[Discussion] CFP: Marx and Theory (12/1/02; e-journal issue)]

[Gonul]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------8B4529408DE25935ECE63671
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-9
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



--------------8B4529408DE25935ECE63671
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by firat.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr id g97CavK12814

Received: from pigeon.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr (pigeon.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr [139.=
179.30.22])
	by firat.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g95H0VK22102;
	Sat, 5 Oct 2002 20:00:31 +0300 (EET DST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9047930933; Sat,  5 Oct 2002 20:00:31 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from dept.english.upenn.edu (DEPT.ENGLISH.UPENN.EDU [128.91.200=
.51])
	by pigeon.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5A1E0308FC; Sat,  5 Oct 2002 20:00:29 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from dept.english.upenn.edu (majordom@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dept.english.upenn.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g95FUV7s018858;
	Sat, 5 Oct 2002 11:30:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by dept.english.upenn.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit) id g95FUUsC018857;
	Sat, 5 Oct 2002 11:30:30 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200210051530.g95FUUsC018857@dept.english.upenn.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: dept.english.upenn.edu: majordom set sender to =
owner-cfp@dept.english.upenn.edu using -f
From: "Frederick Luis Aldama" <aldamaf@hotmail.com>
To: cfp@english.upenn.edu
Subject: CFP: Marx and Theory (12/1/02; e-journal issue)
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 14:16:44 -0600
Sender: owner-cfp@dept.english.upenn.edu
Precedence: bulk
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20010714

MARX AND THEORY (Call For Papers for Issue 64)
"Bad Subjects issue 64 on Marx and Theory seeks to complicate --even=20
interrogate--the way Marxism has been misappropriated by the academic lef=
t's=20
over investment in poststructural theory and over-investment cultural=20
studies, an investment that ultimately betrays Marxism's fundamental=20
interest in a material economy.  Leftist critiques are currently filled w=
ith=20
buzz-concepts such as =93resistant peformativity=94, =93alternative citiz=
enship=94,=20
=93discursive political praxis=94, =93mimicry=94, =93radical hybridity=94=
, to name only=20
a few.

The editors wonder, to what end?  Can theories based on an immaterial=20
conception of cultural production, language, and politics =93really=94 of=
fer=20
forms of social critique and resistance? Essays might also critique theor=
ies=20
from the left that presuppose the text-as-reality in which the production=
 of=20
different literatures of resistance--from genre bending Musicscapes,=20
graffiti,genre-bending, tattooed/pierced bodies, performance art, footbal=
l=20
or literary texts--are viewed as all the resistance necessary for a=20
meaningful politics. Can cultural phenomena that resist =93mastery=94 rea=
lly=20
work as sites of resistance and as modes of political intervention? Or ar=
e=20
these theories simply participating in capitalist modes of production and=
=20
consumption that have no substance, or if there is substance, is it one=20
invested in a masculinist ontology, a colonial metaphysics of =93Whitenes=
s=94,=20
or an elitist academic performance?  When cultural discourse IS politics,=
=20
what are the implications for =93real=94 coalition building among the wor=
king=20
classes world wide to ensure the right of all citizens to equal access to=
=20
education,coalition-building, world-wide medical care, common=20
transportation, and communication?

Essays might also explore the dangers of the notion of power as not=20
locatable, a notion that directs the understanding of the actual=20
concentration of power away from a state that oppresses and exploits thos=
e=20
at the margins of class, race, sexuality, and gender =93norms=94. In the =
ironic=20
and textually playful world of a so-identified Marxist poststructuralism,=
=20
power exists in the hands of no one social class nor any specific state=20
institution.  Without a state or collective at the locus of power, power=20
becomes purely fluid and symbolic. Is a solely symbolic intervention=20
satisfactory?  Submit articles--without footnotes/endnotes--to issue edit=
ors=20
Frederick Aldama [aldamaf@hotmail.com] and Robert Soza=20
[r_soza@uclink.berkeley.edu]. Issue deadline: December 1st, 2002.


         =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
         From the Literary Calls for Papers Mailing List
                      CFP@english.upenn.edu
                       Full Information at
                http://www.english.upenn.edu/CFP/
          or write Erika Lin: elin@english.upenn.edu
         =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

--------------8B4529408DE25935ECE63671--