struggles between dominant

struggles between dominant and subordinate social groups?a terrain on

which hegemony, or consent, is fought for and resisted (Hartley, 2002;

Storey, 2006). This Gramscian view of cultural studies is apparent in the work of critical

curriculum scholars, especially those who focus on

popular culture as a site

of public pedagogy. However, much of the public pedagogy literature

emphasizes how popular culture perpetuates dominant values such as

racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, machismo, and violence (Mayo,

2002), rather than its counterhegemonic possibilities. This work includes studies of various sites of public pedagogy, including the practices of cor

porations such as Calvin Klein (Giroux, 1997), Nike (Tavin, Lovelace, Stabler, 8c Maxam, 2003), Disney (Giroux, 1999; Tavin 8c Anderson, 2003),

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.159 on Tue, 21 Apr 2015 21:24:42 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

326 JENNIFER A. SANDLIN AND JENNIFER L. MILAM

and McDonald’s (Kincheloe, 2002); and the ideologies of films such as

GhostWorld (Giroux, 2003b), Dirty Dancing (Giroux & Simon, 1989), and

Fight Club (Giroux, 2001). Although we see the importance of exploring how people are raced, classed, and gendered through popular culture, we

also believe it is imperative to investigate popular culture as a form of resistance (Denzin, 2003; Duncombe, 2002; Solorzano & Delgado Bernal,

2001). Through our examination, we seek to “criticalize” the notion of

“public pedagogy” and thus expand the concept of ” critical public peda

gogy” (Giroux, 2000, p. 355, emphasis ours). While scholars in other disciplines have recognized culture jamming as

a mode of communication (Harold, 2004) and as consumer resistance

(Handelman, 1999), too little research within education?with some

exceptions, including researchers within critical art education (Darts, 2006;

Freedman, 2003; Kincheloe, 2003; Springgay, 2005; Stuhr, 2003; Tavin,

2003), and educators who enact and research performance pedagogy (Boal, 1985; Denzin, 2003; Garoian, 1999)?has focused on how popular

culture can act as critical pedagogy. This is surprising given the many manifestations of critical public pedagogy occurring in popular and public culture, including the work of activists and artists such as The Guerilla

Girls, Guillermo Gomez-Pena, James Luna, Adrian Piper, and The Yes Men.

However, despite a handful of studies of public pedagogy as a means of

resistance (e.g., Martin, 2005), much work in the area of “critical public

pedagogy” has remained theoretical, consisting mainly of “calls to action”

(Brady, 2006; Giroux, 2000, 2003a, 2003c, 2004a, 2004b, 2004c; Pozo, 2005) and has been harshly criticized for perpetuating “highly abstract and

Utopian” ideals that reinforce repressive myths and perpetuate hegemonic relations (Ellsworth, 1988, p. 298). Moreover, while art education scholars have examined how culture jamming may be used in schools

to promote

civic engagement with images, society, and identities (Tavin etal., 2003), much of this work is new, remains largely theorized, and is not widely