach the thought behind it, and in doing so, speculates. Van der Tuin and Verhoeff (2022, 179) provide two examples of speculation in the creative process: speculative design and creative writing. Speculative design projects the future onto the present, evolving those products we already know into what they might become (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022, 179). Speculation for this creative practice becomes a tool of projection and imagination. This allows for a connection between innovation and speculation, where making certain choices will affect the outcome. Additionally, if an issue is found in an existing design, the designer speculates its solution. In contrast, creative writing allows for an expansion of possible outcomes and explores ideas otherwise hidden (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022, 179). Overall, ‘speculation’ is mostly important in the creative process, rather than the result. However, in creative writing, and many other art forms, it is harder to separate the creative process and the product. Not only does the artist speculate, but the viewer does too. In both these practices, speculation is used as a method in the creative process to shape the medium by looking outside its own frameworks.

Speculation in History

Since history is a basis of society it is a key figure in understanding one’s embedded frameworks. This segment of the essay argues that speculation is part of the very basis of historical thought. Historical research is limited by what one can factually know about the past, since it is studying something that does not exist anymore. Especially in heritage studies and cultural history which focuses on the immaterial past that cannot be captured or leave any tangible remains. Speculating and spinning theories is what makes this field even remotely possible. Moreover, a famous saying among historians is “history is an endless debate” (Van Der Waag 2012, 126) and this is true: the very essence of historical research is to discuss and debate, agree, and disagree on ideas and choices other historians have made about the past. This speculation leaves the possibility for other historians to chime in and share their own theories and opinions is the backbone of the academic historical community. But how exactly is speculation used in historical practice (Bolin 2009, 110)? 

On one hand it is comparable to creative fiction: historians fill in the gaps of what we know with a well-structured guess based on further research and their understanding, similarly to creative writers. Although in contrast to creative practice, historical research always has to be founded on concrete evidence and sound argumentation. On the other hand, speculation plays a vital part in a lot of the theoretical frameworks of historical research. For example, within the broader topic of explanatory models, which are different methods historians employ to explain the processes and developments of the past, speculation has a key role. There are three well-known models: covering law, intentional and the lesser used comparative (Paul 2015, 97-105). While all of these of course intrinsically use speculation as we cannot fully water down complex historical events to two to three for sure trigger events or certain decisions, one is far more speculative than the others: the comparative model. Within this, instead of looking at why an event such as the French Revolution happened as it did, one looks at why there was no revolution in Germany as well. The basic idea is to ask what the reason was that it happened in one place and not anywhere else with comparable circumstances, or even simply just two places across time and space. Furthermore, to ask why exactly something didn’t happen, one cannot just do research on what did take place, one has to speculate about what would have been an alternative past using amongst other methods such as the concept of ‘counterfactuals’ (Paul 2015, 105). This can be better understood by reflecting on questions such as: what if the French Revolution never succeeded in the first place? Or what if Robespierre had not been executed and instead stayed in power? These questions open up the usually rigid academic air of history to a bit more freedom and creativity. However, it is highly debated if counterfactuals are truly something that should belong in academic history (Paul 2015, 105). Overall, speculation cannot be separated from historical practice. Without it, the field of history would be limited to very few truths we can fully support and not be as rich and interactive a community as it is in this day and age.

Speculation in Film studies

It is within this interactive community that one must shift focus to one of the pillars of modern-day society: Media. To speculate is, according to Van der Tuin and Verhoeff, to “reach into a future or an elsewhere” (2022, 178). The emphasis on ‘speculation’ as a core concept of the Humanities allows for a reflection surrounding the use of the notion in Film studies. This part of the essay will apply its focus to the theoretical side of film analysis, with approaches that provide tools to comprehend the ‘complex narrative’ process. Interestingly, the canonical film approach known as ‘cognitive film theory’ was established surrounding the process of unlearning while relying on previous knowledge (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022, 178; Bordwell 2008). A key name in this theory is David Bordwell, who proposes a perspective which argues that spectators should understand film narrative through the medium of “inferential elaborations” in his book The Poetics of Film (2008, 93). 

Similarly, to the definition of ‘speculation’ provided by Van der Tuin and Verhoeff (2022), this cognitive holistic approach to understating film narrative focuses on an interdisciplinary view of cinematic experience and argues how “[i]t cuts across distinctions of art and science, fiction and nonfiction, literature and the other arts” (Bordwell 2008, 86). In summary, the theory believes that audiences are constantly being presented with nuanced codes that allow viewers to produce schemata. Therefore, speculating does not only reflect on the future of the narrative but also builds upon preconceived knowledge derived from other experiences (Bordwell 2008, 93-94). Moreover, speculation or inferential elaborations become a key tool for film creators to produce a narrative pattern that allows audiences to constantly wonder and speculate on the codes projected into the screen (Bordwell 2008, 101-103). This notion of constantly positioning spectators into producing speculation, mostly called schemata, exposes a key aspect of every narrative: the aspiration to position spectators to constantly ask what will happen next (Bordwell 2008, 101). Nevertheless, one needs to understand habits or previous knowledge to understand cinematic patterns of motifs (Bordwell 2008, 102). Composing what can be argued as an “educated speculation”, where audiences theorise on the narrative based on its previous experiences of gender, production, or outside information. It is exactly the idea of “educated speculation” that allows for audiences to watch a scene with a driving car, see the empty liquor bottle on the floor and produce the schemata that the driver is intoxicated (Bordwell 2008, 93). 

