NOTES ON DECONSTRUCTING THE POPULAR Stuart Hall 1981

«NOTES ON DECONSTRUCTING THE POPULAR» Stuart Hall 1981

What does deconstructing mean? What does the title suggest?

Deconstruct means to dismantle, to dissect The title implies that the notion popular will be critically examined and the commonplace ideas regarding the meaning of the word popular will be challenged.

Hall gives a historical account of the development of British popular culture with reference to the social tensions in the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries in order to show these tensions shaped popular culture.

Key concepts in Hall’s essay are: struggle, resistance, acceptance, containment, autonomy, capitulation, dominant, subordinate, power, transformation, cultural domination, cultural implantation, hegemony, masses

In his essay, he refers to the changing attitude of the working class, which was once rebellious and confrontational. During the 1930 s (the economic depression), a «militant, radical, mature culture of the working class» was non-existent.

Hall examines different meanings of the concept popular, some of which he disagrees with: 1. Manipulative aspect of commercial popular culture Based on this meaning of popular, working class people are depicted as «passive consumers» ( «cultural dopes» ) who take everything that is offered. This view suggests that there is no original working class culture, but as Hall argues, «the notion of the people as purely passive» is «a deeply unsocialist perspective. » Popular culture is shaped by the dominant class (e. g. impositions of new cultural definitions and representations through TV shows – Coronation Street – in the process of reconstructing the «realities of working class life» ) Mass manipulation Cultural implantation See page 75

To Hall culture is a battlefield, a way of struggle between the dominant and the subordinate. Popular culture keeps shifting between pure autonomy and capitulation.

2. Hall refers to the anthropological definition of popular – that is, «the mores, customs and folkways of the people. » He finds this definition restrictive because individuals do not have the same hobbies and/or interests.

3. He views popular culture in a continuing conflict with the dominant culture. According to him, cultures are not conceived as separate ways of life but as ways of struggle. Popular culture is an ongoing process. Cultural forms, signs and practices may change in time as a result of the new meanings inscribed on them (e. g. Swastika, a Sanskrit word (‘svasktika’) with a positive implication, meaning «well-being» , «good luck» )

The Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857 -1913) theorised that humans make a separation between a word and what that word means. All words in a language, body language, signs and symbols are signifiers. Signifier: the expression, the material embodiment Signified: the meaning, the concept conveyed by the signifier SIGN

Hall refers to «new cultural apparatuses» and «scholarly apparatus» . These tools, as Hall states, are based on power relations which divide the culture into its «preferred» and «residual» categories. In other words, these apparatuses function as manipulative tools in terms of setting socially acceptable practices of culture and distinguishing them from the «valueless» part - the part which is rendered «valueless» by the dominant/ruling ideology.

Hall’s engagement with these apparatuses brings to mind the French scholar Louis Althusser’s (1918 -1990) theorisation of the ideological forces that control and maintain the structure of society through the means of production. To Althusser, these ideological forces often lead to the repression and oppression of one social group – i. e. the subordinate class.

In his essay «Ideology and Ideological State Apparatus» (1970), Althusser states that an ideology always exists in an apparatus and in its practice, or practices, therefore the existence of ideology is «material» (Althusser, Lenin and the Philosophy of Other Essays 112). In other words, the ‘ideas’ or ‘representations’ which tend to make up ideology do not have an ideal or spiritual existence, they have a material form in society, a form which can be observed at two levels: • The State Apparatus (SA) contains the Government, the Administration, the Army, the Police, the Courts, the Prisons. The State Apparatus constitutes Repressive State Apparatuses (RSA) (Althusser, Lenin and the Philosophy of Other Essays 143). Althusser argues that RSA belong to the public domain and they function ‘by violence’. • Ideological State Apparatuses (ISA) contain “a certain number of realities which present themselves to the immediate observer in the form of distinct and specialized institutions” such as family, religion, politics and culture (Althusser, Lenin and the Philosophy of Other Essays, 143). Althusser states that Churches, Parties, Trade Unions, families, some schools, most newspapers, etc. are private (Lenin and the Philosophy of Other Essays 144). Therefore, he indicates that ISA belong to the private domain and they function ‘by ideology’.

Both Raymond Williams and Stuart Hall examined culture in relation to the sociopolitical practices of the ruling ideology. Although Williams agreed with the Marxist view of culture which situates culture in a close relationship with the system of production, he disagreed with the idea that the masses were deliberately left ignorant. Williams also disagreed that the masses had same interests and tastes, but he nonetheless explored culture within a power relationship with the ruling/dominant class. Stuart Hall was against the social construction of the masses as passive consumers, but he views popular culture as a practice influenced by the dominant cultural production which is regulated by ideological state apparatuses like family, religion, institution, educational system, and media – apparatuses which give us an identity.

According to Hall, this sense of identity formed via cultural apparatuses is strengthened by cultural practices. See page 78

In line with Gramsci, Hall agrees with Marx’s view that the class which seizes material power also seizes ideological power or the power of ideas. To overcome this hegemony, it would be necessary to develop a counter-hegemony formed by working class to promote the creation of of a new culture.

Hall argues that popular culture is a site defined by a struggle for and against the culture of the powerful.

According to Hall, popular culture is a struggle for a culture of the powerful and it is against the culture of the powerful