[Bibliography] [Relevant Link] [Other Theories][Cultural Studies]

Cultural Studies: Representation and Identity

Cultural Industry and Cultural Populism,

or productionism vs. consumptionism

Theodore Adorno -- 
    Adorno 為首的文化工業批評者認為,大眾文化即是愚眾文化;它使消費者成為劃一、無自主性、批判性的群眾(mass)。 
    Adorno's concept of modernism as a form of negation.  According to Adorno, "art is the negative knowldge of the actual world"; it "expresses the idea of harmony negatively by embodying the contradictions, pure and uncompromised, in its innermost structure."  For Adorno, modern avant-garde art is de-aestheticized and its aura eroded from within (through its form and structure) and this immanent negativity distances the reality it alludes to.
    1. General Introd; 2. "Culture Industry" outline; 3. Adorno on Modernism

Michel de Certeau   1. The Practice of Everyday Life General Introduction outline

    de Certeau認為消費本身即是主動的再創造 ("active re-creation"  Poster 102);  它是機動性、零碎的、不明顯的改寫或竊取 , 利用「加於她身上的力量」在一個不屬於自己的地方「再創造」。換言之,消費者就是移民,離開了傳統的團結社會,在工業科技社會四處流浪,並把自己的otherness帶入社會(de Certeau 40; Poster 103)
    Walking in the City: 對de Certeau而言,日常生活就是介入、挪用權力的方式﹔改寫都市版圖的方式就是個人在都市中的行走。de Certeau指出,行走之於地圖就如同語言行為(parole)之於語言系統(langue)﹔行走(或謂「行人的語言行動」或寫作)說/寫出了城市的多重空間。「行走肯定、懷疑、試驗、僭越、尊敬它所『說出』的軌道」(97-99)。如果都市地圖上有工整的街道,行人的腳蹤是不規律的(東歪西拐走捷徑)﹔如果都市地圖是完整的,行人的「空間」故事則是以偏代全(de Certeau用的是修辭語synecdoche,提喻),省略連接詞(asyndeton﹔100-10)。於是,移民在都市行走,一方面可能是遵循既有的軌道或被困於其中,一方面可能是寫出它的空間故事,是他/她們突破物質困境,挪用都市空間的方式之一。
John Fiske--
    大眾文化是個鬥爭的場所("a site of struggle" Fiske 1989: 20),有控制,也有抗爭。
    大眾文化屬於弱勢族群("the weak" de Certeau 37; "the subordinated and the disempowered"  Fiske 1989 4-5) ; 抵抗龐大笨拙、沒想像力、太有組織("cumbersome"、"unimaginative"、"over-organized")的權力 (Fiske 1989 32)。
    消費者抵制的方式可以是規避("evasion"),也可以是抗拒("resistance")。在Power Plays, Power Works 中,Fiske 更進一步將消費者的伎倆分為較被動的轉換(inversion)、規避(evasion),及較主動的反抗(opposition)及顛覆(disruption)。
    Fiske 的例子:Madonna fans, blue jeans wearers, homeless people.
John MacGuigan -- 
    Fiske . . . represents a dramatic narrowing of vision: the gap between 'popular' and 'mass' culture is finally closed with no residual tension; the relation between interpretative cultural studies and the political economy of culture is obliterated from the surface of the argument.  (p. 550)
    [following Nowell-Smith] an exclusive attention to the popular may distract critical analysis from focusing on how cultural field works in general. . . 
      Modern culture is capitalist culture. . 
      Modern culture also takes the form of a single intertexual field, whose signifying elements are perpectually being recombined and played off against each other.