Skip navigation

Tag Archives: Intellectual Property

Karl Marx

MARX IS BACK: THE IMPORTANCE OF MARXIST THEORY AND RESEARCH FOR CRITICAL COMMUNICATION STUDIES TODAY

Marx is Back: The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

Call for Papers for a Special Issue of tripleC – Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society
Edited by Christian Fuchs and Vincent Mosco: http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/uploads/CfP_Marx_tripleC.pdf
For inquiries, please contact the two editors.

In light of the global capitalist crisis, there is renewed interest in Karl Marx’s works and in concepts like class, exploitation and surplus value. Slavoj Žižek argues that the antagonisms of contemporary capitalism in the context of the ecological crisis, the massive expansion of intellectual property, biogenetics, new forms of apartheid and growing world poverty show that we still need the Marxian notion of class. He concludes that there is an urgent need to renew Marxism and to defend its lost causes in order to render problematic capitalism as the only alternative (Žižek 2008, 6) and the new forms of a soft capitalism that promise, and in its rhetoric makes use of, ideals like participation, self-organization, and co-operation, without realizing them. Žižek (2010, chapter 3) argues that the global capitalistcrisis clearly demonstrates the need to return to the critique of political economy. Göran Therborn suggests that the “new constellations of power and new possibilities of resistance” in the 21st century require retaining the “Marxian idea that human emancipation from exploitation, oppression, discrimination and the inevitable linkage between privilege and misery can only come from struggle by the exploited and disadvantaged themselves” (Therborn 2008, 61). Eric Hobsbawm (2011, 12f) insists that for understanding the global dimension of contemporary capitalism, its contradictions and crises, and the persistence of socio-economic inequality, we “must ask Marx’s questions” (13).

This special issue will publish articles that address the importance of Karl Marx’s works for Critical Media and Communication Studies, what it means to ask Marx’s questions in 21st century informational capitalism, how Marxian theory can be used for critically analyzing and transforming media and communication today, and what the implications of the revival of the interest in Marx are for the field of Media and Communication Studies.

Questions that can be explored in contributions include, but are not limited to:

* What is Marxist Media and Communication Studies? Why is it needed today?

* What are the main assumptions, legacies, tasks, methods and categories of Marxist Media and Communication Studies and how do they relate to Karl Marx’s theory?

* What are the different types of Marxist Media/Communication Studies, how do they differ, what are their commonalities?

* What is the role of Karl Marx’s theory in different fields, subfields and approaches of Media and Communication Studies?

* How have the role, status, and importance of Marx’s theory for Media and Communication Studies evolved historically, especially since the 1960s?

* In addition to his work as a theorist and activist, Marx was a practicing journalist throughout his career. What can we learn from his journalism about the practice of journalism today, about journalism theory, journalism education and alternative media?

* What have been the structural conditions, limits and problems for conducting Marxian-inspired Media and Communication Research and for carrying out university teaching in the era of neoliberalism?

* What are actual or potential effects of the new capitalist crisis on these conditions?

* What is the relevance of Marxian thinking in an age of capitalist crisis for analyzing the role of media and communication in society?

* How can the Marxian notions of class, class struggle, surplus value, exploitation, commodity/commodification, alienation, globalization, labour, capitalism, militarism and war, ideology/ideology critique, fetishism, and communism best be used for analyzing, transforming and
criticizing the role of media, knowledge production and communication in contemporary capitalism?

* How are media, communication, and information addressed in Marx’s work?

* What are commonalities and differences between contemporary approaches in the interpretation of Marx’s analyses of media, communication, knowledge, knowledge labour and technology?

* What is the role of dialectical philosophy and dialectical analysis as epistemological and methodological tools for Marxian-inspired Media and Communication Studies?

* What were central assumptions of Marx about media, communication, information, knowledge production, culture and how can these insights be used today for the critical analysis of capitalism?

* What is the relevance of Marx’s work for an understanding of social media?

* Which of Marx’s works can best be used today to theorize media and communication?  Why and how?

* Terry Eagleton (2011) demonstrates that the 10 most common held prejudices against Marx are wrong. What prejudices against Marx can be found in Media and Communication Studies today? What have been the consequences of such prejudices? How can they best be contested? Are there continuities and/or discontinuities of prejudices against Marx in light of the new capitalist crisis?

All contributions shall genuinely deal with Karl Marx’s original works and discuss their relevance for contemporary Critical Media/Communication Studies.

