Page 109 - Cultural Studies and Political Economy

98 Chapter Three

the implication would be that contemporary cultural studies builds on the
foundations laid by the inaugural writers. Indeed, according to McRobbie, be-
cause cultural studies today remains a radical critique, because it opposes
economism and disputes reductionism, and because it rejects both the
base/superstructure model and the category known as false consciousness, it
is consistent with its beginnings. She continued: “The return to a pre-post-
modern Marxism as marked out by critics like Frederic Jameson and David
Harvey [and likely, in her view, Garnham] is untenable because the terms of
that return are predicated on prioritizing economic relations and economic de-
4
terminations over cultural and political relations.” Hall, too, as cited by Gar-
nham, claimed that inaugural British cultural studies critiqued “certain re-
ductionism and economism, which I think is not extrinsic but intrinsic to
Marxism; a contestation with the model of base and superstructure,” adding
that British cultural studies at its outset “was located and sited in a necessary
and prolonged and as yet unending contestation with the question of false
consciousness.” 5
It is apparent that the depictions cited here by McRobbie and Hall of in-
augural British cultural studies differ markedly from the descriptions, cita-
tions, and analyses presented in chapter 2. Indeed, I will argue in this chap-
ter that contemporary cultural studies, far from remaining consistent with
the cultural materialism of Hoggart, Williams, and Thompson, has de-
parted from its origins to such an extent that there is now as great an op-
position between the works of contemporary poststructuralist cultural stud-
ies scholars and the founders of British cultural studies as there is with
critical political economists. If this assessment is correct, the important
questions become whether, in what ways, and to what extent the transfor-
mation in cultural studies—from cultural materialism to poststructural-
ism—is useful or benign.
In the sections to follow I identify, analyze, and assess major points of
departure between cultural studies and political economy as made evident
by participants in the Colloquy. Most of the differences, I will argue, are
either superficial, and hence not overly problematic, or they actually con-
stitute good reasons for reintegrating the fields. However, there is an issue
(addressed toward the close of this chapter and ironically skimmed over
quickly by the participants) that is so fundamental that it is likely impossi-
ble to resolve. The areas of controversy addressed in the chapter are: false
consciousness, production vs. reception, base/superstructure (economic
determinism), social science vs. humanities, class, and ontology. I reserve
for chapter 4 the perhaps most basic issue of all, namely the political econ-
omy of scholarship.