archives@tulane.edu / 1 / Jordan Mintz

This thesis explores how the American right fought the culture wars of the 1980s in the context of the rights revolution and the regulatory state. It does so by examining divisions over anti-abortion measures in Congress, controversies surrounding allegations of discriminatory withholding of medical care from disabled newborns, debates over the extent to which Title IX and other federal anti-discrimination regulations bound Christian colleges that rejected direct federal funding, and the interplay between rights and education during the AIDS crisis. In doing so, it contributes to the still-growing historiography on both American conservatism and the culture wars. Firstly, it adds shades of nuance to the literature on the American right, which has, until recently, posited the election of Ronald Reagan as the beginning of an era of untrammelled conservative ascendancy. However, these case studies reveal that despite Reagan’s resounding electoral success and the refiguring of the Republican party along conservative lines, the 1980s right was forced to fight many of its battles on terrain that remained structured by the liberal legacy. This finding also contributes to recent trends in the historiography of the culture wars, which have added a great depth of historical understanding to America’s interminable conflicts over abortion, evolution, equal marriage and other social issues. By examining how the right conceived of and reacted to the enduring influence of the rights revolution and the regulatory state in the culture wars of the 1980s, the centrality of the right to privacy becomes clear. Acknowledging the importance of this right leads to the conclusion that the fundamental restructuring of relations between the federal government and the states that had taken place during the 1960s gave rise to the culture wars of the 1980s.

I address a selection of texts published in Australia between 1993 and 1997 which engage with feminist debates about sex and power. These texts are important, I argue, because they signpost the historical moment in which the culture wars and globalisation gained force in Australia. A key word in this thesis is ‘framing’. The debates which my texts engage with have (much like the culture wars in general) commonly been framed as conflicts between polarised political factions. These political factions have, in turn, been framed in terms of generations; that is, an ‘older’ feminism is pitted against a ‘newer’ feminism. Each generation of feminists supposedly holds quite different views about sex. I argue that my texts actually provide an insight into how various feminist perspectives on sex diverge and intersect with each other, as well as with certain New Right discourses about sex. My selected texts also suggest how the printed text has helped transport feminism within and outside Australia / My texts fit into two broad genres, fiction and scholarly non-fiction. The texts are: Helen Garner’s The First Stone (1995), Sheila Jeffreys’ The Lesbian Heresy (1993), Catharine Lumby’s Bad Girls (1997), Linda Jaivin’s Eat Me (1995) and Justine Ettler’s The River Ophelia (1995). I engage with various critical responses to these texts, including reviews, essays and interviews with the authors. I draw also from a range of theoretical sources. These include analyses of the culture wars by the American theorist Lillian S. Robinson and the Australian scholars McKenzie Wark, David McKnight and Mark Davis. Davis has provided a useful overview of how the metaphor of ‘generational conflict’ circulated in Australian culture during the 1990s. I draw on Arjun Appadurai’s model of “global cultural flows” and Ann Curthoys’ history of feminism in Australia. I engage with research into the increasingly ‘globalised’ nature of Australian writing, as well as a number of feminist works on the relationship between sex and power

The increasing importance of religious and moral issues in American politics makes salient once again the question of the relationship between religion and democracy. The United States is in the midst of a debate pitting secularists and those who adapt their faith to progressive outlooks against conservatives who see a need to ground liberal-democracy in something Biblical. Taking up this debate, I argue that the viewpoints of both secular progressives and religious conservatives suffer from key oversights. While the former fail to notice that their commitment to toleration rests on certain absolute claims, the latter overlook the extent to which religion has been transformed and liberalized. Seeking a more nuanced version of this debate, I compare the Enlightenment’s case for toleration to Tocqueville’s claim that democracy requires religion for moral support. Examining Locke and Spinoza, I argue that the Enlightenment sought to achieve freedom, prosperity, and a rich cultural and intellectual life through the weakening or liberalization of religious belief. I then turn to Tocqueville’s friendly critique of the Enlightenment and try to elucidate his solution for preserving, in times of liberalism and equality, the great human devotions which he saw as inextricably linked to religion. I conclude that that by describing a civil religion capacious enough to permit tolerance but substantive enough to encourage real devotion, Tocqueville gives us a kind of moderate politics seldom found in today’s debates. / text

