Ethnic, National, Religious, and “Other” Identities
SAGES University Seminar
248 (CRN: 56123)
Spring Semester 2006
MSASS, Room 224
TR 2:45-4:00
Required Readings
Chapters and Articles:
Bernstein, Mary. 2005. “Identity Politics.” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31. Pages, 47-74.
Bondi, Liz. 1993. “Locating Identity Politics.” In, Place and the Politics of Identity. Editors, Michael Keith and Steve Pile. London: Routledge, Pages, 84-101.
Hollinger, David A. 2004. “Identity in the United States.” In, Keywords: Identity: For a Different Kind of Globalization. New York: Other Press, Pages, 27-45.
Isin, Engin F. and Patricia K. Wood. 1999. “Redistribution, Recognition, and Representation,” From, Citizenship and Identity. London: Sages, Pages, 1-24.
McDermott Monica and Frank L. Samson. 2005. “White Racial and Ethnic Identity in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology. Volume 31, Pages 245-261.
Nagel, Joane,. 1994. “Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture. Social Problems, Vol. 41, No.1, Special Issue on Immigration, Race and Ethnicity, in American, Pages, 152- 176.
Orwell, G. May 1945. Politics and Language.
Plummer, Ken. 1993. “Identity.” In, Social Thought. Ed. William Outhwaite and Tom Bottomore. London: Blackwell. Pages, 270-272.
Wright, Richard. almostaman2/3
Stewart, Kathleen and Susan Harding. 1999. “Bad Endings: American Apocalypsis.” Annual Review of Anthropology, 28, Pages 285-310.
Recommended Reading: (See Blackboard Links)
Kolchin, Peter, Whiteness Studies: The New History of Race in America. The Journal of American History 89.1 (2002): 41 pars. 14 Jan. 2006. (link is on Blackboard)
Also, take a look at the on-line Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on Identity Politics (link is on Blackboard)
Evaluation
Synopses (50 points)
Thoughtful and timely reading of the assigned readings is essential! You will be held accountable for the reading, each day! They will require your close attention, regular review, and numerous rereadings. Because this class has a logical progression, failure to regularly attend will inevitably result in poor performance and certain disappointment. I have, moreover, discovered that successful discussion of the readings requires attendance: those who fail to attend often disrupt the class. The synopses will count for 50% of the grade. You are required to provide a synopsis for the readings, articles and book chapters, due on Tuesday at the beginning of class. You will be expected to effectively use the synopses in the discussions and participation will be measured by your willingness to contribute to the discussion during each session and use of the reading for that day in making your interventions. And because this class is organized as a seminar, you will have numerous opportunities to demonstrate your preparation. In short, you will be favorably evaluated for participation if you have attended class and completed the assigned readings and synopses in a timely manner. Synopses submitted late will not be evaluated.
The purpose of the synopsis is to identify the central thesis or controlling ideas of the reading and to briefly examine the evidence and ideas used in their development. In addition to summary, it is the purpose of the synopsis to evaluate. You will be expected to pose questions regarding the logic of the work, its merits and shortcomings. Where the author uses data or cites evidence, you must examine the evidence and the conclusions drawn. They must be no more than one page, typed, and single-spaced (12 pt, 1” margins): no exceptions. See attachment for more detailed description of what is expected from the synopses. Please bring to class two copies of the synopses, one for me and a second for your use in class. You will each lead seminar discussions using the synopses (frequency to be determined).
*indicates that you should submit a synopsis for that reading—on Tuesday
Finally, I advise that you purchase a binder for the readings. And please make sure you always bring the readings to class.
