[Commlist] CFP 2022 ICA Pre-conference: Critique, post-Critique and the Present Conjuncture

*2022 International Communication Association (ICA) 
pre-conference:/Critique, post-Critique and the Present Conjuncture/*

*//*

/in collaboration with the/

Culture/cultures/CREA 370 research group

(François Cusset, Veronique Rauline and Thierry Labica)

Université Paris Nanterre

*//*

*Hybrid format: *Online and Université Paris 
Nanterre<https://www.parisnanterre.fr/m-thierry-labica>

*Date and time: *Wednesday May 25, 9.00pm to 6.00pm (CET)

*Conference registration fee:*$35.00 USD

*Keynote speakers *(with more to be confirmed):

François Cusset (Université Paris Nanterre)

Alan Finlayson (University of East Anglia)

Sahana Udupa (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München)

A commitment to critique – in its diverse theoretical forms and idioms – 
is the defining ethos of scholarship attuned to the power dynamics of 
academic research and knowledge production more generally. Critique 
encourages us to interpret the given world suspiciously, often for very 
good reasons. However, it can also be a “thought style” (Felski, 2015, 
p. 2)with its own intellectual and political limitations. This 
pre-conference will reflect on the place of critique in a political 
moment that poses some distinct challenges to how critique is imagined 
and practised in communication and media studies and elsewhere. It does 
so from a perspective that is affirmative of critique, yet mindful that 
“to be faithful to its core principle, critique must involve its 
self-critique” (Fassin & Harcourt, 2019, p. 3). It also invites 
perspectives and contributions from different fields and disciplines. We 
think the question of critique should summon a healthy disregard for 
disciplinary strictures and imperatives, and demand engagement with all 
the paradoxes and tensions of the present conjuncture.

Three rather different conjunctural developments justify discussion of 
this topic now. First, authors in different fields have questioned the 
condition of critique by invoking the notion of “post-critique” (Anker & 
Felski, 2017). This label has been read by some as signifying a 
straightforward renunciation of critique. However, this characterization 
annihilates the intellectual richness of some of the post-critique 
literature, and we agree with Rita Felski’s (2015) observation that it 
is “becoming ever more risible to conclude that any questioning of 
critique can only be a reactionary gesture or a conservative conspiracy” 
(p. 8). Similar arguments have been made by appealing to motifs like 
“critique of critique” or “critique of the critical”, to signify how 
critique can take forms that are formulaic and marketized (Billig, 
2013), disenchanted from the political question of emancipation 
(Rancière, 2011), or over-reliant on a rhetoric of moral denunciation 
(Phelan, 2021). Work done under the heading of “critical university 
studies” (Smyth, 2017)emphasizes, in turn, the need for meaningful 
critique in the institutional universe that shapes scholarly identities 
and practices, as an antidote to a critical gaze that directs its 
attention exclusively outwards.

Second, critique is increasingly being represented in pejorative ways by 
an ideologically heterogenous cast of political, cultural and media 
actors, often self-styled academic dissidents. These figures sometimes 
assume the mantle of the real critical thinkers unmasking the 
politicized scholarship of left-wing academics, as if to dramatize Bruno 
Latour’s (2004)fears about how the “weapons of social critique” can be 
reappropriated (see also Tebaldi, 2021). These developments have gained 
wider public visibility in far-right attacks against “critical race 
theory” in the US (Goldberg, 2021). They are also expressed in a 
generalized condemnation of “critical” and “postmodern” scholarship 
across the humanities and social sciences. These anti-critique 
discourses are produced in malleable forms (Jay, 2020)that circulate 
easily across media cultures and national boundaries. They become part 
of the ready-to-hand weaponry of “culture war” politics. The critical 
academy is targeted for its role in the creation of an authoritarian 
“woke” culture that, we are told, threatens sacred Enlightenment values.

