Skip to main content

1/26 Discussion Questions

 1) I, like many of my peers by the looks of the posts before me, was struck by Giroux et al.'s arguments surrounding Cultural Studies and the constraints placed on knowledge production by the academy and disciplines within it. I was particularly interested in their discussion surrounding "interdisciplinary" programs within the academy, such as American Studies or Gender/Women's Studies. They note that, although these departments were constructed because of the "sense that the most important issues were being lost in the cracks between the rigid boundaries of the disciplines," they tend to either be radical and resisting of these disciplines, which discredits them in the academy, or they tend to lose their radical edge in order to become more successful and "legitimate" within the academy. I think these are still concerns for people who study within these interdisciplinary programs, and so my question is if this paradox can be remedied, and if it can be, how do we go about doing so? Is the only answer to move this work outside of the academy, like Giroux et al. call for at the end of their piece?

2) Hall's article on the two paradigms of cultural studies was also illuminating for me, as it really helped me understand the fundamental differences between the culturalist and structuralist positions in cultural studies. One question I have from this reading is based on the notion of "experience." I am trying to work through my own understanding of experience (which I had always seen as a sort of "ground," much like the culturalist paradigm), but through Hall's explanation of experience as the effect of cultural categories, I think I actually quite lean the other way. My question, then, is how do we understand experience and its relationship to culture? Is it the "ground" where consciousness and social conditions intersect, or can experience really only come as an effect of living through already constructed categories and classifications?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Journals and Prose

My two questions from this week have emerged from the Judith Butler piece, A 'Bad Writer' Bites Back , both centered around the journal, Philosophy and Literature —which Butler describes as the self-proclaimed “arbiter of good prose.”  I agree with Butler’s staunch defense of questioning common sense and provoking “new ways of looking at a familiar world”, and was reminded of David Harvey’s quote in the introduction to his Companion to Marx’s Capital : “Real learning always entails a struggle to understand the unknown.”   Butler describes Philosophy and Literature as a “culturally conservative academic journal” which naturally led me down a longer-than-anticipated visit to the journal's website . I was greeted with a video presented by the Philosophy and Literature’s editor Garry L. Hagberg, who rails against the “jargon infested” work that litters the journal’s field, locating Philosophy and Literature in clear opposition to such bothersome clutter.  However, Hagberg...
Post a Comment
Read more

Articulation_by_Abby Escatel

 In "Race, Articulation and Societies Structured in Dominance," Stuart Hall is concerned with complicating Marxist theory's tendency to overgeneralize and universalize its claims that are specifically located within a European history of labor. Questions concerning slavery, coloniality, unfree/forced labor come to the fore and force Marxist theorists to grapple with the need to be specific in their contextualization and historicization of particular moments, ruptures and conjunctures. My questions are as follows:  1. How do we move forward with Marxism while taking into account the component of "unfreedom" when conceptualizing class, labor, and labor power? How does the "proletariat" fail to account for the lived realities of racialized bodies?  2. It seems as though Hall is also saying that race is not all encompassing and also shouldn't be overgeneralized/universalized. In short, labor and race are both always already at work. As a scholar who ce...
Post a Comment
Read more

Week 5

  What are the differences between Gramsci’s concept of the “organic intellectual” and Hall’s “public pedagogy?”   On the topic of the diasporic intellectual, Kuan-Hsing Chen mentions that “Some of the diasporic intellectuals I know of have exercised their power, for better or worse, back home, but you have not. And some of them are trying to move back, in whatever way. So, in that sense, you are very peculiar” (503). Although Hall felt some reconnection with the Carribean through the Black diasporic population in Britain, he insists that cultural identity is not fixed but “comes out of very specific historical formations, out of very specific histories and cultural repertoires of enunciation, that it can constitute a ‘positionality’, which we call, provisionally, identity” (503). Individuals can negotiate, rearticulate, recontextualize their different identities, but how does this rearticulation work at an institutional-level?   Thelma
Post a Comment
Read more