This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0021934709335135v1 40/1/65    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mazama, A. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Naming and Defining

A Critical Link

Temple University

Although it came into existence 40 years ago, Black Studies is still referred to by many names today. This proliferation of labels attests that, indeed, the question of naming remains a sensitive one for Black Studies. However, and this is one of the main contentions of the present article, this unfinished naming process reflects a deeper and equally unsettled issue: that of self-definition. Most specifically, it is argued here that as long as Black Studies is primarily defined by subject matter, as it is the dominant practice, rather than by perspective, the naming of the discipline will remain a contentious and tricky affair.

Key Words: naming • interdisciplinarity • discipline • Black Studies • paradigm

This version was published on September 1, 2009

Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 40, No. 1, 65-76 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0021934709335135


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?