8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

1/19

Subjectivation and Performative Politics: Butler Thinking Althusser and Foucault:Intelligibility, Agency and the Raced-Nationed-Religioned Subjects of EducationAuthor(s): Deborah YoudellSource: British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 27, No. 4, Troubling Identities:Reflections on Judith Butler's Philosophy for the Sociology of Education (Sep., 2006), pp. 511-528Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30036159 .Accessed: 24/02/2011 19:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to British Journal

of Sociology of Education.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancishttp://www.jstor.org/stable/30036159?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancishttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancishttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/30036159?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

2/19

BritishJournal of Sociology of EducationVol. 27, No. 4, September2006, pp. 511-528 RoutledgeTaylor&FrancisGroup

Subjectivationa n d performativepolitics--Butlerth ink ing Althussera n d Foucault: intelligibility,a g e n c ya n d t h e raced-nationed-rels u b j e c t s o f educat ionDeborah Youdell*University of London, UK

Judith Butler is perhaps best known for her take-up of the debate between Derrida and Austin overthe function of the performative and her subsequent suggestion that the subject be understood asperformativelyconstituted. Another important but less often noted move within Butler's consider-ation of the processes through which the subject is constituted is her thinking between Althusser'snotion of subjection and Foucault's notion of subjectivation. In this paper, I explore Butler's under-standing of processes of subjectivation, examine the relationship between subjectivation and theperformative suggested in and by Butler's work, and consider how the performativeis implicated inprocesses of subjectivation-in 'who' the subject is, or might be, subjectivated as. Finally, I examinethe usefulness of understanding the subjectivating effects of discourse for education, in particularfor educationalists concerned to make better sense of and interrupt educational inequalities. Indoing this I offer a reading of an episode of ethnographic data generated in an Australian highschool. I suggest that it is through subjectivating processes of the sort that Butler helps us to under-stand that some students are rendered subjects inside the educational endeavour, and others arerendered outside this endeavour or, indeed, outside student-hood.

IntroductionThis paperconsiders the usefulness for educationof JudithButler'sthinkingbetweenAlthusser's notion of subjection and Foucault's notion of subjectivation and thepossibilityfor discursiveagencyandperformativepolitics that this thinking opens up.*Senior Lecturer in Sociology of Education, School of Educational Foundations and PolicyStudies, Institute of Education, University of London, 20 Bedford Way, London WC 1H 0AL, UK.Email: d.youdell@ioe.ac.ukISSN 0142-5692 (print)/ISSN 1465-3346 (online)/06/040511-18C 2006 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/01425690600803160

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

3/19

512 D. YoudellWhile concernedwith the broadutilityof these conceptual tools, the paperillustratestheir usefulness by deploying them to analyse the processes of raced-nationed-religioned subjectivationat a 'MulticulturalDay' event in a Sydney high school. Indoing this, the paperproceeds from a series of what might be termed 'left' or 'critical'concerns centred around the differentiatingand exclusionary effects of schooling,and, with a focus here on the subjectivationof 'Arabic'students, on the operationsofrace,racismandWhiteness.These mayseem unlikelypoints of departurefora paperoffered as apost-structuralpiece. But as Foucault's (1988a) discussion in 'CriticalTheory/IntellectualHistory'points out, 'left' thinkershave for some time been looking for tools forunderstandingand strategies for interrupting material inequality through an engagement withlanguage;a decentredsubject;and an unstable truth. Rather than askingwhat struc-tures and institutions (economic, social, or linguistic) produce material inequality,this move reconfiguresthis concern and asks how the self comes into being, what thecosts of the self might be, and how the self might be made againdifferently.A central project has been developing tools and strategies for interrogatingthe'nature of the present' (Foucault, 1988a, p. 36), an interrogationthat seeks to exposethe relationship between 'the subject, truth, and the constitution of experience'(Foucault, 1988b, p. 48). These efforts are wholly political in that they focus uponthose aspects of the present that Foucault finds 'intolerable'. Foucault seeks todevelop understandingsof how the presentis made, and so how it might be unmade,by 'followinglines of fragilityin the present',trajectoriesthat mightallow us to 'graspwhy and how that-which-ismight no longer be that-which-is' (1988a, p. 37). Butlertakes this further and posits a performativepolitics in which she imagines discoursestakingon new meaningsand circulatingin contexts fromwhich theyhave been barredor in which they have been renderedunintelligible, as performativesubjectsengageadeconstructive politics that intervenes and unsettles hegemonic meanings (Butler,1997a).In exploringthese conceptual tools and putting them to use, the paper focuses onthe subjectivationof a group of Lebanese and Turkishyoung. The analysissuggestsa series of political, educational, popular and (sub)culturaldiscourses that circulatein this school setting and beyond, and which provide the discursive terrainon andthroughwhich these students are subjectivated.Specifically,the paper exploreshowLebanese and Turkish students (collectively called 'Arabic' in this setting) aresubjectivatedin ways that render apparentlyincommensurable constitutions of thegood-Arabic-student-subjectand the bad-Arabic-subjectthrough the citation andinscription of an Orientalism (Said, 2003) reinvigoratedby post-9/11 anti-Islamicdiscourse (Lipman, 2004). This, then, is the intolerablepresentI want to interrogate.The paper also considers how these students render themselves through the possibil-ities for practices of self, or discursive agency, that subjectivationbrings. This is aconsideration that demonstrates the capacity of Butler's performative politics tomaintain in view simultaneously a sense of the context of constraint in which theseperformatively constituted subjects are effected and the potential for these subjects toact and to act with intent.

