Week 8 Questions (Crossley)

 1) Hall suggests that Gramsci operated as an "open" Marxist, "develop[ing] many of the insights of Marxist theory in the direction of new questions and conditions." ( Hall, p 412) Hall further explains how Gramsci moved from "conceptual generality" to historical specificity," suggesting the abstractness of theory exists on multiple levels.  Gramsci's genius lay in his ability to concretize theoretical concepts on a lower level while classic Marxism existed on a higher, more general level. Gramsci merges supplemental theories into Marxism based on specific historical moments. 

A scholar's technique and intentions determine how theory is used. Academia stresses knowledge of theoretical concepts but not necessarily its development. We, as scholars, implicitly add our ideas to theoretical concepts while producing a body of work.  It is a craft which needs development. Yet, we don't often speak about how we do this or more, specifically, how to do it. It can be implied but not distinguished as a skill in the broader scope of coursework. My question may seem remedial even on a basic level, let alone for a graduate course.  But why do we not speak of this more as a craft and skill to be honed, much like writing?  Is it enough to teach theory? How do we learn to develop and implement broader or supplemental theory with intentionality?

2) Speaking more broadly regarding culture and theory, a discussion with fellow classmates left me startled by my ability to be (at times) dismissive of ideas that do not automatically speak to me.  My openness to new ways of doing the thing, isn't as open as I'd like to believe. The discussion centered around contemporary pop culture and its (sometimes) lack of answers that satisfy, perhaps because it can live so definitively in the theoretical world.  I was trained in history where we use evidence to suggest new ways of viewing people, places, events, etc. The conversation allowed me to think of scholarly works in terms of living documents that need to be read with openness and vulnerability, especially when we (I) exist on the fringes of a culture being examined. I'm curious to know how others approach their own discomfort when coming across works that do not speak to us or give us the answers we think we want. How do we turn it into an opportunity to expand not only knowledge but empathy, compassion, and acceptance (within limits)?