Third, the university is now routinely depicted on the political right 
as one of a number of elite social institutions (including “the media”) 
that has been captured by “wokeness” and the forces of “cancel culture” 
(Labica, 2021). Yet, in tandem with these discourses, it is not hard to 
cite examples of how the culture of scholarly critique is being 
“cancelled” in a rather different way by forces within and outside the 
neoliberal university. This was exemplified by events at the University 
of Leicester in 2021, when several critical management studies and 
political economy academics(Halford, 2021)were made redundant for doing 
research that was deemed to be at odds with the future strategic vision 
of the university’s business school. It was illustrated in a June 2021 
motion passed by Danish parliamentarians on the boundaries between 
science and politics, which was described – in a letter co-signed by 
over 3,000 academics – as an attack on “critical research and teaching” 
in areas like “race, gender, migration and post-colonial studies” 
(Myklebust, 2021). It also takes a distinctly French form in the image 
of academic departments that have been taken over by the forces of 
“islamo-gauchisme”, or in the assumption that even talking about race 
indicates activist commitments at odds with a normative conception of 
proper science (Dawes, 2020; Mohammed, 2021). Universities can, and do, 
respond differently to external political attacks, and sometimes in ways 
that affirm a principled commitment to scholarly critique. This was 
illustrated by cross-university support for a September 2021 conference 
/Dismantling Global Hindutva/, despite the “harassment and intimidation” 
of speakers and organizers “by various Hindu right-wing groups and 
individuals staunchly opposing the conference” (Naik, 2021). 
Nonetheless, the transnational dynamics of such attacks point to the 
normalization (Krzyżanowski, 2020)and mainstreaming (Mondon & Winter, 
2020)of far-right discourses globally. It is not difficult to imagine a 
dystopian future for the university where attacks against critical 
academics become more common, or where the managerial class of more 
universities capitulate to the agenda of reactionary publics.

*Format and papers*

Our description of the pre-conference theme is intended to be suggestive 
rather than exhaustive: we welcome diverse paper proposals that confront 
all the contradictions and possibilities of the current political 
moment, both from a critical communication and media studies perspective 
and a wider interdisciplinary horizon. The conference will be organized 
as short keynote and roundtable panels that will create space for 
conversation between panellists and audience questions. We also 
encourage submissions that reflect plurality in terms of region, career 
level, ethnicity, gender, class, disability and sexual orientation.

The format of the conference is hybrid. Speakers can present either in 
person or online (the precise online platform is subject to 
confirmation). The on-site gathering will take place at the Université 
Paris Nanterre. Registration costs for paper presenters and in-person 
attendees will be US$35, to help cover basic conference expenses, 
including catering costs. We also hope to open the event (at no cost) to 
a wider online audience.

Paper proposals should be submitted as short abstracts of 150 to 250 
words (not counting references). They should be sent as PDF attachments 
to the email address (critiqueICA2022 /at/ gmail.com) 
<mailto:(critiqueICA2022 /at/ gmail.com)>, with the pre-conference title listed 
in the abstract. The deadline for abstract submission is *Friday March 
4, 2022.* Please also include a short bio note of 100 words maximum. And 
please clarify how you are planning to attend the pre-conference, 
indicating “don’t know yet” if you are not sure.

The pre-conference chairs are Sean Phelan (Massey University/University 
of Antwerp), Simon Dawes (Université Versailles St-Quentin-en-Yvelines) 
and Pieter Maeseele (University of Antwerp). Any questions about the 
pre-conference should be emailed to Sean at (sean.phelan /at/ uantwerpen.be) 
<mailto:(sean.phelan /at/ uantwerpen.be)>.

Abstracts should be framed as short provocations that speak clearly to 
the pre-conference theme. Potential sub-themes include:

  * Critique, the university and the politics of knowledge production
  * Reflections on the post-critique debate
  * Critique, post-critique and capitalism
  * Critique, media and journalism
  * Critique, post-critique and communication studies
  * Critique and digital culture
  * Critique, Marxism and socialism
  * Critique, suspicion and reactionary politics
  * Critique and the left
  * Critique, race and racism
  * Critique, gender, and gender theory
  * Critique and the politics of social justice
  * Critique and ideology
  * Critique and critical discourse studies
  * Critique, meaning and identity
  * Critique, science and activism
  * Anti-critique, critical theory and reactionary pedagogy
  * Anti-critique and the transnational far right
  * Far-right appropriation of critical discourse and signifiers
  * **

