I'm writing this as an update for the very small circle of academic friends who want to know what I'm up to, my family who probably feels like I'm neglecting them this month, and, primarily, for myself to keep track of my thoughts. This is in addition to the pages upon pages of notes I've scrawled out in the past two days.
My first questions officially arrived Monday morning, 8AM sharp. Not exactly what I was expecting in terms of content and style (I was expecting something asking me to analyze primarily the historiography, rather than the history - this appears to be the inverse).
I'm not putting the questions themselves on this blog, as I don't know if I'm allowed to (I'll also have to check before blogging the final papers I write - I don't see why I wouldn't be allowed, as it's my own work, but better safe than sorry). Here's the gist of them, though, for my Canada field:
1) Explain the rise of the modern Canadian state, referring to the liberal order framework.
2) Explain the evolution of gender identity and the family in Canada, with reference to ethno-cultural differences.
Analytically, I like to start answering questions by tearing the wording apart. In this case, "rise" and "evolve" were the first things to get under my skin, as they imply a sort of progression and positivity that I don't feel is appropriate for either the state or gender identity. Next comes "modern" and "state" and of course "gender" and "identity" and "ethnocultural." Constructed, important words.
I am tackling each of these questions in what may appear to be a roundabout way, but one that makes sense to me after reading all three of my field lists. For the first, after discussing some elements of state formation in Upper and Lower Canada surrounding the Rebellions (this section makes me nervous, as my field supervisor specializes in this, and so I'd have to draw on one of his own books! Commenting on profs' books in front of them is terrifying.), and of course a brief discussion of the liberal order framework, I'm going to segue into the imposition of a colonial state in "frontier" areas of Canada - the reserve system and wildlife conservation, as interlinked initiatives, will be a key focus here. I see one text, Curtis's Building the Educational State as almost a microcosm of my wider argument. I have no intention of returning this book to the library until after I graduate. When I initially read it, I seriously disliked it as it was very much focused on settler society; I've more recently warmed up to it, theoretically. Inconveniently, it is the very text my field supervisor argues against in his own work. This should be awkward, but at least provoke discussion in the oral exam! At first, my fear for this paper was gathering up enough material. Now, the challenge is hemming it in a bit - each essay can be only 3000 words.
For the question on gender, one of my challenges is to avoid approaching this in overly post-structuralist terms, as the supervisor for this field is not as inclined toward that sort of theory as I am. Nonetheless, in comes Judith Butler, an impostor from my sex and gender field...several of the texts talked about gender in relation to pageants, parades, rodeos, and various other shows, so I'm taking it in the direction of a quite literal performance and considering symbolism of gender identity. I haven't put in as much time for this paper as it's more within my comfort zone than the state formation one, so stay tuned to see how I can make this analysis take shape.
Among my challenges is avoiding the descent into intensive interpretation through metaphor. So far, I've made these topics make sense to me by thinking about dinosaurs, octopi, and geodesic domes. For the sake of amusement, here is the liberal octopus:
 |
| Conceptualizing liberalism is like dressing an octopus in formal wear |
No comments:
Post a Comment