Louis Althusser, Ideology and the State 1970
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Althusser: this site provides a complete biography of Althusser.
http://www.lexingtonbooks.com/Catalog/SingleBook.shtml?command=Search&db=%5EDB/CATALOG.db&eqSKUdata=0739
This one gives review of a book by William Lewis: Althusser and the traditions of French Marxism, which replaces Althusser ins the socio-historical context of his writing: desillusion of the french intelligentsia facing the ruin and failure of the communist political practice of Marxism (former USSR, etc)
http://home.earthlink.net/~potterama/Michele/projects/hyper/structuralism.html:
This one gives definition of marxist criticism, lieterary criticism and structuralism as well as belongers of these movements.
It was frustrating to keep bumping into sites where membership was needed to retrieve articles (Jstore and its likes)it. It is a nice review of basic marxist principles and terminology (infrastructure/superstructure, class struggle, state apparatus (RSA, & ISA), means/conditions of production, & reproduction of relations of production (labour and relations), capital (minimum w wage, surplus value), moving into Althusser's own definition of ideology/history/imagination
Limitations: I noticed how "French" some of the positions and definitions sound:
- the "Church" is The R. C Church, therefore, for instance, the only definition offered for a religious rep is "Priests ".
- The socio-historical culture depicted is "the" socio-historical culture of France: monarchy, clergy, aristocracy, bourgoisie.
- Again: Absence of race and quasi absence of gender (but for a small comment p. 176).
Yet, it provides a great foundation for Bourdieu (school as an agent of social reproduction), and the multiple references to other philosophers and school of p. forces me to do more review (not finished yet: Pascal, Spinoza, Nietzsche-nnot mentioned but present!, Jansenism,): the richness is undeniable. What the heck, I am bringing my Cambridge dictionary of philosophy tomorrow.

- The Need for Cultural Studies, Giroux, Shumway, Smith, Sosnoski-
What I liked:

• The vision of a possibility via Cultural Studies for academics or intellectuals to ultimately impact and improve society: "Resisting intellectuals can provide the moral, political, and pedagogical leadership for those groups which take as their starting point the transformative critique of the conditions of oppression (p.10)." And more specifically on p. 11 : "Providing students with the critical tools they need to understand and dismantle the chronic rationalization of harmful social practices, "& "Actively engage in projects which encourage them to address their own critical role in the production and legitimation of social relations."
  Under this lens, cultural studies scholars (the resisting intellectuals) become political "Activists: "Intellectuals must play the crucial role of mobilizing such resistance into a praxis that has political impact." Of course, for me it seems to split society in two classes: the intellectuals (enlightened) and the "others," thus making the emergence of classes and some hierarchy unavoidable? The the questions: How will the intellectuals know how to address the others? How will they know that they are listened to and understood?
  
• The clear contrasting between two conflicting characterizations of culture: In the present "disciplinary"context, culture has "a permanent character," and "has already been formed" (p.9); students' part is limited to accumulating as much knolwedge of this preexisting body of culture as possible (p. 8); the cultural studies approach would enable students to "investigate the culture they live in as a set of activities", and it is constantly"in the process of transformation" (p.9). This concept of culture as organic is familiar and reminds me of theories (Vygotsky) supporting t that development and learning must be viewed through socio-historical context.
  

What I liked less:

• Much of the definition of "Counter-disciplinary praxis" is explained using the notioin of "normal science (Kuhn's normal science)," yet, there is no definition or clarification, and I am not sure what Normal science is. Also, I wish the article pointed out more real life examples of Counter disciplinary praxis
• Within the discussion about specialization and departmentalization of disciplines in academia, the dichotomy between resisting and earning a living, although addressed, is not resolved. It cannot be. There is a constant pull between tearing apart a system and living from this sytem.
  

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/routledge/09502386.html. Provides a thorough definition of CS:
Cultural Studies understands the term 'culture' inclusively rather than exclusively, and publishes essays which encourage significant intellectual and political experimentation, intervention and dialogue. Special issues focus on specific topics, often not traditionally associated with cultural studies, and occasional issues present a body of work from a particular national, ethnic or special tradition.

http://www.popcultures.com/
Bibliography and excerpts Jean Baudrillard (incl. “Forget Foucault”) and Roland Barthes: 2 theorists I keep hearing/reading the names of.


http://www.egs.edu/faculty/baudrillard.html
For the complete biography of Baudrillard I was looking for!
This site is the communication studies resources website for the U. of Iowa. It has an alphabetical list of most critical theorists with list of their works and bios.
spent lots of time reading on Douglas Kellner' (UCLA Ed Professor) website, (Noticed Jay got it too): http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/index.html

Gender, uh?

My name is Odile Mattiauda and I am a doctoral student in Education at URI-RIC in cohort 2004. I teach French at URI and Sexuality Education to the Coming of Age (G8) class of the 1st Unitarian Universalist Church in Providence. I am a co-founder of the French-American school of Rhode Island, so I do come from language and languages (French, German, Spanish and some Italian) with an M.A in English and German. I am a practitioner and believer of early immersion when it comes to learning a language. (I also have a MBA from the Marseilles' School of Business (now Euromed), as I thought it would make my dad, a banker all his life, so happy...The business world did not really excite me that much! My passion is how we talk gender: I am interested in the discourse of boys and how it may reveal how and what they know and learn what it means to be a boy.
I chose to take this course because:
- I love theory, talk about it, read it, want to know more about it
- I love Lesley's classes and teaching style: this is my third class with L. She is the one who originally talked to me about this program and got me back on this life's track. I feel like L. makes any concept not-so intimidating, and empowers me to learn it
- I would like to organize theory in my mind: to be able to situate theorists and authors whenever I read an article, to be able to connect theorists with each other, most importantly to figure out as much as possible of the language/jargon of critical theory and cultural studies so as to use it accurately in my own writings and discourse.
- I would like to explore theory in a way useful to conceptualizing the theoretical part of my dissertation proposal and dissertation.
-