Eagleton Terry. 2011. Why Marx was right. London: Yale University Press.
Hobsbawm, Eric. 2011. How to change the world. Marx and Marxism 1840-2011. London: Little, Brown.
Therborn, Göran. 2008. From Marxism to post-Marxism? London: Verso.
Žižek, Slavoj. 2008. In defense of lost causes. London: Verso.
Žižek, Slavoj. 2010. Living in the end times. London: Verso.

Editors

Christian Fuchs is chair professor for Media and Communication Studies at Uppsala University’s Department of Informatics and Media. He is editor of the journal tripleC – Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society. His areas of interest are: Critical Theory, Social Theory, Media & Society, Critical Political Economy of Media/Communication, Critical Information Society Studies, Critical Internet Studies. He is author of the books “Foundations of Critical Media and Information Studies” (Routledge 2011) and “Internet and Society: Social Theory in the Information Age” (Routledge 2008, paperback 2011). He is co-editor of the collected volume “The Internet and Surveillance. The Challenges of Web 2.0 and Social Media” (Routledge 2011, together with Kees Boersma, Anders Albrechtslund, Marisol Sandoval). He is currently writing a book presenting a critical theory of social media. http://fuchs.uti.at 

Vincent Mosco is professor emeritus of sociology at Queen’s University and formerly Canada Research Chair in Communication and Society. Dr. Mosco is the author of numerous books on communication, technology, and society. His most recent include Getting the Message: Communications Workers and Global Value Chains (co-edited with Catherine McKercher and Ursula Huws,Merlin, 2010), The Political Economy of Communication, second edition (Sage, 2009), The Laboring of Communication: Will Knowledge Workers of the World Unite (co-authored with Catherine McKercher, Lexington Books, 2008), Knowledge Workers in the Information Society (co-edited with Catherine McKercher, Lexington Books, 2007), and The Digital Sublime: Myth, Power, and Cyberspace (MIT Press, 2004). He is currently writing a book on the relevance of Karl Marx for communication research today.

Publication Schedule and Submission

Structured Abstracts for potential contributions shall be submitted to both editors (christian.fuchs@im.uu.semoscov@mac.com) per e-mail until September 30th, 2011 (submission deadline). The authors of accepted abstracts will be invited to write full papers that are due five months after the feedback from the editors. Full papers must then be submitted to tripleC. Please do not instantly submit full papers, but only structured abstracts to the editors.

The abstracts should have a maximum of 200 words and should be structured by dealing separately with each of the following five dimensions.

1) Purpose and main questions of the paper
2) Description of the way taken for answering the posed questions
3) Relevance of the topic in relation to the CfP
4) Main expected outcomes and new insights of the paper
5) Contribution to the engagement with Marx’s works and to Marxian-inspired Media and Communication Studies.

Journal

tripleC (cognition, communication, co-operation): Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, http://www.triple-c.se 

Focus and Scope:

Critical Media-/Information-/Communication-/Internet-/Information Society-Studies; tripleC provides a forum to discuss the challenges humanity is facing today. It publishes contributions that focus on critical studies of media, information, communication, culture, digital media, social media and the Internet in the information society. The journal’s focus is especially on critical studies and it asks contributors to reflect about normative, political, ethical and critical implications of their research.

Indexing:
Scopus, EBSCOHost Communication and Mass Media Complete, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
Open Access: tripleC is an open access journal that publishes articles online and does not charge authors or readers. It uses a Creative Commons license (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License) that allows reproduction of published articles for non-commercial purposes (without changes of the content and only with naming the author). Creative Commons publishing poses a viable alternative to commercial academic publishing that is dominated by big corporate publishing houses.

Prof. Christian Fuchs
Chair in Media and Communication Studies
Department of Informatics and Media
Uppsala University
Kyrkogårdsgatan 10
Box 513
751 20 Uppsala
Sweden
christian.fuchs@im.uu.se
Tel +46 (0) 18 471 1019
http://fuchs.uti.at
http://www.im.uu.se
NetPolitics Blog: http://fuchs.uti.at/blog
Editor of tripleC: http://www.triple-c.se
Book “Foundations of Critical Media and Information Studies” (Routledge 2011)
Book “Internet and Society” (Paperback, Routledge 2010)

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

MySpace Profile: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski

The Ockress: http://www.theockress.com

Rikowski Point: http://rikowskipoint.blogspot.com

Volumizer: http://glennrikowski.blogspot.com

Online Publications at: http://www.flowideas.co.uk/?page=pub&sub=Online%20Publications%20Glenn%20Rikowski

