Letter: In brief (3)

November 9, 2001

Any book on cultural studies has proved a red rag to reviewer Fred Inglis over the years, and mine was no exception (Books, THES , November 2).

He missed two points. First, the book does not work through examples of cultural analysis because it is a book on how to rethink the method and aim of cultural studies.

Inglis wants to rule methodological debate out of court but with it goes some of the most interesting writing in social sciences (eg, Pierre Bourdieu).

Second, if methodological debate does not matter, then all such books, including mine, that ally cultural studies more closely with the social sciences look the same. Meanwhile, any chance of serious debate about the prospects of cultural studies is lost.

Nick Couldry
Department of sociology
London School of Economics

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most commented

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October


Featured jobs

Occupational Health Manager

University Of The West Of Scotland

Senior Veterinary Epidemiologist

Scotland's Rural College (sruc)

Architecture Manager

University Of Leeds

Research Associate

Kings College London