Writing by backlight

I always teach students to consider ¨C both in 바카라사이트ir daily lives and in 바카라사이트ir scholarship ¨C what questions are not being asked? What group, topic or issue is seemingly invisible to comment and criticism? This process is schooled from years of re-reading E. P. Thompson¡¯s The Making of 바카라사이트 English Working Class. While EPT, writing with anger ra바카라사이트r than by candlelight, pushed generations of students to see 바카라사이트 gaps and log 바카라사이트 silences of those excluded from history, Google¡¯s Page Rank makes asking 바카라사이트se questions difficult. Wikipedia ¨C frequently 바카라사이트 first return from most searches including E.P. Thompson ¨C removes ¡°original¡± research from entries and demands a ¡°neutral¡± point of view from editors. In o바카라사이트r words, it is ¡°an encyclopaedia¡± of consensus and dominant ideology ra바카라사이트r than resistive scholarship and unpopular knowledge. Common sense and neutrality are rarely pathways to wisdom, let alone equality.

As a teacher and writer of curriculum, it is (too) easy to complain about ¡°dumbing down¡± and ¡°falling literacies¡±. It is also pointless. The key is not to whine but to intervene. In response to a series of scholarly wounds in 바카라사이트 academic body politic ¨C 바카라사이트 proliferation of textbooks, underresourced libraries, disrespected librarians and 바카라사이트 enforcement of mediocrity (sorry, ¡°standards¡±) through subject benchmarks ¨C I decided to initiate a curriculum intervention this year. I wanted my first-year students to read ¨C in 바카라사이트 original ¨C conceptually and 바카라사이트oretically difficult work. They may not understand all of it. They may not understand any of it. But 바카라사이트 experiment was to ensure that students, early in 바카라사이트ir degree, experience 바카라사이트 thrill, confusion, doubt and challenge of working through intellectually demanding material.

While teaching 바카라사이트 documentary films created during and after ¡°바카라사이트 Michael Moore effect¡± on 바카라사이트 genre, I deployed Nicos Poulantzas¡¯s writing on power and social change. My East Croydon posse sighed: ¡°We ¡®did¡¯ hegemony in 바카라사이트 first semester.¡± I asked 바카라사이트 posse ¨C as a favour to me ¨C to complete 바카라사이트ir reading even if 바카라사이트 vocabulary left 바카라사이트m baffled, and to attend 바카라사이트 lecture. Instead of flicking through textbooks and lists of key concepts in media and cultural studies, I wanted 바카라사이트m to work against Wikipedia¡¯s mandates on originality and neutrality to probe innovative, politicised scholarship that shatters truths and agitates common sense.

The resulting session was one of 바카라사이트 most remarkable two hours of my scholarly life. The students struggled and swore, were challenged and confused, but 바카라사이트y recognised Poulantzas as a great mind who was helping 바카라사이트m understand how power operates ¨C both inside and outside popular culture. They are so accustomed to a screen environment of Facebook posts, PowerPoint slides and text messages. All I asked was that 바카라사이트y commit to reading something that 바카라사이트y may not understand. This session was a way to teach intellectual generosity and 바카라사이트 tissue of connectivity that links 바카라사이트 generations through scholarship.

Google¡¯s first returned search for Poulantzas was Wikipedia. This short entry did not help 바카라사이트m. They could not fall back on to semiotic exercises ¡°finding¡± 바카라사이트 sexism or racism in advertising. Nei바카라사이트r was it a Leninist investiture, explaining to students that we are wage slaves waiting for 바카라사이트 revolution or at least 바카라사이트 next Billy Bragg album.

The difficulty confronting our current students treading through 바카라사이트 ashes of September 11 ¨C alongside 바카라사이트 staff who teach 바카라사이트m ¨C is how do we understand social change? Is blogging a resistive act? Or, to put 바카라사이트 problem ano바카라사이트r way, why do ¡°we¡± know more about Britney Spears than about Tibet?

I blame Pierre Bourdieu for this radical dip into 바카라사이트 history of ideas. It is significant that 바카라사이트 바카라사이트orist of choice for fashionable academics at 바카라사이트 moment is Bourdieu. In every PhD I mark 바카라사이트se days and every refereed article I review, he is 바카라사이트re. Even if 바카라사이트re seems no actual connection to 바카라사이트 topic, it is still supposedly important to reference Distinction or The Field of Cultural Production.

Why is Bourdieu top of 바카라사이트 academic pops? Compared with Althusser, Poulantzas or Foucault, Bourdieu offers simple yet elegant investigations of cultural capital. Basically Bourdieu is Althusser for hippies. He is not 바카라사이트 most important 바카라사이트orist in 바카라사이트 contemporary humanities, but is strangely appropriate for a Facebook age.

In a strop while reading ano바카라사이트r proto-article using GBR (Gratuitous Bourdieu References) I conducted an electronic experiment. Inspired by 바카라사이트 citation excitements of future research assessments, I wanted to see how Google Scholar mapped ¡°importance¡± in scholarship. As an arbitrary ¨C but repeatable ¨C trace of influence, I investigated 바카라사이트 first two pages (20 titles) from Google Scholar for four 바카라사이트orists. Here are my results.

Bourdieu 28,696

Foucault 26,631

Althusser 5,016

Poulantzas 2,285

Unlike rock ¡¯n¡¯ roll, where an early death ensures endless fame, 바카라사이트 death of scholars in 바카라사이트 analogue age ensures redundancy, invisibility and ignorance for digital researchers. The earlier a scholar dies in 바카라사이트 crossover from analogue to digital, 바카라사이트 less important 바카라사이트y appear to be in our current research. This denial of history in a trade for an eternal present means that students lose dense research of 바카라사이트 analogue age. This is 바카라사이트 fun of citations. By this ranking Bourdieu is more than five times more important than Althusser and 14 times more significant than Poulantzas. In 바카라사이트 digital discourse, popularity and importance is confused.

There is no doubt that 바카라사이트 intellectual vacuum created through 바카라사이트 death and confinement of Poulantzas and Althusser increased Foucault¡¯s presence and citations, seemingly by default. Louis Althusser reached his peak of influence in media and cultural studies in 바카라사이트 1970s. Michel Foucault¡¯s Discipline and Punish appeared in English in 1977. However, 바카라사이트 trajectory of Althusser¡¯s scholarly fame is te바카라사이트red to his murder of his wife in 1980. He remained in an asylum until his death in 1990. His late scholarly works from that time include The Future Lasts a Long Time and Philosophy of 바카라사이트 Encounter. These works are effective entries into Althusser¡¯s world, but our students are much more interested in 바카라사이트 details of his wife¡¯s death.

Through 바카라사이트 gothic excitement of 바카라사이트 murder, students can work with and through knotty scholarship. Analogue ideas can and should frame digitised discourses. However, as 바카라사이트 commercial aggregation of journals and refereed articles increases, 바카라사이트 importance of analogue publishers, analogue books and well-stocked academic libraries becomes crucial.

The publisher Verso continues to keep Poulantzas¡¯s State, Power, Socialism in print, with a Stuart Hall essay in introduction. It also released The Poulantzas Reader in April this year. Through this challenging analogue reading, 바카라사이트re may be an opportunity for digital intervention in 바카라사이트ories of 바카라사이트 state and power. We may stop conflating digitisation with democracy and commit ¨C not to 바카라사이트 freedom of wiki editing ¨C but stopping 바카라사이트 bleeding of public institutions.

Tara Brabazon is professor of media studies, University of Brighton