The Margins Review · Culture-Centered Approach

This is a reflection of a recent experience with a piece I had sent out for peer review. This piece drew upon Subaltern Studies theory to articulate the processes of erasure in the Eurocentric mainstream. One of the reviewers responded to this piece by noting that this argument has already been made in the Communication literature (citing a piece in rhetoric that was published in 2000 by a Caucasian scholar at a mainstream American university). So I went back to the piece with the idea that I had something new to learn, although even on its face, the reviewer's argument did not work as the postcolonial and Subaltern Studies literature predate to arguments made by South Asian and Latin American scholars starting in the 70s. I still wanted to check out this 2000 piece to see if it was indeed citing some of this postcolonial work (as far as I knew, other than the works of Raka Shome, Radha Hegde, Radhika Parameswaran, and some other scholars of Latin American and South Asian origins, ...

Just heard of one of these social scientists (who is known for making blanket statements) making some claim in a class that "there is no such thing as culture." This bright young mind (who truly believes he is a scientist in a lab coat and can measure things like skin color to predict social behavior) noted that culture doesn't exist because it can't be defined. In terms of epistemology, this raises a vital question regarding how social scientists think of the legitimacy of the science they do: To the extent they can define something, lay it out (they call it operationalization), and come to an agreement about it (which is mostly some privileged white men and women sitting around a table/journal/conference panel/review panel), the thing comes to existence. So from this standpoint, having some privilege and then using the privilege to come to an agreement is what constitutes the valdity of a concept. What I find insightful in this logic is the agenda of neocolonial...

Culture. Identity. Politics. Health. Four different concepts and ideas and yet they are so intertwined. What is culture? Although this question may sound simple to many people, social scientists consider this to be one of the key questions in the field. Many social scientists have tried to define this in their own way, but have failed to come to any solid conclusion. Interestingly, I had this long debate with someone recently about how many people it needs to create a 'culture.' I agreed with the author (cannot remember the name right now) who said that it only takes two people to create a culture. But my 'opponent' did not agree with me and she resisted this notion of at least two people strongly. Her opinion was that such a concept can perhaps (and only) define a sub-culture, as those two people will have many things in common with other 'major' cultures. I tried to convince her that, just as Airhihenbuwa (2007) says, any culture cannot be entirely unique of ...