Doing Cultural Studies is an attempt to tackle the contortionist definition of cultural studies’ methodology. It is one that is continually being wrestled into form. The methodology of cultural studies as proposed in this text is cyclical. It allows for the constant evaluation of new sources of evidence/input/information in a continual evaluative pattern. The evaluative pattern is called the “circuit of culture” and consists of five divisions which cross-reference each other. In order to develop an understanding of cultural “meaning” a continuous juggling act is performed among a circus of performers.
The juggling act consists of various forms of analysis with regards to cultural practices. The most common practice is the analysis of an artifact’s history. This features questions such as, “Who made it?” or “Where did it come from?” This analysis of cultural identity I call the “History Lesson.” The second practice analyzed is called production which I think is an inaccurate term for studying the imprinting of culture to objects. I hesitate to use the word “on” or “in” because it is more about the idea of culture being “embodied” in an object. This requires the reviewer to see beyond the material form of an object to the ideas it manifests. The third practice reviewed is consumption and how manufacturing objects influences or is influenced by culture. Fourth is an analysis through the practice of regulation which is actually a system of classification where objects are compared and derive relational languages.
These four modes of analyses feed into a fifth practice called representation which I picture as the juggler’s hands constantly manipulating information to construct meaning. This meaning expressed through language which is a “set of signs or a signifying system to represent things and exchange meaning about them” (13). Thus, this cultural studies model allows one to develop a tentative conclusion about a culture and/or cultural artifact with the understanding that those conclusion may/will change with the input of additional information, perspective or time. Using this form of evaluation permits the inclusion of cultural processes which are intangible, such as the consideration of “signs, images, languages, beliefs” (1-2) and allows one to decipher and communicate meaning of things.
How does this apply to literature?
Using this method, literature is one way in which I can derive cultural meaning. For years the correct method of studying literature was by studying its history. Today, Norton Anthology literature collection still uses this method. Before you begin reading the actual literary text, a biography is supplied at the beginning containing information about the author, who they were and perhaps the time period in which they are writing. This history lesson is an examination of the literature’s identity. As you begin to read the text, you subconsciously notice the materials of the text, such as the paper, the glue and the ink. However, the materials of the object are not what interest you. It is the ideas embodied by the text that interest you. You are analyzing the object’s production. As you read the ideas expressed from the text, you may wonder how these ideas affected the world around them or the effect of consumption. During the course of subconscious juggling enters the practice of comparisons and relational information in which object and ideas are categorized or regulated. All these activities are an attempt to derive meaning from the intangible object of language and ideas because literature represents culture.
Take it a step further though, “How does one derive meaning from an intangible object within an intangible object?” There’s a mind bender!
Word Count: 590
Total Edits: 0
No comments:
Post a Comment