Glenn Rikowski on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/glenn.rikowski

Advertisements

Digitisation Perspectives

EPHEMERA – VOLUME 10 NUMBERS 3 – 4

The Digital Labour Group in the Faculty of Information and Media Studies at the University of Western Ontario and /ephemera: theory and politics in organization/ are pleased to announce the arrival of Volume 10: 3-4:

*** Digital Labour: Workers, Authors, Citizens ***

Edited by Jonathan Burston, Nick Dyer-Witheford and Alison Hearn

ephemera: http://www.ephemeraweb.org/

Born out of the conference of the same name held in the fall of 2009 at the University of Western Ontario, this special double issue of / ephemera / addresses the implications of digital labour as they are emerging in practice, politics, policy, culture, and theoretical enquiry. As workers, as authors, and as citizens, we are increasingly summoned and disciplined by new digital technologies that define the workplace and produce ever more complex regimes of surveillance and control. At the same time, new possibilities for agency and new spaces for collectivity are borne from these multiplying digital innovations.

This volume explores this social dialectic, with a specific focus on new forms of labour. Papers examine the histories and theories of digital capitalism, foundational assumptions in debates about digital labour, issues of intellectual property and copyright, material changes in the digital workplace, transnational perspectives on digital labour, the issue of free labour and new definitions of work, and struggles and contests on the scene of digital production.

Contributors include Brian Holmes, Andrea Fumagalli and Cristina Morini, David Hesmondhalgh, Ursula Huws, Barry King, Jack Bratich, Enda Brophy and many others.

This issue also contains vital contributions from union and guild activists hailing from the Canadian Media Guild (CMG), the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), the American  Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA), the University of Western Ontario Faculty Association and the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT).

The Digital Labour Group: Jonathan Burston, Edward Comor, James Compton, Nick Dyer-Witheford, Alison Hearn, Ajit Pyati, Sandra Smeltzer, Matt Stahl, Samuel E. Trosow.

 

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

MySpace Profile: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski

The Ockress: http://www.theockress.com

Rikowski Point: http://rikowskipoint.blogspot.com

Volumizer: http://glennrikowski.blogspot.com

The Lamp Post

6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE IN INTERPRETIVE POLICY ANALYSIS

Call for papers or proposals:
6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE IN INTERPRETIVE POLICY ANALYSIS: DISCURSIVE SPACES. POLITICS, PRACTICES AND POWER
http://www.ipa-2011.cardiff.ac.uk/

I am soliciting papers for the panel:

Panel 20: Globalizing Technology and Innovation Policies: Interpretative and Critical Approaches Chair: Jeremy Hunsinger, Center for Digital Discourse and Culture, Virginia Tech
Send proposals to: jhuns@vt.edu

This panel addresses technology and innovation policies as politico-ethico-juridico- technical systems comprised of arrangements of things and peoples. Through it, we are particularly interested in the transitions these systems undergo as they migrate from local and national applications to transnational and global systems. These systems undergo significant translations, modifications, and reorganizations as they come to match the sensemaking practices of global and transnational interests and their policymaking regimes. Examples of such transitions and translations ongoing now are: questions of information technology, intellectual property, genetically modified organisms, internet governance, STEM education funding, Mode 2 centered research funding and many, many others.

Given the plurality of possibilities for this panel, it is important to maintain two themes in your submissions: 1. center on technology, innovation, or research policy, 2. the trend from local to global in the application of these policies.    As fitting with the core concepts of the conference, this panel will consider critical and interpretive approaches with those two themes

Submissions due 5 February, 2011

Jeremy Hunsinger
Center for Digital Discourse and Culture
Virginia Tech

http://www.tmttlt.com

Whoever ceases to be a student has never been a student.
-George Iles

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

MySpace Profile: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski

The Ockress: http://www.theockress.com

Rikowski Point: http://rikowskipoint.blogspot.com

Glenn Rikowski on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/glenn.rikowski

Volumizer: http://glennrikowski.blogspot.com

Uncertainty in Higher Education

UNIVERSITIES AS KNOWLEDGE INSTITUTIONS IN THE NETWORKED AGE

CALL FOR PAPERS FOR SPECIAL ISSUE

Universities as Knowledge Institutions in the Networked Age

Guest Editors: PHILIPPE AIGRAIN, JUAN CARLOS DE MARTIN & URS GASSER

The journal Policy Futures in Education (PFIE) – available online at www.wwwords.co.uk/PFIE – will publish a special issue on the impact of information technology and the Internet on universities: to keep and develop their role as knowledge institutions, how should universities reshape in this new environment? Sub-topics, such as open access to scientific literature and distance learning, have an established track of studies and proposals. However, it has not been common so far to aim at an integrated analysis of how universities will and should change to accommodate the changes brought by cyberspace in their specific role of knowledge user, processor, producer and disseminator.

