[G_O] Bad Subjects
EE
erikempson@wanadoo.fr
Mon, 23 Sep 2002 16:21:38 +0100
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01C2631D.4B4CF010
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
BAD SUBJECTS 2002-2003
----------------------
CALL FOR PAPERS
BAD SUBJECTS promotes radical thinking and public education about the
political implications of everyday life. We offer a forum for =
re-imagining
progressive and leftist politics in the United States and the world. We
invite you to join us and participate in the Bad Subjects project as we
enter our eleventh year of publishing.
We are always looking for material to publish in Bad Subjects. If you =
are
interested in writing an article for the magazine, please consult the
individual Calls for Papers below and contact the editors for an issue =
you
would like to write for (whether it be on the issue topic or something =
else
-- we welcome non-topic submissions). The ideal Bad Subjects article is =
no
more than 3000 words and keeps specialized terminology to a minimum. If =
you
are interested in writing reviews for our Web site, please contact our
Reviews Editors Joel Schalit <riotgoy@ix.netcom.com> or Charlie Bertsch
<cbertsch@u.arizona.edu>.
TASTE (Issue 63)
Politics matter more than taste. But we always seem to let matters of =
taste
infiltrate our politics. Religious conservatives are "tasteless." The
activist who lets his sexual desires bleed into his political desires is =
a
"boor." The earnest men and women who distribute party literature at
demonstrations are mocked for their nerdy K-Mart attire. And the
twenty-somethings at another kind of party feel good about themselves
because they all like the music of band X or band Y. Why can't we draw a
firm boundary between our political and aesthetic judgments?
This issue of Bad Subjects is dedicated to exploring the politics of
taste. We're interested in a wide range of approaches, from essays that
make theoretical work on taste accessible to a broad audience to
first-person pieces that provide a window on particular subcultures.
Possible topics include: thinking with the body; popular culture vs. =
mass
culture; taste and smell; anything on the relationship between art and
food; the beautiful, the sublime, and the ugly; sexual preference as =
taste
preference; reconsidering the avant-garde; opiates of the masses; class,
taste, and culture; things you do with your tongue; Bourdieu -- and =
beyond
-- for beginners; aestheticizing politics or politicizing aesthetics;
fetishism; "alternative" cultures; cultural programming from the womb
onward; taste and technology; flavor enhancement; rituals of the table;
anorexia and bulimia as metaphors (or not); self-fashioning now and =
then.
If you're interested in writing something for this issue, submit a query =
--
tastefully done, of course -- to issue editors Joel Schalit
[riotgoy@ix.netcom.com] or Charlie Bertsch [cbertsch@u.arizona.edu] as =
soon
as you can. Or just send in a polished essay by the drop-deadline of
October 15, 2002.
MARX AND THEORY (Issue 64)
"Bad Subjects issue 64 on Marx and Theory seeks to complicate --even
interrogate--the way Marxism has been misappropriated by the academic
left's over investment in poststructural theory and over-investment
cultural studies, an investment that ultimately betrays Marxism's
fundamental interest in a material economy. Leftist critiques are =
currently
filled with buzz-concepts such as "resistant peformativity", =
"alternative
citizenship", "discursive political praxis", "mimicry", "radical
hybridity", to name only a few.
The editors wonder, to what end? Can theories based on an immaterial
conception of cultural production, language, and politics "really" offer
forms of social critique and resistance? Essays might also critique
theories from the left that presuppose the text-as-reality in which the
production of different literatures of resistance--from genre bending
Musicscapes, graffiti,genre-bending, tattooed/pierced bodies, =
performance
art, football or literary texts--are viewed as all the resistance
necessary for a meaningful politics. Can cultural phenomena that resist
"mastery" really work as sites of resistance and as modes of political
intervention? Or are these theories simply participating in capitalist
modes of production and consumption that have no substance, or if there =
is
substance, is it one invested in a masculinist ontology, a colonial
metaphysics of "Whiteness", or an elitist academic performance? When
cultural discourse IS politics, what are the implications for "real"
coalition building among the working classes world wide to ensure the =
right
of all citizens to equal access to education,coalition-building, =
world-wide
medical care, common transportation, and communication?