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

4/19

Subjectivation and performativepolitics 513

MethodologyMy experiencesof 'MulticulturalDay' in anAustralianhigh school aresituatedin theconduct of a school ethnographyduring 2001. There has been significant debateabout the implications, and even the possibility, of undertaking ethnographyin apost-structuralor Foucauldianframe. Critical,interpretiveand feminist traditionsinschool (and other) ethnographyhave long emphasized the multiplicityof meaningsand perspectivesthat exist within contexts; the complexities of and tensions withinthe roles and status'of the researcherand the researched,as well as relations betweenthem; and the potential and limits of reflexivity(see, for instance, Carr & Kemmis,1986; Lather, 1991; Stanley & Wise, 1993; Skeggs, 1994; Delamont & Atkinson,1995; Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995). These methodological insights have beenusefully supplemented and, indeed, scrutinizedin the light of post-structuralideasand adaptationsof qualitative methodology informedby these ideas (see, for exam-ple, Miller, 1997; Prior, 1997; Silverman, 1997; Stronach & MacLure, 1997;Britzman, 2000; Lather, 2000; McCoy, 2000; St Pierre, 2000; Harwood, 2001;Alvesson, 2002; Maclure, 2003).In doing ethnographyin school framed by a concern to interrogatethe subjecti-vating effects of an intolerable present, I make use of the usual methods of inter-view, observation, collection of artefacts and texts. I am not, however, asking theresearched to explicate their understanding of the context and relations within it.Rather, I am looking for moments in which subjects are constituted and in whichconstituted subjects act. I am looking for discourses and their subjectivatingeffects.I ask myself what discourses might be circulating inside and/or across schoolcontexts, how these are being deployed, what their effects might be. While at timesit seems that discourses and their effects are clearly evident, more often it seemsthat these are subtle and oblique, needing to be teased out, to be deconstructed.Ultimately, I want to know whether thinking in terms of the subjectivatingeffectsof discourse can help me to understand how students are made within particularconstraintsand how these constraintsmight be breached. This is not the collectionof 'real' or 'actual' discourses, but is wholly constrained by my own discursiverepertoire-the discourse that I see and name-and my capacityto representthese.I am, then, absolutely entangled in the data I generate and the representationsIproduce.These dataareinevitablysimulacra(Baudrillard,1994) of my own creation,copieswithout originalthat cannot reflect any 'real'moment in a field that is itself inacces-sible without the mediatingdiscursive framesthat fill it with meaning. In this way theethnographic data offered bear a heavy interpretiveburden. I am not seeking todescribe the nuances of the context and tease out what is happening within it. Rather,I am seeking to construct compelling representations of moments inside school inorder to untangle the discursive frames that guide meaning and render subjects withinit. My research process is unavoidably implicated in the very subjectivating processesabout which it speaks. Yet these data are recognizable. They do not contain, exposeor reflect any universal truth, but these petite narratives do resonate.

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

5/19

514 D. YoudellGiven the focus on subjectivationin this paper, the place of the subject deservessome further consideration here. Serious attention is increasinglybeing paid to the

problematic relationship between the 'knowing' subjects implicit to empiricalresearch and the 'troubled' subjects of post-structural writing (see, once again,Britzman, 2000; Lather, 2000; St Pierre,2000). Yet there is no easy solution. Under-standing the researchingand researchedsubject to be perpetuallybut provisionallyconstituted through discourse means that researchpractice is wholly implicated inprocesses of ongoing subjectivation(of both the researcherand the researched)evenas these subjectivitiesform the objects of study. Replacing sovereign agencywith thenotion of discursive agency (Butler, 1997a)-which I will explore in some detaillater-goes some way to illuminateand relieve these tensions, offeringan ethnogra-phy that retains agency and intent in the context of discursive constraint withoutimplicitlycastingthis subjecta sovereign.

Understanding the subjects who inhabit schools and school ethnographyin thisway suggests that the discourses deployed by students and teachers (and researcher)may be both intentional and unintentional: discourses intentionally deployed mayescape or exceed the intent of the subjectwho speaks or acts, and/or the subjectmayunwittingly deploy discourses whose historicities and/or intersections assert unantic-ipated meanings. Indeed, discursivepracticesmay entail the deployment of complexcombinationsof intentionaland unintentional discourses and their discursive effects.Taking up Butler'snotion of discursiveagency,this analysisassumesmultipledegreesof both intent andunderstandingamong subjectsin terms of the embedded meaningsand effectsof discourses.On the one hand, it suggeststhat subjectsdo not necessarilyregurgitate discourse unwittingly. On the other hand, however, it suggests thatdiscourses are not necessarilycited knowinglyand that they are not necessarilyknownexplicitly to the subject and/or audience. As such, subjects need not be self-consciously alert to the discourses deployedin orderfor their familiarand embeddedmeanings to be inscribed. Furthermore, the analysis suggests, again after Butler(1997a), that discourses do not need to be explicitly cited in order to be deployed.Rather, multiple discourses are referenced through the meanings, associations andomissions embedded in the historicityof apparentlysimpleandbenign utterances andbodily practices.As I have explored elsewhere (Youdell, 2005), these discussions render indeter-minable the question of whetherI should offer an account of myselfas the researcher.The risk of slipping into an inadvertent essentialism tempts me to avoid such anaccount; however, the risk of assuming a disembodied authorial authority by notdoing so seems much greater.Given the centralityof visual economies to prevailingdiscourses of gender and race (see Jacobson, 1998; Seshadri-Crooks,2000), my ownlocation within these discourses (woman, White) is undoubtedly'visible' to and takenas immutableby the students involved in my research. Yet my social class, sexuality,subculturaland agelocations areperhapsless singularor 'obvious'and, therefore,lesstightly constrained. For instance, in the context of prevailing hetero-normativediscourse, it is likely that students locate (constitute) me as heterosexual-theunspoken Same of the heterosexual/homosexual Same/Otherbinary-as long as an

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

6/19

Subjectivationandperformativepolitics 515alternativesexualityis not asserted. And as a British('English')woman doing schoolethnography in Australia, nationality was an explicit axis of my subjectivation:students who had speculated privatelythat I might be 'very posh' or 'fromEngland'(but not both) were reassuredby my Englishness (in ways that posh-ness may nothave been reassuringin this low-income locale), and at the same time this Englishnesswas constitutiveof my position as an outsider whose lack of knowledgeof the contextwas acceptableand whose interest in it was comprehensible(or just about).

Performativesubjects,subjectivation,performativepoliticsAs my discussion so farhas indicated, this paper is concerned with two interrelatedthreads-understanding (some of) the intolerable effects of education as well as thecontribution that can be made to this by Judith Butler's work on the subject, thesubject'spotentialto actwillfully,andpolitics . For me, it is in Butler's returnto Alth-usser via Foucault that an understandingof subjection/subjectivation,agency, andthe political is most usefully developed (Butler, 1997a, b, 2004).JudithButlerbegins by adopting Foucault's notion of discourse as productiveanduses this alongsidethe notion of the performativeto consider the productionof sexedand gendered subjects (Butler, 1990, 1993). This is not the performativity,afterLyotard, of the marketized and corporatizededucation workplacethat Stephen Ball(2003) writes about. Rather, this performativeis borrowed from a debate betweenDerrida(1988) and Austin (1962) concerningthe natureof languageand its relation-ship to the world in which a performativeis: 'that discursivepracticethat enacts orproduces that which it names' (Butler, 1993, p. 13). Butlersuggests that:

Discursiveperformativityappearsto producethatwhichit names,to enact its own refer-ent,to name and to do, to name and to make. ... [g]enerallyspeaking,aperformativefunc-tions to producethat which it declares.(Butler,1993, p. 107)Butler argues that the subject must be performatively constituted in order to makesense as a subject. While these subjects appear, at least at the level of the everyday orcommonsense, to precede their designation, this apparently pre-existing subject is anartefactof its performativeconstitution.A keycontributionmade to debates concern-ing the function of the performativeis Derrida's (1988) assertion that any performa-tive is open to misfire and so might fail or doing something unintended orunexpected. And Foucault's (1990a) account of discourse insists that no discourseisguaranteed-while particulardiscourses prevail in some contexts and endure overtime, the potential for the meaningsof these to shift and/or for subordinatediscoursesto unsettle these remains.

