关键时刻的语境大串联——关于文化研究的对话

这里刊出的是两位著名文化研究学者的一篇对话,主题自然是文化研究。劳伦斯.格罗斯伯格早年学习历史与哲学,后在英国伯明翰大学当代文化研究中心做研究,师从文化研究领军人斯图尔特.霍尔。他撰写和主编的大量论著在文化研究领域具有广泛影响,许多成为经典性论著。他主编的《文化研究》杂志,创刊于1987年。20年来,该杂志发表了近千篇学术论文,对文化研究领域的形成和发展有举足轻重的意义。刘康现担任美国杜克大学公共政策学院中国传媒中心主任、教授,南京大学兼职教授。照对话者的看法,文化研究的要旨在于如何“讲好故事”,路径之一乃是“串联”(articulation,又译作“接合”)。“串联”概念源出于斯图尔特.霍尔,旨在将不同事物联系起来构成新东西。对话者首先提出了跨学科的“串联”,以问题为中心,将不同学科的视角、方法、观念和理论相互碰撞,必然会产生各种新的观念。以问题为核心,就是强调回到问题本身是研究之宗旨所在。这就触及到所谓的“激进的语境主义”,也就是将特定问题带回到它们出现的那个特定社会、政治、经济和文化背景之中。提倡从问题出发、反对理论先行,这就击中了当前一些文化研究普遍存在的弊端。“关键时刻”概念特指社会矛盾激化的重要时刻,是语境的另一种描述,中国和西方目前都处在这一时刻。劳动的贬值,共同价值的衰落,文化的经济化,消费社会的崛起,传媒的影响等,都作为关键时刻的问题凸现出来,向文化研究提出了挑战。理论如何与大众“串联”,是对话又一重要主题,将文化研究变成公共知识,而非学院派的密语,看来是今后文化研究所面临的难题。在这方面右派比左派做得更好,也更有效,倒是一个发人深省的问题。于是,文化研究议程的创新,特别是在中国,如何从理论消费转向理论生产,乃是一个不容忽视的重大问题。     

Work and Work Alternatives for Disabled Young People

This paper presents results from a population based action research study in East Devon of the needs of 383 young people aged 16-25 years with a whole range of impairments and disabilities, and 152 able-bodied controls. A comparison between these two groups is made of their current and past experiences of work and work alternatives. The aspirations and expectations of the disabled young people are also compared with those of their families and service providers, and the preferred occupations of the young people, with various profiles of disability, are explored. Although the analysis pinpoints groups of disabled young people with particularly high levels of employment handicap, there is, throughout the study group, a need for progress out of static or unstable occupational paths. The handicapping features of employment services that impede this progress are discussed together with an examination of society's response to high levels of unemployment among disabled people. The research findings, set within this context, provide a basis for action research now being undertaken in local communities within East Devon to improve employment opportunities.     

Who Cares about Water Pollution? Opinions in a Small-Town Crisis*

A survey was conducted in a small New England town following the discovery that the town's water supply had become contaminated by industrial chemicals. Principal findings include: (1) respondents from more affluent households were more concerned about the pollution problem; (2) long-term or older residents tended to be less concerned; and (3) women with young children viewed the problem as particularly serious. The first two findings are consistent with previous research on similar “technological catastrophes” and on environmental protection in general. The third finding has not appeared in environmental protection research, but it is consistent with reports from Three Mile Island. Such technological catastrophes transform environmental issues into safety issues, thereby raising parents’anxieties about the safety of their children–perhaps more so for women than for men. These safety concerns may eventually be generalized to broader environmental issues, as toxic waste and other disasters continue to occur.     

The advantages and disadvantages of different social welfare strategies

This paper presents a framework for consideration of change in or reform of social welfare systems. The author describes characteristics of the approaches to providing social welfare most commonly used in North America and western Europe. These include social insurance, employer mandates, individual mandates, voluntary arrangements (tax expenditures), means-tested programmes, and universal programmes (demogrants). He then evaluates each of the approaches in terms of its ability to achieve a set of social and economic objectives. The social protection objectives include treating people with dignity and respect, assuring complete coverage, equitably distributing costs and benefits, and operating efficiently to lower overhead. The objectives important to promoting a healthy economic environment include encouraging individual saving and work effort, fostering government fiscal responsibility, and facilitating smooth market functioning. The author concludes that there is no one correct way to organize social welfare systems, that each approach has strengths and weaknesses, and that different societies will attach different priorities to different objectives. Thus, as social goals change, we may expect that the particular mix of approaches used will also evolve and change over time.