Essays might also explore the dangers of the notion of power as not
locatable, a notion that directs the understanding of the actual
concentration of power away from a state that oppresses and exploits =
those
at the margins of class, race, sexuality, and gender "norms". In the =
ironic
and textually playful world of a so-identified Marxist =
poststructuralism,
power exists in the hands of no one social class nor any specific state
institution. Without a state or collective at the locus of power, power
becomes purely fluid and symbolic. Is a solely symbolic intervention
satisfactory? Please send email queries and essay submissions to issue
editors Frederick Aldama [aldamaf@hotmail.com] and Robert Soza
[r_soza@uclink.berkeley.edu]. Issue deadline: December 1st, 2002.
PANIC (Issue 65)
The experience of panic is like no other. It is fear and frenzy all =
mixed
up in a stew of undirected energy. Panic can be a gut reaction, a false
emotion, a motivator, or a entire lifestyle. Panic is a sound =
biological
reaction to immediate physical danger. But it also surfaces at odd,
inopportune moments. It is not just a personal thing: as the Wall =
Street
Journal and the New York Times tell us, something as big and abstract as
the stock market can panic. Panic may be felt as deeply personal, but =
it
is inherently political.
The Panic issue of Bad Subjects will consider those panicked moments of
modern life. From the garden variety panic attack to Dick Cheney hiding
out in his bunker -- we want to hear from you about panic as a condition =
of
modern culture and a metaphor for personal and political life. What =
fuels
the proliferation of panic all around us, and what does all this panic =
in
turn promote? Does panic have a style? And what should cause us to =
panic:
Terror? Sex? The continued destruction of the environment? Your own
shadow? Neoliberalism? The fresh spaghetti sauce stain on your =
expensive
new outfit?
Send queries and submissions to Zack Furness [zafst+@pitt.edu] or =
Jonathan
Sterne [jsterne+@pitt.edu]. Issue deadline: February 1st, 2003.
NATION (Issue 66)
Headlines in the US blare: Pakistan and India steadily march towards
nuclear war. The conflicting desires of Israelis and Palestinians flare
into unusually public display. Catholics, Protestants, and the British =
face
off in Northern Ireland. Yet for all the ink spilled in Western =
newspapers
over the conflicts in these regions, readers get little sense that the =
West
was there. Instead, we read sustaining fictions of two bellicose people,
two age-old hatreds, two more or less democratic nation-states, all in =
need
of the firm, unwavering hand of Western democracy to guide them.
Liberal interventionists argue that the foreign policy disasters of the
Clinton era require a restoration of American national will and of the
moral and military might to stop ethnic butchers and to set the world
right. And while the Bush White House tries to spin the war in =
Afghanistan
as America's first war to "liberate Third World women", the awareness =
that
there ever was or could be an American imperial era slips away.
Postcolonial history-in the majoritarian sense-is being redefined as a
history in which colonialism has no legacy and cannot explain =
contemporary
problems.
Meanwhile, economic globalization-the catchword of governments,
corporations, and media-apparently bounces over the speed bump of
anti-globalization movements (movements that are increasingly global).
President Bush's "fast track" victory-granting him the authority to
unilaterally write trade agreements with other countries-is only the =
latest
step towards an integrated elite and a fragmented world.
As jingoist patriotism and national identity sweeps across the United
States, American power sponsors nation building in Afghanistan and =
nation
dismantling in Iraq, and confronts national and religious movements with
their own imperial dreams. We ask: does nationalism have any relevance =
for
progressive politics today? Is the concept of a nation inherently
repressive? What prospects for liberation does it offer, and at what =
cost?
What lessons must we learn from the national movements of the 20th =
century,
and what mistakes must we prevent? What accounts for the enduring
popularity of nationalism's promises?
