Stuart hall in “Who Needs Identity” states that identification is “a process of articulation, a suturing, an over-determination not a subsumption. There is always ‘too much’ or ‘too little’ -- an over determination or a lack, but never a proper fit, a totality.” In this understanding of identification, Hall determined that in the process of identifying, a person is differencing in a form that does not completely fit the whole of one’s personhood, but because of the over determination of identification, it serves as an all-encompassing whole that could identify a person as a group of people. In relation to the indication of identification, how does identification control power structures of hegemonic cultures in the complicated relationship of empowering and depowering individuals who are unified?
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?
Comments
Post a Comment