READINGS Guidelines for Mitchell next to Lockman

This week we will discuss Lockman and Mitchell. I updated the syllabus, so first session is on Lockman, and the second session is solely on Mitchell. Please take a Quick Look at these book reviews of Lockman's book before coming to class on Tuesday and take notes about your observations concerning different styles of book review writing. Allen, - Download Allen, - Davis - Download Davis - Falk - Download Falk - Foster - Download Foster - Robbins Download Robbins.  Please share with us if you find any other reviews of Lockman's book. 

You will use these for a fast written book review of your book choice which we will discuss next week first session of the class. 

April 8

Lockman, Contending Visions…, 274-278; 66-148, 155-159. (Read to identify theoretical approaches discussed).

BOOK CHOICES BY STUDENTS.

April 10

Mitchell, “The Middle East in Past…”

Lockman, Contending Visions…,

USE THE FOLLOWING PROMPTS FOR A BRIEF DISCUSSION AFTER THE WEEK'S MEETING

Reading Support: Timothy Mitchell, “The Middle East in the Past and Future of Social Science”
Plus a discussion prompt on Lockman’s conclusion

In preparation for our class discussion, please take a few minutes to reflect on Timothy Mitchell’s 2003 article, "The Middle East in the Past and Future of Social Science." This piece critically rethinks the legacy and structure of area studies, including the intellectual and institutional conditions that shaped how “the Middle East” has been studied within U.S. academia.

 Reading Guide – Consider the following as you read:

• How does Mitchell critique the division between “theory” and “area knowledge”?

• What does he mean by “the recursive logic of empire,” and how does it shape the production of knowledge?

• How does he use specific examples—e.g., U.S. defense funding, economic modeling—to show the entanglements between scholarly knowledge and power?

• Mitchell :  “Far more effectively than mere theory, these circulations of ideas, political forces, refugees, armies, and exiles began to dislocate the claim that area studies made to a disinterested, managerial expertise.” Make a list of names he cites as influential (positively or negatively) in the development of the study of Near and Middle East, group them, how would you group them? 

Reflection Prompt (Due after our class meeting):

Mitchell’s essay challenges the conventional structures of social science and the role of Middle East studies within them. What moment or argument in the article most surprised or unsettled you—and why?

You may respond briefly in a paragraph after our class meetings and then comment on at least three classmates' responses

Late submission -10%