We're looking for a broad, international range of viewpoints on =
nationhood,
globalization, and national and international rivalries. Possible topics
include: national, international, transnational, and global identities; =
the
effect of religious rivalries on national identity; the figuration of
international rivalries in sports and other arenas; representations of
nationhood and the body in hip-hop and popular culture; corporate =
branding
and national identity; the power of corporate imperialism versus =
national
sovereignty; concepts of the nation and internationalism in organizing
against globalization; the localization of language in books to promote
nationhood (for example, translating Harry Potter for American =
audiences);
the relevance of Nation of Ulysses's 13 Point Plan to Destroy America to
contemporary political life; the cosmic fellowship of One Nation Under a
Groove. Send your thoughts to issue editors Aaron Shuman
[Ashuman101@aol.com] and Elisabeth Hurst [lizyjn@earthlink.net]. The
deadline for submissions is April 1st, 2003.
FAMILY (Issue 67)
Languages increasingly need new words for family members beyond mom, =
dad,
the kids, grandparents and so on. Stepmothers and stepfathers, then
half-siblings? Stepsiblings? It seems everybody also has twisted custom
designations, like "I've always called Brenda 'Auntie', even though =
she's
really my father's best friend". Then there's the queer family. As of
2002, the New York Times accepts advertisements for same sex commitment
ceremonies, published side by side with wedding announcements. The
California State Assembly wants to extend in testate rights to the
registered partner in a domestic partnership. In state after state, =
courts
are granting people the right of second parent adoptions. So-called
"Florida" marriages are increasingly common among the elderly and
disabled. Increasingly, the question of who qualifies as "family" is =
being
determined not just by governments and religious denominations, but also =
by
corporate interests. In 1884 Friedrich Engels expressly linked the =
family,
private property and the state itself. To what extent do we still do =
so?
Who decides what a family is? In a world where how we constitute a =
family
seems to change dramatically from decade to decade, what do we mean when =
we
refer to our family? Let's find out. For this issue of Bad Subjects, =
we're
looking for political perspectives on stable and explosive nuclear
families, functional and dysfunctional households, family secrets,
monogamy, polygamy, polyandry, communes, parenting, generational =
conflicts,
loving and loveless couplings, lineage and heritage (both civil and
religious), adoption. Brothers and Sisters, send your essays to Cynthia
Hoffman [choff@lmi.net] and Mike Mosher [mosher@svsu.edu] by June 1, =
2003.
ORGANIZE (Issue 68)
Thomas Jefferson is reputed to have quipped that if he could go to =
heaven
only after shedding his affiliation with a political party, he would =
prefer
to have his name stricken from the guest list. Today, however, it seems
increasingly common for political life to be lived in private. Across =
the
political spectrum from the micro-militias of the extreme Right to the
nebulous networks of the postmodern Left organization seems locked in a
steady decline. Is this, as many have suggested, a positive development,
leading in the direction of greater freedom for opinion and action? Or =
does
the decline of organized politics leave ordinary citizens weakened in =
the
face of powerful elites? Is 'organization' itself a suspect principle,
leading down a slippery slope from housecleaning to the Holocaust?
This issue of Bad Subjects looks to examine the problems, perils, and
positive things that can come from political organizing and organizing
politics. Can organizing your bookshelves or CDs or not be a political
statement? What does it take to be organized? Are time management, day
planners, PDAs and pocket protectors tools of The Man or tools for
liberation? And can or should politics even be organized in our time? =
Put
this on your to-do list: send your submissions to J. C. Myers
[jcmyers@csustan.edu] or Scott Schaffer =
[scott.schaffer@millersville.edu]
no later than August 1, 2003. Time's a-wastin'.
