cfp.english.upenn.edu

Broad messages, complicated political positions, and blurred generational and class lines characterize and problematize the Occupy Wall Street movement. As if its connection to the Canadian magazine Adbusters were not enough, this “U.S.” movement’s clearest and most original position may be its denial of position. Beyond “We are the 99%”—a general position against greed and inequality—the “movement” remains difficult to categorize in terms of the red/blue politics of the United States. The picture becomes even more complicated at the regional level where clear, defining symbols of nationalist power and capital are absent.

Our call for papers asks for work which explores the relationship between Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and Occupy Main Street (OMS). How do OWS politics change when moved to Main Street (in terms of organization, agenda, focus, audience, tactics)? How does the complicated positioning of OWS and OMS allow for change?

We seek work which attempts to theorize OWS politics in terms of the local and regional and explores some of the practical issues involved in this movement from the “center” to the “margins” of Ohio, Brussels, Hong Kong, Egypt, and so on. We seek narratives which depict the process by which Occupy Wall Street is translated by grassroots organizers and others outside of Washington.

Deadline: April 1, 2012

Your 300 word abstract and a brief bio (and any queries) should be emailed to Todd A. Comer (Defiance College) and Nathan Crook (Ohio State University) at occupydefiance@gmail.com.