A Critical Introduction to Feminist Cultural Production: There's Only Two or Three Things [We] Know for Sure. (Introduction)

The title of this issue of RFR/DRF, Critical Debates and Practices, suggests that both debates and are central to what constitutes The articles critically debate practices of and contribute to dilemmas arising from practices. A growing concern for both the symbolic and material importance of representations suggests a need for attention to the histories, methodologies, and strategies underlying production. When we began working on this issue, we designed a call for papers that would solicit work from producers, understood broadly as artists / teachers / activists / academics. We envisaged a wide range of problematics, linked by an attention to criticality; to describing, deciphering, and deconstructing contexts and conditions of practice; and to uncovering new forms and territories of theory. What is evident in the multiplicity of concerns and approaches in this collection is an engagement with dilemmas of feminist and cultural This is a productive and invigorating tension that is reflected in the title of the issue. In the introduction to their edited collection, Poststructural Theory and Methods in Education (2000), Elizabeth A. St. Pierre and Wanda S. Pillow suggest that the Book chapters work with a question about the relationship of and poststructuralism: 'How are they beside each other?' (p. 2). Similarly, in this issue of RFR/DRF, the articles ask how feminist and cultural production are beside each other and how debates and are beside each other and beside Feminist and Cultural Production: What? How? When? Where? We envisioned and worked towards an issue that would contest and confound assumptions about and that would, in fact, develop a flexible and unfixed vision of what constitutes production. This collection of articles produces such a moment of problematization. The issue offers analyses of a range of forms and practices across many conceptual and theoretical frameworks. Given this notion of contestation about what constitutes cultural and when, where, and how it may be brought into being, the idea of feminist is produced correspondingly as a term debated rather than assumed. The articles invoke an understanding of feminist that references multiple practices, theories, histories, activisms, politics, and relations that engage with questions of power and difference. Many scholars working in studies underline the importance of understanding feminism as a term of contingency, and they emphasize the strengths and possibilities that inhere in the contestation and debate of the term (Butler, 1992; McRobbie, 1994). We hope that this issue of RFR/DRF will contribute to academic discourses about by reconfiguring the terms and the field and by raising new questions for future engagements. Thus, with regard to the relationship of this collection of articles to future developments in production, we might begin a set of questions that problematizes how knowledge is produced through our organization of the issue and through the particular articles therein. How does this issue of RFR/DRF participate in shaping what constitutes feminist? How does it shape cultural How do notions of feminist and cultural production inform each other through the articles? What are the implications for developments in research and scholarly writing about production? Multiple Approaches Questions of epistemology are threaded throughout this issue: all of the papers ask questions about how knowledge is organized to shape the issues and practices of production. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.