Essay (50 points)
You will write an essay that explores representations of whiteness in popular culture using the concepts developed in this class. For this paper you should avoid mere description or chronology of events, unless they are useful in developing an argument. You might consider, for example, writing a paper on the Simpsons, MTV, advertising, pop music, music video, or shopping. Or you might consider examining a single topic, e.g., race, whiteness, nationalism, ethnicity, across a range of popular cultural forms such as film, television, music, sport, best-sellers, etc. Or you might consider writing a paper on a specific instance of popular culture: a specific hip-hop artist or cult films. You should attempt to find something that you care about our have some personal interest in. But you must relate a theory or theories to your reading or viewing. And you must select a mode of analysis that is appropriate to your selected area of study. For the final paper I am asking you to ‘explain’, ‘compare’, ‘analyze’, ‘evaluate’. You should consider the underlying values found in knowledge claims, including your own. If you pick the Simpsons, for example, your objective should be to carefully evaluate how different and sometimes competing arguments have been constructed to explain this particular instance or form. You must appropriately use citations to support to your arguments. Although you are expected to use academic books and articles, you may also consider, where appropriate, non-academic sources (e.g. video recording, television, etc. ). You should also demonstrate an understanding of the plurality of views on your topic and seek to identify underlying allegiances, values, and assumptions. Your ability to analyze and develop arguments of your own is essential to your academic success. See this website for discussion of cultural analysis of music videos: http://www.sibetrans.com/trans/trans4/rybacki.htm
The first draft must be submitted on the Thursday before spring break, March 9. I will not look at your first draft until the writing liaison, Dr. Tidwell, has looked at it. She will maintain a record of your visits for my review. And do not wait until the last minute to arrange for these visits. We will use the final week of class to make brief presentations of the papers.
Distribution:
Synopses: 50 points
Essay and Presentation: 50 points
Week 1: Tuesday, January 17 and Thursday, January 19
Introduction
The Book Review
The final essay
Readings:
Orwell, G. May 1945. Politics and the Language. (see Blackboard)
Wright, Eric Olin. The Seminar (see Blackboard)
Week 2: Tuesday, January 24 and Thursday, January 26
Key Concepts
These ideas will be explored with the thought in mind of equipping you with the conceptual tools necessary for critical and reflective reading. They will also transfer to other areas of your learning. You will find that every theory or idea has embedded in it ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions. It will be useful to have these ideas integrated into your conceptual vocabulary at his stage in your learning. We will return again and again to these ideas so that you can thoroughly integrate them and use them not only in this class but in related areas of study.
Readings: handouts
Week 3: Tuesday, January 31 and Thursday, February 2
The Self and Identity
On Thursday, we will discuss the final paper.
Week 4: Tuesday, February 7 and Thursday, February 9
During these two weeks, we will explore several dominant themes in academic and political debates regarding identity and the politics of identity: social constructivism and related debates on essentialism and anti-essentialism, biological determinism, and various forms of reductionism. The arguments used and learned in this week will apply across the human (e.g., sociology, anthropology, history, psychology)and natural sciences (e.g., biology, genetics) and humanities. You will find it useful to know how these arguments are constructed and used in these disciplines and in our political cultures. Once you’ve mastered these ideas, you will find it easier to grasp and use the arguments in other aspects of your learning.
Readings:
Plummer, Ken. 1993. “Identity.” In, Social Thought. Editors, William Outhwaite and Tom Bottomore. London: Blackwell. Pp. 270-272.
*Bernstein, Mary. 2005. “Identity Politics.” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31. Pages, 47-74.
Week 5: Tuesday, February 14 and Thursday, February 16
Continued
Readings:
*Bondi, Liz. 1993. “Locating Identity Politics,” In, Place and the Politics of Identity. Editors, Michael Keith and Steve Pile. London: Routledge.
Week 6: Tuesday, February 21 and Thursday, February 23
Readings:
*Hollinger, David A. 2004. “Identity in the United States.” In, Keywords: Identity: For a Different Kind of Globalization. New York: Other Press.
Adapted from Helping Students Write Well, Barbara E. Fassler Walvoord, New York: MLA Press. 1986, Pages 56-58.
SAGES University Seminar
248 (CRN: 56123)
Spring Semester 2006
MSASS, Room 224
TR 2:45-4:00
Instructor:
Jeffrey Longhofer, Ph.D., LISW
Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Room 309
Phone: 368-0160
Office Hours: By appointment
Writing Liaison: Joanne Tidwell, Ph.D.