Developing this notion of the performatively constituted subject, Butler (1997a, b,2004) takes up Althusser's notion of subjection and Foucault's notion of subjectiva-tion to elaborate a nuanced understanding of production and constraint.

For Althusser (1971), 'subjection' is achieved through the action of 'ideologicalState apparatuses' (p. 136). These ideological State apparatuses are understood asrepresentations of ideas, outlooks and beliefs that are imaginary or 'distortions' of a

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

7/19

516 D. Youdellscientificallyaccessible 'real' (p. 153) (in Althusser's terms, the 'real' conditions ofproduction and consumption). As these ideas are translatedinto actions and socialpracticesand come to be embedded in social ritual,ideology is given a material exist-ence that is at once a distortion and implicated in the production of this distortion.These ideological state apparatusare both at stakein and the site of struggle,with theschool identified as a key site.For Althusser, ideology, and ideological State apparatuses,are inextricablylinkedwith the subject (Althusser, 1971). The subject, Althusser argues, is constituted byideology that constitutes the individual as a subject. The subject is hailed as anindividual,even as she/he is constituted a subject.This transformationof the individ-ual into a subject,and the 'obviousness'of subjecthood,arekeyfunctions of ideology.

Recognition is centralto these processes. The subject recognizesherself/himselfasshe/he is hailed. Furthermore,she/he recognizes herself/himselfreflected in/by theSubject-Althusser's 'Subjectpar excellence'(1971, p. 167; original emphasis) whooccupies the centre of ideology-by whom/on whose behalfthe subjectis hailed. Thisis Althusser's 'mirror-recognition'(1971, p. 168). It is throughthis recognition thatthe subjectis 'recruited'-subjecthood is freelytaken and subjectionis freely acceptedby the good subject. In Althusser's neo-marxist Science this recognition is, in fact, amis-recognition-the subject is not a reflection of the Subject, but subjectto theSubject: 'thereareno subjectsexceptby andfor theirsubjection'(1971, p. 169; originalemphasis).This recognition of the hail and transformationof the individual into a subject issimultaneous and inseparable.In Althusser's account there is no 'before' subjectionwhen the subject was an individual-as Althusser asserts, 'individuals are always-alreadysubjects' (1971, p. 164). Nevertheless, just as ideology suggests real knowl-edge free fromdistortion,the individual/subjectbinarydoes seem to retain an implicitsense of an individual free from subjection.Freedom, albeit constrained,is suggestedagain by the idea that the subjecthood is freely taken up, even as this is a freedomtaken insidesubjection.Althusserarguesthe intrinsicambiguityof the subject:

In the ordinary use of the term, subject in fact means: (1) a free subjectivity, a centre ofinitiatives, author of and responsible for its actions; (2) a subjected being, who submits toa higher authority, and is therefore stripped of all freedom except that of freely acceptinghis [sic] submission. This last note gives us the meaning of this ambiguity, which is merelya reflection of the effect which produces it: the individual is interpellatedas a (free) subjectin orderthat he shall submitfreelyto the commandmentsof theSubject,i.e. in orderthat he shall(freely) accepthis subjection,i.e. in order that he shall make the gestures and actions of hissubjection 'all by himself. (1971, p. 169; original emphasis)

A foreshadowingof Foucault's notion of the individual constituted in discourses andthrough the technologies of disciplinarypower (Foucault, 1990a, 1991) or throughpractices of the self (Foucault, 1990b, 1992) is evident in Althusser's account ofideology and subjection. I am provokedto wonder, much as JudithButlerhas, whatwould 'happen'ifI were to think of ideologies (aswell as the 'undistortedtruth'), andideological State apparatuses,and the subjection that ideological State apparatuseseffect, as discursive,as performative.

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

8/19

Subjectivationand performativepolitics 517According to Foucault, the person is subjectivated-she/he is at once rendered asubject and subjected to relations of power through discourse. That is, productivepowerconstitutes and constrains,but does not determine, the subjectswith whom itis concerned. Yet while Foucault indicates a concern with the subjectat the centre ofhis work, he says relativelylittle directlyabout the notions of subjection and subjec-tivation.Foucault says of the relation between productive power and the subject, and the

subject's location in productivepower:This form of powerappliesitself to immediateeverydaylifewhichcategorizesthe individ-ual, markshim [sic] by his ownindividuality,attacheshimto his own identity,imposesalaw of truthon himwhich he mustrecognizeandwhichothershave to recognizein him.It is a form of powerwhich makes individualssubjects.There are two meaningsof thewordsubject:subjectto someone else by controland dependence,and tied to his ownidentity by a consciousself-knowledge.Both meaningssuggesta form of powerwhichsubjugatesand makessubjectto. (1982, p. 212)

In a similarvein, in 'CriticalTheory/IntellectualHistory', Foucault suggests that:If I tell the truth aboutmyself,as I am doingnow, it is in partthatI am constitutedas asubjectacrossa numberof powerrelationswhichareexertedover me and whichI exertoverothers.(1988a,p. 39)

Here the echoes of Althusser's model of subjection resonates through Foucault'sthinkingabout the subject, despite the very cleardivergenceof these thinkersin rela-tion to the status of science, knowledge,Truth and so on.In Foucault's final interview he offers a direct account of his understanding ofsubjectiv(iz)ation.He says:I willcallsubjectivizationtheprocedurebywhichone obtainsthe constitutionof a subject,or moreprecisely,of asubjectivitywhich is of courseonlyone of the givenpossibilitiesoforganizationof a self-consciousness.(Foucault,1988c,p. 253)

While the operationsand constraintsof productivepowerremainevident,herepowerrelations appearin the background,with the self, and the possibility of (contingent)self-knowledgeand volition foregrounded.This is more clearlystatedby Foucault in'An Aesthetic of Existence', when he says of the subject:the subjectis constitutedthroughpracticesof subjection,or, in a moreautonomousway,throughpracticesof liberation,or liberty,as in Antiquity,on the basis, of course,of anumberofrules,styles,inventionsto be foundin the culturalenvironment.(1988b,p. 51)Here, the self-conscious practices of the subject, and her/his involvement in her/hisown constitution, are indicated as (potentially) 'practices of liberation' at the sametime as the constrainedcontext in which this subjectacts is indicatedby 'practicesofsubjection'.The subject acts, but she/he acts within/atthe limits of subjection.Perhaps more significantly, processes of subjection/subjectivationare demon-strated through Foucault's specific contextual studies in which the subject is a keyfield of concern at the same time as the subject as a field of concern is interrogated.In particular, Discipline and Punish (Foucault, 1991) and History of Sexuality Volume

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

9/19

518 D. Youdell1 (Foucault, 1990a) show how the subject is subjectedto relations of power as she/he is individualized,categorized,classified, hierarchized,normalized, surveilledandprovokedto self-surveillance.These aretechnologies of subjectionbroughtinto playwithin institutions. This is not because such institutions are ideological Stateapparatusesas in Althusser's account, but because institutions improvise, cite andcirculate discursive frames and coterminous technologies that render subjects inrelations of power. As Althussernotes the simultaneityof subjectionand the makingof a 'free' subject, so Foucault notes the non-necessary effects of discourse and thedisciplinary technologies it makes meaningful and the persistence possibility ofresistanceintrinsic to productive power (Foucault, 1990a). It is to the potentialitiesof being otherwise or, to adapt a construction of Foucault's, that-which-is-not, thatFoucault's Uses of Pleasure(1992) and Care of the Self (1990b) turn. Here theaesthetics, self-care, the technologies of self, allude to the possibilities of beingotherwise, not through lessons of/from resistance but from the self-conscious prac-tices of subjects, even if these subjects come into being through the condition ofsubjection, or subjectivation.