One topic to be addressed is how the process of learning within universities will change because of the Internet and digital devices. For centuries, college student were educated by listening to their professor read aloud selected books taken from the university library (‘lesson’ comes, in fact, from ‘lectio’, Latin for ‘reading session’). Gutenberg changed that by making books cheaper and therefore more amenable to individual ownership and private reading, but the typical university lesson ended up not changing much anyway. Thanks to technology, we are now experiencing, at least potentially, a Renaissance of learning methods: from e-books to podcasts, from virtual worlds classrooms to streaming, from computer-assisted learning to videogames, the avenues of learning have increased dramatically. Are we heading towards purely technology-mediated learning strategies? Is the old Socratic professor-student direct approach completely obsolete? Doesn’t the wider spectrum of approaches offer the opportunity to educate those students who have always been uncomfortable with the traditional approach? What about the impact on lifelong learning?

A second topic is how research will be affected by the Internet. A major potential impact will be on the way research results will be communicated in the future. The scientific paper as a rhetorical device is increasingly under pressure in favour of more flexible, digitally-enabled forms of communication, mostly based on semantic web technologies. How would the decline of the scientific paper affect science? What about the role of search engines in the future of research? Will the Internet enable new forms of evaluation of scientific results? How would that change the centuries-old mechanism of recognition and promotion within the scientific community? Moreover, the transition towards digital knowledge seem to affect trends towards commercialization of knowledge at universities and knowledge institutions, and the impact those trends have on knowledge generation. Additionally, the Internet seem to be increasing the tension between the growing specialization of research activities and the aspiration towards increased interdisciplinarity.

The third topic regards how should universities use cyberspace to best implement their mission with respect to society. In recent years society has been asking universities to do more than simply – albeit crucially – educate students and produce new academic knowledge. The list of new demands include life-long education, open access to scientific papers and educational resources, and encouragement and support for spin-offs and start-ups. But is that it? Of course not. Public education, at all levels, was born with a clear mandate to educate citizens and to increase social mobility, not simply provide students with marketable skills and bookshelves with new scientific journals. Moreover, in our age the increasingly complex problems that we are facing as society, from global warming to water supplies, from the environment to energy issues, from the challenges (and opportunities) presented by bio-genetics and nanotechnology, don’t call for a renewal of the concept of University as Public Institution? In other words, don’t universities – as institutions as well as through their individual researchers – have a duty to engage more frequently in the public sphere, placing their super skills and knowledge at the service of citizens – and their representatives – to allow them to properly deliberate? If so, how? What would be appropriate and what would, instead, constitute a deontological breach of professorial decorum and integrity? If it is indeed important, shouldn’t universities allow/favour internal organizational changes to better implement such social role? How is that social role linked to freedom of research? Is the growing need of universities in many countries to court potential private investors (or governments) affecting it? If so, what could the consequences be for our societies? Doesn’t the Internet offer extraordinary tools to empower the public sphere presence of universities, professors and students, and to help to reduce social and cultural divides?

The special issue builds upon the COMMUNIA 2010 Conference on University and Cyberspace – Reshaping Knowledge Institutions for the Networked Age, held at Turin, 28-30 June 2010.

Submitters can visit the conference site and access material originating from the conference at http://www.communia2010.org

Possible issues relating to the above topics include:

– Digital Natives: how will the characteristics of the new generations of students, faculty and staff shape the future of universities?
– The Spatial Infrastructure: physical and virtual spaces for higher education
– The Use of Digital Technology in the Classroom
– Open Access to Scientific Results (papers, data, software)
– Open Educational Resources
– Educational Videogames
– Digital Devices as Platform for Learning
– Non-formal Education via the Internet
– Digital Divide and Higher Education
– Long-term Knowledge Preservation in a Digital Age
– Academic Production and the Knowledge Commons
– Digital and Physical Social Networks
– Intellectual Property and Academic Production
– Physical and Digital Library
– Semantic Web Technologies Applied to Scientific Results and Educational Resources