SLAVERY (Issue 69)
In 1853, concerning liberal politics that protested foreign slavery but
ignored its own oppressions, Karl Marx connected the struggle against =
wage
slavery directly with the struggle against race slavery in the US =
southern
states. "The enemy of British Wage-Slavery has a right to condemn
Negro-Slavery...a Manchester Cotton-lord -- never!" That same parallel
convinced early19th-century trade unionists and readers of Connolly's =
1913
manifesto, "To the Linen Slaves of Belfast". Slavery has functioned
throughout the modern era as a connective metaphor in political =
rhetoric.
The slaveries of everyday life continue no less today than under classic
slave systems. Economic globalization drives wages continually downward =
in
order to provide dominant economies with cheaper goods, at the expense =
of
workers in Asia, Latin America and Africa. Impoverished neo-slavery,
absence of labor rights, and subordination to capital represent the =
terms
of existence neo-liberalism has established for uncountable hundreds of
millions of workers. Large segments of the sex industry function =
through
violence against women and sex slavery. For some -- like the =
Palestinian
'captive nation' -- enslavement assumes the form of collective =
oppression
and denial of equal political entitlement.
Slavery remains one of the most relevant descriptions of contemporary =
life,
yet it gets treated as either history or rare exoticism. Bad Subjects
issue 69 will re-explore the metaphor and reality of slavery. Worklife,
economic, gender/sex, national, religion, social discipline and prisons, =
or
other forms of slavery: we are looking for non-fiction prose essays of
2500-3000 words that expand the paradigm. We will be especially =
interested
also in witness essays addressing the forms of neo-slavery described in
Bales' Disposable People. The essays we are looking for might remember =
the
original words of the Internationale: "Esclaves, debout, debout / Le =
monde
va changer de base / Nous ne sommes rien, soyons tout."
Contact issue co-editors Joe Lockard [Joe.Lockard@asu.edu] or Aaron =
Shuman
[aShuman101@aol.com] with essays or essay proposals. The deadline is
October 1, 2003.
------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01C2631D.4B4CF010
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2719.2200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY=20
style=3D"BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; FONT: 10pt =
verdana; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none"=20
bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><BR>BAD SUBJECTS=20
2002-2003<BR>----------------------<BR>CALL FOR PAPERS<BR><BR><BR>BAD =
SUBJECTS=20
promotes radical thinking and public education about the<BR>political=20
implications of everyday life. We offer a forum for =
re-imagining<BR>progressive=20
and leftist politics in the United States and the world. We<BR>invite =
you to=20
join us and participate in the Bad Subjects project as we<BR>enter our =
eleventh=20
year of publishing.<BR><BR>We are always looking for material to publish =
in Bad=20
Subjects. If you are<BR>interested in writing an article for the =
magazine,=20
please consult the<BR>individual Calls for Papers below and contact the =
editors=20
for an issue you<BR>would like to write for (whether it be on the issue =
topic or=20
something else<BR>-- we welcome non-topic submissions). The ideal =
Bad=20
Subjects article is no<BR>more than 3000 words and keeps specialized =
terminology=20
to a minimum. If you<BR>are interested in writing reviews for our Web =
site,=20
please contact our<BR>Reviews Editors Joel Schalit <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:riotgoy@ix.netcom.com">riotgoy@ix.netcom.com</A>> or =
Charlie=20
Bertsch<BR><<A=20
href=3D"mailto:cbertsch@u.arizona.edu">cbertsch@u.arizona.edu</A>>.<BR=
><BR><BR>TASTE=20
(Issue 63)<BR><BR>Politics matter more than taste. But we always seem to =