Consideringthese Althusserian and Foucauldian accounts of subjectiontogether,Butlerasserts that:'subjectivation'... denotesboth thebecomingof thesubjectandtheprocessof subjec-tion-one inhabits the figure of autonomy only by becoming subjected to a power, asubjectionwhichimpliesaradicaldependency.[...] Subjectionis, literally,themakingofa subject,the principleof regulationaccordingto which a subjectis formulatedorproduced.Suchsubjectionis akindofpowerthatnotonlyunilaterallyactsonagivenindi-vidual as a form of domination, but also activates or forms the subject. Hence, subjectionis neither simply the domination of a subject nor its production, but designates a certainkind of restriction in production. (Butler, 1997b, pp. 83-84; original emphasis)

Likewise:It is important to remember at least two caveats on subjection and regulation derived fromFoucaultian scholarship: (1) regulatory power not only acts upon an preexisting subjectbut also shapes and forms that subject; moreover, every juridical form of power has itsproductive effect; and (2) to become subject to a regulation is also to be brought into beingas a subject precisely through being regulated. (Butler, 2004, p. 41)

Butler develops these ideas to detail how subjectivationas an effect of discourseand, more specifically, the performativeoffers political potential. She engages withAlthusser'sunderstandingof interpellation(Althusser, 1971)-the turn to the hail ofauthority-to think about how the hail might be understood as a performativeandhow the performativelyconstitutedsubjectsmight engagein the sorts of insurrection-ary acts of which Foucault speaks. She suggests that while the subject needs to benamed in ways that make sense in discourse in order to be 'recognizable'(Butler,1997a, p. 5; original emphasis), by being subjectivatedthe subject can subjectivateanother. Butler writes:

the one who names, who works within language to find a name for another, is presumedto be already named, positioned within language as one who is already subject to thefounding or inaugurating address. This suggests that such a subject in language is

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

10/19

Subjectivationandperformativepolitics 519positionedas both addressedand addressing,and that the very possibilityof naminganotherrequiresthat one first be named. The subjectof speechwho is namedbecomes,potentially,one who mightwell name anotherin time. (1997a,p. 29)

Butler calls the capacity to name and so constitute that results from subjectivation'discursiveagency' (Butler, 1997a, p. 127). By thinking of agency as discursive-asbeing the productof being inauguratedin andby discourse and so able to join its cita-tional chains-Butler moves past an understandingof intent and agency that is thepropertyof an apriori,rational,self-knowingsubject,but retainsa subjectwho can actwith intent. Discourse and its effects ultimately exceed the intent or free will of anagent,but, like Foucault'spracticesof self, the performativelyconstitutedsubjectcanstill deploy discursiveperformativesthat have the potential to be constitutive.Butlersuggests that as a politics these practicesinvolve:

decontextualizingandrecontextualizing... termsthroughradicalacts of publicmisappro-priationsuchthat the conventionalrelationbetween[interpellationandmeaning]mightbecome tenuous and even brokenover time. (Butler,1997a,p. 100)This 'performativepolitics' (Butler, 1997a, p. 127) offers significant promise for apost-structural politics of change. Through such practices, Butler insists, thesedimented meanings of enduring and prevailingdiscoursesmight be unsettled andreinscribed;subordinate,disavowed or silenced discoursesmight be deployedin, andmade meaningful in, contexts from which they have been barred;and challenges toprevailingconstitutions of subjects might be deployed self-consciously through thediscursive practices of subjects who are themselves subjectivated. Butler sets out,then, a possible method for Foucault's struggles againstsubjection.1These ideas have massive implications for education. With this understandingofsubjectivation,the school student is so because he/she is designatedas such. Indeed,while these designations appearto describepre-existingsubjects, understandingthesedesignations as performativereveals that it is theveryactof designationthat constitutesthesesubjectsas if they were alreadystudents. Simultaneously, the practices of thesediscursiveagents amount to a politics that insists nobody is necessarily anything,andwhat it means to be a teacher, a student, a learnermight be opened up to radicalrethinking.The political challenge,then, is to interceptthese subjectivatingprocessesin order to constitute students again differently.Butler's performative politics offertools for thinking how this might be done. These are understandingsthat I put towork in the analysisof school data that follows.

Subjectivating practices at 'MulticulturalDay'Multicultural Day, Plains High, Sydney, Australia, December 2001It is an extremelyhot, sticky day-even for Sydney'souter-westat the top of summer.Set up around Plains High's outside spaces there are stalls, dance and dramaevents,sportsactivities,and a duckingpool (offeringup the male PE teachersfor a dunking).Studentsand theirfamilyandguestsmillaround,visitingstalls,socializingandwatchingperformances.

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

11/19

520 D. YoudellThe Deputy Principal and a team of 4 male teachers, all White Australians aged around40, patrol the school grounds, communicating with each other on walkie-talkies. I-aWhite English woman invited to experience an 'Australian Multicultural Day' by some ofthe students who have been participatingin my research-watch the Deputy Principal andhis team watching the students and their guests as I wander around the school groundsfrom one event site to another.As well as being a multicultural 'celebration', this is also a school fund-raiser and a key partof this is the stalls provided by students, parents, family and friends. These stalls are set upunder a covered walkway that surrounds 3 sides of the school's main quad. These havehand-written A3 size signs: 'InternationalHotdogs';'InternationalFood'; 'ItalianFood'; 'HairBraiding' and 'Hair braidingstarted in Africa but is now populararound the world'; 'FlowerLais'; 'Makeyour ownbeads'; 'PhilipinoFood'; 'GermanCafe'; 'ArabicFood' and 'Kebabs'.White chalk on the fascia board above the Arabic Food stall reads 'Lebanon'and 'LebsRule'. 'LebsRule' has been crossed out, but not erased, and 'TurksRule' chalked next to it.A half moon has also been drawn there.The Arabic Food stall is constantly surrounded by a press of students, as well as guests andteachers, who wait for kebab rolls or chat with friends. The stall staff-a group of 14 and15 year old students and a small number of slightly older young men and women-workhardto keep up with demand. The atmosphere around the stall is buzzing, and it continuesto trade long after the other stalls have sold-out.The Deputy Principal, or a member of his walkie-talkie team, regularlystands in the quadin front of the Arabic Food stall watching.Around the middle of the afternoon I see the Deputy Principal standing with two Arabicboys (aged roughly 16-18) who have been hanging out at the Arabic Food stall on a BMXbike. The Deputy Principal tells the boys to 'leave the school premises immediately'. Onemotions towards a students on the stall and replies 'you told him to invite his family andfriends, well I'm his friend so I can be here'. The Deputy Principal responds 'No, we saywho can be here, now please leave'.A while later, the Deputy Principal ejects another Arabic boy, also on a BMX, who hasspent the afternoon at the stall. The Deputy Principal says to him 'You were going to lightup on the premises-now leave'. The boy cups an unlit cigarette in his hand. One of thestudents from the stall asks: 'Sir, what if I personally vouch for him?'. The Deputy Princi-pal does not respond to this offer and directs the boy away. The Deputy Principal watchesme watching.Later in the afternoon I walk past the carparkbehind the quad and see a police van parkedthere. The Deputy Principal stands nearby with one of his walkie-talkie team and says tohim 'the thing they have to realize is that we decide who comes onto the premises'. Hiscolleague replies 'they don't realize that'. (Fieldnotes)

