Remembering our Future: A Practitioner’s Perspective on the ‘Crisis’ in Cultural Studies”

The “Cultural Studies Now” conference brought together scholars from all over the world to discuss issues confronting cultural studies today. As the London Times reported, this was “the biggest cultural studies conference ever held in the UK, with 500 papers submitted and academics traveling from as far away as Iran, Mexico, Russia and Taiwan” (Times Higher Education Supplement, 20th July, 2007). According to conference committee chair Mika Nava the intent was “ to explore the profile of cultural studies as a discipline to see how far it has been able to survive as a radical intellectual project in today’s political climate” ( qtd. in Times Higher Education Supplement, 20th July, 2007). Certainly in most of the sessions I attended, efforts were made to situate cultural studies within its historical context with many presenters referring back to the early days of the Birmingham Centre and “founding fathers” Richard Hoggart and Raymond Williams. Often the emphasis was on the differences between cultural studies now and cultural studies “then,” but in other instances, the need for continuities – of values and goals – was stressed. Of special interest were presentations by Stuart Hall, Dick Hebdige, Doreen Massey, Nick Couldry and Andrew Calcutt. 
\n
\nMuch of the discussion revolved around the (sometimes problematic) relationship of cultural studies to other academic disciplines. Is it essential for cultural studies to be a “stand alone” subject area or have traditional disciplines incorporated cultural studies themes and methods to such a degree that what formerly was marginal is now central? If so, is this incorporation necessarily a good thing? Conversely, if cultural studies still has a distinct identity (and raison d’etre) what is its relationship to other forms of inter or trans disciplinary studies? Finally, what intersections are possible between academic cultural studies and the broader society? These are not easy questions to answer (and I can’t say that any “quick fixes” were offered by the presenters) but it was encouraging to see that cultural studies practitioners – today, as in the past – don’t shy away from asking them.
\n
\nNot surprisingly, this international conference provided scope for a range of perspectives. For some, a commitment to broad-based societal change remains the defining element of cultural studies. Others take a more playful and celebratory approach, foregrounding individual performativity and the micro-politics of identity (as witnessed in presentations by feminist scholar Rosie Braidotti and queer theorist Judith Halberstam). For many of those working at the macro-level, the rise of religious fundamentalisms and global environmental crises were seen as topics in need of immediate theoretical and practical attention. Some were inclined to mourn what they saw as the collapse of leftist alternatives (to the global hegemony of neoliberal capitalism) while others saw the need for oppositional politics as more pressing than ever.
\n
\nMy presentation was part of a panel entitled “Cultural Studies and the University I.” Co-panelists were Alan Apperley and Mark Jones from the Media and Cultural Studies Program, University of Wolverhampton, as well Aljosa Puzar a Croation scholar who presently lecturer in cultural studies at the University of Rijeka. Probably the most challenging question directed specifically at my presentation came from Jaafar Aksikas, Assistant Professor of cultural studies at Columbia College, Chicago, who asked me to define “interdisciplinarity” (even after six years, we in the MAIS Programme still struggle with that one!) Two people have subsequently requested copies of my paper, which I intend to provide once I’ve gotten beyond the rough draft stage. Other Canadian academics presenting at the “Cultural Studies Now” conference included Jody Berland from York University, Rinaldo Walcott from OISE and Amber Dean from the University of Alberta.
\n
\nThe sheer number of presenters meant that, over a four-day period, there were eleven concurrent sessions. As a result, one could not take in everything but, based on the sessions I did participate in, I can say without hesitation that this was the most thought-provoking and (for my own future work) inspiring, conference that I’ve attended in quite some time. It was well worth the energy and effort I put into attending and presenting, and I think it was also a good investment on the part of all concerned.

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.