Explanation, Articulation, Imagination

I argued in Chapter 1 that if the idea of sociology requires ‘traditionalist’ benchmarks for enquiry, these remain indispensable even under postpositivist lights. Then, in Chapter 2, I showed that if sociology and cultural studies are significantly different in some aspects of their intellectual styles and characteristic interests, there are many respects in which they share the same investigative and pedagogic terrain, and common resources in theory and methodology. Thus, if poststructuralism and post-Marxism undoubtedly influenced the framing of cultural studies in the last twenty years, there are plenty of statements in the periodic set-piece collections (Grossberg et al . 1992, Morley and Chen 1996, Ferguson and Golding 1997, Gilroy et al . 2000), which call for a determined ‘recovery’ of those materialist, experiential, institutional and structural dimensions of analysis. At the very least, we need to register a plurality of perspectives in cultural studies, some of which strike a definite sociological note, albeit pitched within an inter- or post-disciplinary conspectus (Morley 2000: 247–8). These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Aesthetics · Articulation (sociology) · Discipline · Epistemology · Framing (construction) · Materialism · Political science · Social science · Sociology · Anthropology · Cultural Studies · History · Law · Philosophy · Social and Cultural Dynamics