ENGL 676
Introduction
to Cultural Studies
Professor
David Kaufmann
459 Robinson Hall
(703)
993-2766
Office
Hrs: M 1:30-3:00 by appt
It is impossible to look at modern advertising
without realizing that the material object being sold is never enough: this
indeed is the crucial cultural quality of its modern forms. If we were sensibly
materialist, in that part of our living in which we use things, we should find
most advertising to be of an insane irrelevance. Beer would be enough for us,
without the additional promise that in drinking it we show ourselves to be
manly, young in heart or neighbourly. A washing machine would be a useful
machine to wash clothes, rather than an indication that we are forward-looking
or an object of envy to our neighbours. But if these associations sell beer and
washing machines, as some of the evidence suggests, it is clear that we have a
cultural pattern in which the objects are not enough but must be validated, if
only in fantasy, by association with social and personal meanings which in a
different cultural pattern might be more directly available. The short
description of the pattern we have is magic: a highly organized and
professional system of magical inducements and satisfactions, functionally very
similar to magical systems in simpler societies, but rather strangely
coexistent with a highly developed scientific technology. Raymond Williams, ÒAdvertising: The Magic SystemÓ
(1961)
A
way to talk about Cultural Studies (CS)
Many courses in and on CS concentrate on its rich and
complicated past. We wonÕt do that.
We will concentrate on two of the leading themes of CS in the United
States. This is an unfortunate limitation—CS was first conceived in the
UK and has developed in interesting way sacross the English-speaking world--
but our time is, by necessity, very short.
Here is how I see CS and therefore see this course.
CS works from two definitions of culture. The first
derives from a standard Enlightenment opposition between culture and nature. In
CS this opposition allows us to show how illegitimate forms of domination
justify themselves—and usually successfully--by claiming that oppressive institutions
and practices rest on immutable natural laws. (Think about the Òlaw of supply
and demand.Ó Is this the same kind of law as the law of gravity? What if it
wasnÕt?) CS tries to demonstrate that these institutions and practices are the
products of contingent histories. That is, they were developed in specific
places at specific times in response to particular conditions and are therefore
susceptible to change. Natural law, as we understand it, cannot be changed.
(Think of Star Trek: ÒYou cannot change the laws of nature, Jim.Ó Think about the
fact that the starship is called the Enterprise.) So, CS maintains (explicitly in its Marxist, more implicitly
in its post-Foutcaultian forms),
that what people have created, people can transform. The ideological
position that what is, must be is fetishism in its original, anthropological
sense: it is to bow down to the creations of our own labor. This kind of
secular idolatry depends on a kind of magical thinking.
The second definition sees society as a distinct
totality and therefore maintains that every component-every institution and
practice—both structures and is structured by society as a whole. Social
relations within modern capitalist societies are ultimately determined by the
relations of production and distribution, although such determination is not
always direct or clear. To understand what a specific social fact means or how
it works, we have to figure out its place in the social totality.
As
I have indicated, these definitions of the C in CS have a decidedly Marxist
bent. But CS goes beyond an interest in class and therefore beyond Marxism. In
the end, IÕd like to hazard that CS in all its forms has been particularly
interested in the way that the present social dispensation reproduces itself. For
that reason weÕll be looking at two sub-themes that help explain this
reproduction. The first entails the investigation of the ways that class structure gets
reproduced. If capitalism is to
survive with the minimum of overt repression, it needs to convince us that its
organization is a product of human nature and of the inviolable nature of the
very heart of capitalism, the commodity. The second sub-theme investigates the
ways that contemporary society reinforce ÒtraditionalÓ racial, gender and sexual identities.
CS has a lot to offer the study of literature. For
instance, consider that odd human artifact, the poem. What kind of questions
might a student of CS ask? Here are some possibilities. (Remember they might be
exhausting but they are not exhaustive.) What constitutes ÒpoetryÓ at a given
time—How is it written? Who is allowed to write to it? What is it allowed
to say or not to say? What words must it use? Must it avoid? How are those who
write it paid or arenÕt they paid? Who publishes it and how is it published?
(Remember: printing and publishing are not necessarily the same thing.) Who
reads it and where? How do readers find out about it? Who criticizes/judges
it? How is it judged and where? How does it survive and why?
Even though we are only scratching the proverbial
surface of the interests and engagements of CS, there is a lot here to digest.
I cannot promise mastery of the field by the end of the semester, but I do know
but you will have deeper, more sophisticated understanding of the way you might
approach the study of literature.
