Skip to main content

Last post of the semester

This is a very zoned in question that isn’t the central argument Stratton and Ang are making, but I wanted to unpack their description of the cultural studies book as monstrous. I understand their use of it, but it seems like such a specific word to use. On page 363 they write: “What we have here is more than a simple western hegemony; what we have is a new American hegemony in an English-speaking cultural studies (which speaks to their main argument). I think I am wondering about the tension between not being an “average academic book” as monstrous and cultural studies as an ‘international venture’ as monstrous. Should we desire the not typical, average academic (bringing it all the way back to Giroux) while interrogating the ‘international’ venture? 


Also, just a lighthearted question, I was wondering if people wanted to share what they’re walking away with/thinking about as the semester ends :-) 

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