Page 211 - Cultural Theory and Popular Culture an Introduction

CULT_C09.qxd 10/24/08 17:25 Page 195

Fredric Jameson 195

power to practices and to the very structure of the psyche itself can be said to have
become ‘cultural’ in some original and as yet unauthorised sense (89).

The thorough ‘culturalization’ or ‘aestheticization’ of everyday life is what marks
postmodernism off from previous socio-cultural moments. Postmodernism is a cul-
ture, which offers no position of ‘critical distance’; it is a culture in which claims
of ‘incorporation’ or ‘co-optation’ make no sense, as there is no longer a critical space
from which to be incorporated or co-opted. This is Frankfurt School pessimism at
its most pessimistic (see Chapter 4). Grossberg (1988) sounds the critical note with
economy:

For Jameson . . . we need new ‘maps’ to enable us to understand the organisation
of space in late capitalism. The masses, on the other hand, remain mute and pas-
sive, cultural dupes who are deceived by the dominant ideologies, and who
respond to the leadership of the critic as the only one capable of understanding
ideology and constituting the proper site of resistance. At best, the masses succeed
in representing their inability to respond. But without the critic, they are unable
even to hear their own cries of hopelessness. Hopeless they are and shall remain,
presumably until someone else provides them with the necessary maps of intelli-
gibility and critical models of resistance (174).

Although Jameson can be located within the traditions of Frankfurt School pes-
simism, there is a sense in which he is not quite as postmodern as one of the School’s
leading figures, Herbert Marcuse. Marcuse’s (1968b) discussion of what he calls
‘affirmative culture’ (the culture or cultural space which emerged with the separation of
‘culture’ and ‘civilization’, discussed in Chapter 2) contains little of Jameson’s enthusi-
asm for the historical emergence of culture as a separate sphere. As he explains,

By affirmative culture is meant that culture of the bourgeois epoch, which led in
the course of its own development to the segregation from civilisation of the men-
tal and spiritual world as an independent realm of value that is also considered
superior to civilisation. Its decisive characteristic is the assertion of a universally
obligatory, eternally better and more valuable world that must be unconditionally
affirmed: a world essentially different from the factual world of the daily struggle
for existence, yet realisable by every individual for himself ‘from within’, without
any transformation of the state of fact (95).

Affirmative culture is a realm we may enter in order to be refreshed and renewed in
order to be able to continue with the ordinary affairs of everyday life. ‘Affirmative’ cul-
ture invents a new reality: ‘a realm of apparent unity and apparent freedom was con-
structed within culture in which the antagonistic relations of existence were supposed
to be stabilised and pacified. Culture affirms and conceals the new conditions of social
life’ (96). The promises made with the emergence of capitalism out of feudalism, of a
society to be based on equality, justice and progress, were increasingly relegated from