The Hall (1980) piece starts
by laying out the two most common tendencies or ways of thinking about racial
social formations: the economic and the sociological. He claims that folks in
the economic school believe that social divisions that most people believe to
exist because of racial or ethnic characteristics can actually be explained
through economic structures. In contrast, folks in the sociological realm
believe that these differences could be attributed to "social or cultural
features of the social formations" (306). Hall claims that they both feed
into each other (309). I feel as though this has been a debate within race stratification
for quite some time now. Some scholars feel it is super important to study
inequality only as it relates to the economic or "hard" resources and
look down on scholars who study inequality that stems from symbolic or cultural
materials. However it is important to note that in many ways the symbolic
bleeds into the cultural and it is from the cultural that we're able to
challenge (and sometimes change) hegemonic structures and institutions (Hall
1980:315). From my understanding, it seems like articulation was made to bridge
the gap between the economic and sociological realms, avoiding the cons of each
(reductionism and essentialism).
More General Questions about Articulation
Articulation
is not a static concept but a dynamic process involving potential
contradictions and tensions. How might scholars navigate these complexities
when studying articulations in specific cultural contexts?
How
might educators apply Hall's understanding of articulation in pedagogical
settings, particularly in fostering critical thinking and political engagement
among students?
Comments
Post a Comment