Skip to main content

Corrine's Last Reading Post!

 Hi everyone! Looking forward to seeing you all tomorrow to talk through these readings. Something that struck me in these readings was how easily something like cultural studies (which is supposed to be provisional and non-universal, for the most part) becomes broken down into binaries that posit one position or the other rather than a more flexible understanding. For example, du Gay (and other scholars we've read) explores how the political economy and the cultural economy are set against one another, which is why Hall's call to understand the economic as cultural is so necessary, and Stratton and Ang explore how cultural studies itself became set up as largely national vs. the global, or maybe rather a larger emphasis was placed on the national. 

My question in all of this is: While we know it can be helpful to be able to abstract our scholarship to larger issues, can it ever be helpful to think in universal terms or binaries? These readings (and the tenets of cultural studies) seem to really push us to think beyond these more "simple" ways of thinking, and I absolutely am with it and try to replicate that in my own work, but I do wonder if writing these off completely is just setting up another binary? Is it always both/and with cultural studies rather than the traditional and/or? (I hope this all makes sense, I feel like I am rambling a bit and having a hard time putting these thoughts into words!) 

Comments

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?

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?