let=20
matters of taste<BR>infiltrate our politics. Religious conservatives are =
"tasteless." The<BR>activist who lets his sexual desires bleed into his=20
political desires is a<BR>"boor." The earnest men and women who =
distribute party=20
literature at<BR>demonstrations are mocked for their nerdy K-Mart =
attire. And=20
the<BR>twenty-somethings at another kind of party feel good about=20
themselves<BR>because they all like the music of band X or band Y. Why =
can't we=20
draw a<BR>firm boundary between our political and aesthetic=20
judgments?<BR><BR>This issue of Bad Subjects is dedicated to =
exploring the=20
politics of<BR>taste. We're interested in a wide range of approaches, =
from=20
essays that<BR>make theoretical work on taste accessible to a broad =
audience=20
to<BR>first-person pieces that provide a window on particular=20
subcultures.<BR>Possible topics include: thinking with the body; popular =
culture=20
vs. mass<BR>culture; taste and smell; anything on the relationship =
between art=20
and<BR>food; the beautiful, the sublime, and the ugly; sexual preference =
as=20
taste<BR>preference; reconsidering the avant-garde; opiates of the =
masses;=20
class,<BR>taste, and culture; things you do with your tongue; Bourdieu =
-- and=20
beyond<BR>-- for beginners; aestheticizing politics or politicizing=20
aesthetics;<BR>fetishism; "alternative" cultures; cultural programming =
from the=20
womb<BR>onward; taste and technology; flavor enhancement; rituals of the =
table;<BR>anorexia and bulimia as metaphors (or not); self-fashioning =
now and=20
then.<BR><BR>If you're interested in writing something for this issue, =
submit a=20
query --<BR>tastefully done, of course -- to issue editors Joel=20
Schalit<BR>[riotgoy@ix.netcom.com] or Charlie Bertsch =
[cbertsch@u.arizona.edu]=20
as soon<BR>as you can. Or just send in a polished essay by the =
drop-deadline=20
of<BR>October 15, 2002.<BR><BR><BR>MARX AND THEORY (Issue =
64)<BR><BR>"Bad=20
Subjects issue 64 on Marx and Theory seeks to complicate=20
--even<BR>interrogate--the way Marxism has been misappropriated by the=20
academic<BR>left's over investment in poststructural theory and =20
over-investment<BR>cultural studies, an investment that ultimately =
betrays =20
Marxism's<BR>fundamental interest in a material economy. Leftist =
critiques are=20
currently<BR>filled with buzz-concepts such as "resistant =
peformativity", =20
"alternative<BR>citizenship", "discursive political praxis", =
"mimicry", =20
"radical<BR>hybridity", to name only a few.<BR><BR>The editors wonder, =
to what=20
end? Can theories based on an immaterial<BR>conception of cultural =
production,=20
language, and politics "really" offer<BR>forms of social critique and=20
resistance? Essays might also critique<BR>theories from the left that =
presuppose=20
the text-as-reality in which the<BR>production of different literatures =
of=20
resistance--from genre bending<BR>Musicscapes, graffiti,genre-bending,=20
tattooed/pierced bodies, performance<BR>art, football or literary=20
texts--are viewed as all the resistance<BR>necessary for a =
meaningful=20
politics. Can cultural phenomena that resist<BR>"mastery" really work as =
sites=20
of resistance and as modes of political<BR>intervention? Or are these =
theories=20
simply participating in capitalist<BR>modes of production and =
consumption that=20
have no substance, or if there is<BR>substance, is it one invested in a=20
masculinist ontology, a colonial<BR>metaphysics of "Whiteness", or an =
elitist=20
academic performance? When<BR>cultural discourse IS politics, what are =
the=20
implications for "real"<BR>coalition building among the working classes =
world=20
wide to ensure the right<BR>of all citizens to equal access to=20
education,coalition-building, world-wide<BR>medical care, common =20
transportation, and communication?<BR><BR>Essays might also explore the =
dangers=20
of the notion of power as not<BR>locatable, a notion that directs the=20
