"The Public Sphere and Experience": Selections

Negt, Oskar; Labanyi, Peter

doi:10.2307/778678

Cited by 59 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Along with the work of Arendt (1998) and Dewey (1927), a key reference point in this tradition has been Habermas's (1989) model of the public sphere as a realm of rational debate oriented towards consensus-formation. Others have highlighted the exclusionary tendencies of this model and the importance of counter-publics (Negt & Kluge, 1993;Fraser 1990); emphasised the inadequacies of deliberative public sphere theory and instead proposed a model based on agonistic pluralism (Mouffe 2002;Dahlberg 2007); and pointed to the Eurocentric underpinnings of the public sphere concept (Santos 2012). Normative perspectives figure prominently in the literature on public engagement with research, which has debated the relative merit of different models of democratic life (Biegelbauer & Hansen, 2011;Chilvers, 2008) and sought to 7 establish normative frameworks, drawing on such models, for evaluating public engagement projects (Rowe & Frewer 2000;Rowe et al 2008).…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The frontiers of participatory public engagement

Mahony

Stephansen

2016

European Journal of Cultural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently missing from critical literature on public engagement with academic research is a public-centric analysis of the wider contemporary context of developments in the field of public engagement and participation. Drawing on three differently useful strands of the existing theoretical literature on the public, this article compares a diverse sample of 100 participatory public engagement initiatives in order to first, analyse a selection of the myriad ways that the public is being constituted and supported across this contemporary field and second, identify what socio-cultural researchers might learn from these developments. Emerging from this research is a preliminary map of the field of public engagement and participation.This map highlights relationships and divergences that exist among diverse forms of practice and brings into clearer view a set of tensions between different contemporary approaches to public engagement and participation. Two 'frontiers' of participatory public engagement that socio-cultural researchers should attend are also identified. At the first, scholars need to be critical regarding the particular versions of the public that their preferred approach to engagement and participation supports and concerning how their specific identifications with the public relate to those being addressed across the wider field. At the second frontier, researchers need to consider the possibilities for political intervention that public engagement and participation practice could open out, both in the settings they are already working and also in the much broader, rapidly developing and increasingly complicated contemporary field of public engagement and participation that this article explores.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The frontiers of participatory public engagement

Mahony

Stephansen

2016

European Journal of Cultural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These conceptualizations provide a means of understanding the political significance of cultural practices without collapsing the cultural and the political into one another in over-inflated notions of cultural politics. They do so by pointing to an expanded notion of public sphere that is anticipated in Negt and Kluge's (1993) earlier critique of Habermas, in which they defined the public sphere to include the practices and relationships that constituted the horizons of social experience (see also Barnett 2003). Yizo Yizo deploys an amalgam of local and global cultural forms to expand the horizons of normative debate in a cultural context in which discussion of sexual harassment, violent crime, abuse, and addiction have been either highly moralized or consigned to silence.…”

Section: Talking About Tvmentioning

confidence: 99%

Yizo Yizo: Citizenship, Commodification and Popular Culture in South Africa

Barnett

2004

Media, Culture & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article critically examines the development of an innovative approach to educational broadcasting in post-apartheid South Africa. Examining the policy background and the public debate sparked by the controversial drama series, Yizo Yizo, it is argued that the spatial restructuring of media markets re-articulates the sites and scales at which media practices and citizenship are connected. Yizo Yizo makes creative use of globalized media genres to address pressing social issues in ways that connect to national public policy debates. It does so by mainstreaming educational broadcasting, and by recognizing children’s complex media literacies and competencies. It is argued that the series is an example of a new rationality of media citizenship developed in the distinctive context of post-apartheid transition that has broader significance for understandings of the implications of media globalization for citizenship, culture and participation. Yizo Yizo is a practical example of mediated deliberation aimed at empowering citizens. It is indicative of subtle but important shifts in the dimensions of public culture in a highly divided society.

show abstract

“…How can it both fail to account for material and social particularities, yet operate productively as if it resolves them? Some commentators have argued that this paradox is fundamentally ideological (Fraser, 1993;Negt and Kluge, 1993), that it represses and assimilates material and social particularities in order to deny representation in and access to the democratic franchise under the cover of inclusion. In response to Habermas's Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere ([ 1962] 1989), which first thematized the public paradox for theoretical interrogation, many theorists have been concerned with how to represent marginalized social groups within theories of public.…”

Section: The Paradox Of Publicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many theorists have developed models that feature particularist publics (Asen, 1999;Asen and Brouwer, 2001;Fraser, 1993;Negt and Kluge, 1993;Warner, 2002;Young, 1990). Generally, these models respond to widespread concerns about Habermas' emphasis on universality and rationality in his theory of the public sphere and in his communication theory.…”

Section: Particularist Publicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Public Metonym

Cramer¹

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the central critiques of the bourgeois conception of public holds that, in its implicit claim to universality, it fails to account for the material particularities of social groups and for the variety of possible rationalities. Some theorists have aimed to solve this problem by describing particular publics and particular rationalities based on racial, ethnic, gender, or political identities. While particularist public models represent difference in protest of the totalizing and counterfactual valence of a bourgeois conceptualization of public, they fail to acknowledge that glossing difference is fundamental to the function of and the authorizing power of public, as it is marshalled by speakers. By analogizing Perelman and OIbrechts-Tyteca' s universal audience with public, this paper (a) introduces the public metonym, a rhetorically productive counterfactual totality that glosses the material particularities of social groups, (b) critiques the particularist approach to the paradox of public, (c) introduces the resistance metonym as a rhetorically-minded alternative, and (d) clarifies distinctions among projects that claim to address a common object called pUblic.Resume: Une des critiques majeures du concept bourgeois du publique affirme que, dans ses pn!tentions a I 'universalite, il ne tient pas compte des particularites materielles des groupes sociaux, ni des diverses possibilites de la raison. Quelques auteurs ten tent de resoudre ce probleme en proposant des modeles differents du publique et de la rationalite; des concepts bases sur des criteres raciaux, ethniques, sexuels, ou politiques. Quoique ces modeles plus particuJiers offrent une alternative au concept bourgeois du pubJique, its ne reconnaissent pas que Ie concept du publique employe par des intervenants visent justement a minimiser les differences entre Ies groupes sociaux.. En faisant une analogie avec Ie concept de I'audience universelle de Perelman et Olbrechts-Tyteca, j'introduis I'idee de la metonymie publique: une totalite illusoire, mais utile rhetoriquement, qui passe au dessus de ces circonstances particuJieres des groupes sociaux. Je presente une critique des methodes particularistes au paradoxe du publique; j'introduis Ie comme une alternative rhetorique, et je distingue nettement les divers projets qui elaborent une theorie de I' objet intellectuel commun que nous appelons un publique.

show abstract

"The Public Sphere and Experience": Selections

Cited by 59 publications

References 0 publications

The frontiers of participatory public engagement

The frontiers of participatory public engagement

Yizo Yizo: Citizenship, Commodification and Popular Culture in South Africa

The Public Metonym

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About