studies have led to a proliferation of studies into relatively disadvantaged
subcultures. Much of the research in cultural studies follows a similar
pattern to that in literary and media studies: the social practices of a
subcultural grouping are considered as a ‘text’ to be analysed and
explained. Such research can again be related to different stages of the
encoding-decoding discourse cycle. There is, however, more of a problem
in cultural studies of determining the ‘auteur’ and the ‘audience’ of the text.
In
Subculture: The Meaning of Style
, Hebdige (1979: 122–3) distinguishes
between the ‘self-conscious innovators’, the ‘originals’ who develop a sub-
culture, and the ‘hangers-on’ who later appropriate the symbols of the
subculture, without consciously or deliberately adopting its ideology. This
distinction is echoed in the complaints of Widdiecombe and Wooffitt’s
subcultural informants about ‘plastic goths’, ‘pseudo goths’ and other
‘shallow’ or ‘inauthentic’ subcultural members. In both cases, it seems,
there is a small group of ‘auteurs’ whose behaviour and style are taken up
by a larger group, or audience, but in the process the core beliefs of the orig-
inators are diluted or lost. However, McRobbie (1993) has questioned such
distinctions, by arguing for a fusion in the categories of consumption and
production. For example, when cultural practices such as fashion are
concerned, the consumer can combine and adapt ready-made garments in
order to produce something ‘original’. The cyclical version of the encoding-
decoding discourse model is adaptable enough to account for this
bricolage
(i.e. the improvisatory use of given materials to make new meanings): the
decoder feeds new encodings back into the discourse system and contrib-
utes actively to the dialogic evolution of texts.
Methods of analysis in cultural studies therefore downplay the roles of
auteur and audience as distinctive categories, and focus instead on the
semiotic analysis of the texts, and the ethnographic analysis of members of
the subculture as
both
consumers and producers of meaning. As an illustra-
tion of how researchers in cultural studies have approached social practice
as semiotic text and as ethnographic data, I shall look at two approaches to
dance. First, McRobbie (1993) considers the social practices of young female
dancers at the mass raves which flourished in Britain in the early 1990s.
These took place in large, disused warehouses and hangars, to the sound of
hypnotic ‘techno’ music, and were associated with the use of the drug
Ecstasy. Girls danced in hot pants and bra tops, and some wore babies’
dummies or whistles, in their mouth or around their neck. The dances lasted
for long periods – some for several days – and tired dancers were provided
with ‘chill-out’ rooms where ice-lollies were sold. McRobbie’s description of
the girls’ dress and behaviour utilises the vocabulary of text analysis: for
example, the dances and fashions ‘articulate’ social tensions (McRobbie
1993: 25–6):
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: