DOCSLIB.ORG

The Distortion of Discussion David Backer Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Phil

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Distortion of Discussion David Backer Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Phil The Distortion of Discussion David Backer Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy under the Executive Committee of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 ©2014 David Backer All rights reserved ABSTRACT The Distortion of Discussion David Backer This dissertation addresses a common, but troubling, educational interaction: when a facilitator (whether teacher, professor, or organizer) announces that a discussion will take place about some subject or question, but proceeds to speak at length and field questions regarding that subject. In this case, a controlled and unequal form of interaction known as recitation has occurred, though the interaction was called a “discussion” at the outset. Since discussion, as a form of interaction, connotes democracy, equality, and freedom, this interaction (where recitation passes for discussion) is distorted. After a survey of discussion’s many pedagogical meanings, a Marxist theoretical approach—primarily drawing from Louis Althusser and Valentin Voloshinov—is used to critique the distortion of discussion. From the Voloshinovian perspective, the aforementioned distortion composes and iterates the social formation known as neoliberal capitalism. A psychoanalytic theoretical approach is then used to propose a new concept of discussion that works against this neoliberal distortion, one founded on Jacques Lacan’s early concept of dehiscence. The dissertation concludes with suggestions for dehiscent facilitation practices, calling for greater emphasis on the form of interaction (as opposed to content) when working for social and political change. Table of Contents Introduction 1 The Doctoral Student Discussion 1 Distortion 5 Discussion and Neoliberalism 11 Chapter Outline 19 Chapter 1: What is Discussion? 21 Definitions 22 Gaps 24 Ways to Close the Definitional Gap: Etymology and Theory 25 Transition to Contemporary Philosophy of Discussion: Categorizing the Aims, Roles, and Purposes of Discussion 32 Discussion as Exchange of Ideas, and Other Economic Language 40 Chapter 2: The Reified View, or The First Distortion 46 Questions 48 The House and The Theater: Fundamental Terms in Marxism i According to Cohen and Althusser 51 Reification 59 Schmidt and Taylor 64 Ideologemic Analysis 70 Chapter 3: Recitation, or The Second Distortion 75 Recitation 76 “The Persistence of the Recitation” 81 Voloshinov and the Peculiar Case of the Pedagogical Ideologeme 86 Neoliberalism 96 Chapter 4: The Dehisced View 102 From Voloshinov to Lacan: Dehiscence, Part I, The Eye 104 Dehiscence, Part 2: Freud and The Lifting 112 Dehiscence, Part 2.1: Church and Army 115 Dehiscence, Part 2.2: Introjection 117 Dehiscence, Part 2.3: Hypnosis 122 Dehiscence, Part 2.4: The Mass 124 Dehiscence, Part 3: The Group and The Mass 126 Tactics 130 Harkness Pedagogy 131 Horizontal Pedagogy 135 ii Conclusion 146 Premises, Conclusion, and the Pebble Metaphor 146 Objections and Responses 153 Standing up: Anecdotes of Dehiscence 160 References 165 iii Acknowledgements This dissertation is the result of thinking done in public spaces, classrooms, board rooms, and subways. I am grateful for all the interactions woven into its arguments. In particular I would like to thank my parents, Erica Rosen, and the Horizontal Pedagogy Workshop of the Occupy University, New York City. Chris (Winter) Casuccio, Joe North, and Jason Wozniak were constant companions in this research. The dissertation is largely a response to the pedagogical and political questions with which we have struggled during the last three years. Elon Shore, Patrick Livingstone, and Allison Moseley generously opened their classrooms to my observations, facilitations, and questions during the 2011-2012 school year. The interactions I observed in these spaces formed a situated foundation for the dissertation’s arguments. David Johnston provided much needed clarity when I began studying Marxist political theory, and in the later stages of my thinking Tyson Lewis’s suggestions were essential, as were those given by the other members of my dissertation committee: Daniel Friedrich, David Hansen, and Sophie Harotounian-Gordon. Throughout the entire process, Megan Laverty’s support and advice constituted the dissertation’s lifeline. She was responsible for ensuring the continuity of its pulse, and I thank her immensely. Thanks also to Yoshiaki Nakazawa and Patrick Comstock, and the other members of the Dissertation Proposal Workshop, whose critiques propelled my thinking forward. Finally, the chapters of this dissertation are revised transcripts of lecture-discussion sessions held at Teachers College between December 2013 and March 2014. I would like to thank the regular attendees of these chapter sessions, whose time, energy, and thinking iv were integral to the final draft: Stefan Dorosz, Jessica Lussier, Rachel Longa, Paula Davis, Matt Hastings, and Carlos Burgos. v Introduction The Doctoral Student Discussion On September 25th, 2013, Teachers College, Columbia University, held a “doctoral student discussion.” A flyer for the event told its audience to “come grab a coffee and hear President Fuhrman and Provost James share their reflections on education…” 1 The second floor of the library had been set up for the occasion. Two plush chairs were placed at the front with a marble table in between them. Two bottles of water stood on the table, along with microphones within reach. Facing the two plush chairs were rows of plastic chairs. Participants took their seats and waited for the event to begin. Two speakers were introduced. They sat in the two chairs at the front, each speaking into his or her respective microphone for a time. After their presentations they took questions from the crowd, to which the presenters responded, and followed up with other comments. After an hour the event was more or less over. At that time there were other doctoral student discussions occurring throughout the building. A student movement had emerged in the months preceding the aforementioned event. This movement began with conversations in hallways, stairwells, and classrooms throughout TC’s complicated architecture, from which questions and critiques of the institution’s internal budget policies and external influence in society emerged. The conversations spread, blossoming into a larger series of meetings and actions. By September 25th, the student movement had organized two direct actions, distributed several communiques, and enacted various other forms of critique which confronted these troubling policies. One of those policies, an issue that galvanized the student movement, was President Susan Fuhrman’s relationship with a company called Pearson PLC. Pearson PLC is a multi-billion-dollar corporation that, in the last ten years, has become responsible for New York State’s standardized testing and teacher certification, as well as Texas’s, and has become similarly involved in education systems around the world. 2 President Fuhrman was on the Board of Directors of Pearson PLC from 2004 until 2013. Not only was she a member of the Board but she was also compensated handsomely for her work with the company through a salary and stock benefits, which she may still hold. Many students—and increasingly staff, alumni, and faculty—thought this relationship was a conflict of interest. In the movement itself, students understood this state of affairs not as an isolated incident, but rather a manifestation of a widespread social and political phenomenon. In letters to the President1, students associated her personal gain from the privatization of public education with neoliberalism, a social- political arrangement in which freedom is defined by freedom of the market and the privatization of public goods (more on this below). This dissertation’s central question about discussion derives from an interest in the pedagogy and the politics of events such as the aforementioned doctoral student discussion and its attendant political phenomena. Pedagogically, the seating arrangement of the event is significant: there were rows of seats facing forward; the presenters, seated at the front and facing the "audience," presented in a lecture-style, speaking at length into microphones, while participants faced them rather than facing each other; after the presenters presented they fielded questions from the participants, listening to and then answering these questions one at a time. In addition, the event was called a discussion where a select few would “share” their ideas about education. Politically, the contentious social-political arrangements and ideologies at play within the institutional milieu of Teachers College are also significant, specifically the neoliberal critiques coming from the student movement coinciding with the doctoral student discussion event in 1 Reyes, C. (2013, June 12) “In Letter, Teachers College Students Slam TC President Susan Fuhrman,” Columbia Spectator, retrieved from http://www.columbiaspectator.com. 3 September. This dissertation’s question derives from the possibility of a relationship between pedagogy and politics in cases such as this, particularly with respect to the word “discussion” and the verbal form of interaction to which it refers. There are two options when thinking through the possibility of such a relationship between pedagogy and politics. The first option is that there is no relationship. It might be the case that there was an event called a “doctoral student discussion” which was structured in a certain
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The System of Language, Dialogue and Discourse
    The system of language, dialogue and discourse Ana Zandwais1 Resumo: O objetivo deste artigo consiste em refl etir sobre a concepção de discurso, como um objeto complexo, constituído por opacidade e hibridez. A fi m de investigar esta concepção, analisaremos algumas noções impor- tantes introduzidas no contexto soviético por Valentin Voloshinov, Mikhail. M. Bakhtin e Lev Jakubinskij, durante as primeiras décadas do sec. XX, as quais não somente contribuíram para a construção de uma concepção de discurso, mas também infl uenciaram as bases de estudos importantes sobre as noções de polifonia, heterogeneidade e ideologia, desenvolvidos por semanticistas, linguistas e fi lósofos franceses como Oswald Ducrot, Jacqueline Authier-Revuz e Michel Pêcheux. Palavras-Chave: Discurso; sujeito, sentido; ideologia. Abstract: The objective of this article developed at Post-Graduate studies at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul State is to refl ect on the concep- tion of discourse, as a complex object, constituted by opacity and hybridity. For investigating this conception, we will analyze some important notions introduced in the Soviet context by Valentin N. Volochinov, Mikhail M. Bakhtin and Lev Jakubinskij, during the fi rst decades of the twentieth cen- tury, that not only contributed to the construction of the conception of dis- course but also infl uenced the basis of important studies developed about the notions of polyphony, heterogeneity and ideology, in European context, by famous french semanticists, linguists and philosophers as Oswald Du- crot, Jacqueline Authier-Revuz and Michel Pêcheux. Keywords: Discourse; subject; sense; ideology. Introduction Investigating discourse, as a materiality, by analyzing the ways it works, requires re- fl ections beyond the system of language.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emergence of a Dialogic Perspective on Language on The
    The Emergence of a Dialogic Perspective on Language on the Boundary between Language and Literature / A emergência, nas fronteiras entre língua e literatura, de uma perspectiva dialógica de linguagem Beth Brait ABSTRACT This text aims to reflect on some aspects of the relationship between language and literature, linguistic studies and literary studies. More specifically, it focuses on the means by which this relationship is present in Bakhtin’s thought, being directly connected to issues related to dialogue and dialogism, which traverse and single out the works of the Bakhtin Circle. In this train of thought, it is possible to testify that this relationship between language and literature is discussed, explored and problematized not solely in the works explicitly signed by Mikhail Bakhtin, but also in the ones whose authorship is disputed, for they clarify the way the other members of the Circle, especially Valentin Voloshinov and Pavel Medvedev, conceive this relationship and contribute to make it fundamental to the understanding of language and to the development of concepts, notions, and categories that make language study possible. KEYWORDS: Works of the Bakhtin Circle; Linguistic Studies and Literary Studies; Language and Literature; Dialogue; Dialogism RESUMO O objetivo deste artigo é refletir sobre alguns aspectos referentes à relação existente entre língua e literatura, estudos linguísticos e estudos literários e, mais especificamente, como essa relação se apresenta ao longo do pensamento bakhtiniano, articulando-se diretamente
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop 1 Meaningful Interpretation
    Workshop 1 Meaningful Interpretation “Invoking the interpretive mode is one of the most creative ways to make a text personal to all kinds of learners. Every student in a classroom can come to appreciate a text on his or her own level.”—Virginia Scott, Chair of French and Italian, Vanderbilt University Learning Goals How can you build your students’ interpretive skills? In this session, you’ll review relevant research, observe video discussions and classroom examples, and do a culminating activity on the interpretive mode of communication. At the end of this session, you will better understand how to: · lead students from comprehension to deeper interpretation of authentic texts; · prepare effective interpretive tasks for students; · integrate interpretive communication tasks into a unit of study; and · select from a range of authentic texts—such as art, film, folktales, advertisements, and books—based on their cultural and interdisciplinary content. Key Terms · authentic text · co-construction of meaning · communicative modes · four-skills approach · Schema theory · top-down reading process Definitions for these terms can be found in the Glossary located in the Appendix. Materials Needed An authentic text that you would like to use in an upcoming lesson with your students. For example, you could select a Web site, literary text, audio recording, film, or visual (such as a painting) that relates to the theme of the lesson or addresses cultural issues. Teaching Foreign Languages K–12 Workshop - 17 - Workshop 1 Before You Watch To prepare for this workshop session, you will tap your prior knowledge and experience and then read current research on interpretive communication.
    [Show full text]
  • Grammar Education, It Was Connected with Writing and Covered a Broad Spectrum Including the A: Qawàaid Al-Lu©A
    HIMA 13,4_340_f19_392-399 11/8/05 2:17 PM Page 393 Grammar education, it was connected with writing and covered a broad spectrum including the A: qawàaid al-lu©a. – G: Grammatik. – appreciation of literature. The grammateîs of F: grammaire. – R: grammatiks. – the New Testament were the ‘scribes’ (Mat 2, S: gramática. – C: yufa 4). In the Middle Ages, it became syno- Before the ‘linguistic turn’ that marked nymous with knowledge or study of Latin, many fields of study in the twentieth century, and often learning in general, especially the Gramsci understood that grammar as the type of knowledge of the learned classes. underlying structure that makes languages With the rise of the nation-state and the possible is an important political issue, vernacular languages, ‘grammar’ lost its both as a regulative social institution and a particular connection to Latin and became key element in philosophical questions of associated with ‘modern’ languages. thought and knowledge. Indeed, Gramsci One of the basic distinctions in grammar dedicated his last prison notebook (Q 29) to is between descriptive grammar and nor- grammar. There his discussion of the politics mative (or proscriptive) grammar. What is of grammar can also be seen as a grammar of known as the Port-Royal Grammar (published politics, as a metaphorical examination of in Paris in 1660) is an important historical the dynamics of hegemony. foundation of normative grammar. It used Of the many meanings and dimensions the idea of a ‘universal grammar’ shared by of ‘grammar’, the most important for all languages to further its aim of teaching Marxists is whether it is seen as the structure people not necessarily how language is used, or set of rules defining a language that is but how it should be used.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence for the Effectiveness of Great Books K–12 Programs and Inquiry-Based Learning
    Evidence for the Effectiveness of Great Books K–12 Programs and Inquiry-Based Learning Table of Contents Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Measuring the Impact of Junior Great Books Programs .............................................................. 3 Measuring the Impact of Key Components of Inquiry-Based Learning .................................... 12 Measuring the Impact of Professional Learning on Developing Teacher Proficiency in Inquiry-Based Instruction ....................................................................... 28 Direct Endorsements of Great Books Professional Learning ...................................................... 32 35 East Wacker Drive, Suite 400 Chicago, Illinois 60601-2105 800.222.5870 • greatbooks.org Overview The Shared Inquiry™ Method of Learning The Shared Inquiry method is a distinctive, inquiry-based approach to the reading and discussion of literature. Teachers serve as partners in inquiry with students, working together to question and interpret what they read. At the heart of the program is Shared Inquiry discussion, where students think and talk about open-ended questions of meaning in a text while the teacher, as discussion leader, encourages them to develop their ideas, support those ideas with evidence, and listen and respond to their classmates. Through the use of Great Books programs, students develop the habits and strategies of good readers and critical thinkers in a vibrant,
    [Show full text]
  • Learning to Do Shared Inquiry in a Fourth Grade Classroom
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by eScholarship@BC Learning to do Shared Inquiry in a Fourth Grade Classroom Author: Nancy Alexandra Hait Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/2418 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2011 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. BOSTON COLLEGE Lynch School of Education Department of Teacher Education, Special Education, and Curriculum and Instruction Language, Literacy, and Learning LEARNING TO DO SHARED INQUIRY IN A FOURTH GRADE CLASSROOM Dissertation By NANCY ALEXANDRA HAIT submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2011 Nancy Hait ©copyright by NANCY ALEXANDRA HAIT 2011 1 Nancy Hait ABSTRACT Learning to do Shared Inquiry in a Fourth Grade Classroom Author: Nancy Alexandra Hait Advisor: Dr. Curt Dudley-Marling This qualitative dissertation, informed by sociocultural theory (Gee, 1996; Vygotsky, 1978), examines how a fourth grade teacher and his students learned to participate in Shared Inquiry, a discussion practice where students learn how to build an evidential argument, including a claim that is supported by evidence and justified by a warrant (Toulmin, 1969). Students also learn how to weigh the merits of opposing arguments and how to modify their initial opinions as evidence demands. Over the course of ten weeks, the fourth grade teacher implemented Shared Inquiry as part of the Junior Great Books (JGB) program, offered as a supplement to a district mandated reading program. The teacher was observed while using the JGB program and while providing instruction through the mandated reading program.