Phone: 368-1805
Overview
This three-credit course, Ethnic, National, Religious, and “Other” Identities, will consider the ways individuals and groups come to identify as members of organizations, social movements, races, ethnicities, nations, and religions. This course is aimed at understanding the complex, competing, and sometimes contradictory ways individuals and collectivities identify in our so-called “post-modern” world. The organizing concept for the course is identity. We will review and critique the notion of identity as being dynamic, multiple, relativistic, context specific, and fragmented. To accomplish this, we consider the concepts of ego identity, social identity, multiple identities, and multiple aspects of identity. We will also consider whether and how identity serves to provide individuals with a personal standpoint for acting and making decisions. We will use the relatively recent literature and debates in political culture on the constructions of “whiteness” to explore national, religious, and ethnic identity. Finally, it will be necessary throughout the course to consider, for lack of a better term, “other” identities; it is, for example, virtually impossible to talk about national identity without also considering gender and sexual identities.
Objectives
At the conclusion of this semester, students should be able to:
- Understand how the concepts identity and identification have been used across the disciplines (social sciences and humanities) and in current political cultures.
- Recognize and distinguish between and use essentialist and anti-essentialist arguments (e.g., social constructionist).
- Understand and use key ideas from the philosophy of social science (ontology, epistemology, methodology and theory) and apply them to the study of identity and citizenship.
- Understand what is meant by a knowledge claim and the differences among them.
- Understand the various forms of reductionism, (naturalism, scientism, cultural, holistic) and how they apply to identity politics.
- Apply key concepts in the philosophy of social science to the study of identity.
- See how identity politics influences new political actions and claims and to understand the diversity of arguments occurring in our various political cultures.
- Understand the limits of identity politics. For example, is it too person-centered?
- Understand what is meant by a post-modern identity.
Required Readings
Chapters and Articles:
Bernstein, Mary. 2005. “Identity Politics.” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31. Pages, 47-74.
Bondi, Liz. 1993. “Locating Identity Politics.” In, Place and the Politics of Identity. Editors, Michael Keith and Steve Pile. London: Routledge, Pages, 84-101.
Hollinger, David A. 2004. “Identity in the United States.” In, Keywords: Identity: For a Different Kind of Globalization. New York: Other Press, Pages, 27-45.
Isin, Engin F. and Patricia K. Wood. 1999. “Redistribution, Recognition, and Representation,” From, Citizenship and Identity. London: Sages, Pages, 1-24.
McDermott Monica and Frank L. Samson. 2005. “White Racial and Ethnic Identity in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology. Volume 31, Pages 245-261.
Nagel, Joane,. 1994. “Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture. Social Problems, Vol. 41, No.1, Special Issue on Immigration, Race and Ethnicity, in American, Pages, 152- 176.
Orwell, G. May 1945. Politics and Language.
Plummer, Ken. 1993. “Identity.” In, Social Thought. Ed. William Outhwaite and Tom Bottomore. London: Blackwell. Pages, 270-272.
Wright, Richard. almostaman2/3
Stewart, Kathleen and Susan Harding. 1999. “Bad Endings: American Apocalypsis.” Annual Review of Anthropology, 28, Pages 285-310.
Recommended Reading: (See Blackboard Links)
Kolchin, Peter, Whiteness Studies: The New History of Race in America. The Journal of American History 89.1 (2002): 41 pars. 14 Jan. 2006
Also, take a look at the on-line Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on Identity Politics (link is on Blackboard)
Evaluation
Synopses (50 points)
Thoughtful and timely reading of the assigned readings is essential! You will be held accountable for the reading, each day! They will require your close attention, regular review, and numerous rereadings. Because this class has a logical progression, failure to regularly attend will inevitably result in poor performance and certain disappointment. I have, moreover, discovered that successful discussion of the readings requires attendance: those who fail to attend often disrupt the class. The synopses will count for 50% of the grade. You are required to provide a synopsis for the readings, articles and book chapters, due on Tuesday at the beginning of class. You will be expected to effectively use the synopses in the discussions and participation will be measured by your willingness to contribute to the discussion during each session and use of the reading for that day in making your interventions. And because this class is organized as a seminar, you will have numerous opportunities to demonstrate your preparation. In short, you will be favorably evaluated for participation if you have attended class and completed the assigned readings and synopses in a timely manner. Synopses submitted late will not be evaluated.