Criticalmulticulturalism,critical anti-racismand, more recently, critical race theoryin education offer significantcriticisms of the sort of pluralistmulticulturalismthatappearsto frame MulticulturalDay at PlainsHigh. These criticalaccounts arguethatpluralist(as opposed to political or critical)multiculturalismpresents cultural differ-ence as naturally occurring and neutral, and race/ethnic harmony (tolerance) asfollowing on from a recognition and celebration of these differences. This version ofmulticulturalism is criticized for ignoring the persistent (discursive) constitution ofrace/ethnicity as axes for differentiation and stratification, erasing historical and

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

12/19

Subjectivation and performativepolitics 521contemporaryexploitationsand subjugations,and failingto note, let alone challenge,the enduring supremacyof the majorityrace/ethnicity.There is not scope within thispaperto explorethese criticismsas fully as might be justified,but see Gilroy (1986),Gillborn (2004), Ladsen-Billings (2004), McCoy (2000) and Rizvi (1997) forexcellent accounts.

Workin these areas has also extended significantlyour understandingsof race andracism. In particular,critical analyses of Whiteness and the mechanisms wherebyWhite supremacy(Gillborn, 2005) or White hegemony (Youdell, 2003) aresecured,White Noise becomes overwhelming(McCoy, 2000) and Whiteness is reproducedasat once normative and invisible (Leonardo, 2004), offer extremelyfruitful tools forinterrogatingthe discourses that circulate in school settings and the subjectivatingeffects that these discoursemighthave. Also particularlyuseful for the analysisofferedhere are Lipman's (2004) account of how anti-Islamic discourses are pervadingeducational discourse and settings 'post-9/11' and McCoy's (2000) reminder of thesense of 'epidemic' and being 'out-of-control' that infuses official and populardiscourses (including pluralistmulticulturalism)and so frames the terms in whichdifferencemight be intelligible.The data that I produce and analysehere offera series of moments from 'Multicul-tural Day' at Plains High. These readings are tentative and inevitably incomplete.They are also contentious and unsettling.The 'tokenism' of one-day-onlyethnic foodand craft stalls, wearing of traditionaldress, and ethnic music and dance that formthe focus of many such days of 'celebration'is evident (Solomos &Back, 1996). Andthe inclusion of the traditional 'Aussie' dunking pool and cricket match under-scores the refusal of Whiteness and its cultural forms to be shifted fromthe centre foreven this token day. This, then, seems to be a very typical example of a (pluralist)'MulticulturalDay'. Also evident, and the focus of this analysis,arestrugglesovertheplace and meaning of the 'Lebanese', 'Turkish' and 'Arabic' subject within thiscontemporaryAustralianhigh school.Edward Said's works Orientalism (2003) and RepresentingIslam (1992) usefullyidentifythe peculiarityof the 'Orient' and the 'Oriental',and laterIslam, in the west-ern imagination. For Said, the problematic is the gap between how the Orient, theOriental, Islam, and the 'Arab'actuallyare, and how these are envisioned and repre-sented in western ideas and media. While Said's work stresses heterogeneity andchange, what is at stake for him is the distance between the real and the imagined.Taking a Foucauldian approach to these ideas, in particular approaching themthroughButler'sconceptions of performativityand subjectivation,radicallyunsettlesthis real/imagineddivide. It does this by underscoringthe discursive construction ofthis realand, therefore,exposing Orientalism(s)as constitutive of subjects,as perfor-mative, as subjectivating. Thinking about Orientalism as discourses steeped in histo-ricity and sedimented meaning helps to expose how the scientific rationale of colonialnorth Africa; the religious rationale of Crusades in the near and middle east; and theEmpire's deployment of these in the construction of the Orient as the Occident'sexotic Other and the Oriental/Arab as in the proper service of his (sic) colonial master,all suffuse contemporary western discourses of the Orient and of Islam. The 'Savage

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

13/19

522 D. YoudellArab' once in need of taming and Christianizingcomes, in contemporarydiscourse,to be in need of westernizing, 'democratizing'.And these are needs heightened toepidemic levels in post-9/11 discourses of 'terror'. As Butler (1997a) notes inExcitableSpeech,such discoursesdo not need to be made explicitor spokento be citedand to have performativeforce. On the contrary,discourses that go unspoken, thatare silent or silenced, remain constitutive. Furthermore,Butler's suggests that thesubjectivated subject acts her/his place in the discourses through which she/he hasbeen rendered intelligible, through which subjecthood, albeit subjectivated andsubjugated,is effected. In a discursive framein which Whiteness (synonymous withwestern-ness) is normative and these enduring(but mobile) discourses of the Orient/Islam continue to be cited, the White/Anglo/Aussieand the Arabact their respectiveplace in discourse (but not necessarilyalways). And in a discursive frame of schoolauthorityin which a teacher/studentbinaryis afundamentalsubjectivatingdivide, theteacherandthe student act theirrespectiveplace in discourse (but, again,not always).These conceptual tools, then, help us to identify these discourses as they aredeployed,resisted,recuperatedanddeployedagainin the eventsof MulticulturalDay.This is not an exhaustive account of the discourses that frame this setting (such anaccount is surely impossible). Further discourses are also clearlyat play, intersectingthe prevailingdiscoursesof the Orient/Arabthat I have alreadysketched;for instance,adult andyouthheterosexual-masculinities,street/youthsubculture,national andreli-gious pride.This partialaccount, then, is offered as fragmentsof a porous networkofdiscourses that areparticularlysignificantto the subjectivationsI am exploringhere.

