Skip to main content

The Harvard Letter

 There’s a lot to talk about in these readings (as always!), especially as related to questions of discipline, culture/meaning make, the political/what should be political, and the academy/school (and the self - I really liked the interview with Hall). Nevertheless, I want to talk about the Giroux piece and citational practices, as put in context with the Harvard letter. 


I think the Harvard letter speaks to a lot of Giroux’s argument and the ways in which educators can become agents of corporate power (343). It also stirred conversation about sexual/abuse within the academy, though many are highlighting the fact that this is *happening in almost every institution, whether among faculty and students or students and students or TAs and students, everyday.* The point is that sexual abuse is rampant and many in the academy *know* of known abusers, even if only through whispered networks. And, yet, nothing is done; but perhaps most importantly, these scholars are still scholars of high esteem. They are cited and referenced and kept in power. Specifically, a scholar referenced many time in cultural studies. Now, if Giroux knows this I have no idea, but I do. Where does that leave us within cultural studies? What do we do with their work and/or citing them? Or is the Harvard letter another ephemeral instance reminding survivors “how little it registers, how little we’ve been able to change anything or get anybody to do anything” (Hall, 1992, 83).

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