Dedicated to sharing opportunities for scholars, students and public intellectuals to collaborate, present or publish their work.
Welcome
I think Sociology is a lot like how the writer and director of The Incredibles describes cartoons:
The reason to do animation is caricature. Good caricature picks out the essense of the statement and removes everything else. It's not simply about reproducing reality; It's about bumping it up.
Good research and teaching by sociologists should likewise attempt to find the essence of a statement and remove everything else. Of course I am not naive enough to think that "essence"="TRUTH", or that all of the external forces and pressures individuals confront, especially in marginalized communities, can somehow be magically removed or held constant. I consider what Bird calls essence more a reflection of the process of sense making in which people engage everyday in order to bring some modicum of rationality to a seemingly hyper-irrational set of social contexts and interactions. In sociology, we often call this the "definition of the situation". It could be extended perhaps to also capture the spirit of what Mills called the "Sociological Imagination". No matter what moniker we give it, it is with this "essence" that I believe sociologists must concern themselves, not as rigid actuaries or impartial "scientists", but rather to approach their task much like the artist--with expression, grace, humility, as well as a good dose of criticism.
When an artist visualizes a painting they are working on, they have in their minds-eye an image of how it will look. Even when the "reality" of what they are actually looking at may simply be a block of stone or a blank canvas and table full of paints to mix. They can shape the creative process, but they do not control it completely. What shape their work will finally achieve is largely due to how they urge their clay, stone, paint or musical notation to find its expression in the face of significant constraints, i.e., time, temperature, temper and even a little bit of luck. Their final product may not look "identical" to what they had in mind, but their ability to "bump it up" can have breathtaking results. Take Michelangelo's masterpiece "Il Davido". Considered virtually perfect by many in the art world, the marble from which this sublime form was born was was rejected as flawed by others:
Michelangelo took a rejected piece of marble that had numerous veins running through it and carved it into this Goliath-sized sculpture that was originally commissioned by Opera del Duomo
Michelangelo was young when he completed The David, yet you can see his talent and genius in this sculpture. He was 25 years old when he began the statue in 1501. No other sculptor wanted this piece of marble because it could be prone to shatter, but Michelangelo created a masterpiece with it...
The gallery that houses this masterpiece is entered through a good sized hallway lined on both sides with the guardians of David--a group of unfinished works called "The Captives", aptly named because they look like bodies frozen in the cold hard marble yearning to break out. Michelangelo abandoned them because they were too far from his vision. However, when I visited the museum, I was really taken by these figures--I could see on the one hand how they were not "perfect", but there was something quite spectacular in their imperfection. It all boiled down to a matter of interpretation and vision.
Sociologists face the same dilemma. I think we have a great chance to work with diverse communities to address important social problems. We must remain aware, however, that our goal is not to "reproduce reality" or impose solutions on communities that are external and coercive of their needs. Our job is to use all of the tools in our kit to "bump it up" and encourage individuals to appreciate the beauty of community involvement and the satisfaction of (cultural) self-determination.
The Rhetorics of Place: Public, Private, Secular and/or Sacred.
Perhaps achieving apotheosis with Foucault's theoretical conscription of Bentham's Panopticon, architecture and other material sites have been used to generate ideas about space and power. In turn, the theoretical material seems to have lost sight of the places themselves. The Editors would like to explore the rhetoric power of specific places and their relationship to the society in which they are located. In other words, while theoretical/textual engagement is crucial to this call for submissions, the Editors will be most interested in publishing pieces that take one or more actual places as their object of analysis.
Questions that might guide or inspire (but are not meant to limit) inquiry:
•How is power reinforced through architecture?
•How is power diffused through urban design?
•How might an ethnographic approach to place contribute to our understanding of power?
•What is the difference between private and public space/place, and how is this difference reinforced?
•What is the relationship between "space" and "place"?
•What is the intersection of private/public with secular/sacred place?
•How is the sacred reinforced visually? architecturally?
•How do buildings and spaces generate civil religion?
\
•Do acoustics contribute to the edification of power?
As usual, submissions from all disciplines are welcome.
Formats include written and hyper-text, audio or video podcasts. We strongly encourage multi-media formats - it's an electronic journal!
Submissions should be sent by 1 May 2009 to J David Hester or Erika Olbricht, Sr. Editors, Queen. We will consider abstracts as well as completed works.
Life in Lamda story submission Guidelines 1. It is preferred that all submissions be entered via email but if you need to send your submission by postal mail please use the address provided below. Please know your stories have the best chance of being used if you submit them through email or priority mail. 2. Stories should be non-fiction, ranging in length between 500-1000 words. 3. No anonymous or author unknown submissions please. 4. Send only one copy of each submission. 5. We do not return submissions, so please don’t send the original. 6. Please submit only stories that have not been previously published. The only exception to this is if your work has only been published in a small local publication with limited circulation. 7. Submission is considered as permission for release and reuse. If the story you wrote is published by us, you will upon publication of the book receive ten free copies of the book your story appears in. Life in Lamda c/o Patelli T Paschal 9125 Recreation Circle Fountain Valley,CA 92708 or email at: tylon1968@ aol.com
I am a sociologist currently living in Montreal, Quebec. For more information about my teaching and research, please visit my portfolio link on this blog.
Posts
