Skip to main content

Week 4 Thoughts

 My first question stems from the tension that seems to come out of most of these readings (especially "The New Left" and "The Great Moving Nowhere Show") between creating "revolutionary" socialist change and playing within the confines of the existing political structures and parties. I was especially struck by Hall's recounting of the New Left's relationship with the Labour Party, in which he writes that "inside the machine, CND withered and shriveled into a talisman, a fetish of party conference resolutions, plaything of the manoeuvres of the block vote, without touching ground in the political consciousness or activity of many actual people" (136). This seems to be quite the issue within the Democratic Party today, in which socialist agendas are utilized to garner votes and give a promise "for a better future" without actually enacting any change at all. I suppose my question here is how can revolutionary leftists work within and without of the existing structures in order to make sure that their goals are not fetishized within the dominant political party?

Something I have been grappling with from these readings (and previous ones) is the importance of the economic base in understanding both political and cultural issues. Hall writes about how the New Left had to push for the cultural dimension (superstructure) to be seen as a constitutive dimension of society, which he states "reflects part of the New Left's long-standing quarrel with the reductionism and economism of the base-superstructure metaphor" (127). While, as a cultural scholar, I absolutely agree with this sentiment, I can't help but wonder if we have done too good of a job moving away from the notion of the determining base. Especially looking at our current situation in COVID (government officials essentially declaring the pandemic over when it is far from such in order to get people back to work, CDC shortening quarantine times, etc.), I wonder if moving even just a notch back toward discussing the base as not the only determining factor, but as one that holds just as much importance as other, more cultural dimensions, would be helpful?

(I apologize for posting so late in the day!)

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

Week 6 Discussion Qs

 Hall brings up the concept of interpellation as applied to social formations. (p 335) How is interpellation related to articulation? How are the two different, if at all? Must the two be discussed together? I have more difficulty conceptualizing interpellation than I do articulation. If we are to take up Hall's warning not to study racism as a set of "historically specific racisms" (336) nor as something with a "universal structure" (337). What balance can we strike today between these two approaches in our current historical moment? Eduardo Bonilla-Silva has written that certain forms of modern racism have been impacted by the prevalent ideology of "colorblindness." Are we still in this moment or are new specificities arising?
Post a Comment
Read more

Corrine's Op Ed

       Although the Grammy’s “rebranded” their “urban” music award in 2020 after being taken to task by Tyler, the Creator for using the term to cover all black artists, regardless of their chosen genre, its lingering presence can still be felt in the new “Progressive R&B” award that has taken its place. Where Tyler, the Creator and other artists argued for more diverse genres that allow for broader categorizations for “people who look like [him],” the Grammy’s simply tucked one category into the other, reflecting how “urban” and R&B are both intrinsically linked and coded to the Grammy’s board as “black music.” This neat folding away of urban back into R&B seems to be unhelpful at best and reductive at worst, and has serious repercussions for us all, artist or otherwise: the pigeonholing of black art/ ists into essentialized categories allows for only a few forms of blackness to be legitimated through the Grammy system, but it also reflects the rigid bo...
Post a Comment
Read more