- Hall Spectacle Of The Other Pdf Download
- Hall Spectacle Of The Other Pdf Reader
- Society Of The Spectacle Pdf
The Work of Representation - Stuart Hall Representing the Social - Peter Hamilton France and Frenchness in Post-War Humanist Photography The Poetics and Politics of Exhibiting Other Cultures - Henrietta Lidchi The Spectacle of the 'Other' - Stuart Hall Exhibiting Masculinity - Sean Nixon Genre and Gender - Christine Gledhill The Case of Soap Opera. The Spectacle of the 'Other' - Stuart Hall In this chapter, Hall highlights racial and ethical difference and how they are represented in the media today - however his ideas can be equally applied to other dimensions of difference such as gender, sexuality, class, disability etc. These reflections may take any form, but must include: 1) reference to the course material or one theoretical concept for the week and 2) relation to one’s personal life and/or a popular culture example. Reflections may take the form of: a written paper, a video or vlog post, a song, podcast, zine, or any other form of creative work. Download full-text PDF Download full-text PDF Read full-text. Hall, “The Spectacle of the Other,” 225–79. Ella Shohat and Robert Stam, Unthinking Eurocentrism.
Copy Citation
Export Citation
Monthly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 10 article PDFs to save and keep
Yearly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 120 article PDFs to save and keep
The vigorous growth of Cultural Studies has in part come about through an insistence on strong contrasts with sociology. Unlike sociology, the theoretical orientations of Cultural Studies are often held to be postmodern and discursive in character. This paper questions the usefulness of such contrasts by examining the work of Stuart Hall, focusing in particular on the problem of hegemony. I argue that Hall's approach slides ambiguously between reading hegemony as either concentrated state domination or free-wheeling discourse. Consequently, Hall cannot resist and indeed in some ways reinforces the discursive turn in contemporary Cultural Studies, despite his own explicit criticisms of this development. I track the instability of Hall's approach to an abstract logic of articulation that fragments social relations and subordinates them to political association. Hall's predicament suggests that social life must be theorized as something more than a pliant diversity of sites. The problem of hegemony calls for an account of cultural and group formation as distinct from their political and ideological construction. I thus conclude that Cultural Studies stands in need of a sociological re-orientation.
For more than 50 years The British Journal of Sociology has represented the mainstream of sociological thinking and research. Consistently ranked highly by the ISI in Sociology, this prestigious international journal publishes sociological scholarship of the highest quality on all aspects of the discipline, by academics from all over the world. The British Journal of Sociology is distinguished by the commitment to excellence and scholarship one associates with its home at the London School of Economics and Political Science.http://www.interscience.wiley.com
Wiley is a global provider of content and content-enabled workflow solutions in areas of scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly research; professional development; and education. Our core businesses produce scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly journals, reference works, books, database services, and advertising; professional books, subscription products, certification and training services and online applications; and education content and services including integrated online teaching and learning resources for undergraduate and graduate students and lifelong learners. Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. has been a valued source of information and understanding for more than 200 years, helping people around the world meet their needs and fulfill their aspirations. Wiley has published the works of more than 450 Nobel laureates in all categories: Literature, Economics, Physiology or Medicine, Physics, Chemistry, and Peace.Wiley has partnerships with many of the world’s leading societies and publishes over 1,500 peer-reviewed journals and 1,500+ new books annually in print and online, as well as databases, major reference works and laboratory protocols in STMS subjects. With a growing open access offering, Wiley is committed to the widest possible dissemination of and access to the content we publish and supports all sustainable models of access. Our online platform, Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) is one of the world’s most extensive multidisciplinary collections of online resources, covering life, health, social and physical sciences, and humanities.
This item is part of JSTOR collection
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
The British Journal of Sociology © 1998 London School of Economics
Request Permissions
| People v. Hall | |
|---|---|
| Decided 1854 | |
| Citation(s) | People v. Hall, 4 Cal 399 (1854). |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Chief Justice Hugh Murray |
| Dissent | Alexander Wells |
The People of the State of California v. George W. Hall or People v. Hall, 4 Cal. 399, was an appealed murder case in the 1850s in which the California Supreme Court established that Chinese Americans and Chinese immigrants had no rights to testify against white citizens. The opinion was delivered in 1854 by Chief Justice Hugh Murray with the concurrence of Justice Solomon Heydenfeldt.[1]
The ruling effectively freed Hall, a white man, who had been convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of Ling Sing, a Chinese miner in Nevada County. Three Chinese witnesses had testified to the killing.[1][2]
Background[edit]
Accession of California to the United States[edit]
With the conclusion of the Mexican–American War, the area of Alta California (which contains the modern U.S. state of California and some other states to its east) came under the control of the United States. Formally, the area was ceded to the United States as part of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. In 1850, California formally joined the United States as the 31st state. Other parts of Alta California that became all or part of later U.S. states included Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming.
California Gold Rush and Chinese migration to California[edit]
In early 1848, gold was discovered in California. This led to the California Gold Rush, where people from the United States, Mexico, and China arrived at California in search of gold. Although mining was the original attraction, many Chinese moved into the cities to provide services. Although their competition in mining was not liked by the whites in California, their presence in city services was initially highly appreciated.[3]
Legal background[edit]
Section 14 of the Act concerning Crime and Punishment, passed in 1850, stated that 'No black or mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man.'[4][1] As written, the Section did not appear to apply to Chinese witnesses.
