Skip to main content

External Influences and Alarming Tendencies

I particularly enjoyed reading “On Postmodernism and Articulation: An Interview with Stuart Hall" this week—especially as sections of the piece were taken from conversations that took place here at the University of Iowa! 

The final two pages (149-150), which examined the institutionalization and codification—Stuart Hall is keen to differentiate the two terms in his response— of cultural studies in the United States encouraged me to consider the current position of cultural studies within U.S. academia. Indeed, I drew a connection between this piece and "The Last Interview: Stuart Hall on the Politics of Cultural Studies," conducted thirty years later, in which Hall stated—perhaps with a hint of frustration—that "I think a lot of people in cultural studies think we can’t just go on producing another analysis of The Sopranos."

In "On Postmodernism and Articulation" Hall states "cultural studies has to be open to external influences, for example, to the rise of new social movements, to psychoanalysis, to feminism, to cultural differences" which forms my first question: 

What external influences have moulded—and continue to shape—contemporary cultural studies?

a. In what ways do these external influences diverge in different geographical locations; for example, between the U.S. and U.K.? 

My second question is inspired by Hall's quote (146) earlier in the interview: "Perhaps I ought to say in parenthesis that I do find an alarming tendency in myself to prefer people’s less complete works to their later, mature and complete ones... I like people’s middle period a lot, where they have gotten over their adolescent idealism but their thought has not yet hardened into a system."

Does Hall's "alarming" tendency to favor the middle period of scholars' work resonate with anyone else in the class? 

Glenn H 

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