    [Show full text]
  • Eddie Izzard's Bible…
    THE BIBLE & CRITICAL THEORY ARTICLES Dialogism, Monologism, and Cultural Literacy: Classical Hebrew Literature and Readers' Epistemic Paradigms Terje Stordalen, Faculty of Theology, University of Oslo1 Abstract: This essay explores the question of a genealogy for dialogical thought and literature, as well as for its opposite mode: monological thought and writing. Mikhail Bakhtin argued that dialogical literature existed in antiquity, but did not elaborate much on this question and only briefly mentioned classical Hebrew examples. In fact, Bakhtin often construed the bible as the prime monological texts of European culture. Large parts of biblical Hebrew literature could, however, be seen as fundamentally dialogical. The dominance that monological modes of thought and writing (and reading!) exert today seems to rely to a great extent upon the spread of cultural literacy. If so, the monological bible is hardly more than a few centuries old. For a good two decades scholars of classical Hebrew literature have engaged with Bakhtin's writings.2 As a biblical scholar I often settled for the relatively modest aspiration to employ Bakhtin in order to make sense of biblical texts. Bakhtin, on the other hand, engaged with Dostoevsky's and others' texts in order to make sense of reality as he knew it. Running the risk of sounding too pretentious, this time I take a lead from Bakhtin and ask whether a study of biblical literature could help grasp the genealogy of dialogical thought and the apparent dominance of monological modes of writing and thinking. Trying to uncover the genealogies of monologism and dialogism is of course an impossibly broad aspiration.
    [Show full text]
  • Funny Things Are Happening on the Way to the Bakhtin Forum Nina
    #231 Funny Things are Happening on the Way to the Bakhtin Forum Nina Perlina Indiana University Nina Perlina is an Associate Professor of Literature at Indiana University at Bloomington. The author of Varieties of Poetic Utterance: Quotation in the Brothers Karamazov (University Press of America, Lanham, 1985), Dr. Perlina has been working on Mikhail Bakhtin since 1974. She wrote "Funny Things are Happening on the Way to the Bakhtin Forum" during her tenure as a Kennan Institute Research Scholar from September 1986 through July 1987. Copyright March 1989 by the Wilson Center The Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars The Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies is a division of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Through its program of fellowships, meetings, and publications, the Institute encourages scholarship on Russia and the Soviet Union, embracing a broad range of fields in the social sciences and the humanities. The Kennan Institute is supported by contributions from foundations, corporations, individuals, and the United States Government. Kennan Institute Occasional Papers The Kennan Institute makes Occasional Papers available to all those interested in Russian and Soviet Studies. Occasional Papers are submitted by Kennan Institute scholars and visiting speakers, particularly those who wish to receive timely feedback on their work. Copies of Occasional Papers and a list of papers currently available can be obtained, free of charge, by contacting: Occasional Papers Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW, Suite 704 Washington, D.C. 20024-2518 (202} 297-3000 The views expressed in Kennan Institute Occasional Papers are those of the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 TEACH ED 309/MS ED 409: Speech & Communication in The
    TEACH_ED 309/MS_ED 409: Speech & Communication in the School Environment Fall 2020 Monday, 6:30-9:30pm CDT All class sessions held remotely via Zoom Brad Wadle [email protected] Resources for Remote Learning: Please review NU's guidance for organizing your participation in remote learning courses. Course Description Communication is at the very core of what teachers do. Teachers must communicate with students, and foster an environment in which students can communicate with each other. This course is designed to address these issues. Public speaking, interpersonal communication, and classroom management issues will be discussed, with emphasis on fostering productive discourse in the classroom. This includes sharing ideas, building on one another's ideas, and working together to further our learning as a community. For classroom teaching, this means cultivating and supporting an environment in which students use academic talk to work with one another as part of a learning community. This course will address supporting discourse in the classroom and school environment, including designing discussion-based tasks, supporting students in academic discourse, creating a classroom climate supportive of discussion, questioning strategies and talk moves that facilitate discussion, and assessment in discussion-based tasks. This course requires several small oral presentations, reading, writing, and lesson design. It also satisfies the public speaking requirement for licensure. Course Goals 1. Understand theories of interpersonal communication and public speaking. 2. Develop confidence speaking in a variety of settings. 3. Understand use of technology, both to augment public speaking, and also as a medium for communication on its own. 4. Understand strategies to help your own students become better speakers.