Papers should be sent as email attachments: pfie-specialissue@nexa.polito.it

Deadline for submissions: 15 January 2011

All papers submitted will be evaluated using the PFIE’s normal peer review process. Please also see the Journal’s information for authors: www.wwwords.co.uk/pfie/howtocontribute.asp

EDITORIAL CONTACTS

Dr Philippe Aigrain
CEO, Sopinspace
4, passage de la Main d’Or
F-75011 Paris
France
philippe.aigrain@sopinspace.com

Professor Juan Carlos De Martin
Co-Director, NEXA Center for Internet & Society
Politecnico di Torino – DAUIN
Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24
I-10129 TORINO
Italy
demartin@polito.it

Urs Gasser
Executive Director
Berkman Center for Internet & Society
23 Everett Street, 2nd Floor
Cambridge, MA 02138
USA
ugasser@cyber.law.harvard.edu

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

MySpace Profile: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski

Wavering on Ether: http://blog.myspace.com/glennrikowski

Rikowski Point: http://rikowskipoint.blogspot.com/

Academic Labor and Law

Special Section of Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labor

 

Guest EditorJennifer Wingard

University of Houston

 

The historical connections between legislation, the courts, and the academy have been complex and multi-layered. This has been evident from early federal economic policies, such as the Morell Act and the GI Bill, through national and state legislation that protected student and faculty rights, such as the First Amendment and affirmative action clauses. These connections continue into our current moment of state and national efforts to define the work of the university, such as The Academic Bill of Rights and court cases regarding distance learning. The question, then, becomes whether and to what extent the impact of legislation and litigation reveals or masks the shifting mission of the academy. Have these shifts been primarily economic, with scarcities of funding leading many to want to legislate what is considered a university education, how it should be financed, and who should benefit from it? Are the shifts primarily ideological, with political interests working to change access, funding, and the intellectual project of higher education? Or are the shifts a combination of both political and economic influences? One thing does become clear from these discussions: at their core, the legal battles surrounding higher education are about the changing nature of the university –the use of managerial/corporate language; the desire to professionalize students rather than liberally educate them; the need to create transparent structures of evaluation for both students and faculty; and the attempt to define the types of knowledge produced and disseminated in the classroom. These are changes for which faculty, students, administrators, as well as citizens who feel they have a stake in higher education, seek legal redress. This special section of Workplace aims to explore the ways in which legislation and court cases impact the work of students, professors, contingent faculty, and graduate students in the university. Potential topics include but are not limited to:

 

Academic Freedom for students and/or faculty

* Horowitz’s Academic Bill of Rights

* Missouri’s Emily Booker Intellectual Diversity Act

* First Amendment court cases concerning faculty and student’s rights to freely express themselves in the classroom and on campuses

* Facebook/Myspace/Blog court cases

* Current legislative and budgetary “attacks” on area studies (i.e. Queer Studies in Georgia, Women’s Studies in Florida)

Affirmative Action

* The implementation of state and university diversity initiatives in the 1970s

* The current repeal of affirmative action law across the country

* Benefits, including Health Benefits, Domestic Partner Benefits

* How universities in states with same-sex marriage bans deal with domestic partner benefits

Collective Bargaining

* The recent rulings at NYU and Brown about the status of graduate students as employees

* State anti-unionization measures and how they impact contingent faculty

Copyright/Intellectual Property

* In Distance Learning

* In corporate sponsored science research

* In government sponsored research

Disability Rights and Higher Education

* How the ADA impacts the university

* Sexual Harassment and Consensual Relationships

* How diversity laws and sexual harassment policies impact the university

Tenure

* The Bennington Case

* Post 9/11 court cases

 

Contributions for Workplace should be 4000-6000 words in length and should conform to MLA style. If interested, please send an abstract via word attachment to Jennifer Wingard (jwingard@central.uh.edu) by Friday, May 22, 2009. Completed essays will be due via email by Monday, August 24, 2009.

 

E. Wayne Ross

Professor

Department of Curriculum and Pedagogy

University of British Columbia

2125 Main Mall

Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4

Canada

604-822-2830

wayne.ross@ubc.ca

 

http://www.ewayneross.net

 

Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labor: http://www.workplace-gsc.com

Cultural Logic: http://eserver.org/clogic

 

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

MySpace Profile: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski  

Enclosures

 

 

Call for Submissions

Issue #108: “Enclosures”


Issue Editors: Amy Chazkel and David Serlin

The Radical History Review seeks submissions for an issue entitled, “Enclosures,” which will explore the twin phenomena of proprietary demarcation and dispossession that has accompanied the global transition to industrial capitalism in cities and rural areas alike.