understanding of the actual<BR>concentration of power away from a state =
that=20
oppresses and exploits those<BR>at the margins of class, race, =
sexuality, and=20
gender "norms". In the ironic<BR>and textually playful world of a =
so-identified=20
Marxist poststructuralism,<BR>power exists in the hands of no one =
social=20
class nor any specific state<BR>institution. Without a state or =
collective=20
at the locus of power, power<BR>becomes purely fluid and symbolic. Is a =
solely=20
symbolic intervention<BR>satisfactory? Please send email queries and =
essay=20
submissions to issue<BR>editors Frederick Aldama [aldamaf@hotmail.com] =
and=20
Robert Soza<BR>[r_soza@uclink.berkeley.edu]. Issue deadline: =
December 1st,=20
2002.<BR><BR><BR>PANIC (Issue 65)<BR><BR>The experience of panic is like =
no=20
other. It is fear and frenzy all mixed<BR>up in a stew of =
undirected=20
energy. Panic can be a gut reaction, a false<BR>emotion, a =
motivator, or a=20
entire lifestyle. Panic is a sound biological<BR>reaction to =
immediate=20
physical danger. But it also surfaces at odd,<BR>inopportune=20
moments. It is not just a personal thing: as the Wall =
Street<BR>Journal=20
and the New York Times tell us, something as big and abstract as<BR>the =
stock=20
market can panic. Panic may be felt as deeply personal, but =
it<BR>is=20
inherently political.<BR><BR>The Panic issue of Bad Subjects will =
consider those=20
panicked moments of<BR>modern life. From the garden variety panic =
attack=20
to Dick Cheney hiding<BR>out in his bunker -- we want to hear from you =
about=20
panic as a condition of<BR>modern culture and a metaphor for personal =
and=20
political life. What fuels<BR>the proliferation of panic all =
around us,=20
and what does all this panic in<BR>turn promote? Does panic have a =
style? And what should cause us to panic:<BR>Terror? Sex? =
The=20
continued destruction of the environment? Your =
own<BR>shadow? =20
Neoliberalism? The fresh spaghetti sauce stain on your expensive<BR>new=20
outfit?<BR><BR>Send queries and submissions to Zack Furness =
[zafst+@pitt.edu] or=20
Jonathan<BR>Sterne [jsterne+@pitt.edu]. Issue deadline: February =
1st,=20
2003.<BR><BR><BR>NATION (Issue 66)<BR><BR>Headlines in the US blare: =
Pakistan=20
and India steadily march towards<BR>nuclear war. The conflicting desires =
of=20
Israelis and Palestinians flare<BR>into unusually public display. =
Catholics,=20
Protestants, and the British face<BR>off in Northern Ireland. Yet for =
all the=20
ink spilled in Western newspapers<BR>over the conflicts in these =
regions,=20
readers get little sense that the West<BR>was there. Instead, we read =
sustaining=20
fictions of two bellicose people,<BR>two age-old hatreds, two more or =
less=20
democratic nation-states, all in need<BR>of the firm, unwavering hand of =
Western=20
democracy to guide them.<BR><BR>Liberal interventionists argue that the =
foreign=20
policy disasters of the<BR>Clinton era require a restoration of American =
national will and of the<BR>moral and military might to stop ethnic =
butchers and=20
to set the world<BR>right. And while the Bush White House tries to spin =
the war=20
in Afghanistan<BR>as America's first war to "liberate Third World =
women", the=20
awareness that<BR>there ever was or could be an American imperial era =
slips=20
away.<BR>Postcolonial history-in the majoritarian sense-is being =
redefined as=20
a<BR>history in which colonialism has no legacy and cannot explain=20
contemporary<BR>problems.<BR><BR>Meanwhile, economic globalization-the =
catchword=20
of governments,<BR>corporations, and media-apparently bounces over the =
speed=20
bump of<BR>anti-globalization movements (movements that are increasingly =
global).<BR>President Bush's "fast track" victory-granting him the =
authority=20
to<BR>unilaterally write trade agreements with other countries-is only =
the=20
latest<BR>step towards an integrated elite and a fragmented =
