Hall makes the argument that Gramsci's theories are "too concrete." When does being "too concrete" become an issue in scholarship? How do we navigate this in our own writing, especially as junior scholars?
If representations, as Hall argues, have to power to destabilize existing discourses about identity groups, but we are nearing "the end of a certain critical innocence in black cultural politics" (449) that discards the good/bad binary, is there any use for discussing the aesthetic value of popular culture texts? Hall seems to be partially discouraging this.
Comments
Post a Comment