In the school's acceptanceof the Arabic students' donation of an Arabic Food stall,the school constitutes 'Arabic' as a legitimateaxis of minorityculturaldifference andsubjectivatesthe Arabic subject as a good student. And in donating the stall andparticipatingin Multicultural Day, this good-Arabic-student-subjecttakes up thissubjecthood.In doing this, just as the school cedes the good-Arabic-student-subject,so this subjectcedes the authorityof the school institutionby which she/he is subjec-tivated. And the students gain the rights of the student (to invite guests) but alsosubjectionto teacherauthority (to have theirguests ejected).The stall, the food it sells, and so the students and otherswho staff it, are named(by the students?) 'Arabic'.This collective performative interpellationis particular-ized by the furtherperformativenames 'Lebs' and 'Turks'. And nationalism meetscompetitive team sports (or in another discourse something more sinister) in thechalked proclamation (performative?)'Lebs Rule' and 'Turks Rule'. The crossingout, without erasure,of 'Lebs Rule' (by the author of 'TurksRule'?)does not lessenthe constitutiveeffect of this textual practice.That the crossingout, the replacementof one 'ruling' nationalitywith another, is left for public displaycontinues to cite theclaim as well as the erasure and the overthrowthat calls up. It seems that this is not abattle but a playfulskirmish-Lebanese and Turkish students have organizedand arestaffingthe 'Arabic Food' stall together under that collective given and taken name:'Arab'.Indeed, there is a collectivityevident in these claims. Ratherthan erasingeachothers' self-constituting performatives,then, each claim in this apparentcontest actsto render the other intelligible (Butler, 2004), even if this is also a subjectivation.

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

14/19

Subjectivationandperformativepolitics 523In a discursiveframe of normativeWhiteness, the claim that Lebs or Turks rulecannot have performativeforce. The subjectivatingpracticesof the school rendertheArabic subject (the Leb or the Turk), but she/he remains (reviled?)'ethnic'2 in thiscontext-in the school and the wider social context of contemporaryAustralia,Lebsand Turks certainlydo not rule. Yet this practiceof self, made possible through the

prior subjectivationof these raced-nationed-regionalizedsubjects, is simultaneouslyfelicitous. That is, Lebs and Turks may not rule, but the statement is not empty.Insteadit silentlycallsup once againthe threat of the savageArabOther.Whatmightbe read as (invisibly) written on the fascia board is 'Arabs Rule'. And the crescentmoon of Islam drawnalongside these claims interpellatescollective regionalidentityin religiousterms-these good-Arabic-student-subjectsalso silently constitute them-selves Islamic.And the constitution 'Islamic'alongside a proclamationof rulingcallsup that deepest of post-9/11 western/Whitefantasies-that Islam aims to Rule. Andthe spectre of 9/11, anti-western 'terror'silently rises. In this discursiveframe, theLebs and Turks (Arabsand Islamist) do not rule, but they would. And so these oncegood-Arabic-student-subjectsare potentially subjectivated(throughthe coalescenceof performativepracticesas externalas the US media and as intimateas theirown) asIslamic-Fundamentalistand even potential terroristthreats-and in urgentand abso-lute need of surveillence. And as the Arab/Islamistthreatens to burst out of theconfines of service andstudenthood, this is not the surveillanceof the panopticon,buta very immediate and visible coercive surveillance-the White, male, senior teacherstands in the quad in front of the stall, walkie-talkiein hand.

This, then, is a moment in which the 'Arabic' students in the school gain publicrecognition as legitimate, and this subjectivation opens up the opportunityfor self-constitution. But, given the discursive terrain of this subjectivationand practices ofself, this self-constitution is one that threatens to slide back into injury and theconstraintof the SavageArab/Islamistthreat.It appearsfrom this reading that it is the students' practices that have suggestedconfrontation, a possible risk or danger-the wider discourse of Arabic threat isimplicit in the claim that Lebs/Turks rule. Yet it is likelythat the discourse of Islamic/Arabic threat would permeate this context at this moment without these chalkedclaims, that it would be 'on the lips' of White teachers-it was alreadyone of thediscourses of the Other that effect Whiteness and its normativity long before 9/11happened. Again, Said'sreadingof the relation between the Occident and the Orient,inflected with a notion of discourse and the performative,is pertinent. These long-established discourses echo in contemporarycontexts without ever being spoken.Indeed, perhapsthe absence of the need to explicitlycite a discoursein order for it tobe cited goes to its endurance and performativeforce. But the appearancethat thisdiscourse was deployed by the students and only respondedto by the school renders'legitimate' the teachers' apparent diagnosis of cultural discontent or threat andmakes their move to police this threat not a raced and racist subjectivationbut anecessary response. This is not to say that the squad of senior teachers armed withwalkie-talkies is a response to this constitutive chalked claim-the establishment ofthis squad and the procurementof walkie-talkiesto facilitate the best governmentof

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

15/19

524 D. Youdellthis population surely dates back to the students volunteering to mount the kebabstall, their arrivalin the suburb,the school, the White AustraliaPolicy, the refusal ofOrientals at nineteenth-centurycolonial ports?Butler's theoreticaltools, then, enable us to see how the teacherssubjectivatethesestudents as particularraced-nationed-religioned subjects, with the possibilities fordiscursive agency and the constraints of the discursive terms of subjection that thisentails.While the pronouncement 'Lebs/TurksRule' might be a performativeconsti-tution of self as Arab not normally permittedin school, practicingthese technologiesof self simultaneously evokes the very discourses of epidemic difference and threatthroughwhich a school andwidersocietyinfusedbyWhitenesssubjectivatesthe ArabOther. As Butler'swork suggests they will, these students act their place in this webof discourses.And the school subjectivatesthese (no longer good) students in theseterms and 'responds' accordingly-by keeping vigilant watch at the MulticulturalDays most popularstall (and no doubt biggest fund-raiser)and by ejecting from thepremises any Leb/Turk/Arabyouth who fails to fulfil the schools requirementsof the'good ethnic'. Indeed, the Arab as a good-student-subject mightbe outside prevailingintelligibilityafter all.The notion of subjectivationalso allows us to see how these teachers (and poten-tially their colleagues inside and beyond this school) are constituted by prevailingdiscourses of education, professionalism,the teacher and teacher authority(perhapsno longer the good teacher) as well as wider discourses-particularly pressing here,hetero-masculinityand Whiteness. And, within this discursiveframe, they are alsoconstituted by their own practices of self: White supremacy-masculine authority/entitlementis inscribedthroughtheir surveillantpracticeseven as it also subjectivatesthese men racist and vulnerable (and so perhaps not masculine at all). The cost ofbeing made subjecthere is not borne by the Lebanese/Turkish/Arabicsubjectalone.Indeed, by understandingthese discursivepracticesas subjectivatingwe can begin toconsider how these constitutions and their framing discourses might effect otherstudents and subjectsmore broadly.A series of tensions seem to endure through these subjectivations. First, thestudents are good students who contribute (very well) to the school's fund-raisingeffort. They are also good 'ethnic' students who participatein MulticulturalDay bydisplaying their 'difference'. But at the same time they are 'bad' students, or badsubjects:their ethnic(ized) subculturaldisplay-Islamic crescents, Lebs/Turks Ruleproclamations and BMX bikes-are all well outside the good student-subject.Second, this ethnic(ized) subcultureis entangledwith a further axis of tension in thesubjectivationof these students-the discourseof the Islamic threatpresseshere andoverwhelms the possibility of the good student-in this discursive frame the Arab/Islamist is a bad subject. Finally, multiculturalpluralism (as enacted by Multicul-tural Day) also sits in tension with the Islamist threat and the policing of this. Andyet, in post-9/11 western contexts, perhaps this pluralism and policing arereconciled in the subjectivationof the good teacher and good citizen who celebratesdiversityas long as it remainsminoritized, marginalizedand willing to be (impossi-bly) Westernized.