world.<BR><BR>As=20
jingoist patriotism and national identity sweeps across the =
United<BR>States,=20
American power sponsors nation building in Afghanistan and =
nation<BR>dismantling=20
in Iraq, and confronts national and religious movements with<BR>their =
own=20
imperial dreams. We ask: does nationalism have any relevance =
for<BR>progressive=20
politics today? Is the concept of a nation inherently<BR>repressive? =
What=20
prospects for liberation does it offer, and at what cost?<BR>What =
lessons must=20
we learn from the national movements of the 20th century,<BR>and what =
mistakes=20
must we prevent? What accounts for the enduring<BR>popularity of =
nationalism's=20
promises?<BR><BR>We're looking for a broad, international range of =
viewpoints on=20
nationhood,<BR>globalization, and national and international rivalries. =
Possible=20
topics<BR>include: national, international, transnational, and global=20
identities; the<BR>effect of religious rivalries on national identity; =
the=20
figuration of<BR>international rivalries in sports and other arenas;=20
representations of<BR>nationhood and the body in hip-hop and popular =
culture;=20
corporate branding<BR>and national identity; the power of corporate =
imperialism=20
versus national<BR>sovereignty; concepts of the nation and =
internationalism in=20
organizing<BR>against globalization; the localization of language in =
books to=20
promote<BR>nationhood (for example, translating Harry Potter for =
American=20
audiences);<BR>the relevance of Nation of Ulysses's 13 Point Plan to =
Destroy=20
America to<BR>contemporary political life; the cosmic fellowship of One =
Nation=20
Under a<BR>Groove. Send your thoughts to issue editors Aaron=20
Shuman<BR>[Ashuman101@aol.com] and Elisabeth Hurst =
[lizyjn@earthlink.net].=20
The<BR>deadline for submissions is April 1st, 2003.<BR><BR><BR>FAMILY =
(Issue=20
67)<BR><BR>Languages increasingly need new words for family members =
beyond mom,=20
dad,<BR>the kids, grandparents and so on. Stepmothers and =
stepfathers,=20
then<BR>half-siblings? Stepsiblings? It seems everybody also has twisted =
custom<BR>designations, like "I've always called Brenda 'Auntie', =
even=20
though she's<BR>really my father's best friend". Then there's the =
queer=20
family. As of<BR>2002, the New York Times accepts advertisements =
for same=20
sex commitment<BR>ceremonies, published side by side with wedding=20
announcements. The<BR>California State Assembly wants to extend in =
testate=20
rights to the<BR>registered partner in a domestic partnership. In =
state=20
after state, courts<BR>are granting people the right of second parent =
adoptions.=20
So-called<BR>"Florida" marriages are increasingly common among the =
elderly=20
and<BR>disabled. Increasingly, the question of who qualifies as =
"family"=20
is being<BR>determined not just by governments and religious =
denominations, but=20
also by<BR>corporate interests. In 1884 Friedrich Engels expressly =
linked=20
the family,<BR>private property and the state itself. To what =
extent do we=20
still do so?<BR><BR>Who decides what a family is? In a world where =
how we=20
constitute a family<BR>seems to change dramatically from decade to =
decade, what=20
do we mean when we<BR>refer to our family? Let's find out. For =
this issue=20
of Bad Subjects, we're<BR>looking for political perspectives on stable =
and=20
explosive nuclear<BR>families, functional and dysfunctional households, =
family=20
secrets,<BR>monogamy, polygamy, polyandry, communes, parenting, =
generational=20
conflicts,<BR>loving and loveless couplings, lineage and heritage (both =
civil=20
and<BR>religious), adoption. Brothers and Sisters, send your =
essays to=20
Cynthia<BR>Hoffman [choff@lmi.net] and Mike Mosher [mosher@svsu.edu] by =
June 1,=20
2003.<BR><BR><BR>ORGANIZE (Issue 68)<BR><BR>Thomas Jefferson is reputed =
to have=20
quipped that if he could go to heaven<BR>only after shedding his =
