Well … I liked the introduction. I felt like Williams did a nice job of articulating where cultural studies fits in among similar disciplines – history, anthropology, philosophy, etc. He also talks about what culture studies is supposed to do, succinctly, which I liked, because sometimes it’s damn near impossible to explain to an “outsider” the differences between cultural studies and English, the function of cultural studies, etc. without sounding like a rambling idiot (kind of like I do right now). And it is especially hard at a bar when you’ve had a few beers … I usually tell people I meet that I am a business major, because it’s sexier than physics and “Literary and Cultural studies” turns into word vomit. Anyway, here is my one sentence summary of Williams’ function of cultural studies; LCS evaluates cultural artifacts (books, movies, artworks, even personalities) within a specific, contemporary context.
But I did not really understand the rest of the excerpt. It was a little boring and it felt more like a history lesson than a cultural evaluation. I kept thinking … “So what?” “Why does this fact, notion matter?” I also would have liked to see specific examples to support his claims. He also seems a little indifferent, like he is spouting idea after idea and gives us no indication as to how we should feel about this or that. I think that the best cultural commentary comes with a bit of passion and direction, because it is all rather subjective and it cannot rely on factual weight to be impactful.
On the other hand, I admire his ability to take complex ideas, movements and compress them into neat, succinct concepts, which are easily understandable and transferable. I can see why LCS professionals reference him so often. This text provides a toolbox of general ideas that can be expanded and applied.
No comments:
Post a Comment