Page 111 - Decoding Culture
P. 111

104  D E C O D I N G   C U L TU RE

           social  interests,  then that would lead to identification of specific
           social consequences  and,  therefore,  provide  a basis for critical
           political analysis. In Screen theory however, as we have seen, the
           preferred theory of ideology was derived from Althusser's 'ideol­
           ogy-in-general',  a  version  of the  concept  which  set  aside  the
           'sectional interests' aspect of the loose usage  (for Althusser that
           was a matter for the analysis of ideologies) in favour of a highly gen­
           eralized account of the unavoidable construction of subjects within
           ideology. In this view, people were 'interpellated' by systems of dis­
           course, constituted as subjects by the cultural materials that they
           encountered, 'always-already' positioned by the ideologies in which
           they found themselves caught.
             In its original form this account conceived social agents as, more
           or less, victims of ideology, and as it was applied in Screen theory it
           led toward an  analysis  of reader-text  relations which  was  pro­
           foundly text-driven. Films, like cultural texts more generally, were
           seen to constrain readers, to provide an inscribed subject position
           ensuring that the text was understood in specific ways. In such a
           model it is difficult to conceptualize independence or resistance on
           the  part of readers;  there  appears little  room for  negotiation  or
           ambiguity.  As  Turner  (1990:  107)  concisely  puts  it:  'in  Screen
           theory,  texts  always  and  irresistibly  tell  us  how to  understand
           them', and even the rather more positively disposed Lapsley and
           Westlake  (1988:  52)  observe that in  the Althusserian  phase  of
           Screen theory 'the central emphasis throughout was on the text's
           power to determine the subject's response'. The degree to which
           this  tendency  is ameliorated by the  turn  toward  psychoanalytic
           concepts is neither clear nor agreed. Lapsley and W e stlake follow
           up  their  above  observation  by  invoking  Heath's  Lacanian-influ­
           enced  later concern with  'a dialectic of the  subject'  in  which,  as
           they  summarize  it,  'meaning  and  subjectivity  come  into  being
           together,  each  engendering  the  other  in a  process  of endless





                              Copyrighted Material
   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116