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

Addressing the Crisis: Your Collective Digital Stories

https://www.wevideo.com/view/2668669034    https://www.wevideo.com/view/2665696438  https://vimeo.com/695272441  https://www.youtube.com/embed/BN2wDbBLMWo https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pggTZblBzhQ5Nd6d8MU7jg28kBV0WixT https://www.wevideo.com/view/2648072657  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tUBup-RbbiCCl9-pWoOCvs2JFbUJYvhC/ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Eed6_fpya8WOfEb0Hjhd4jySuMgi8fI0/

On Journals and Prose

My two questions from this week have emerged from the Judith Butler piece, A 'Bad Writer' Bites Back , both centered around the journal, Philosophy and Literature —which Butler describes as the self-proclaimed “arbiter of good prose.”  I agree with Butler’s staunch defense of questioning common sense and provoking “new ways of looking at a familiar world”, and was reminded of David Harvey’s quote in the introduction to his Companion to Marx’s Capital : “Real learning always entails a struggle to understand the unknown.”   Butler describes Philosophy and Literature as a “culturally conservative academic journal” which naturally led me down a longer-than-anticipated visit to the journal's website . I was greeted with a video presented by the Philosophy and Literature’s editor Garry L. Hagberg, who rails against the “jargon infested” work that litters the journal’s field, locating Philosophy and Literature in clear opposition to such bothersome clutter.  However, Hagberg...