Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The failure of France and the Netherlands to approve by referendum the Constitutional-Treaty of Leuken proposed by the Convention on the Future of Europe in 2005 surprised much of European elites and political analysts alike, who then pointed out the deficiencies of an already fragile process of political integration. In general, the French and Dutch “No” to the European Constitution is usually explained by traditional literature in terms of economic and political factors. While materialist approaches attribute the failure to approve the treaty to a broad rejection to its neoliberal economic content, institutionalist approaches argue that it was due to provisions for establishing a supra-nationality which would disrupt the Member-States’ sovereignty. Finding fault with both approaches for not taking into account the system of meanings constructed by the discourse on European integration, and the feeling those meanings evoke on people’s sense of their own nationalities, we will argue that the failure to approve the Constitutional-Treaty of Leuken is better understood by looking into the discourse on European integration. Inspired by Laclau and Mouffe literature on discourse and hegemonic ideology, we claim that the rejection of the treaty is due to the unsuccessful discursive strategy of articulating two elements - “constitution” and “treaty” – that already stood in opposition within a competing underlying discursive formation. Moreover, as we develop further our argument, we will point out that the discursive formation which led to a popular rejection to the idea of an “European Constitution” is not recent. By employing discourse analysis methods, we will show that, since the founding treaties of the EU, the discourse on European integration has always been resistant to this kind of discursive articulation.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: In classic media criticism, television entertainment is invariably viewed as a corrupt form of mass distraction, a way of exploiting and diverting an oppressed public. In response to this deterministic view, it has frequently been pointed out that producers and consumers operate independently of each other, each within their own social setting. The result of constantly stressing this separation, however, is to lose sight of the interactions between the two and the associated broader social context. This article puts forward an alternative theory for the study of television entertainment, interpreting its production and consumption as a coherent cultural phenomenon, specifically as a form of festive culture. We find that other parties besides producers and consumers, such as participants and power configurations, play an important role: significance is attributed to television entertainment in a dynamic, multi-actor process. This approach is visualized in a model. Public opinion research, interviews with participants and analysis of the content of the longest-running entertainment programme on Dutch television are used to show how the model can be applied in practice.

Publication Type: Invited Paper

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper critically engages two distinct trends in contemporary T-shirts: the postmodern aesthetic distancing of middle-class suburban 'fashion tees,' and the coded yet grounded social realism of controversial shirts popularized within black urban hip-hop subcultures. Using a framework drawn from Bourdieu, I investigate how these different signifying practices and taste cultures stem from continuing social and material inequalities, effectively challenging the perceived universality of the detached, surface-obsessed postmodern American consumer subject.