CFP: Special Issue: Reimagining Canadian Communication Thought
Special Issue: Reimagining Canadian Communication Thought
It has been almost 25 years since Robert Babe published Canadian Communication Thought: Ten Foundational Writers (Babe, 2000). In his book, Babe attempted to create a canon of “Canadian Communication Thought” based on a consideration of influences, themes, and conceptual dispositions of ten disparate Canadian scholars and cultural practitioners that, from his perspective, represented a coherent (if heterogenous) approach to communication which was identifiably and distinctively Canadian.
For Babe, each of the ten theorists represented a significant departure from the theories of communication and methodologies of empirical research that dominated communication studies in the United States from the mid- to late 20th century. Positioned outside of yet in close proximity to the US, these scholars developed an approach to communication (and culture) that shared a suite of distinctive intellectual dispositions. First, their work was “dialectical” in its mode of reasoning and analysis and, as such, foregrounded a critical bearing towards the dynamics of power in media, communication, and culture. Second, this critical, dialectical framework attuned this collective body of work to the focus of critical political economy with concern for the intertwined power of the state and capital(ism). Third, according to Babe, these scholars were overtly concerned with the mediations of everyday life produced by technologies of media and communication. Fourth, such mediations were seen as inextricably linked with the “ontologies” of identity and community in Canada, ontologies which were also very much rooted in the particularities of the Canadian landscape as well as Canada’s social, political, and economic development as a “counter-revolutionary” settler colony at the periphery of an empire. From Babe’s perspective, it is the articulation and confluence of these characteristics that generated a mode of theorizing about communication that was “quintessentially Canadian.”
Babe’s project of creating a foundational canon of “Canadian Communication Thought” was certainly ambitious, especially in terms of staging a tableau of such a diverse array of intellectual figures, ranging from Harold Innis, Marshall McLuhan, Gertrude Robinson, George Grant, and Dallas Smythe to C.B. McPherson, Northrup Frye, Graham Spry, John Grierson, and Irene Spry. But it was also audacious in its determination to find a through line of a “quintessentially Canadian” mode of conceptualizing communication that united these diverse figures under the common nationalist signifier of “Canadian Communication Thought.” However one assesses the validity of choosing this particular group of scholars and attempting to fit them within a common framework of interpretation, as the CJC review of the book argued, “What the book asserts by virtue of its existence is perhaps of as much importance as the claims within it” (Dowler, 2001:570). That is to say, the idea of a coherent intellectual topos that can be named and recognized as “Canadian Communication Thought” matters as much—if not more—than the particulars of its inhabitants and borders that Babe sought to map.
Almost 25 years after the publication of Babe’s book, we propose a special issue of the CJC devoted to the reassessment of, and perhaps more importantly, reimagining of the intellectual project of “Canadian Communication Thought.” Babe’s project was very much constructed as a backward-looking, historical accounting of the formation of something Babe could delineate as “Canadian Communication Thought.” With the exception of Gertrude Joch Robinson, all of Babe’s foundational figures made their intellectual careers and mark in the dark heart of the mid-20th century and had passed on well before the dawn of the 21st century. As such, the time(s) and place(s) of their Canada is very much different from ours. Moreover, the positionality of Babe's foundational figures was very white, very anglophone, very Upper Canada and Ontario centric, and, with the exception of Gertrude Robinson and Irene Spry, very male. Accordingly, the “solitudes” of Babe’s canon of “Canadian Communication Thought” are myriad, and if the concept of “Canadian Communication Thought” is to have any coherent salience in the 21st century, their hermetic boundaries must be breached by inviting diverse voices from different positionalities into a conversation about what the concept might mean going forward into the future.
Accordingly, in this issue we seek article submissions that address one or more of the following questions:
- Is the continued assertion of the existence of “Canadian Communication Thought” as a coherent intellectual topos still a virtue in the contemporary moment of the near mid-21st century? If so, how would or should we imagine its terrain, and what itineraries of inquiry would be appropriate in mapping it?
- What makes this intellectual space distinctively “Canadian”? Is it necessary or sufficient for a scholar or school of thought to be Canadian by nationality, residence, or institutional affiliation? Or is it more appropriate to argue that “Canadian Communication Thought” is a topos or a territorially emplaced imaginary of theory and analysis that is defined by distinctive conceptual articulations of media, communication, and technology rather than a geographic or national identity?
- What would a topos of “Canadian Communication Thought” look like from different positionalities that characterize the multicultural Canadian present—Indigenous, francophone, POC, Black Canadian, South Asian, queer, LGTBQ2S+, and so on?
- What are the possible articulations of the key theoretical/conceptual paradigms that have emerged and characterized “Canadian Communication Thought” in the 21st century, including (but certainly not limited to): feminist media and communications studies; materialist medium theory and analysis; post-colonial and decolonial approaches to media, communication, and technology; critical infrastructure studies; critical political economy and policy studies; critical internet studies; media history and media archaeology; and so on?
Format and Editorial Priorities
This bilingual special issue will gather two types of contributions: 1) full-length research articles (7000-8000 words) that reflect on/problematize epistemic and ontological features of Canadian communication thought and 2) shorter interventions (2500-3000 words) that offer a synthesis of a certain stream of theory or conceptual work, a “school of thought” or a specific approach that is representative of Canadian communication thought in its diversity.
We invite scholars based in Canadian academic institutions and scholars from around the world with an interest in the topic to submit work. Please note that we are especially interested in receiving submissions from Indigenous scholars, emerging scholars and scholars representing visible minorities. We also welcome both English and French-language submissions.
Abstracts should be 400 words for an article proposal and 250 words for an intervention proposal; they should include a title, type of submission, and contact information, including a short bio (50 words for each author).
Timeline
- September 30th, 2024: Deadline for abstract proposal submissions, to be sent to both Special Issue Guest Editors @ Andrew Herman (aherman@wlu.ca) and Guillaume Latzko-Toth (latzko-toth@com.ulaval.ca).
- October 1st-November 15th 2024: Review of abstracts and decisions sent to authors.
- November 15th, 2024-March 15th, 2025: Development and writing of contributions by authors, including editorial dialogue, where helpful.
- March 15th, 2025: Final draft contributions DUE.
- March 15th-June 15th, 2025: Review of contributions. Suggestions for revision communicated to the authors.
- September 15th, 2025: Deadline for revised contributions.
- Summer 2026: Issue published!