The present thesis focuses on the critical dialogues on the literary canon developed between 1970 and 2000 in the United States as a crucial juncture for the consolidation of the notion of canon as a scholarly subject matter within the field of literary studies. By taking stock of the abundance of scholarly contributions on the literary canon produced at this time, this thesis pursues two aims: first, it initiates a process of systematisation of the scholarly material on the canon produced during the last thirty years of the twentieth century; second, it focuses on a selection of particularly influential works that have furthered the understanding of specific aspects of the notion of canon. Two introductory chapters outline respectively the historical and the theoretical background of this research. Chapter One explores the historical framework within which the canon started to receive increasing critical attention inside and outside U.S. academia. In particular, it observes how the historical and cultural phenomenon known as the Culture Wars came to bear upon the way in which the notion of canon was perceived and treated by critics and scholars. Early and later examples of canonical criticism are juxtaposed so as to argue that the absorption of debates about the definition of national cultural heritage within U.S. academia influenced the terms in which the canon was being discussed, privileging oppositional rhetorical strategies over the more moderate tones of early theoretical approaches. Chapter Two draws on Jan Gorak’s work in The Making of The Modern Canon: Genesis and Crisis of a Literary Idea (1991) to explore the history of the concept of canon and of its associations with the diverging attitudes adopted by critics in relation to the canon in the period in exam. The second part of this thesis constitutes of three case studies that illustrate the significance for our understanding of the concepts of canon, canonicity and canon formation, of three texts published in the 1990s by Harold Bloom, John Guillory and Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Each chapter observes how these studies contributed to clarify the relationship between the idea of canon and that of tradition, between canon and ideology and, finally, between the canon and the anthology, respectively. Chapter Three locates Bloom’s The Western Canon: The Books and Schools of Ages (1994) in relation to his earlier theory of the anxiety of influence and argues that Bloom’s account of canon formation relies on his definition of tradition as the agonistic struggle between poets and their predecessors. Chapter Four is a close reading of John Guillory’s Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation (1993) and explores the political ideology underlying its selective use of the work of Pierre Bourdieu, Antonio Gramsci and T.S.Eliot. Finally, Chapter Five engages with Henry Louis Gates, Jr.’s attempt to establish a canon of African American Literature through his role as editor of the Norton Anthology of African American Literature (1996).

No description available.

No description available.

The Age of Trump witnessed the visible rise of intense culture wars and polarization in the United States. While culture wars are not new phenomena, the current iteration has digital media acting as new discursive structures and mediating battlegrounds for all sides of the cultural conflict. This project chronicles these online culture wars, demonstrating how within a neoliberal and postmodern socio-cultural condition, the rise of ambivalent, profit-driven digital technologies and platforms structure affect and mediate newly networked neo-reactionary populist (sub)cultural ideologies and discourses. The resulting online ecosystems afforded the digital formations of obscure reactionary subcultures (trolls, antifeminists, the alt-right, etc.) with particular personalized and affectively driven memetic communicative logics. These reactionary affective publics eventually began converging under perceived common ideological and social interests as online actions and reactionary discursive (re)formations and (re)networkings were catalyzed by (sub/cross)cultural conflicts and moments of sentimental activation. This led to the emergence of affectively charged and informally networked reactionary publics which began spilling out into the offline world alongside Trump's ascendancy to the White House. The increasing progressive reactions during the Trump Era also faced limitations in combatting reactionary politics due to structural dynamics of digital media and the larger culture war filtering of politics. The overall macro function of these new online culture wars is the bipartisan obfuscation and undermining of a collectivist and materialist reality and engagement with politics in the favor of a more personalized, symbolic and affective engagement that is indicative of the neoliberalized postmodern era.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / After the fight by the Indiana chapter of the National Organization for Women (Indiana NOW) to include the Equal Rights Amendment into the Constitution of the United States failed at the national level, it was thrust into a battle to protect abortion rights. During the 1980s culture wars, a period of identity politics and antifeminist movements, abortion rights became the largest issue Indiana NOW had to face. Indiana NOW utilized a strategy based on both empathy (to form an emotional motivation) and a political (or legal) strategy to combat the political Right’s attempts to eliminate women’s right to obtain a legal abortion. This thesis looks at Indiana NOW’s strategies to fight for women’s right to keep abortions safe and legal during the 1980s. Understanding Indiana NOW’s efforts throughout the 1980s and into the early 1990s to combat the removal of abortion rights offers a glimpse into how we can understand feminism before, during, and after the culture wars. This understanding allows us to see the utility of and problems with the idea of “waves” of feminism.

No description available.