communication Vicissitudes of poststructuralism
Cannibalism (the discipline of communication), Victor Silva and Rodrigo Brownes Echeto Sartori, Biblioteca Nueva, Madrid, 2007, 172 pp. Welcome
the contentious mood and cognitive seriously put in the work of this pair of researchers working at universities in Chile (although Echeto Silva is a native of Uruguay). On the one hand, not in the current academic discussions to raise spirits, against those who suppress "on behalf of a misunderstood polite criticism and any confrontation of ideas. In turn, the care in the expository style as well as in the reference to the sources, makes it clear that intellectual rigor is a critical prerequisite to practiced by the poststructuralist formalism. If anyone thinks that deconstruction is synonymous with a crude anti-method, or the praise of the event as an excuse for intellectual laziness, this book is at odds with a flourish.
The work consists of a series of chapters largely independent of each other, even though intertwined with the approach that underlies-a quest to politicize the debate on communication, from a radical critique to modern notions of abstraction and conceptualization, as lead of homogenizing and generalizing.
no way follow the detail of the texts that make this work, which would lead us too far in length, but also does not do justice to the central idea that governs: the meanderings of reality should be followed by the thought its thoroughness and its inherent multiplicity. So, it is a synthesis that not be a betrayal of the previous version that was intended to synthesize (Which, for its part, in this situation will never be original.) Notably
-winning adaptation against much of the production on communication in the subcontinent, the book keeps a careful decision to intervene in politics: the chapter on Chile on September 11 and September 11 attack to the Twin Towers is eloquent in this regard, first and last name put some of those responsible are not always known, and consideration not just appreciative of cultural studies (in its version known complacent market capitalism), definitely make what we say.
The assumption of the post-structuralist is raised from the idea of \u200b\u200badapting to a post-modern episteme, in writing the book is true to the collapse of modernity, but not established in the abdication of critical thinking that are common to thinkers who are assumed to be postmodern. It is no accident that the authors being appealed (Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze) are not properly poststructuralist and postmodern, as in the past the edge of the denial has been consciously abandoned.
An issue as busy as of multiculturalism is working from innovative approaches and clumsy without giving into the notion of intercultural symmetry usually proposed from the canonical approach Benetton ": different cultures are in a position to also differ. The authors propose the importance of translation for mutual understanding, although the problem could be deepened in the limits of translation and the remainder is provided throughout the translation process. Doing so would be consistent with post-structuralist position that resists all homogeneity, also in the field of consciousness.
work while promoting a careful critique of postcolonialism (not Latin American versions, but in the original, eg., Edward Said), warns very well on the performative contradiction of those who criticize the binary from their positions Once binaries. You are cautioned that postcolonial are against the idea of \u200b\u200ba central contradiction vs colonialists. colonized, but his speech stated therein.
For our part, we would critique on another issue, which affects both posconialistas as poststructuralist criticism: the "binary" that is blamed Marxism seems not to fully understand this line of thought. Marxism-just see the old and Mao analysis on the secondary contradictions, never assumed that there is only a contradiction in capitalist society (bourgeoisie vs. Proletariat), but this is what the rest overdetermined. And this is a statement that can still be significantly if you want to understand contemporary societies.
For their part, the authors, in line with poststructuralist position, have an unfavorable account of Marxism (eg, on pg.35), we believe that this could be qualified, and also the idea that "power produce "taken from Foucault, and that it has often been presented as novel, it is perfectly compatible with previous notions of Marxist theory (perhaps the" production of hegemony "posed by Gramsci, clearly does not imply that the power produced, it is not just a machine to suppress and prevent? and ideology, which is above notion is not producing practical effects?).
It should be noted-and in reference to another theme of the book, the criticism made by authors to the hegemonic version of cultural studies, succumbed to much of the production of communication in recent decades. It is also suggesting the recovery of the constituent relationship between communication and culture, so that is not understood outside of their actual social realization. Of course, this means that you need to link communication to culture, but to place culture as part of the social-economic-including non-fetishized, and that must be assumed that the purpose of communication never overlaps with cultural as "plain." Thus, the communications expert is not a new anthropologist, but someone technically able to account for specific communication processes, illegible to Anthropology or any other existing discipline (although it is worth to them, eg. Semiotics, which gives A key part of such processes.)
is remarkable chapter on the Brazilian movement of Cannibalism, and the application of its impact on current thinking. There the authors show ample capacity to recover a key artistic movement almost idiosyncratic, and propose universal values \u200b\u200bregarding defensible: they assume without detriment to the Latin American universal.
Especially suitable for open discussion is the proposed space for thinking and interdisciplinary communication and discipline. Undoubtedly, communication is an area of \u200b\u200bintersection of disciplinary discourse, but that disciplinary proposals from previously consolidated (Communication appeals to sociology, linguistics, anthropology, etc.). Can you imagine an in-disciplined knowledge that no part of mixture and cannibalism already established disciplines? Personally, I pose a problem the possible influence of general discipline knowledge, which involve the simple removal of existing disciplines, but in any case would be to specify much more than what it is, rather than sustaining its conclusion a priori.
However, the authors argue openly challenge their own rituals and routines of thought as it is now codified, and this may be the basis for deep re-think this, to do a conversion material enough intense as to promote new horizons of intelligibility. It is also strong
the controversy begins with the idea of \u200b\u200b"thinking without a state" that bring the perpetrators, and to assume the contrary in fact produced in Marxism, when you want to delete State long-term, short-fortifying. And where the search for a common life involves stateless after a long struggle, precisely focused on the control of the state. However, it is not obvious that ignoring the state to allow disposal. Is it possible a kind of "subsumption" of the functions of the state by society as somehow raised Holloway? Or is it to ignore the rule if it still exists, which would be a negation of the illusory powers that there are combined?
However, the authors refer to "think outside the center, to think freely, to think without authority. For which they know to invite with intellectually demanding and rigorous thought. In this sense, if someone claims that poststructuralism is a simple call to the disorder, is completely wrong: freedom is won, and poststructuralism is an unwanted son, yes, of the Enlightenment.
Therefore, this book comes in handy for communication studies, where there are still those who believe that "theory" is a bad word, and more vulgar practicality that can be exercised on behalf of alleged "demands of reality" .-
0 comments:
Post a Comment