Although usually associated with the social and legal conflicts over the peasantry’s use of the commons in early modern England, politicians, activists, thinkers and scholars of all ideological orientations have applied the concept of enclosure broadly across a vast variety of historical and geographical contexts.  The “commons” has become a generic metaphor for public property and, by extension, the commonweal; it has come to denote not only agricultural land but also the most abstract types of common property, such as academic disciplinary knowledge and access to the airwaves. Likewise, the enclosure of the commons has taken multiple meanings that extend the idea of the fencing off of common property in the interest of private gain and liberal (or neoliberal) individual property rights.

This special issue offers an opportunity to take stock of the idea of enclosure—to explore the connections between, for example, the type of “primitive accumulation” for which the term was originally applied and its more abstract, contemporary instances, and to historicize rigorously its application. To what degree was there ever really a “commons”?  How did constructions of sacrosanct public space and its privatization and dispossession become naturalized features of cultural life?  By collectively publishing work on such diverse phenomena as urban squatters throughout the world, intellectual property, or social conflicts over indigenous collective property rights in colonial and post-colonial settings, the journal editors aim to explore the limits of the usefulness of the concept of enclosure as a critical paradigm for understanding modern political and social life, and to consider how to connect its manifold manifestations.

While we would welcome submissions that revisit the early modern European context to which the term enclosure has typically been applied, we strongly encourage works from any time period, especially those that critically examine the broad applicability of the term and those that venture beyond the European and North American contexts.

The range of topics might include, but is not limited to, the 
following:

Enclosure of the commons and the genesis of informal economies
The historical roots of the privatized city
Enclosure and the politics of population control
The political and cultural uses of nostalgia for the “commons”
Visual culture and the process of enclosure
Environmental politics as part, or counterweight, to the process of enclosure
Transnational historical perspectives on political and social movements such as Brazil’s and India’s respective anti-dam movements, or the struggle over the privatization of water in Bolivia
Successful assertions of communal rights, for example in urban shantytowns and former runaway slave communities in the Americas: have they challenged the process of enclosure?
Artistic, cinematic, or other cultural representations of enclosure and creative responses to it—for instance, in Agnès Varda’s cinema verité classic, The Gleaners and I, or Britain’s punk and post-punk movements as aesthetic responses to Thatcher’s sweeping politics of privatization
Enclosure and imperialism: what is the relationship between the domestic reapportioning of property rights and the possession of overseas territories? How can we connect the enclosure of the commons in the metropole to the fate of communally owned indigenous lands and other resources under colonial rule?
The making of modern statecraft from the perspective of the “enclosers”: the surveyors, judges, and notaries who carried out the quotidian work of enclosure
The politics of public space and the exclusionary “public sphere”
Enclosure of the scientific commons and the commodification of  
knowledge
The human genome as private property and the ownership of self
The intellectual commons and radical approaches to intellectual and academic life
Innovative uses of the cartographic and judicial records that enclosure left behind
Critical reassessments of the classic works on enclosure, particularly E. P. Thompson and his cohort of Warwick School historians of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century English agrarian society.

 

The RHR seeks scholarly research articles as well as such non-traditional contributions as photo essays, film and book review essays, interviews, brief interventions, “conversations” between scholars and/or activists, teaching notes and annotated course syllabi, and research notes.

Procedures for submission of articles:
By February 1, 2009, please submit a 1-2 page abstract summarizing the article you wish to include in this issue as an attachment to rhr@igc.org

with “Issue 108 abstract submission” in the subject line. By March 1, 2009, authors will be notified whether they should submit a full version of their article for peer review.  The due date for completed drafts of articles is August 1, 2009. Those articles selected for publication after the peer review process will be included in issue 108 of the Radical History Review, scheduled to appear in Fall 2010. Articles should be submitted electronically with “Issue 108 submission” in the subject line.  For artwork, please send images as high resolution digital files (each image as a separate file).

 

Abstract Deadline: February 1, 2009

Radical History Review
Tamiment Library, 10th
Floor
New York University
70 Washington Square South
New York, NY 10012

Email: rhr@igc.org
Visit the website at:
http://chnm.gmu.edu/rhr/rhr.htm

 

 

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas at: http://www.flowideas.co.uk