The purpose of the synopsis is to identify the central thesis or controlling ideas of the reading and to briefly examine the evidence and ideas used in their development. In addition to summary, it is the purpose of the synopsis to evaluate. You will be expected to pose questions regarding the logic of the work, its merits and shortcomings. Where the author uses data or cites evidence, you must examine the evidence and the conclusions drawn. They must be no more than one page, typed, and single-spaced (12 pt, 1” margins): no exceptions. See attachment for more detailed description of what is expected from the synopses. Please bring to class two copies of the synopses, one for me and a second for your use in class. You will each lead seminar discussions using the synopses (frequency to be determined).
*indicates that you should submit a synopsis for that reading—on Tuesday
Finally, I advise that you purchase a binder for the readings. And please make sure you always bring the readings to class.
Essay (50 points)
You will write an essay that explores representations of whiteness in popular culture using the concepts developed in this class. For this paper you should avoid mere description or chronology of events, unless they are useful in developing an argument. You might consider, for example, writing a paper on the Simpsons, MTV, advertising, pop music, music video, or shopping. Or you might consider examining a single topic, e.g., race, whiteness, nationalism, ethnicity, across a range of popular cultural forms such as film, television, music, sport, best-sellers, etc. Or you might consider writing a paper on a specific instance of popular culture: a specific hip-hop artist or cult films. You should attempt to find something that you care about our have some personal interest in. But you must relate a theory or theories to your reading or viewing. And you must select a mode of analysis that is appropriate to your selected area of study. For the final paper I am asking you to ‘explain’, ‘compare’, ‘analyze’, ‘evaluate’. You should consider the underlying values found in knowledge claims, including your own. If you pick the Simpsons, for example, your objective should be to carefully evaluate how different and sometimes competing arguments have been constructed to explain this particular instance or form. You must appropriately use citations to support to your arguments. Although you are expected to use academic books and articles, you may also consider, where appropriate, non-academic sources (e.g. video recording, television, etc. ). You should also demonstrate an understanding of the plurality of views on your topic and seek to identify underlying allegiances, values, and assumptions. Your ability to analyze and develop arguments of your own is essential to your academic success. See this website for discussion of cultural analysis of music videos: http://www.sibetrans.com/trans/trans4/rybacki.htm
The first draft must be submitted on the Thursday before spring break, March 9. I will not look at your first draft until the writing liaison, Dr. Tidwell, has looked at it. She will maintain a record of your visits for my review. And do not wait until the last minute to arrange for these visits. We will use the final week of class to make brief presentations of the papers.
Distribution:
Synopses: 50 points
Essay and Presentation: 50 points
Course Schedule
Part I: Some Philosophical Considerations
Course Objectives
Week 1: Tuesday, January 17 and Thursday, January 19
Introduction
The Book Review
The final essay
Readings:
Orwell, G. May 1945. Politics and the Language. (see Blackboard)
Wright, Eric Olin. The Seminar (see Blackboard)
Week 2: Tuesday, January 24 and Thursday, January 26
Key Concepts
These ideas will be explored with the thought in mind of equipping you with the conceptual tools necessary for critical and reflective reading. They will also transfer to other areas of your learning. You will find that every theory or idea has embedded in it ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions. It will be useful to have these ideas integrated into your conceptual vocabulary at his stage in your learning. We will return again and again to these ideas so that you can thoroughly integrate them and use them not only in this class but in related areas of study.
