Saturday, February 23, 2008

"Can I Have a Say in Our Future?" Forum

"Can I Have a Say in Our Future?" Forum
Sounds right up some of our alleys...


Speakers include Tony Clarke, Peter Victor, Bill Vanderberg, Eduardo Sousa, Jocelyn Thorpe, and Lois Wilson

Fri. Feb. 29, 1-5pm, in the OISE auditorium (ground floor?)

http://scienceforpeace.sa.utoronto.ca/forum-08
for more info...

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Responding to Freire: a beginning

It’s hard to comment on Freire when I haven’t read what I imagine to be a library of responses to his work. So I don’t know if I’m repeating what others have already said or adding something new. I know from reading postings on the website (http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/research/edu20/) that there are common themes in people’s reaction to his work, and I too address some of these themes. I think within the context of the website, at least, what I have to say should be of interest. It certainly has been helpful for me to have this site to post my thoughts and thereby engage further with Paulo Freire and those sharing an interest in his work. Also, my post is a little different from the others in that it’s not so much a book review as it is a response to what I see as problems and opportunities for using Freire’s work to develop an approach to understanding human-nature relations today.

Education, for Paulo Freire, had to be an emancipatory force, one that would contribute to human development. His goal was to help illiterate people learn how to use language to engage with the “themes of their time.” In setting parameters for this educational project Freire articulated a set of inter-related distinctions between culture and nature, people and animals, the rational and the emotional, the causal and the magical, communication and extension, among others. These distinctions gave meaning and direction to Freire’s work, and other scholars have raised important criticisms about them. What seems to be missing, however, is an explanation as to why Freire’s framework continues to have widespread appeal: people around the world – in conditions that are likely quite different from those that influenced Freire – continue to be inspired by his methodology and vision. This paper considers the core distinctions of Freire’s theoretical framework, some problems associated with them, and why the framework continues to inspire scholars. In particular, I’m interested in the contributions that Freire’s framework might make to current debates within the pedagogy of environmental studies and transforming human-nature relations.

A set of inter-related distinctions

Freire believed that education ought to contribute to human development. Making sense of this development required a way of distinguishing between different states of human existence—a progression along a spectrum with degrees of human liberation. First, to define the spectrum itself, Freire needed to establish something concrete about what it meant to be human. He turned to a distinction between humans and animals. While animal behaviour could be best understood as a reflex to the world, humans related to the world through culture: humans had the unique ability to make sense of the world and to intervene in reality—to transform it. It was this human capacity for reflection, decision-making – in short consciousness – that Freire wanted to develop.

Next, Freire distinguished between different states of consciousness, suggesting that some states were further along the path towards critical consciousness than others. On the one end of this spectrum there was “semi-intransitivity of consciousness,” a state of limited comprehension of one’s immediate surroundings where “[m]en [sic] confuse their perceptions of the objects and challenges of the environment, and fall prey to magical explanations because they cannot apprehend true causality” (Freire 1973: 17). “Naïve transitivity” was not much better, “characterized by an over-simplification of problems; by a nostalgia for the past; by underestimation of the common man; by a strong tendency to gregariousness; [....]"

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

CFP: Race, Environment, and Representation - Deadline Apr. 15

“Race, Environment, and Representation”
Special issue of: Discourse: Journal for Theoretical Studies in Media and Culture

Originally posted on H-Net: http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=160956

This special issue of Discourse will present interdisciplinary scholarship that examines the intersection of the environment, race, and representational practices. It aims to redress the lack of conversation between critical race studies, ecocriticism, and media studies. This important conversation can be more fully opened by exploring some of the following questions: How are environment and race both, in the terms of Lawrence Buell, mutually constructed, shaped by the material world and the world of discourse? How does the concept of “environment” inform the work of ethnic authors who are often concerned with urban, industrial, and agricultural landscapes overlooked or shunned by conservation-oriented environmentalists? How have artists and critics responded to the emergence of a more socially oriented discourse and practice of environmental justice? What aesthetic forms and strategies can represent the burdens of pollution, health, and structural violence that are inflicted upon different groups, often with effects that seem invisible, temporally remote, or geographically removed?

We invite essays from a broad a range of scholars and methodologies on topics such as ethnic studies, cultural geography, visual culture, urban history, philosophy, literary criticism, American studies, environmental history, and anthropology. In bringing together diverse approaches to the problems posed by race, environmental justice, and cultural mediation, the issue will explore how attending to the uneven distribution of environmental burdens might enable political coalitions and aesthetic practices that move beyond, without leaving behind, local struggles and the politics of identity that have characterized many aspects of both environmentalism and antiracist discourses.

We understand the key terms of our title – race, environment, and representation – broadly. With respect to race we are interested in extending the critical conversation about the environment to more fully address how historically sedimented racial groups—including whites—intersect with issues of location (i.e., in environmentally impacted, disinvested urban areas or in overseas regions affected by toxic dumping) and access (i.e., to health care, education, and pesticide-free products). By environment we mean not only places commonly represented as “natural” and “wild” – thus the usual targets of environmentalism – but also cities, suburbs, and working landscapes. While we are convinced by poststructuralist arguments that understandings of nature are always matters of representation and not merely scientific fact, we are especially interested in how particular representational practices mediate experiences of nature and the environment.

Possible topics might include, but should by no means by limited to:
--visual representations of intangible, invisible environmental “body burdens”
--the racial politics of urban/suburban design
--how media have been mobilized to create translocal imagined communities among differently situated grassroots activists (and even across species lines)
--intersections between environmental justice and emerging scholarship on biopower, or, in Nikolas Rose’s phrase, “the politics of life itself”
--social aspects of environmental art or earthworks
--intersections of religion, environmentalism, and race
--Review essays on books such as The Environmental Justice Reader (ed. Adamson, Evans, and Stein); Race, Nature, and the Politics of Difference (ed. Moore, Pandian, and Kosek); The Quest for Environmental Justice (Bullard); Noxious New York (Sze); and The Future of Environmental Criticism (Buell).

Articles should be a maximum of 7,500 words in length, and formatted in Chicago style. Interested contributors please send an abstract (max. of 500 words) by 15 April 2008. The deadline for receipt of articles will be 15 July 2008. We welcome any questions. Please email all materials and queries to Discourse Guest Editors, Mark Feldman (markfeld@stanford.edu) and Hsuan L. Hsu (hsuan.hsu@yale.edu).

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

stream - sfu grad journal

description below; contact stream.journal@gmail.com for more info, or add the FB group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=9901024427
Stream is an E-Journal. The goal is to create a peer-reviewed journal for graduate students to submit their work, which encompasses three often-overlapping ‘streams’ of concentration: Culture, Technology & Politics. We hope that this student initiative will become a space for graduate students to publish new work and expand upon new ideas, contributing to a thriving graduate intellectual culture.

Submissions will be selected through a double-blind review process, and should be submitted electronically to facilitate the editing and publishing process. Papers should fit into one of the proposed streams, but we invite contributors to challenge their conceptions of these subjects with innovative takes on these fields.

Notes to Contributors:

Papers should be 15-20 pages in length and submitted via email in Word (.doc) or RTF (.txt) format. Manuscripts are expected to be the original work of the author and should use Canadian English, be double spaced and cited according to APA style.

Although the purpose of the journal is to encourage academic dialogue between streams, we ask that authors select between culture, politics, and technology, when submitting manuscripts in order to facilitate the editing process.

As this journal will be housed exclusively online, we encourage authors to include images, videos, sound and any other electronic media in their submissions. Please contact our Production Manager to check the compatibility of our programs with your particular media needs.