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

16/19

Subjectivation and performativepolitics 525Performative politics, or politics in subjectivationButler uses the notion of the performative,the notion of discourse and the notion ofsubjectivationto think about the constitution, constraint and political possibility ofthe subject.This paperhas demonstrated the deploymentof these notions for under-standingpracticesinside schools and begun to show how performativepolitics mightbegin to destabilize both the explicit and silent discursiveties between biographiesand studenthood, ties that make possible, and normal, the continued subjectivationof differentiatedstudent-subjects.Yet the relationshipsbetween the performative,discourse and subjectivation,andthe significance of these relationshipsfor thinking about a post-structural politics,merit further consideration.

The performative,Butler tells us, enacts what it names-it names and makes. Inthis sense, all categoricalnames and claims to action are potentially performativelyconstitutiveof the subjectsto whom they refer.But it is not only utterances thathavethe potential to act performatively.Butler (1997a, b) also notes the possibility ofbodily practices being performative,and examines this possibility throughher consid-eration of Bourdieu's (1991) bodily habitus.I have not pursued this here, but if wereflecton the bodies of the teachers and students in the earlierepisode, we can beginto see how, for instance, the particularway that the boy sat on his BMX bike, unlitcigarette cupped in his hand, and the particularway that the Deputy Principalstoodlegs apart,shoulderssquare,walkie-talkiein hand, arebodily practicesthat simulta-neously enact particularsorts of subjects.In the move fromthe performativityof names to widerutterances,and from utter-ances to practices, the performativecan be seen as a function within discourse.Indeed, it might be helpful to think of the performativeas a particularelement ofdiscourse and as a nuance within the discursiveprocesses through which discoursescome to have productive effects. Discourse itself might be as performative.Thissuggests that the performative might be understood very specifically, after Butler'searlierengagements with the idea, and that the specific performativeand the widerdiscursivefield in which it is located can be understood as discursivelyconstitutive.Subjectivationunderstands the constitutive effect of discoursesin this way, but thenotion of subjectivation underscores how this constitution is simultaneouslyandunavoidably entangled in the production of discursive relations of power. Constitutionwithin constraintis alwayspresentwithin the notions of the performativeand discur-sive constitution, but when we take up a notion of subjectivationthis simultaneousconstitution within constraint -made subjectand subjectedto/by-becomes whollyexplicit. Indeed, that discursiverelations of power areintegralto being a recognizablesubject is central to the notion of subjectivation.

Subjectivation is effected through discursive practices, and understanding theperformative is an important tool for understanding the constitutive effects of thesediscursive practices. But it is the more explicit sense of the way that power is impli-cated in subjectivationthat I find particularlyhelpful. And this has led me to think,alongside Butler's (1997a) notions of performative politics and politics of hegemony,

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

17/19

526 D. Youdellabout a politicsin subjectivationin which discursively constituted and constrainedsubjects deploy discursiveagency and act within and at the bordersof the constraintof theirsubjectivation.By interrogatingand renderingvisible the subjectivatingprac-tices that constitute particularsorts of students tied to particularsubjectivitiesand,by extension, particulareducational (and wider) trajectories,we begin to uncover thepotential of Butler's performative politics or a politics in subjectivation. Whetherchallenging the effects of, for instance, discourses of poverty, heredity, intelligence,heteronormativity, or, like here, racism and Whiteness, understanding theseprocesses helps us to see where discursive interventionsmight enable new discoursesto be rendered intelligible or enduring discourse to be unsettled within schoolcontexts.

In mappingthe subjectivatingpracticesof a school and its teachers, and the prac-tices of self of teachers and students, this paper demonstrates the importance ofengagingthese ideas for making sense of the practices and effects of schooling. Theparticularanalysisofferedhere adds anotherlayerof understandingto existing anal-yses of enduring patternsof raced educationalinequalityand exclusion. Yet it is nota pessimistic analysis-these theoretical tools insist that the potential to act withintent and, therefore,shift meaning is inherent to the contingent nature of discourseand the discursive agency inherent to subjectivating processes. The teachers' andstudents' practices that I have interrogatedhere are performativepolitics that bothreinscribe and unsettle hegemonic meaning. These teachers are involvedin practicesof Whiteness that subjectivate raced-nationed-religioned students, and thesestudents are involved in practicesof insurrectionas they aresubjectivated.The teach-ers'performativepolitics constitute themselves and Arabic studentsin theirrespectiveplaces in enduring discourse. The students' performativepolitics are the skirmishesthat these subjectivatedsubjects engage in when their discursive agency is workedagainstthe prevailingdiscoursesthroughwhich they aresubjectivated.Orwhen thesesubjects deploy subjugated discourses through their practices of self, even if thesediscourses, and the subjectivitiesthey constitute, are rapidly recuperated.Performa-tive politics does not entreat us to identify the subjectivationand then move on todesign a corresponding performativeinsurrection(although at the level of collectiveaction activists/academicsmight want to do this). Rather,these arepoliticsin subjecti-vation,enacted at any (every?)moment of constitution.

Notes1. In 'The Subject and Power', Foucault suggests that we might recognize three forms of strugglethat exist in 'complex and circular relations' (1982, p. 213): struggles against domination,

against exploitation and against subjection. These struggles against subjection, for Foucault,are increasingly significant both to the subjects who struggle against their own subjection andto the enquirer into the present. At the centre of Foucault's work, then, is a concern with strug-gles for change. This is not a struggle for the liberation, or self-determination, of the subject;but struggles played out through the persistent potential for resistances in the circulation ofcounter- and subjugated discourses (vol. 1) and the freedom suggested by the possibility oftransformation (Foucault, 1988a).

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

18/19

Subjectivation and performative politics 5272. In this setting, as many in multi-ethnic, urban Sydney, 'ethnic' is commonly used on its ownto name minority ethnic individuals and communities. Indeed, it has become the object ofironic recuperation.

ReferencesAlthusser, L. (1971) Ideology and ideological state apparatuses, in: Lenin and Philosophy (B.

