FACULTY OF CREATIVE AND CRITICAL STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF CRITICAL STUDIES
2012 Winter Term 2
Methodologies: Cultural Theory
English 502/ IGS 501Y
Instructor: Dr. George Grinnell
Office: Fine Arts 350
Hours: Wednesday 12-2pm, or by appointment
Email:
Course Objectives and Learning Outcomes:
This course examines contemporary cultural theory, with a particular emphasis on methodology. The course will develop knowledge of a range of theoretical methods and concepts crucial for understanding Cultural Studies approaches to culture. This course will explore the history and practice of Cultural Studies via close attention to a number of works of cultural theory, exploring concepts such as Power, Ideology, Culture, Space, Subjectivity, and Time.
We begin with attention to the distinct histories of Cultural Studies in France and in the UK and will then consider how the discipline has developed within universities in North America and around the world. These early weeks will ask: What is and what is not Cultural Studies? How does it arise and how has it changed over time? What sorts of questions does it ask of us and of culture? How are its methods distinct from other research practices in the university and how does it borrow from traditions in the humanities and the social sciences or create new interdisciplinary frameworks? In the weeks that follow, we will examine a range of topics of particular interest to Cultural Studies and work individually and collectively via course assignments and class discussion to build a practical understanding of cultural theory.
As a course in methodology, we will read the assigned texts, in part, to develop an understanding and archive of theoretical work that informs the methodological decisions we make as researchers. If these texts can be thought of as tools—as Foucault once hoped his work could be—they need to be considered as implements that have been crafted in particular ways and for particular ends. What, moreover, does it mean to speak of a text as a tool? Why might we want to resist doing so? Indeed, we may see great value in challenging the notion that “theory” amounts to something one marshals in the service of doing one’s work, as if it were a substance to be added to research (“what is your theoretical approach?”), rather than a language for addressing the ways in which we are always, ineluctably, working in theory.
Because this class involves a significant number of structured in class assignments it is imperative that we conduct ourselves with respect for one another and be willing to listen more than we speak. This course takes very seriously the premise that we need to hear from others to better understand what we do individually. Many course texts and discussions may immediately help you to think about your own graduate research practices. We may also examine texts in this course that are, or appear to be, unrelated to the work you wish to pursue during your degree. This course believes that knowing what lies beyond one’s research is as important as knowing the ideas and practices that are at the core of one’s research and that understanding the limits as well as the condition of the possibility of conducting your research can be tremendously clarifying.
Required Text:
Szeman and Kaposy, Eds. Cultural Theory: An Anthology. West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell, 2011.
Evaluation Criteria and Grading
Seminar Presentation 30%
Seminar presentations will occur between weeks 4-8. These presentations will be given in pairs. A signup sheet will be made available online after the first class. The goal of these presentations will be to teach the assigned week’s readings to the class. Pairs will present on readings designated to group 1 or group 2 in the reading schedule.
Your presentation should teach the readings. Summaries of course readings should only appear as part of your handout. Teaching a text may involve moments of summary, but summarizing is not adequate for this task. Your colleagues in the class have already read the work, so you should develop ways of better understanding the ideas and form of the work.
Each seminar should include the following, and seminars that weave these requirements into a considered and thoughtful, rather than mechanical, presentation structure are particularly welcome:
· A detailed summary handout
· A sense of the history of ideas or cultural theory out of which these works emerge, including previous course texts which appear to have similar or different preoccupations
· Precise attention to the form and argument of the readings
· Introduce recent critical assessments or analysis of these ideas (secondary criticism); please consult the “Additional Readings” associated with each chapter of our textbook
· Your own assessment of the legacy of these ideas or practices of thought
· Examples from culture that help to illustrate, explain, or test the ideas and methods you discuss
· Questions for the class to consider regarding the assigned text, that help to steer our discussion in a direction that most fits with your chosen approach to the readings
Presentations should be no longer than 50 minutes so that adequate time is left for the class to respond and work with you to better understand course readings. In addition to the above criteria, presentations will also be based on the depth and quality of your thought as well as the effectiveness of your approach and efforts to teach the class about your readings.
