• Corpus ID: 142090553

The Black Studies Tradition and the Mappings of Our Common Intellectual Project

@article{Fenderson2009TheBS,
  title={The Black Studies Tradition and the Mappings of Our Common Intellectual Project},
  author={Jonathan B. Fenderson},
  journal={Western journal of black studies},
  year={2009},
  volume={33},
  pages={46}
}

• Jonathan B. Fenderson
• Published 22 March 2009
• Sociology
• Western journal of black studies

"the African American Studies discipline is accurately conceptualized as a set of theoretical perspectives, rather than a single theoretical perspective, a set of perspectives that has developed out of a discourse about how to constitute knowledge of historical and contemporary experiences, conditions, and aspirations of black people" (Hall 1999, 63). The discipline that Hall refers to here, as African-American Studies, carries various designations, including African Diaspora Studies, Africana Studies, African New World Studies, Africology, Afro-American Studies, Pan-African Studies and Black Studies. The differing names depend completely upon what academic institution is brought into question, as departments across the country have sought to adopt titles that best fit their aspirations at particular junctures in their historical development. Although the discipline remains decorated with various monikers, it is, as Hall points out, bound by a shared critical engagement and study of the experiences of Black people. While the theoretical approaches to studying Black people are almost as varied as the multifarious names the discipline goes by, it is the link between the two--nomenclature and theory--that rests as the central concern of this article. Essentially, this article argues that the disparate names used to describe the field are more than just names; in fact, the multiple monikers are bound by geographical assumptions that have direct implications for questions of epistemology in defining the scope and shape of the discipline. Throughout this article I will use the term "Black Studies" as a generic reference to the field. I employ this term for two reasons; first, the pioneering academic unit that established a full program in this field emerged at San Francisco State University in 1968 (then San Franscisco State College) under the title of Black Studies (Karenga 2002, Aldridge 2000, Colon 2003, Rooks 2006, Bobo et al. 2004, Rojas 2007). Secondly, the term "Black Studies" continues to resonate as the dominant "catch-all" phrase by which the discipline is known and referred to in discourses both inside and outside the academy. As A1 Colon points out, Black Studies is the generic term for the reform movement and for the emerging discipline and programs based in but not confined to institutions of higher education in the United States which critically and systematically celebrate [and interrogate] the discovery, recording, teaching, learning and utilization of knowledge about African heritage, the African Diaspora and African American experience[s] and initiatives for Black community development (Colon 2003,145). The prevailing use of the public or popular referent--"Black Studies"--has yet to be transformed by the continued debate over naming, since this debate has unfolded primarily within the discipline and has not expanded outside academia into the arena of U.S. or Black popular consciousness. The only exception perhaps, is the shift to the term African-American Studies which also directly reflects the shifts in identity politics and self-referential preferences that have recently occurred among African Americans in the U.S. within the last thirty years, but have deeper roots in early African-American political debates (Austin 2006, Rael 2002). Nevertheless, the phrase "Black Studies" is useful here, because it provides a broad sweeping reference to explore the significant ideological distinctions that have emerged within the field. In thinking about these ideological distinctions, David Scott's conception of tradition is helpful. He defines a tradition as: a socially embodied and historically extended argument ... moreover, if tradition presupposes "common possession" it does not presuppose uniformity or plain consensus. Rather it depends upon play of conflict and contention. It is a space of dispute as much as consensus, of discord as accord...what is shared is what is argued about. …