Texts: Ehrenreich Nickel and
Dimed; Klein, No Logo; Lewis, The Lion, The Witch and the
Wardrobe; Rowling,
Harry Potter and the SorcererÕs Stone; Schlosser, Fast Food Nation; Twain Tom Sawyer (Penguin)
Other
readings will either be available online, in ebooks that can be easily accessed through the GMU library
catalog (During,
The Cultural Studies Reader and Bobo et al, The Black Studies Reader) or in a course packet.
Class
Jan
28
Intro: Cultural Studies and Some
Questions About Freedom
Feb 4
The
(middle) class(es) talk about (the working) class(es) Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed; NYT ÒOverviewÓ and ÒHealth,Ó
from Class Matters
www.nytimes.com/indexes/2005/06/12/national/class/index.html
Feb 11 Commodity Fetishism/The Magic of Things: Marx, Selections from Capital; Zizek, from The Sublime Object of Ideology; Taussig, from The Devil and Commodity Fetishism
Feb
18
Behind
the Magic of Production: Schlosser, Fast Food America
Feb
25
Behind
the Magic of Distribution: Klein, No Logo
March
3
Magical
Children:
Rawlings, Harry Potter and the SorcererÕs Stone
March
10
Spring Break
March 17
Doing
Things with/to Harry Potter: readings tba
March 24
Reproducing
Class(es): Gramsci,
ÒHegemony;Ó Fiske, ÒCulture, Ideology and Interpellation;Ó (packet); Althusser,
ÒIdeology and Ideological State ApparatusesÓ http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htm
March 31 1 Reproducing
Subjects/Subjugation:
Foucault, ÒPanopticism,Ó; Excerpt from ÒThe Eye of Power,Ó at http://foucault.info; ÒBody/PowerÓ at http://www.thefoucauldian.co.uk/bodypower.htm
April 7
Intersections
and Interpellations of Race and Gender and Sexuality: Butler, ÒSubjects of
Sex/Gender/DesireÓ (CSR) Sedgwick, ÒAxiomaticÓ (CSR); Lott, ÒRacial
CrossdressingÉÓ (CSR); McBride, ÒCan the Queen Speak?Ó (BSR) DuCille, ÒDyes and
DollsÓ (BSR)
April
14
Interpellating
(British/English) Children: Lewis, The Lion, The Witch and t
he
Wardrobe
NO
CLASS APRIL 21
April
28
Interpellating
(American) Children: Twain,
Tom Sawyer
May
5
Wrap
Final
Paper Due
Requirements
A
working GMU email account: Your paper prompts will be sent by email. I also
might need to reach you quickly or need to advise you about some quirk or
change in the syllabus.
.Assignments:
You will
have to write a reaction paper of no more than 500 words to the weekly reading
each week. This paper should have a thesis and cite evidence. My hope for this
is that you will come in every week loaded for theoretical bear. Your final paper—a
research paper of 10-12 pages—should be a spin-off of your favorite or
most perplexing of these weekly papersIt should go without saying that you are
expected to do all the assignments and your grade will reflect both your
performance in class and your completion of all the assignments. If you find
you cannot hand in an assignment on its due date, please make arrangements with
me beforehand.
Attendance:
This is a
graduate so its health and success depend on active participation and regular
attendance. Now, we all have real lives and multiple commitments, but if you
anticipate missing more than two sessions, you should seriously consider NOT
taking this course. If you cannot attend a session for whatever reason, please
email me ahead of time.
Comportment:
CS is
both political and polemical. You will not agree with some of the positions
that its theorists maintain and a few of you will not agree with all of the
positions that its theorists maintain. You will not agree with positions that
other students in the class may take, especially on touchy issues. Most of the
issues in CS ar e touchy issues. We must therefore maintain civility. We are
interested in inquiry, not in browbeating our opponents into compliance.
Personal attacks will not be tolerated at any point for any reason. If you do engage in such attacks, you will be
asked to leave graciously but firmly.
Grading
: The
papers will constitute no less than 60 % of the grade. Class participation
(which should be vigorous, if not impassioned) will count for the rest.
Remember: You are responsible for your ignorance. If you have a question, ask
it. If youÕre scared to ask it in class, email me. This is about education, not
about competition.
Plagiarism: I shouldnÕt have to talk
about plagiarism, but it seems I must. If you present work as your own which
was actually written by someone else (whether another student or a professional
scholar), you are cheating. If you say something in a paper that you would not
have said if you had not read Smith, even if you do not quote Smith word for
word, then you need to footnote Smith (this includes sources from the Internet,
by the way). Be sure to familiarize youself with proper modes of
documentation. (I prefer the Chicago Manual of Style, but feel free to use MLA
style.) ANYONE WHO CITES, RELIES ON OR OTHERWISE REFERS TO THE WORK OF SOMEONE
ELSE WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING THIS FACT IN A FOOTNOTE WILL BE REFERRED TO THE
HONOR COMMITTEE.