Seminar Response 10%
Each member of the class will conduct one analytical response to a presentation s/he has witnessed during the course. This written assignment should be submitted within three days of the seminar presentation, via email. The response should be approximately 1000 words and should be rooted in a sense of intellectual responsibility for the subject and readings under discussion. The goal here is to respond to the presentation in a manner that continues and augments its analysis of the text(s) under discussion. Have the presenters missed an important detail or misunderstood part of the argument? Would you have emphasized something else? Why? Do you agree with how they illustrated the ideas associated with the text or did the examples hinder our understanding? Why? You might suggest and develop important connections to other readings that the presenters failed to notice. Can you offer a more precise interpretation of the readings by engaging in forms of close textual analysis? You might explore the limitations of the form of the presentation? Did it embody the spirit of the ideas under discussion or contradict them in some way?
Essay Proposal
We will discuss how to craft effective proposals during the term, and will conduct one class as a collaborative workshop in which we will provide feedback on the proposal and the project that it describes. Proposals should be approximately 750 words.
Essay Proposal Presentation 10%
This assignment will occur in class during weeks 10-12. Each presentation should be approximately 15 minutes. While you will have crafted an essay proposal and received comments upon it from your colleagues in class, this presentation asks you to do more than simply rehearse your proposal. In addition to providing the information regarding your research question and object(s) of analysis contained within the proposal, this presentation should place your work in a broad context of similar thought that helps you to justify your particular intellectual intervention. While a proposal includes this sense of the critical terrain to which your paper responds, this is a chance to more fully introduce the extant criticism and better elaborate the ways in which your work responds to that extant criticism. You should also justify your methodology by explaining your assumptions and argue why this methodology is appropriate as well as consider what it will prevent you, alternatively, from doing in your paper. You might also introduce and explain an example of critical writing that provides a model for the sort of analysis you plan to undertake. The over-arching goal of this assignment is to provide us with the knowledge we need to thoughtfully consider the work you will undertake. The class is encouraged to provide advice and engage in the important task of thinking with you to help you refine your ideas.
Final Paper 30%
Building upon the ideas introduced in the essay proposal, this paper will be ~5000 words and utilize one or more of the critical concepts or methods discussed during the term on a topic of your choosing. Topics should be original, appropriate for analytical graduate-level work, and sufficiently narrow in scope that they offer an argument that is precise and that reflects the Cultural Theory learned in this course. Your paper should conform to the practices of academic argument by responding to the published work of others and articulating an original position in response. Because this is a formal graduate paper, you are expected to follow a consistent citation style such as Chicago or MLA. There will be two deadlines. Papers received after the first deadline will receive only minimal commentary. Extensions will not be granted. The first essay deadline is Thursday April 11. The final essay deadline is April 19.
Participation 20%
Participation is expected and you will be graded on the quality of your contributions in class. Of particular importance here is your responsible engagement with the ideas of the course and your willingness to assist others in learning challenging concepts that require patient and careful effort.
SCHEDULE:
Week 1
New Years Day – University Closed
On Culture
Week 2
Matthew Arnold, “Sweetness and Light” (1869).
Herbert Marcuse, “The Affirmative Character of Culture” (1937).
Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, "The Culture Industry" (1944).
Raymond Williams, "Culture Is Ordinary" (1958).
Fredric Jameson, "Reification and Utopia in Mass Culture" (1979).
Stuart Hall, "Notes on Deconstructing 'the Popular'" (1981).
Theory and Methodology, or why we don’t use theory
Week 3
David Clark and Catherine Myser, “‘Fixing’ Katie and Eilish: Medical Documentaries and the Subjection of Conjoined Twins.” (1998) – available via Connect Library Reserve
Jacques Lacan, “The Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious, or Reason since Freud” (1957).
Michel Foucault, “Method” (1976).
Dick Hebdige, “The Function of Subculture” (1979).
On Ideology and Subjectivity
Week 4
1. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "The German Ideology" (1845).