In short, contrastingly from other creative practices this case focuses on speculation of the receiver, not creator, where he becomes an active participant. Therefore speculation or what I argue as ‘educated speculation’ can be seen as a key aspect of narrative recognition in active spectators. Similarly, to Van der Tuin and Verhoeff’s definition there is a combination of “experimental skills with critical insight” in the active recognition of film narrative (2022, 178), whether in its theoretical critical thinking or in the mundane action of watching a movie. This allows not only for correct inferential elaborations to be made, but also composes crucial doubt provoking characteristics of a film’s story (Bordwell 2008, 93-102).

Speculation in Literature

Another discipline in which speculation can be applied to narrative analysis is that of literature. At its core, literary analysis is largely speculation. By analysing the text, the reader speculates what the meaning of a text is, what the author might have meant, whether something is deliberate or not, whether a theory might be applicable to the text and more. One could thus argue that the entire field of literary studies is speculation in a way, as interpreting is a speculative act in its nature. Speculation in the literary field, however, is found not only in reception, but also in production. An author speculates as they write. The author proposes a problem and then speculates the result of that problem. 

Oziewicz (2017) pointed out three historically located definitions of speculative fiction and the debates surrounding and rejecting them. The first defines it as a subset of science fiction that is involved “with human actions in response to a new situation created by science or technology” rather than technological development (Oziewicz 2022, 3). Others argue that speculative fiction is opposite to science fiction. Margaret Atwood claims that the latter “includes stories about events that cannot possibly happen, such as the Martian invasion and similar scenarios” (Oziewicz 2022, 5), as opposed to in speculative fiction. In its broadest sense, speculative fiction is “a field of cultural production rather than a genre” (Oziewicz 2022, 3) that challenges what is and is not real or possible (or might be) but does not need to be factual (Oziewicz 2022, 19). Simply put, speculative fiction is a broad category of non-mimetic genres that respond to reality (Oziewicz 2022, 2).

One example of a work of speculative fiction is The Word for World is Forest (2010) by Ursula K. le Guin: it is unclear whether the events that occur are plausible to happen in real life. The book is a story of colonisation on an interplanetary scale. The traditionally non-violent Athsheans react to their oppression and exploitation by Terrans (humans from earth) in a very violent manner, having learnt to kill. Though the book involves an invasion from another planet (reminding us of Atwood’s distinction between speculative fiction and science fiction), the book is written from a distinct perspective that shapes the speculation, which fits in Van der Tuin and Verhoeff’s (2022) definition. The Word for World is Forest was written during the Vietnam War and with its speculation offers critiques of issues such as colonialism, militarism, ecocide, racism, and patriarchy: without its historical context, the book would not be the same, and its method of speculation is directly related to the context it was written in. The science fiction-esque setting makes the reader reflect on current society.

Van der Tuin and Verhoeff’s (2022) theoretical framework and definitions of speculation in different disciplines and fields of creative practice largely overlap with the application of speculation in literature, where speculation is a tool that allows one to look outside the boundaries of previous knowledge and reflect on this.

Speculation in Linguistics

Van der Tuin and Verhoeff (2022) suggest that there is an inherent connection between works of fiction and speculation. They focalise Helen Palmer’s idea that world-building occurs on the level of the word. The “connection between the here and now and the there and then” (2022, 180) is encapsulated by the science fiction program Doctor Who (1963–1989, 2005-present). The show’s content combines creative and academic practices in Gallifreyan, its constructed language, its ‘conlang,’. Schreyer defines a conlang as languages which have been created for “real-world or fictional speakers”, under which Gallifreyan is an ‘artlang’; “used for artistic purposes, such as media” (2021, 328). The creator and designer of Gallifreyan must speculate on the formation, evolution, and pragmatics of this fictional language, culminating in a multidisciplinary analysis of interaction between anthropological understandings of socio-cultural impact on language, the eventuality of linguistic phenomenon, (e.g., language contact), and the tangible audio-visual manifestations of the artlang. Speculation in the field of linguistics mainly appears in syntactic theory or speculative grammar. This, however, is an archaic linguistic theory and thus not reflective of the definition proposed by Van der Tuin and Verhoeff (2022). The process of speculation undertaken within linguistics through the construction of new inferences, particularly in sociolinguistics, does adhere to how Van der Tuin and Verhoeff (2022) define speculation; as an innovative expansion on known frameworks. Therefore, linguistics in collaboration with the creative industry, and practice, combine to transcend what is known, what is plausible, and what is possible. 

