Mohan Dutta: Culture-Centered Approach

Professor Devika Chawla from Ohio University graciously sent me an email after having read my blog on "Eurocentric Disciplining," citing the piece that she and Professor Amardo Rodriguez co-authored, titled "Locating Diversity in Communication Studies" (Amardo was an assistant professor at Purdue and had left the department right before I joined the department here). Chawla & Rodriguez put forth the notion that the lack of diversity in Communication is fundamentally epistemological and ontological, privileging certain ways of knowing the world, and simultaneously foreclosing alternative visions of Communication that begin with worldviews that seek to de-center the status quo. They take to task what they identify as the paradigm of "inclusion, toleration, and accomodation, " and istead propose a new paradigm of "evolution, innovation, and confrontation." I found this piece both thought provoking and inspiring...something I would like to use ...

In our advisee group meeting today (Zhuo Ban, Uttaran Dutta, Vicky Ortiz, and Shaunak Sastry, October 30, 2010), we discussed the idea of solidarity through reflexivity (see Dutta & Pal, 2010. As we participate in culture-centered processes of change, how do we articulate projects of solidarity that work toward change and are simultaneously critical of the dominant articulations of emancipation in global discourses of neoliberalism? How can we create avenues for discussing meaningful local participation in global scapes that celebrates the agency of local participation even as it works toward points of critique, both of processes of neoimperialism and the processes of local hierarchies that carry out the marginalization of the subaltern? Solidarity is at once a journey of friendship and a reflexive process that is critically aware of the locations of power one inhabits and the silences attached to these locations. This critical awareness by turning the lens on the self creates entr...

The readings from week four had two distinct branches for me. One dealt with the construction and negotiation of pain, and the other with the need for participation and solidarity to improve life. How do we negotiate pain? For a vast majority of us, it may be safe to say that we think of the physical aspect of pain when we think about it. One can easily point to the location of pain, as in arms, legs, stomach etc. But can this pain be actually objectified? Most people would agree that we cannot see pain. Can pain be pin pointed? Perhaps not. Then how are we constructing it as a physical element? If we take a more post positivist approach we can perhaps define pain as electrical impulses to and from the brain. In that case, why do we not consider pain as a brain manifestation? I witnessed first hand the tendency among the Western doctors to quantify pain - tell me on a scale of 1 to 10, where your pain is right now. I wonder how effective such a statement can be, as it is easy to poke h...