*Advisory Committee *

*
*

Sarah Banet-Weiser (USC Annenberg)

Lilie Chouliaraki (LSE)

Mohan Dutta (Massey University)

Jayson Harsin (American University of Paris)

Thierry Labica (Université Paris Nanterre)

Robert Porter (University of Ulster)

Veronique Rauline (Université Paris Nanterre)

Gavan Titley (Maynooth University/University of Helsinki)

Sahana Udupa (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München)

*Institutional supporters *

ICA Division:**Philosophy, Theory and Critique

ICA Division: Race and Ethnicity in Communication

Department of Communication Studies, University of Antwerp

Centre d’histoire culturelle des sociétés contemporaines, Université de 
Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), France

Université Paris Nanterre**

*Selective references*

Billig, M. (2013). /Learn to Write Badly: How to Succeed in the Social 
Sciences/. Cambridge University Press.

Dawes, S. (2020, November 2). The Islamophobic witch-hunt of 
Islamo-leftists in France. o/penDemocracy/. 
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/islamophobic-witch-hunt-islamo-leftists-france/

Fassin, D., & Harcourt, B. E. (2019). /A Time for Critique/. Columbia 
University Press.

Felski, R. (2015). /The Limits of Critique/. University of Chicago Press.

Goldberg, D. T. (2021, May 2). The War on Critical Race Theory. /Boston 
Review/. 
https://bostonreview.net/race-politics/david-theo-goldberg-war-critical-race-theory

Halford, S. (2021, May 11). /BSA President writes to Leicester VC on the 
proposed closure of Critical Management Studies and Political Economy/. 
https://es.britsoc.co.uk/bsa-president-writes-to-leicester-vc-on-the-proposed-closure-of-critical-management-studies-and-political-economy/

Jay, M. (2020). /Splinters in Your Eye: Essays on the Frankfurt School/. 
Verso Books.

Krzyżanowski, M. (2020). Normalization and the discursive construction 
of “new” norms and “new” normality: Discourse in the paradoxes of 
populism and neoliberalism. /Social Semiotics/, /30/(4), 431–448.

Labica, T. (2021, November 30). De l’ « islamogauchisme » au 
« wokisme »: Blanquer et la cancel-culture des dominants –. /CONTRETEMPS 
REVUE DE CRITIQUE COMMUNISTE/. 
https://www.contretemps.eu/islamogauchisme-wokisme-decolonialisme-cancel-culture-blanquer/

Latour, B. (2004). Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of 
Fact to Matters of Concern. /Critical Inquiry/, /30/(Winter), 24.

Mohammed, M. (2021, May 14). Islamophobic Hegemony in France: Toward a 
Point of No Return? /Berkley Forum/. 
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/responses/islamophobic-hegemony-in-france-toward-a-point-of-no-return

Mondon, A., & Winter, A. (2020). /Reactionary Democracy: How Racism and 
the Populist Far Right Became Mainstream/. Verso Books.

Myklebust, J. P. (2021, June 10). Uproar as MPs claim university 
research is ‘politicised.’ /University World News/. 
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20210610103648390

Naik, R. H. (2021, September 7). US academic conference on ‘Hindutva’ 
targeted by Hindu groups. /Al 
Jazeera./https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/7/us-academic-conference-dismantling-global-hindutva-hindu-right-wing-groups

Phelan, S. (2021). What’s in a name? Political antagonism and critiquing 
‘neoliberalism.’ /Journal of Political Ideologies/, 1–20.

Rancière, J. (2011). /The Emancipated Spectator/. Verso Books.

Smyth, J. (2017). /The Toxic University: Zombie Leadership, Academic 
Rock Stars and Neoliberal Ideology/. Springer.

Tebaldi, C. (2021). Speaking post-truth to power. /Review of Education, 
Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies/, /43/(3), 205–225.


---------------
The COMMLIST
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please use it responsibly and wisely.
--
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
--
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
URL: http://nicocarpentier.net
---------------