Baraitser’s insights hold specific import for feminism. Although Baraitser’s book is not a book about feminism per se, her reassessment of time is certainly relevant to thinking about feminist politics in the present. This is most evident in the fourth chapter, ‘Delaying’. Here, Baraitser begins by asking, ‘In what ways might temporality be a form of politics?’ (p. 93). Her question is not entirely new. Feminist theorising on nostalgia and intergenerational politics and queer theorising on temporality have explored similar questions. Baraitser, however, delves deeper to consider why ‘delayed action’ and even actions that appear to not entail any action at all (e.g. staying) may be especially politically potent. To explore this question, she introduces the somewhat paradoxical idea of the political encampment. From the nearly two-decade-long Greenham Common Women’s Peace Camp to the far more fleeting camps that appeared during the Occupy Movement in 2011, one can find examples of political actions defined by waiting, staying, maintaining, remaining and enduring. Yet, as anyone who has ever participated in a political encampment knows, these camps are not sites defined by stagnation. They are also, as Baraitser reminds us, ‘amode of potentially sustainable living that both experiments with and creates new collective imaginaries’ (p. 112). Baraitser further suggests that the recent re-emergence of the political encampment as a form of protest may itself reveal something about what it means to stay in relation to an elongated present. Rather than represent something new, she suggests that these camps may be best understood as ‘a time delay’ – a ‘reconnection with something that has remained, perhaps unnoticed, in public life’ (p. 113). To be clear, most of the examples that Baraitser references in Enduring Time are derived not from politics but rather from theory, literature and art. The point of her collection of essays, however, is not to offer close readings of events or cultural texts and objects but rather to use these collected meditations to disrupt our entrenched assumptions about time. In Enduring Time, Baraitser asks her readers not only to defamiliarise myriad taken-for-granted assumptions about time but also to consider the powerful political potential of time that appears to have stopped – the time we encounter in the delay, the wait, the repeated sequence. In the process, she also leaves her readers with a surprising revelation – that we may not be as pressed for time or as time-deprived as we thought.

中文翻译：

---

准备好的玩家二：女性游戏玩家和 Shira Chess 设计的身份

Baraitser 的见解对女权主义具有特殊的意义。尽管 Baraitser 的书本身并不是一本关于女权主义的书，但她对时间的重新评估肯定与思考当今的女权主义政治有关。这在第四章“延迟”中最为明显。在这里，Baraitser 开始问道：“时间性在哪些方面可能成为一种政治形式？” （第 93 页）。她的问题并不是全新的。关于怀旧和代际政治的女权主义理论以及关于时间性的酷儿理论都探讨了类似的问题。然而，Baraitser 更深入地思考为什么“延迟行动”甚至似乎根本不需要任何行动（例如留下）的行动在政治上可能特别有效。为了探讨这个问题，她引入了政治营地这个有点矛盾的想法。从长达近两年的格林汉普通妇女和平营到 2011 年占领运动期间出现的更短暂的营地，人们可以找到等待、停留、维持、留下和持久定义的政治行动的例子。然而，任何参加过政治营地的人都知道，这些营地并不是由停滞定义的地点。正如 Baraitser 提醒我们的那样，它们也是“一种潜在的可持续生活模式，它既试验又创造了新的集体想象”（第 112 页）。Baraitser 进一步指出，最近作为抗议形式重新出现的政治阵营本身可能揭示了一些关于留在拉长的现在意味着什么的东西。与其代表新事物，她建议最好将这些营地理解为“时间延迟”——“与公共生活中可能未被注意到的事物重新建立联系”（第 113 页）。需要明确的是，巴雷瑟在《持久的时间》中引用的大多数例子都不是来自政治，而是来自理论、文学和艺术。然而，她的散文集的目的不是提供对事件或文化文本和物体的仔细阅读，而是利用这些收集到的冥想来打破我们对时间根深蒂固的假设。在持久的时间中，巴雷策不仅要求她的读者陌生化无数关于时间的理所当然的假设，而且还要考虑时间似乎已经停止的强大政治潜力——我们在延迟、等待、重复中遇到的时间顺序。进行中，