Noncitizenism 19 ‘Home’, Maria does more than this. She helps us also to notice what she notices but cannot quite see, drawing us into her own efforts and understand a scene that may be outside the viewer’s experience on several levels. Maria, from her own particular perspective, is raising a question, not about her position in society only, but about the society in which she, the viewer of her photograph, and the rough-sleeper all participate. Seen alongside Maria’s more recent work, with the crisp lines of Hong Kong skyscrapers, this image appears as even more of a contrast. It shows what is blurred even in the spaces (including the theoretical spaces) that may appear to be known. It forces the viewer to look more closely at what is otherwise a mundane city scene to see other realities. The photographer shows herself as located, and forces the viewer to acknowledge her/is own locatedness as well. Such recognition will be necessary if we are to develop a liberal theory that recognises noncitizenship. Noncitizenship without the hyphen and its critics I introduce the analytic category of unhyphenated ‘noncitizenship’ to try to respond to this. Unlike hyphenated ‘non-citizenship’, it does not assume a deference to citizenship or an expulsion. Though imperfect and unequal, States’ relationships with, and obligations to, citizens are well rehearsed. Insofar as individuals relate to States as noncitizens, this is not the case. Noncitizenship here is not some status to be added to the list that includes worker and student visas, residents and refugees, and the vast gamut of officially recognised relationships with States. These statuses are not citizenships, but they are also not noncitizenships. Insofar as they are officially recognised, they are approximations or proxies to citizenship, bestowed upon an individual by the grace of a State. That which is officially recognised in these statuses, is not noncitizenship. And so I refer to them as ‘quasi-citizenship’ statuses. The rights associated with them are not-quite-citizenship rights. A person with a work visa is not usually considered eligible for all of citizenship’s benefits but, thanks to a State’s beneficence, s/he has access to some. Noncitizenship is a different dimension of such a person’s relationship with the same State, a dimension not represented in the quasi-citizen aspects of the individual-State relationship. For example, someone living in a State with a work visa has a quasi-citizen relationship with that State, making claims, contributing, perhaps even voting. But at the same time s/he is always vulnerable to the cessation of the work contract and the expiry of the visa. S/he is vulnerable to the State, to the employer and to officials in a special sort of way and must negotiate eligibility for certain goods. Ultimately, s/he is always at risk of deportation. Such individuals are, then, also vulnerable to the State in question as noncitizens – a form of vulnerability that today can be more abject, unmitigated and potentially total, since it is currently largely unrecognised within liberal democratic systems. Such persons might in this respect also pose a challenge to that State. In Chapter 8, this is shown to be a three-faceted challenge: moral challenge, a legitimacy challenge, and perhaps an existential one as well.