    [Show full text]
  • Boundaries Versus Binaries: Bakhtin In/Against the History of Ideas
    Boundaries Versus Binaries: Bakhtin in/against the History of Ideas Graham Pechey Who or what is Mikhail Bakhtin? The two monographs we with a little phenomenology. Rather than affirming an iden­ have on him agree on an identity: Bakhtin is a philosopher. tity we should turn our attention to his specificity as a thinker, The compliment, however well meant, could be lethal. and we can do this by saying that language for him takes place Bakhtin was born in Orel in 1895 and died near Moscow in not in the neutral space of 'communication' but in a charged 1975. This bald statement of a life defined by its extremities and irreducibly sociopolitical space of its own endless mak­ elides the tortuous route that took him from one time and ing and remaking. It will not do to deny either the existential­ place to another; it also glosses over both the fellowship of a ist or the semiotician in Bakhtin, but merely to add to each 'circle' which it was his good luck to have around him in the other these two moments of his thinking without that third early years and the intellectual loneliness that followed in the dimension modifying both is to throwaway the subversive Stalin period, six years of which he spent in internal exile. potential of these two major bourgeois responses to the twen­ These biographical motifs find their echo in a thinking which tieth-century crises of (respectively) the subject and of repre­ is preoccupied with dialogue and with the time-space of sentation. Bakhtin then enters the history of ideas as a charac­ narratives, and these themes in their turn exactly characterize ter with an honoured minor role in the great Western narrative the thought itself: Bakhtin always speaks with more than one of 'human freedom'.
    [Show full text]
  • And New Testament Interpretation
    Framing the text: ‘Background studies’ and New Testament interpretation P J J Botha University of South Africa Abstract Understanding a text always demands knowledge of its context. Possible reasons why context is frequently regarded as a subordinate part of interpretation are analysed. Interpretation within a communicative pers­ pective, and facets of contextualisation are discussed; some theoretical aspects concerning contextual issues are clarified. The notion ‘framing the text’ is defended to emphasise that history is constructed and always pre­ supposes a perspective. Framing is a comprehensive ac­ tivity which adds complexity. Because it engages in his­ torical interpretation and describes aspects of the various levels of context, one’s framing activity can be criticised and improved. Framing arises from oscilla­ tion between intensive interpretation of details and generalisation. 1. INTRODUCTION The appeal to context in matters of dispute about meaning is a natural and obvious­ ly important feature of interpretation. The significance of context has been stressed by all disciplines engaged in interpretation. From psychological research into hu­ man communicative behaviour and the phenomenon of meaning (e g Bransford & * Revised version of a paper read al a subgroup meeting of (he New Testament Society of South Africa held at Unisa on 27 September 1991. Pieter Craffert provided some helpful references and Helen Botha some meaningful criticism, for which I thank them. ISSN 0259 9422 - UTS 49 /1 A 2 (1993) 29 ‘Background studies’ and New Testament interpretation Johnson 1972; Palermo & Bourne 1978:160-173) to folklore studies (Ben-Amos 1983; Honko 1984) the concept context is constantly stressed. This emphasis seems to be related to the very structure of knowledge and understanding: Something out­ side the ‘object’ is needed in order to know or to understand.
    [Show full text]
  • This Distrust? Finally, Perhaps Brandenberger Pushes His Arguments About Russocentrism Too Far
    this distrust? Finally, perhaps Brandenberger pushes his arguments about russocentrism too far. He acknowledges tensions, contradictions, and dualities among notions of internationalism and of russocentrism. Perhaps these contradictions and dualities would have made an interesting and revealing focus. Still, the book is an ambitious and extensive study which provides a major contribution to the surprisingly understudied and insufficiently understood, yet crucial theme of ideology under Stalin, especially through the war years and beyond. His presentation of the controversy and scandal surrounding the History of the Kazakh SSR and of the Short Course on the History of the USSR are fascinating. Brandenberger is to be highly comrnended for wrestling through an enormous amount of extremely varied material and shaping it into a coherent and accessible argument and study. Tracy McDonald McMaster University Peter Ives, Gramsci S Politics of Language: Engaging the Bakhtin Circle and the Frankjiurt School (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004). The last 30 years have seen an explosion of writings on Antonio Gramsci in almost all social science and humanities disciplines - so much so that short of fresh applications of a 'Gramscian' method to the study of specific contexts, one might conclude there is little new to say about Gramsci's thought itself. Yet a newly adapted theoretical reading of Gramsci's ideas is exactly what Peter Ives strives to present in Gramsci k Politics of Language. What results is not just another book on Gramsci, but rather a unique reading of Gramsci's work through a wide-ranging interdisciplinary engagement with history, linguistics, and Marxist philosophies of language, culture, and social and political thought.
    [Show full text]