Page 77 - Decoding Culture
P. 77

70  D E C O D I N G   C U L TURE

           method was seen as the most promising way to extend structural­
           ism  into  general  cultural  analysis.  Little  of  this  material  has
           survived  the  passage  of time  with  any credibility,  and  where  it
           has - as in the case of Wright's (1975) study of the Western - it is
           often  because  key  modifications  were  made to  the  basic  Levi­
           Straussian  framework.  Wright,  for  example,  understands  his
           structures as reflecting  social circumstances  rather than funda­
           mental features of the mind, and draws upon other sources, notably
           Propp, for his method of narrative analysis.
              Nevertheless, Levi-Strauss' particular realization of structuralist
           method did have significant longer-term consequences for cultural
           studies. It played an important part in ensuring that the first impact
           of structuralism emphasized the distinctively formalist potential of
           the approach. A Levi-Straussian analysis, after all, demanded that
           the analyst identified the units from which texts were constructed,
           did so largely in isolation from the actual reading practices of con­
           sumers of those texts, and arrived at an account of 'meaning' by
           examining the  formal  combinations  and  permutations of those
           units across the (trans-cultural) corpus of texts. Such an approach
           is 'formalist' in several senses. First, and most obviously, it focuses
           on the formal patterning of cultural materials across the whole set
           of artefacts, treating this as revealing the most significant 'mean­
           ings' which texts carry.  In  doing that, however,  it abstracts texts
           from their culture,  reifying revealed form. The texts come to carry
           meaning in consequence of the structures that the analysis uncov­
           ers,  a process which functions quite  independently of the  social
           agents who make and use culture. In other words, both the social
           and the individual recede into the background of such an analysis ­
           the  'forms'  themselves  provide  sufficient grounds for  credible
           interpretative  conclusions. Accordingly,  it is  difficult to  say  any­
           thing  about  the  social  role  of cultural forms except at the  most
           general level - Levi-Strauss  (1972: 224), for instance, proclaims





                              Copyrighted Material
   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82