Doctor Who (1963–1989, 2005-present) expands on the speculative function of Gallifreyan by suggesting multiple forms of the language: Old High Gallifreyan (OHG), Modern Gallifreyan, and Circular Gallifreyan (CG). OHG is introduced for the first time in The Five Doctors in 1983, where it is discussed ambiguous and only seen in written form, using mathematical, Greek, and Latin symbols. The exact logistics of Gallifreyan are vague in this first run of the show due to no impending need to speculate the fullest extent of the language. When Doctor Who was revived, so was Gallifreyan. 

For Gallifreyan speculation occurs on two planes: the construction and the reception of the artlang. As Vultee discusses, Gallifreyan is by no means complete, with no canonised or sanctioned version. Similarly, the limited exposure fans have to Gallifreyan, indicates that the show’s writers never mapped the “linguistic iceberg” of Gallifreyan (2013, 117). Vultee explains, “Tumblr and deviantART – have been instrumental in creating communities around [CG]” (2013, 121) where fans speculate on the rules and conventions of the language (informed by their own language systems, i.e.: CG follows English word order; a representation of Van der Tuin and Verhoeff’s (2022) proposition that speculation is dependent on a framework which it then transcends) and construct tutorials. The creation of an artlang such as Gallifreyan displays how multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary speculation is needed at every face of the issue; the actual linguistic construction of the language (integration of linguistics and design), and the interpretation and fan-canonisation of the language, where anthropology, linguistics, design, and the mythology of the show combine to create a speculated version of Gallifreyan, popularised in fanzines, social media, and official fan merchandising. 

Conclusion

As Van der Tuin and Verhoeff state: “there is no way other than to speculate, should one wish to represent n-dimensional space” (2022, 179). Therefore, one can infer that speculation is a nuanced form of deliberation, critical exploration, and augmentation of one’s knowledge, requiring firstly, a concrete understanding of the present framework, and then secondly, the ability to effectively transcend spatial and temporal plains. Nevertheless, speculation works as an umbrella term that allows for manifold interpretations within several disciplines. Speculation is key to any moment of creation; academic, informal, creative all included. It is a moment of subversion from the framework of the traditional present as a stagnant moment and a step into the realm of possibility; to form one’s own metaphysical laboratory for forming and testing hypotheses. To allow for in-depth understanding of the term, there is a need for expansion of the subtlety of the term. 

In conclusion, in any particular execution speculation may be trans-, inter-, or multidisciplinary; but may never be monodisciplinary. Speculation within any singular discipline must eclipse others to form any informed whole. It is reliant on an established framework to then surpass its limitations. Through analysing the concept across a multidisciplinary perspective, including how different discipline’s view and make use of speculation, the canonical hidden function of the concept for creative disciplines becomes clear. This allows for a greater understanding of any one concept’s nuances, manifold definitions, and interpretations. After all, speculation is inherently creative, ontological, and epistemological, and succeeds when it embraces a multitude of disciplines in the proposal of an “elsewhere or else when” (Van der Tuin and Verhoeff 2022, 178). In a way, even the sole process of critically reflecting on Van der Tuin and Verhoeff’s (2022) book requires speculation. 

References

Bolin, Paul E. 2009. “Imagination and Speculation as Historical Impulse: Engaging Uncertainties within Art Education History and Historiography.” Studies in Art Education 50, no. 2: 110–23. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25475894.

Bordwell, David. 2008. Poetics of Cinema. New York: Routledge.

Doctor Who, original run season 20, episode 23, “The Five Doctors,” directed by Peter Moffatt, written by Terrance Dicks, aired November 23, 1983, by BBC, distributed by BritBox and Amazon, https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B074FBY7VP/ref=atv_dp_season_select_s0

Doctor Who, season 3, episode 11, “Utopia,” directed by Graeme Harper, written by Russell T Davies, aired June 16, 2007, by BBC, distributed by BritBox and Amazon, https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0G1968VGG2YX0XX9U36NTMLBT3/ref=atv_dp_season_select_s3

Le Guin, Ursula K. 2010. The Word for World is Forest. New York: Tor Publishing Group.

Oziewicz, Marek. 2017. “Speculative Fiction.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Literature. Accessed 28 Dec. 2023.  https://oxfordrecom.proxy.library.uu.nl/literature/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190201098.001.0001/acrefore-9780190201098-e-78.

Paul, Herman. 2015. Key Issues in Historical Theory. Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315720609.

Schreyer, Christine. 2021. “Constructed Languages.” Annual Review of Anthropology 50 (1): 327–44. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-101819-110152.