One significant contribution of cultural studies has been to analyze critically the formation of academic disciplines, both as discourses and as institutions. This tendency has emerged in part from the need to study "culture," in its myriad definitions, within a new interdisciplinary context that goes beyond the traditional approach of adding the insights, materials, and methodologies of one discrete field to another. Instead, scholars draw on the inquiries of one field to interrogate the boundaries of another, to explore its unspoken ideological underpinnings, and to ask what has been omitted and excluded in order to organize the coherence of the field. This approach involves a self-reflexive account of the disciplines not as natural descriptions of the world but as social constructions or representations that embody unarticulated assumptions about power relations.The essays featured in this symposium offer such a critical perspective on the discipline of diplomatic history by challenging the fundamental dichotomy that has structured the field: the opposition between foreign relations and domestic relations. By yoking together gender and culture, however, the organization of the symposium risks implicitly upholding the hierarchy embedded in this binary opposition if gender as an analytical category enters diplomatic history only through the aegis of culture, and culture becomes an issue primarily in understanding gender. This commentary will suggest how a critical analysis might further examine the structural opposition between the domestic and the foreign; how the categories of gender and of culture posed by this symposium might be at work both in constituting and in criticizing this dichotomy; and how additional questions of representation, nationalism, race, and ethnicity might complicate this basic opposition. As an outsider to the field, I will only draw out general questions for further inquiry suggested by the very rich essays under discussion.Before turning to diplomatic history, let me briefly sketch how the interdisciplinary tendency of cultural studies has drawn on changes in the fields of anthropology and literary criticism to reconceptualize their working definitions of culture, and how these changes have markedly influenced the field of American studies, which could be further enriched by the study of 97