Would You Agree With The Statement That Studying Cultural Studies Can Be Described As A Political Act?

Cultural studies is an academic discipline combining political economy, sociology, society theory, literary theory, media theory, cultural anthropology, and art history to study cultural phenomena in industrial societies. In a bid to understand culture in terms of artistic and political merit, cultural studies researchers often concentrate on how a particular phenomenon relates to matters of ideology, race, social class, and/or gender. (Hall: 1992) In recent decades, this has involved interlinking political theory with culture studies. Encompassing a range of inquiries into visual, textual, popular, and sub-cultures, cultural studies is perhaps best captured by the words of Cohen and Arato, who describe it as “a location where the new politics of difference – racial, sexual, cultural, transnational – can combine and be articulated.” (Cohen and Arato: 1992)
Cultural studies in itself focuses on the practices of individuals whether they be a form of dress, worship or job choice. It is only when these practices are undertaken by a number of people that the practice itself becomes part of a “culture” with a number of people pursuing the same form of lifestyle. From this a “cultural identity” is formed, ften distinguished by key factors such as race and social class. For example it could be argued that unwittingly, the low-income, mobile-home inhabiting, white working class culture of “white trash” has become so through cultural practices distinguished by the group as a whole. Therefore the group is termed by a phrase that refers to both race and social class.
It is then that as the dominant group is fully formed sub-cultures are created. Gelder et al describe sub-cultures as: “a sub-division of national culture, composed of a combination of factorable situations such as class status, ethnic background, regional or urban residence and religious affiliation.” (126: 1997) A sub-culture is borne of the “parent” or “dominant” culture, diversifying from the norm. Although this study in itself will not examine the study of sub-cultures as a political act, it is worth noting that in terms of studying a culture as a whole, sub-cultures must be investigated further to establish the motivations and aspirations of the parent culture.
Although having defined markers such as race and social class and essentially their insulated nature and lack of interaction has previously made it simpler to define cultures as a whole, this theory has been thwarted somewhat by the emergence of capitalism and globalization. Whereas some cultures have in the past been defined by their insular nature, such as some strictly religious or remote civilizations, they are no longer clearly defined by elements such as the food they eat or the entertainment they consume. What once may have been a local dish has been replaced by the globalization of McDonalds and Starbucks, and the stories and music that were once labeled as cultural entertainment has been replaced by the Hollywood blockbuster (although notably in countries such as India films with the dominant cultural touch have bucked the trend and become a “Bollywood” culture in itself). Capitalism has dealt a blow to the study of culture, but in terms of studying the subject as a political act, this will not be touched upon here, as anti-capitalism in itself is already a widespread phenomena and cannot be distinguished between cultural spheres.
In relating cultural studies to a political act, this study aims to discuss the relation between proven political theory, specifically that of Foucault and Connelly, and the background of cultural studies in a bid to analyse how studying culture as a whole can apply to the pursuit of active political beliefs.
Although one might map the interface of political theory and cultural studies by providing a list of political commitments such as anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-homophobia, such a listing approach fails as although one can be idealist, the argument covers no academic theory, and disputes what could be used as a cultural base. For example, in a largely Catholic country centered on Catholic values such as Italy or various South American countries, homosexuality and equal rights for women are rarely celebrated. Such political statements go against the country’s political and therefore cultural background, make-up and identity.
What can be done in a bid to deconstruct and separate strong cultural identities from political beliefs is to examine problematization. Foucault describes problematization as “the development of a domain of acts, practices, and thoughts that seem . . . to pose problems for politics.” (Foucault: 1997) To problematize is to challenge or call into question. Crucially, problematization may involve theoretical interrogation and looking further into the accepted standpoint. It may also involve practices and performances that disrupt “the way things are done around here.” To problematize the political is to develop a domain of thought and practice that separates political thinking from a broader cultural background, but it is also the first step towards assessing how political beliefs can contribute to the pursuit of cultural studies, and if they can be affected as a whole by cultural identity.
Political theory and cultural studies can also be analysed through methods of contextualization. As suggested previously, to assess how political beliefs will impact on a culture, it must first be analyzed how the cultural identity views that belief in context. For example, were a culture to be extremely conservative in the manner of the Puritan Protestant Amish communities of Pennsylvania, loud spoken political beliefs such as equal rights for women and cultural integration may not be accepted from a cultural standpoint, but through studying and further understanding of cultural identity, the issues may not seem so alien if they are promoted to the culture in a way more likened to the accepted cultural phenomenon. This theory is supported by Anne Norton’s work on representation. She translates key elements of American liberalism into everyday practices like eating, dressing, and shopping. Such practices enact assumptions that freedom means choice and that people represent themselves and exercise authority when they choose freely. By contexualizing liberalism in everyday activities, moreover, Norton draws out the way these activities challenge basic premises, claiming they reveal “coercion in the context of choice, showing the power of the representation to overcome that which it purports to represent” (Norton: 1993).
Contextualization involves sorting through the various linked political beliefs and contextualizing them within a cultural background (Laclau and Mouffe, 1985). It is a way of thinking about politics through the variety of connections traversing political and cultural formations. Perhaps most importantly in today’s political climate of thinly veiled capitalism and permanent war, contextualization enables political and cultural theorists to analyze issues, identities and events taken out of political circulation, and analysed within a cultural context.
A third way of addressing how studying cultural identity aids the production of political beliefs is pluralization. To pluralize the political is to reject the idea that politics must be centered in the state, understood as the activity of parties, and explained through analyses of voting behaviour. Inspired by Marx’s focus on the economy, race, and ethnicity, feminist accounts of privacy, and queer theory’s attention to sexuality, pluralization looks at categories that “count” as political, acknowledging interlinked relations, fields, and the effects of them within the networks of politics, in essence, it acknowledges culture as an identity.
William Connolly’s compilation of a list designed to stimulate further pluralization gives a sense of this surplus of political possibilities posed by taking part in such cultural movements, including a micropolitics of action, a politics of disturbance, a politics of enactment. (Connolly: 1995) Instead of encouraging an accepted political standpoint, pluralization and the work of Connolly encourages people to develop their beliefs through a number of active pursuits such as demonstrating and campaigning. Grossberg, Nelson, and Treichler support this further by suggesting political analysis is needed within different cultures. Pluralization is thus an engaged process, one that looks for new paths and makes new links in the interests of opening up the political.
Generally speaking, cultural studies is associated primarily with the humanities, and shifting cultural movement, whereas most theory within political science is disciplined by the field’s infatuation with formal modeling. It must also be remembered that a cultural identity is formed through generations of religion, media intake, interaction and immigration. Culture as a whole is formed through concrete markers that have signified it within a cultural context through history. Conversely, whereas culture is rooted in the past, political beliefs focus on moving forward, employing the pluralization methods of Connelly et al. In essence, the two are very different, but by studying identity, it is a means of communicating political beliefs on a more interactive level. Instead of being an aggressive political act, cultural studies has in itself become an act of communication, of willingness to understand. Therefore, in conclusion, studying culture as a whole is a form of political act, as it examines the emergence of these political beliefs. It is also worth noting that by studying the descendant of such dominant cultural identity – the sub-culture – the researcher may be able to establish the emergence of developing political beliefs, or indeed how it will be possible to address new and diverse beliefs to the dominant and parent culture. As a whole, studying culture whether dominant or sub-cultural, allows communication of new ideas within the cultural context, ultimately allowing the ideas to become more considered and accepted. With a rapidly dividing culture of religion, race and misunderstood generational gaps, studying culture may not just be a form of political act, it may be the ultimate political act for the future.