Page 184 - Decoding Culture
P. 184

O
                                     THE RISE  F   THE READE R    177
          partial and can never simply  be  taken  to represent participants'
          views.  But nor are  they  nothing more  than  convenient fictions.
          Combined with research using other methodological approaches -
          triangulated, to borrow a jargon term - they potentially constitute
          an assembly of variously described materials in relation to which
          we formulate models. Clearly this returns theory to centre stage -
          it is within the terms of our theories that we develop models, and it
          is in relation to these models that we describe and redescribe the
          phenomenal world. But this is not Theory' in the grand capitalized
          sense. This is theory  as a language of analysis and  as an  instru­
          ment of explanatory understanding.
             It is through the development of this theory that the 'structural
          considerations' that Morley wants to  incorporate  into  his ethno­
          graphic approach  can  be brought into  play.  But such  theorizing
          cannot be an inductive by-product of audience ethnographies, as
          some researchers seem to assume. To construct models of audi­
          ence activity we need to draw on theoretical as well as empirical
          resources, and, in particular, develop concepts which will allow for
          the conjoint conceptualization of structure and agency. I suggested
          earlier that cultural studies thinking has been restricted by a com­
          mitment  to  dualistic  forms  of  theorizing,  classically  viewing
          structures as modes of ideological constraint, but more recently, in
          the  rise  of the  active  reader,  affording considerable  degrees  of
          freedom to  agents over structure. Audience ethnographies have
          swung with the theoretical pendulum toward the latter position, if
          not from  theoretical  intent,  then  as  a matter  of methodological
          default. This precisely parallels the kind of dualism that Giddens
          (1984) identifies as a basic difficulty in the development of modern
          sociological  theories,  and  one  which,  he  argues,  can  only  be
          resolved by generating concepts which ensure that we understand
          structure and agency in conjoint terms - the one always implying
          and presupposing the other. This is the kind of thinking that will be





                              Copyrighted Material
   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189