Brewster, Trans.) (London, Monthly Review Press), 170-186.Alvesson, M (2002) Postmodernismand social research(Buckingham, Open University Press).Austin, J. L. (1962) How to do thingswith words(Oxford: Clarendon Press).Ball, S.J. (2003) 'The teachers' soul and the terrors of performativity,Journal of EducationPolicy,

18(2), 215-228.Baudrillard,J. (1994) Simulacra and simulation(Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press).Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and symbolicpower(Cambridge, MA, HarvardUniversity Press).Britzman, D. (2000) 'The question of belief: writing poststructural ethnography, in: A. St Pierre& W.S. Pillow (Eds) Workingthe ruins:feministpoststructuraltheoryand methodsin education

(London, Routledge), 27-40.Butler, J. (1990) Gendertrouble:feminism and the subversionof identity(London, Routledge).Butler, J. (1993) Bodies that matter:on the discursivelimitsof 'sex' (London, Routledge).Butler, J. (1997a) Excitablespeech:a politics of theperformative(London, Routledge).Butler, J. (1997b) The psychic life of power: theories in subjection(Stanford, Stanford University

Press).Butler, J. (2004) Undoinggender(London, Routledge).Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986) Becomingcritical:educationknowledgeand action research(London,

Falmer).Delamont, S. & Atkinson, P. (1995) Fighting familiarity: essays on education and ethnography(Cresskill, NJ, Hampton Press).Derrida, J. (1988) Signature event context, in: J. Derrida (Ed.) LimitedInc. (Elvanston, IL, North-western University Press), 1-23.Foucault, M. (1982) The subject and power, in: H. L. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds) MichelFoucault:beyondhermenuticsand structuralism(Brighton, Harvester), 208-226.Foucault, M. (1988a) Critical theory/intellectual history, in: L. Kritzman (Ed.) MichelFoucault--

politics,philosophy,culture:interviewsand otherwritings1977-1984 (London, Routledge), 17-46Foucault, M. (1988b) An aesthetics of existence, in: L. Kritzman (Ed.) Michel Foucault--politics,philosophy,culture:interviewsand otherwritings1977-1984 (London, Routledge), 47-56.Foucault, M. (1988c) The return of morality, in: L. Kritzman (Ed.) Michel Foucault-politics,philosophy,culture:interviewsand otherwritings1977-1984 (London, Routledge), 242-254.Foucault, M. (1990a) Thehistoryof sexualityvolume1: an introduction(London, Penguin).

Foucault, M. (1990b) The careof theself:thehistoryof sexuality(vol. 3) (London, Penguin).Foucault, M. (1991). Disciplineandpunish:thebirthof theprison(London, Penguin).Foucault, M. (1992) The usesof pleasure:thehistoryof sexuality(vol. 2) (London, Penguin).Gillborn, D. (2004) Anti-racism: from policy to praxis, in: G. Ladson-Billings & D. Gillborn (Eds)The RoutledgeFalmerreaderin multiculturaleducation: criticalperspectiveson race, racism andeducation(London, RoutledgeFalmer), 35-48.Gillborn, D. (2005) Education policy as an act of white supremacy, Journal of EducationPolicy,

20(4), 485-505.Gilroy, P. (1986) Thereain't no blackin the UnionJack (London, Routledge).Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1995) Ethnography:principlesin practice (2nd edn) (London,Tavistock Publications).Harwood, V. (2001) Foucault, narrative and the subjugated subject: doing research with a grid of

sensibility, Australian EducationalResearcher,28(3), 141-166.

8/7/2019 30036159 (1)

19/19

528 D. YoudellJacobson, M. F. (1998). Whitenessof a differentcolor:Europeanimmigrantsand the alchemy of race(Cambridge MA, HarvardUniversity Press).Ladson-Billings, G. (2004) Just what is critical race theory and what's it doing in a nice field like

education?, in G. Ladson-Billings & D. Gillborn (Eds) TheRoutledgeFalmerreaderin multicul-tural education: criticalperspectiveson race, racism and education(London, RoutledgeFalmer),49-68.

Lather, P. (1991) Gettingsmart:feminist researchand pedagogy with/in the postmodern(New York,Routledge).

Lather, P. (2000) Drawing the line at angels: working the ruins of feminist methodology, in A.St Pierre & W. S. Pillow (Eds) Workingthe ruins:feministpoststructuraltheoryand methods ineducation(London, Routledge), 258-312.Leonardo, Z. (2004) The souls of white folk: critical pedagogy, whiteness studies, and globaliza-tion discourse, in G. Ladson-Billings & D. Gillborn (Eds) TheRoutledgeFalmerreaderin multi-culturaleducation:criticalperspectiveson race,racismand education(London, RoutledgeFalmer),117-136.Lipman, P. (2004) Education accountability and repression of democracy post 9/11, paperpresented at American EducationalResearchAssociationAnnual Conference,San Diego, April.MacLure, M. (2003) Discoursein educationaland social research(Buckingham, Open University

Press).McCoy, K. (2000) White noise-the sound of epidemic: reading/writinga climate of intelligibilityaround a 'crisis' of difference, in A. St Pierre & W. S. Pillow (Eds) Workingthe ruins:feminist

poststructuraltheoryand methodsin education(London, Routledge), 237-257.Miller, G. (1997) Building bridges: the possibility of analytic dialogue between ethnography,conversation analysis and Foucault, in: D. Silverman (Ed.) Qualitativeresearch:theory,methodandpractice (London, Sage), 24-44.Prior, L. (1997) Following in Foucault's footsteps: text and content in qualitative research, in: D.

Silverman (Ed.) Qualitativeresearch:theory,methodandpractice(London, Sage), 63-79.Rizvi, F. (1997) Educational leadership and the politics or difference, Melbourne Studies inEducation,38(1), 90-102.St Pierre, E. (2000) Nomadic enquiry in the smooth spaces of the field: a preface, in A. St Pierre &W. S. Pillow (Eds) Workingthe ruins:feminist poststructuraltheoryand methods in education(London, Routledge), 258-283.Said, E. (2003) Orientalism(London, Penguin).

Said, E. (1992) RepresentingIslam (London, Penguin).Seshedri-Crooks, K. (2000) Desiring whiteness: a Lacanian analysis of whiteness (London,

Routledge).Silverman, D. (1997) Towards an aesthetics of research, in D. Silverman (Ed.) Qualitativeresearch:theory,methodandpractice(London, Sage), 239-253.Skeggs, B. (1994) Situating the production of feminist ethnography, in M. Maynard & J. Purvis

(Eds) Researchingwomen'slivesfrom afeminist persepective(London, Taylor & Francis).Solomos J. & Back. L. (1996) Racism and society (Basingstoke, Macmillan).Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1993) Breaking out again: feminist ontology and epistemology(London,

Routledge).Stronach, I. &Maclure, M. (1997) Educationalresearchundone:thepostmodernembrace(Buckingham,Open University Press).

Youdell, D. (2003) Identity traps, or how Black students fail: the interactions between biographi-cal, sub-cultural, and learner identities, BritishJournalof Sociologyof Education, 24(1), 3-20.

Youdell, D. (2005) Sex-gender-sexuality: how sex, gender and sexuality constellations are consti-tuted in secondary school, Genderand Education, 17(3), 247-270.