A
new project, and one that brings some of my activities to a close. I
have decided to write out my Cultural Studies lectures and put them
online for my students. These will be written over the next few months
and will no doubt be edited from time to time. My students have asked
that I make my notes available, but that was always impractical and
would no doubt be confusing, but in this form both present and past
students (and other interested readers). These will not be the actual
lectures, which of course changed and developed over the thirteen years I
taught the class, but they will give some idea of the course and some
reminders for those who sat through my through my class over the years.
It is doubtful that I will teach on this subject again, as my interests
have as is proper moved on to other subjects, such as the work derived from my research into
.
"We all fail in our
efforts to present the essentials of culture to our students.It remains for their genius to convert our failure into success"
Alfred North Whitehead
After over a decade
of teaching and lecturing on Cultural Studies, the realization that a
certain rigidity had enveloped the course became an inescapable
conclusion. This rigidity had occurred despite a good deal of effort
to the contrary. These lectures were given from notes and in a
extemporaneous manner, but even so what might have appeared to others
as improvisation became scripted by habit and repetition. For this
very reason, the extemporaneous manner of delivery was not a long
term solution. As it turned out, nor was the constant revision of
the syllabus in response to student interest as well as my own
changing interests and interpretations. My writing these lectures
shows these efforts to have been, in the end, both a failure and a
success. The remains of this work consists of a fairly impressive
archive of notes, fragments, and other materials steadily accumulated
amid the ruins of these remarks and revisions.
Now, one response to
this problem of authority would be to revolutionize one’s syllabus
and lectures, but a condition of permanent revolution can not, for
obvious reasons, be maintained by a finite person and besides, these
limited revolutions of necessity begin to take on a certain sameness
as the encounters with this personal limit become increasingly
frequent.
A different response
provides the reasons for writing these lectures: one might embrace
the view that perhaps one has said enough and that the many classes
and talks had congealed into something that made sense even as
Cultural Studies itself experienced great changes with its acceptance
and institutionalization in American universities and culture
industries. These changes were also found in miniature in the
institutionalization of Cultural Studies at Pratt and directly
affected the course.
Without a doubt the
orientation of the course changed as well. After some years of
teaching about an “emerging field” of Cultural Studies, I thought
it better to go back and look at the different disciplines, fields of
knowledge, schools, texts, authorities and politics that coalesced
into Cultural Studies. Gradually, the course moved toward tracing
the genealogy of Cultural Studies along with some limited
speculations on its future in the academy. It must be said that
this genealogy had to take into account the social changes that made
possible the movement of Cultural Studies from being marginalized
critiques to being commonplace or even farcical term: witness the
New York Times “Style” section column titled “Cultural
Studies” or the recent exchange in the Chronicle of Higher Education
over the status of Cultural Studies that managed to carry the air of
both a graduate school debate and an argument at a funeral. All too
often, critique has given way to mere criticism. In terms of
everyday life, we are in a historical moment that nicely bookends
Cultural Studies between its origins in the social dislocations of
the 20th Century and those of the present. If it is true
that we have moved from Raymond Williams posing the question of the
future of Cultural Studies to Hall’s eulogy on its theoretical
legacies, then there is ample justification for writing these
reflections in the form of lectures.
Because these
lectures were presented as extemporaneous class talks, they varied
from semester to semester and year to year. Those who attended the
course in the early years will not recognize some aspects of these
summary lectures, but much will seem familiar or at least make a bit
more sense of what you heard. And so the second justification for
writing down these lectures is to give students present and past the
opportunity to revisit or have clarified points that might have been
missed, unclear, or skipped due to the pressures of the classroom.
Of course, everyone
will notice the absence of any of the autobiographical references
that I might have made in class. Students from the class will
immediately understand the reason for this absence. For those other
I might refer you to the little essay “Against Autobiography” written for the student journal. Besides, there is never a reason to
give your detractors words to use against you but at the same time
one must have an implicit trust of one’s students and so in print
there will be no autobiographical content. I have, however,
attempted to retain as much as possible hints of the extemporaneous
mode of presentation.
The third reason for
writing these lectures stems from the essential commitment of
Cultural Studies to education as well as critique. It is the habit
of professors to guard their lectures rather jealously, but this is
antithetical to the history of Cultural Studies. Thus, the public
nature of these writings are a nod to the many interventions into
education that are found in such different locations as Adorno’s
radio talks, Birmingham’s commitment to worker education, the labor
movement, and the Center for Cultural Studies. Teaching the Cultural
Studies course gave me the opportunity to interact with all of the
first year students in the Cultural Studies/Critical & Visual
Studies major in conjunction with my duties as Director/Coordinator.
With our coming curricular changes, it is now appropriate that the
students share a wider common experience.
Every semester, I
began by asserting that I have a particular view of the genealogy of
Cultural Studies and that my view is not shared by everyone, even
among my colleagues here at Pratt. I encouraged them to seek out
other faculty to get their views on any questions or disagreements.
Just as important, to take courses from a range of faculty especially
in those areas such as Feminism that I could not adequately cover in
the short time allowed us, or ideas such as “postmodernism” which
I do not use. The goal of the course was never, however, to present
an established set of texts or to invent a new discipline. The goal,
simply put, was to present students with sometimes difficult
materials that call into question our usual assumptions and call
engage them over the course of many years. Epicurus said that as
teachers “we should not raise children,” by which he meant we
should not prepare our students for their subordination to authority.
The course ended
with students reading work by faculty at Pratt who are affiliated
with Cultural Studies. Students enjoyed the opportunity to read the
work of their own teachers. I was always surprised by the degree to
which students were excited by the assignment and would typically
engage some of the most difficult work. The Fall 2011 question was
the following:
Final Essay Question:
The final essay requires that you read Hall's essay on Cultural
Studies and its Theoretical Legacies. Then you are to choose 2-3 examples of work by professors
here at Pratt and analyze them based upon Hall's critique of American cultural studies. Does
the work of the faculty support Hall's contentions? Essays contributed by Pratt Faculty are
on the course LMS site. The essays are by Professors Ivan Zatz, Lisabeth During, May Joseph, Jon
Beller, Suzanne Verderber, Michael Eng, Chris Vitale, Miriam Greenberg, etc. You may
chose other works by faculty in the department as well, but the faculty member must be in
the School of Liberal Arts.
It should be the
obligation of all senior faculty to teach at least one 1st
or 2nd year class and these lectures fulfilled that
obligation. But for many years my interest in Cultural Studies has
been eclipsed by other specific work. The writing of these lectures
allows me to turn my attention to these other studies and courses
while leaving behind this artifact from the accumulated debris.
BRBIII
New York City