affiliation=20
with a political party, he would prefer<BR>to have his name stricken =
from the=20
guest list. Today, however, it seems<BR>increasingly common for =
political life=20
to be lived in private. Across the<BR>political spectrum from the=20
micro-militias of the extreme Right to the<BR>nebulous networks of the=20
postmodern Left organization seems locked in a<BR>steady decline. =
Is this,=20
as many have suggested, a positive development,<BR>leading in the =
direction of=20
greater freedom for opinion and action? Or does<BR>the decline of =
organized=20
politics leave ordinary citizens weakened in the<BR>face of powerful =
elites? Is=20
'organization' itself a suspect principle,<BR>leading down a slippery =
slope from=20
housecleaning to the Holocaust?<BR><BR>This issue of Bad Subjects looks =
to=20
examine the problems, perils, and<BR>positive things that can come from=20
political organizing and organizing<BR>politics. Can organizing your =
bookshelves=20
or CDs or not be a political<BR>statement? What does it take =
to be=20
organized? Are time management, day<BR>planners, PDAs and pocket =
protectors=20
tools of The Man or tools for<BR>liberation? And can or should politics =
even be=20
organized in our time? Put<BR>this on your to-do list: send your =
submissions to=20
J. C. Myers<BR>[jcmyers@csustan.edu] or Scott Schaffer=20
[scott.schaffer@millersville.edu]<BR>no later than August 1, 2003. =
Time's=20
a-wastin'.<BR><BR>SLAVERY (Issue 69)<BR><BR>In 1853, concerning liberal =
politics=20
that protested foreign slavery but<BR>ignored its own oppressions, Karl =
Marx=20
connected the struggle against wage<BR>slavery directly with the =
struggle=20
against race slavery in the US southern<BR>states. "The enemy of British =
Wage-Slavery has a right to condemn<BR>Negro-Slavery...a Manchester =
Cotton-lord=20
-- never!" That same parallel<BR>convinced early19th-century trade =
unionists and readers of Connolly's 1913<BR>manifesto, "To the Linen =
Slaves of=20
Belfast". Slavery has functioned<BR>throughout the modern era as a =
connective metaphor in political rhetoric.<BR><BR>The slaveries of =
everyday life=20
continue no less today than under classic<BR>slave systems. =
Economic=20
globalization drives wages continually downward in<BR>order to provide =
dominant=20
economies with cheaper goods, at the expense of<BR>workers in Asia, =
Latin=20
America and Africa. Impoverished neo-slavery,<BR>absence of labor =
rights,=20
and subordination to capital represent the terms<BR>of existence =
neo-liberalism=20
has established for uncountable hundreds of<BR>millions of =
workers. Large=20
segments of the sex industry function through<BR>violence against women =
and sex=20
slavery. For some -- like the Palestinian<BR>'captive nation' --=20
enslavement assumes the form of collective oppression<BR>and denial of =
equal=20
political entitlement.<BR><BR>Slavery remains one of the most relevant=20
descriptions of contemporary life,<BR>yet it gets treated as either =
history or=20
rare exoticism. Bad Subjects<BR>issue 69 will re-explore the =
metaphor and=20
reality of slavery. Worklife,<BR>economic, gender/sex, national, =
religion,=20
social discipline and prisons, or<BR>other forms of slavery: we are =
looking for=20
non-fiction prose essays of<BR>2500-3000 words that expand the paradigm. =
We will=20
be especially interested<BR>also in witness essays addressing the forms =
of=20
neo-slavery described in<BR>Bales' Disposable People. The essays we are =
looking=20
for might remember the<BR>original words of the Internationale: =
"Esclaves,=20
debout, debout / Le monde<BR>va changer de base / Nous ne sommes rien, =
soyons=20
tout."<BR><BR>Contact issue co-editors Joe Lockard [Joe.Lockard@asu.edu] =
or=20
Aaron Shuman<BR>[aShuman101@aol.com] with essays or essay =
proposals. The=20
deadline is<BR>October 1, 2003.<BR><BR></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01C2631D.4B4CF010--