Between 1849 and 1854, Chinese had made use of the California court systems, with varying degrees of success. For instance, Ah Toy, a female from China who arrived at San Francisco in 1848, started a brothel in 1850, becoming the first Chinese madam operating in the United States. She attempted to use California's court system to seek justice twice:
- She unsuccessfully sued a group of miners for paying her in brass filings instead of gold dust.[5][6]
- In August 1852, she threatened to sue Yee Ah Tye, a notorious Chinese leader, for extortion, claiming that he had demanded that her prostitutes pay him a tax. Yee Ah Tye backed down, although he would later be imprisoned for other charges.[7]
Case decision[edit]
Hall Spectacle Of The Other Pdf Download
In 1853, a California court convicted George Hall, a white man, of the murder of Ling Sing, a Chinese miner, based on the testimony of Chinese witnesses.[2] George Hall appealed the verdict, arguing that the testimony of the Chinese witnesses should not be accepted and that Section 394 of the Act Concerning Civil Cases, which barred the use of testimony by blacks, mulattoes, and Indians against whites, should also be extended to banning the testimony of Chinese. The California Supreme Court, in an opinion delivered by Chief Justice Hugh Murray with the concurrence of Justice Solomon Heydenfeldt, sided with Hall.[1][2]
The case has been described as 'containing some of the most offensive racial rhetoric to be found in the annals of California appellate jurisprudence' and 'the worst statutory interpretation case in history.'[8]
In support of its decision to include Chinese people within the class prohibited from giving evidence in favor of or against a white man, the California Supreme Court in the majority opinion stated the following about Chinese people:[9]
'The same rule which would admit them to testify, would admit them to all the equal rights of citizenship, and we might soon see them at the polls, in the jury box, upon the bench, and in our legislative halls.'
'This is not a speculation which exists in the excited and over-heated imagination of the patriot and statesman, but it is an actual and present danger.'
'The anomalous spectacle of a distinct people, living in our community, recognizing no laws of this State, except through necessity, bringing with them their prejudices and national feuds, in which they indulge in open violation of law; whose mendacity is proverbial; a race of people whom nature has marked as inferior, and who are incapable of progress or intellectual development beyond a certain point, as their history has shown; differing in language, opinions, color, and physical conformation; between whom and ourselves nature has placed an impassable difference, is now presented, and for them is claimed, not only the right to swear away the life of a citizen, but the further privilege of participating with us in administering the affairs of our Government.'
Hall Spectacle Of The Other Pdf Reader
The case had a dissenting opinion written by Justice Alexander Wells which simply stated: 'From the opinion of the Chief Justice, I most respectfully dissent.'[10]
Society Of The Spectacle Pdf
Consequences and responses[edit]
The case did not make violence against Chinese de jure legal: it was still possible to convict a white person of murdering Chinese if credible white witnesses, or other reliable evidence, could be produced. However, it de facto made it much easier for whites to get away with violence against Chinese.[2]
Ah Toy, the successful Chinese madam, closed down her brothel. While this was primarily because of the anti-prostitution laws instituted in California, it is also believed to have been motivated in part by the increased risk of harassment due to the decision in People v. Hall.
In 1860, Pun Chi, a businessman from China, wrote an impassioned appeal challenging the verdict in People v. Hall and in general challenging the negative view of Chinese in California. His appeal was translated to English by the Presbyterian minister William Speer in 1870.[11]
A state law passed in 1873 invalidated all testimony laws, and therefore overrode the decision in People v. Hall.[citation needed]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^ abcd'THE PEOPLE, RESPONDENT, v. GEORGE W. HALL, APPELLANT. Supreme Court of the State of California, 1854'. Retrieved March 20, 2016.
- ^ abcdSmith, S. E. 'Laying Some History On You: People v. Hall'. Retrieved March 20, 2016.
- ^Henry Kittredge Norton. 'The Chinese'. Retrieved March 20, 2016.
- ^California State Assembly. 'An Act concerning Crimes and Punishments'. First Session of the Legislature. Statutes of California. State of California. Ch. 99 § 14 p. 229.
No black or mulatto person, or Indian, shall be permitted to give evidence in favor of, or against, any white person. Every person who shall have one eight part or more of Negro blood shall be deemed a mulatto, and every person who shall have one half of Indian blood shall be deemed an Indian.
- ^'A short history of bordellos in San Francisco, part 2. The madams behind the whole sordid business'. Marina Times. September 1, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2016.
- ^Barmann, Jay (April 3, 2015). 'San Francisco's 16 Greatest Infamous Local Legends'. Archived from the original on March 31, 2016. Retrieved March 20, 2016.
- ^'Chinese Immigrants and the Gold Rush'. PBS. Retrieved March 20, 2016.
- ^Traynor, Michael. 'The Infamous Case of People v. Hall (1854)'. California Supreme Court Historical Society Newsletter (Spring/Summer 2017): 2.
- ^People v. Hall, 4 Cal. 399, 404-405 (October 1854).
- ^People v. Hall, 4 Cal. 399, 405 (October 1854).
- ^''We Chinese Are Viewed Like Thieves and Enemies': Pun Chi Appeals to Congress to Protect the Rights of Chinese, ca. 1860'. History Matters. Retrieved March 20, 2016.