Skip to main content

Uncut Conversations

As I've gleaned from other posts so far, Uncut Funk has been a particularly popular read for our class; this strikes me as unsurprising considering the warmth (and intellect) of bell hooks and Stuart Hall shines through every page. 

The "fluidity" of conversation, to quote Hall (5), sits in stark contrast to both stuffy, static conference panels and the decentralized "mirage" of digital networks that Gilroy critiques in the book's foreward (ix).  My question for this week asks: 

How can we subvert academia's demand to talk at, not with, people and instead "engage knowledge across different kinds of boundaries," as hooks (6) so beautifully puts it? 

a. How can we make conference panels more collaborative, more organic, more alive? 

Glenn H 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

2/2 Discussion Questions

Althusser makes a point that ISAs operate as "unified" under the ruling ideology. To what extent are certain ISAs unified if they are "the site of class struggle" playing out, holding the potential for "ruptures" (to use Hall's phrase) with dominant ideologies? Here, I am thinking about the University of Iowa's COVID policies and how its rules are practiced and applied in many different ways throughout campus, as administrative burdens and scale make it difficult to oversee large numbers of employees. More generally, as junior scholars, grad students, and/or individuals doing cultural studies work, does it make more sense for us to do deep and nuanced readings of theorists such as Marx and Althusser in our work, or to cite others who have expanded these traditions over the years?
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