[Discussion] CFP: Deconstruction is/in Cultural Studies (9/20/02; ACLA, 4/4/03-4/6/03)]

[Gonul]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------95D6FFBAE4B43CFF646C21AF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-9
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



--------------95D6FFBAE4B43CFF646C21AF
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

>From gonul  Thu Aug 29 16:45:12 2002
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 g7TGj9M29756;
	Thu, 29 Aug 2002 19:45:09 +0300 (EET DST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E42332E574; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 19:45:08 +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 D91532E90A; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 19:44:28 +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 g7TFDwk1018702;
	Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:13:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by dept.english.upenn.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit) id g7TFDwZH018701;
	Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:13:58 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200208291513.g7TFDwZH018701@dept.english.upenn.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: dept.english.upenn.edu: majordom set sender to owner-cfp@dept.english.upenn.edu using -f
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 13:36:31 +0100
From: gary hall <gary.hall@connectfree.co.uk>
To: cfp@english.upenn.edu
Subject: CFP: Deconstruction is/in Cultural Studies (9/20/02; ACLA, 4/4/03-4/6/03)
Sender: owner-cfp@dept.english.upenn.edu
Precedence: bulk
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20010714

Deconstruction is/in Cultural Studies

A panel sponsored by the journal Culture Machine
http://culturemachine.tees.ac.uk, to be held at the American Comparative
Literature Association 2003 conference, Cal State - San Marcos, San
Diego, April 4-6, 2003
Conference website: http://lynx.csusm.edu/acla2003/

'British' cultural studies has often described deconstruction (and
cultural studies in America, which Stuart Hall and others have
associated with deconstruction) in rather pejorative terms.
Deconstruction has been criticized for being too textual and
theoretical, too concerned with meaning and language, and therefore more
suited to the concerns of literature and philosophy than to cultural
studies and its desire to get down and dirty with the real world of
concrete political materiality. As a result, deconstruction has been
somewhat marginalized by the move away from 'theory' and 'back to
reality' and the economic that has taken place within cultural studies
over the course of the 1990s. However, recent years have seen the
gradual emergence of a newer generation of British practitioners many of
whom, while clearly locating themselves in the tradition of Hoggart,
Williams and Hall, nevertheless regard deconstruction and deconstructive
modes of thinking as extremely important to their work. This sponsored
panel invites papers on any aspect of the relation between cultural
studies and deconstruction, as well as between 'old' and 'new' cultural
studies, 'British' and 'American'.

Indicative questions to be addressed by this panel include:

 - Why should cultural studies be interested in deconstruction? Can
deconstruction help us think through some of the problems in
contemporary cultural studies: the relation between culture and society,
the cultural and the economic, cultural studies and political economy,
Marxism and post-Marxism, theory and politics, agency and structure,
textuality and lived experience, the subject and the social?
 - What are the consequences for cultural studies, and for our
understanding of culture, of recent 'deconstructive' work on politics,
ethics, justice, responsibility, performativity, the institution of the
university, teletechnologies, spectrality, the 'New International',
hospitality, the foreigner, the parasite, cosmopolitanism, forgiveness,
secrecy, friendship, experimenting, the future?
 - Why should deconstruction be interested in cultural studies? Is the
latter as interesting as, say, literature or philosophy? Is cultural
studies capable of providing anything that other modes of enquiry cannot
achieve more easily/interestingly/rigorously?
 - Can deconstruction be 'applied' to cultural studies? Is cultural
studies already in deconstruction? Can there be a 'deconstructive
cultural studies'? Is a certain pervertibility and experience of
mobility, transition, translation, transformation and change not what
makes cultural studies at once both possible and impossible?

Papers will be considered for publication in a forthcoming issue of
Culture Machine http://culturemachine.tees.ac.uk

Seminar Leader: Gary Hall, Middlesex University, London
Please send abstracts (approx. 500 words) to g.hall@mdx.ac.uk by
September 20th, 2002.



         ===============================================
         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
         ===============================================

--------------95D6FFBAE4B43CFF646C21AF--