1. Georg Lukács, "Reification and the Consciousness of the Proletariat" (1923).
1. Antonio Gramsci, "Hegemony" (1929).
2. Louis Althusser, "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses" (1970).
2. Slavoj Zizek, “Spectre of Ideology” (1989).
Week 5
1. Stuart Hall, "Recent Developments in Theories of Language and Ideology" (1980).
1. Janet Farrell Brodie and Marc Redfield, “Introduction” to High Anxieties: Cultural Studies in Addiction – ebook available via Connect Library Reserve
2. Frantz Fanon, "The Lived Experience of the Black Man" (1952).
2. Luce Irigaray, "This Sex Which Is Not One" (1977).
Communities: Real and Imagined
Week 6
1. Michel de Certeau, "Walking in the City" (1980).
1. Benedict Anderson, "Imagined Communities" (1983).
2. Arjun Appadurai, "Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy" (1990).
2. Mike Davis, "Planet of Slums" (2004).
Lives and Bodies: Social and Individual Experience
Week 7
1. Donna Haraway, "A Cyborg Manifesto" (1985).
1. Judith Butler, "Subjects of Sex/Gender/Desire" (1990).
1. Paul Gilroy, "It Ain't Where You're From, It's Where You're At" (1990).
Eve Sedgwick, "Axiomatic" (1990).
Essay Proposal Information
Reading Break Feb 18-22
Power, Structures, Norms
Week 8
1. Frantz Fanon, "The Trials and Tribulations of National Consciousness" (1961).
1. Michel Foucault, "Society Must Be Defended, 17 March 1976" (1976).
2. Gilles Deleuze, "Postscript on the Societies of Control" (1992).
2. Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, “Biopolitical Production” (2000).
Week 9
Judith Butler, Frames of War
Week 10
Essay Proposal Roundtable – We will provide commentary on essay proposals.
Cultures of Space, Geography, Self-fashioning
Week 11
Doreen Massey, “Politics and Space/Time” (1992).
David Harvey, “The Body as an Accumulation Strategy” (2000).
Essay Proposal Presentations
History and Temporality:
Why Cultural Studies is not the study of the present, and just what is “the present”?
Week 12
Visiting Speaker: Dr. Ato Quayson
Essay Proposal Presentations
Week 13
Fredric Jameson, “Periodizing the 60s” (1984).
Jean-François Lyotard, “Answering the Question: What is Postmodernism?” (1979).
Ranajit Guha, “A Dominance without Hegemony and Its Historiography” (1997).
Roberto Schwarz, “Brazilian Culture: Nationalism by Elimination” (1992).
Standard Final Examinations Statement
The examination period for Term 2 of Winter 2012 is April 9 to 24. Except in the case of examination clashes and hardships (three or more formal examinations scheduled within a 24-hour period) or unforeseen events, students will be permitted to apply for out-of-time final examinations only if they are representing the University, the province, or the country in a competition or performance; serving in the Canadian military; observing a religious rite; working to support themselves or their family; or caring for a family member. Unforeseen events include (but may not be limited to) the following: ill health or other personal challenges that arise during a term and changes in the requirements of an ongoing job.
Further information on Academic Concession can be found under Policies and Regulation in the Okanagan Academic Calendar http://www.calendar.ubc.ca/okanagan/index.cfm?tree=3,48,0,0 .
Academic Integrity
The academic enterprise is founded on honesty, civility, and integrity. As members of this enterprise, all students are expected to know, understand, and follow the codes of conduct regarding academic integrity. At the most basic level, this means submitting only original work done by you and acknowledging all sources of information or ideas and attributing them to others as required. This also means you should not cheat, copy, or mislead others about what is your work. Violations of academic integrity (i.e., misconduct) lead to the breakdown of the academic enterprise, and therefore serious consequences arise and harsh sanctions are imposed. For example, incidences of plagiarism or cheating may result in a mark of zero on the assignment or exam and more serious consequences may apply if the matter is referred to the President’s Advisory Committee on Student Discipline. Careful records are kept in order to monitor and prevent recurrences.
A more detailed description of academic integrity, including the University’s policies and procedures, may be found in the Academic Calendar at