Page 83 - Cultural Theory

Edwards-3516-Ch-04.qxd 5/9/2007 5:56 PM Page 72

••• Chris Rojek •••

ferment of intellectual exchange, drawing freely on concepts and traditions from
continental Europe that had hitherto been treated as alien by the insular British estab-
lishment. He (1980) contrasted the insularity of British culturalism with structuralism, by
which he meant a more theoretically sophisticated approach to culture. In Birmingham,
the mettle of existentialism, semiotics, psychoanalysis and phenomenology was debated
and tested in collective research, seminars, symposia and PhD work. But Marxism
rapidly emerged as the paramount influence. In the 1970s the most important publica-
tions for which the Centre is now remembered , namely On Ideology (Hall et al 1978a),
Policing the Crisis (Hall et al 1978b) and The Empire Strikes Back (1980), can be interpreted
as operating in a theoretical framework that attempted to fuse certain aspects of
Althusserian structuralism with Gramscianism. Most significantly, Althusser’s theory of
ideology and the functions of the state are inserted with Gramsci’s analysis of ‘power
blocs’, ‘conjunctures’ and of course, hegemony. Interestingly there is relatively little tex-
tual reference to Marx’s work in the output of the Birmingham School. Although, Hall
(1973) himself contributed an important, and oddly neglected, close textual reading of
the ‘Introduction’ to Marx’s Grundrisse which purported to identify a cultural basis in
Marx’s method of historical materialism.
It would be wrong to infer that intellectual labour in Birmingham during the
golden age sought to replace culturalism with structuralism. Hall (1980) was critical
of what he took to be the ‘naïve humanism’ of British culturalism. But he (1993a)
was also fulsome in his praise for the work of Williams and Thompson. Although the
influence of Gramsci and Althusser is pronounced in what is arguably the single
most important work produced by the Centre, Policing The Crisis (1978b), the cultur-
alist emphasis on class traditions and class struggle is also unmistakable.
Using Althusser’s concept of ‘interpellation’ the Centre examined how subjects are
‘hailed’ or ‘called into being’ in capitalist society. The construction of subjectivity
through schooling, the media, policing, medicine and the law is held to be crucial
because they tie individuals into historically specific forms of subjectivity. Although
the Frankfurt School never figured very prominently in Birmingham discussions, it is
clear that Hall and his colleagues share the Frankfurt premise that the liberal consensus
that the individual is free under capitalism is actually an expression of ideological dom-
ination. At the height of Althusser’s influence on Birmingham, Hall (1985) claimed
that there is no space ‘outside’ or ‘beyond’ ideology in capitalist society.
But one senses that Hall was always uncomfortable with the structural–functionalist
strain in Althusser’s thought. Instead he favoured a more flexible approach which
highlighted the contradictions in the capitalist power bloc and gave due to culture
as a key site of resistance. Gramsci’s concept of ‘hegemony’ was enlisted to elucidate
the idea of a cultural and economic horizon in the ordering of subjectivity.
In many ways the Centre reflects typical 60s themes of liberation and anti-
authoritarianism. It sought to use knowledge to emancipate people from cultural and
economic subjection by elucidating the historical roots and structures of normative
coercion that order subjectivity. At the same time, it was critical of expressive, liberationist
politics designed to produce a totally permissive society. Such a construct was utterly
alien to Birmingham thinking on power blocs, hegemony and articulation. The agenda
• 72 •