I must admit that I felt somewhat overwhelmed by the ways in which articulation was being articulated in the readings. Based on my confused understanding of the theory, I have two questions/ concerns.
1. HOW ARTICULATION MAY OR MAY NOT WORK
I found Hall's definition -"an articulation is thus the form of the connection that can make a unity of two different elements under certain conditions....the theory of articulation asks how an ideology discovers its subjects rather than how the subject thinks the necessary and inevitable thoughts which belong to it" - very complex but useful to my work (141, 142). For instance, if I am drawing connections between a few cultural forms, one documentary, one drama series, and an anthology in post-1990s India, is it fair to say that I am "articulating" connections within a single discourse? What is a discourse, especially since Hall is careful not to "reduce everything else to it" (Slack 122)? I am also wondering if articulation works differently from queer relationality. I am thinking of how José Esteban Muñoz picks his subjects and cultural forms in Cruising Utopia which theorizes queer futurity.
2. What is culturalism? Is "reduction" merely a critique of reducing everything to economics?
Comments
Post a Comment