Thoughts on Monday's class (2.12.07)

Complicated class today! There are two fundamental concepts you need to know:

1) IDEOLOGY. Pardon me from quoting directly from Wikipedia, but I couldn't have said it better myself:

"Every society has an ideology that forms the basis of the "public opinion" or common sense, a basis that usually remains invisible to most people within the society. This dominant ideology appears as "neutral", holding to assumptions that are largely unchallenged. Meanwhile, all other ideologies that differ from the dominant ideology are seen as radical, no matter what the content of their actual vision may be."

2) CULTURAL HEGEMONY

This idea refers to a "coalescing" of consciousness, behavior, and ways of living among a social group in a broad sense, which thereby inhibits significantly different viewpoints (and, indeed, ideologies). As I explained in class, hegemonic forces in society act as an umbrella, protecting our widely accepted values, beliefs, behavior, and way of life. According to Antonio Gramsci, this is done mainly through "compulsory schooling, mass media, and popular culture."

In other words, according to Gramsci, "hegemony" is another word for "mass conformity," but it is particularly insidious because it inhibits critical democratic (free) thought. Gramsci developed this idea to explain why, contrary to predictions by Karl Marx & Frederick Engells, the proletariat did not rise up and overthrow the bourgeoisie in the early part of the 20th century (despite rampant growth of capatalism around the world).

In sum, think of it this way:

The hegemonic forces of society (things like compulsory schooling, mass media, popular culture, etc.) help solidify a prevailing IDEOLOGY among the people in society. A certain way of thinking becomes "de facto," and "escaping" that way of thinking becomes very, very difficult indeed.

HOWEVER!

Critics of this argue that Gramsci's theory reduces the mass of people as seemingly idiotic dupes who are easily fooled by "the powers that be." They look like victims without recourse/voice.

BUT JEFF! WHY IN THE HECK ARE WE LEARNING ABOUT THIS ANYWAY??!!

My own contention is that subcultures represent attempts to "break loose" from the prevailing ideology. Early punk rock is a great example (at least insofar as it seriously questioned "pop culture"). This is not to say that I wholeheartedly accept Gramsci's theories. (Indeed, I am no Gramsci scholar, nor am I an expert social scientist/political scientist). Isn't it interesting, though, that there are numerous examples of groups of people who deliberately choose to live in specific ways that counter identifiable values supported by society at large? Furthermore, isn't it interesting, as far as culture is concerned, that so many cultural phenomena are "co-opted" by the "mainstream" (so-called "Alternative" music is a particularly ironic example of this, given its name).

The graffiti artists that we have studied are one example of a "counter-hegemonic" subculture in that their methods undermine the fundamental value of private property. I suggested in class that subcultures represent (in often very creative ways) methods of questioning prevailing "hegemonic" forces in society. So, one of the intentions behind this class is to better understand HOW subcultures do this...(and by the way, to not necessarily condone/accept them).

I'd also like to point out that, while Gramsci was an unapologetic leftist, his ideas have been adopted by the right in this country. Evangelical Christians in particular have attempted to transform public schools (specifically by promoting school prayer and denouncing Darwin's theory of Evolution), and conservatives use this idea of hegemony by decrying the "liberal media." Conservatives argue that the media systematically presents more liberal viewpoints, thereby acting as a "leftist" hegemonic force.

These ideas were prescient during the 1990s, when the "culture wars" were in full swing in the good ol' U.S. of A.

Ok...I'll stop torturing you now...