Readings: handouts
Part II: The Self and Identity
Course Objectives
Week 3: Tuesday, January 31 and Thursday, February 2
The Self and Identity
On Thursday, we will discuss the final paper.
Week 4: Tuesday, February 7 and Thursday, February 9
During these two weeks, we will explore several dominant themes in academic and political debates regarding identity and the politics of identity: social constructivism and related debates on essentialism and anti-essentialism, biological determinism, and various forms of reductionism. The arguments used and learned in this week will apply across the human (e.g., sociology, anthropology, history, psychology)and natural sciences (e.g., biology, genetics) and humanities. You will find it useful to know how these arguments are constructed and used in these disciplines and in our political cultures. Once you’ve mastered these ideas, you will find it easier to grasp and use the arguments in other aspects of your learning.
Readings:
Plummer, Ken. 1993. “Identity.” In, Social Thought. Editors, William Outhwaite and Tom Bottomore. London: Blackwell. Pp. 270-272.
*Bernstein, Mary. 2005. “Identity Politics.” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 31. Pages, 47-74.
Week 5: Tuesday, February 14 and Thursday, February 16
Continued
Readings:
*Bondi, Liz. 1993. “Locating Identity Politics,” In, Place and the Politics of Identity. Editors, Michael Keith and Steve Pile. London: Routledge.
Week 6: Tuesday, February 21 and Thursday, February 23
Readings:
*Hollinger, David A. 2004. “Identity in the United States.” In, Keywords: Identity: For a Different Kind of Globalization. New York: Other Press.
Part III: Ethnic and Racial Identities
Week 7: Tuesday, February 28 and Thursday, March 2
Ethnicity, Race and Racial Identity
Readings:
*McDermott Monica and Frank L. Samson. 2005. “White Racial and Ethnic Identity in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology. Volume 31, pages 245-261.
Week 8: Tuesday, March 7 and Thursday, March 9
Discussion of Papers
Developing your research question
Locating the literature
Week 9: Spring Break Tuesday, March 14 and Thursday, March 16
No Class
Week 10: Tuesday, March 21 and Thursday, March 23
Readings: McDermott continued.
Part IV: National and Religious Identities
Week 11: Tuesday, March 28 and Thursday, March 30
*Nagel, Joane. 1994. “Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture.” Social Problems, Vol. 41, No.1, Special Issue on Immigration, Race and Ethnicity, in American, 152-176.
Week 12: Tuesday, April 4 and Thursday, April 6
Reading:
*Stewart, Kathleen and Susan Harding. 1999. “Bad Endings: American Apocalypsis.” Annual Review of Anthropology, 28, Pages 285-310.
Paper Presentations
Week 13: Tuesday, April 11 and Thursday, April 13
OWENS, BECCA
WOLOSCHYN, GREG
KERVICK, CHRISTOPHER
WILLIAMS, ASHLEY
AKUSOBA, CHIAZOR
Week 13: Tuesday, April 18 and Thursday, April 20
COOPER, DARA
LONGSTREET, EMILY
HOLMES, KATHLEEN
HAMILTON, JOSHUA
Week 13: Tuesday, April 25 and Thursday, April 27
NGUYEN, VAN
HOLLABAUGH, JOSHUA
ANIGBOGU, CHIOMA
HORACEK, EMILY
KITTOE, AMANDA
Organizing the Synopses
Here are some suggestions for writing the Synopses. You will find that from reading to reading that you will apply these in different ways. Some articles present different kinds of data, for example (e.g., historical, case study, ethnographic, quantitative, etc.). Other articles are based strictly on the development of an argument (theoretical or conceptual arguments). You’ll need to read through these guidelines to make a determination about how best to discuss each article. In addressing these questions, always consider: epistemology, ontology, theory and methodology.
- relationship between events and conditions?
Adapted from Helping Students Write Well, Barbara E. Fassler Walvoord, New York: MLA Press. 1986, Pages 56-58.