S.Hall---The-Question-of-Cultural-Identity

TheQuestionofCulturalIdentityStuartHallItisnowacommonplacethatthemodernagegaverisetoanewanddecisiveformofindividualism,atthecentreofwhichstoodanewconceptionoftheindividualsubjectanditsidentity.Thisdoesnotmeanthatpeoplewerenotindividualsinpre-moderntimes,butthatindividualitywasboth'lived','experienced'and'conceptualized'differently.Thetransformationswhichusheredinmodernitytoretheindividualfreefromitsstablemooringsintraditionsandstructures.Sincethesewerebelievedtobedivinelyordained,theywereheldnottobesubjecttofundamentalchange.One'sstatus,rankandpositioninthe'greatchainofbeing'--thesecularanddivineorderofthings--overshadowedanysensethatonewasasovereignindividual.Thebirthofthe'sovereignindividual'betweentheRenaissancehumanismofthesixteenthcenturyandtheEnlightenmentoftheeighteenthcenturyrepresentedasignificantbreakwiththepast.Somearguethatitwastheenginewhichsetthewholesocialsystemof'modernity'inmotion.RaymondWilliamsnotesthatthemodernhistoryoftheindividualsubjectbringstogethertwodistinctmeanings:ontheonehand,thesubjectis'indivisible'--anentitywhichisunifiedwithinitselfandcannotbefurtherdivided;ontheother,itisalsoanentitywhichis'singular,distinctive,unique'.1ManymajormovementsinWesternthoughtandculturecontributedtotheemergenceofthisnewconception:theReformationandProtestantism,whichsettheindividualconsciencefreefromthereligiousinstitutionsoftheChurchandexposeditdirectlytotheeyeofGod;Renaissancehumanism,whichplacedMan(sic)atthecentreoftheuniverse;thescientificrevolutions,whichendowedManwiththefacultyandcapacitiestoinquireinto,investigateandunravelthemysteriesofNature;andtheEnlightenment,centredontheimageofrational,scientificMan,freedfromdogmaandintolerance,beforewhomthewholeofhumanhistorywaslaidoutforunderstandingandmastery.Thosewhoholdthatmodernidentitiesarebeingfragmentedarguethatwhathashappenedinlate-modernitytotheconceptionofthemodernsubjectisnotsimplyitsestrangementbutitsdislocation.Theytracethisdislocationthroughaseriesofrupturesinthediscoursesofmodernknowledge.Inthissection,Ishallofferabriefsketchoffivegreatadvancesinsocialtheoryandthehumanscienceswhichhaveoccurredin,orhadtheirmajorimpactupon,thoughtintheperiodoflate-modernity(thesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury),andwhosemaineffect,itisargued,hasbeenthefinalde-centringoftheCartesiansubject.Thefirstmajorde-centringconcernsthetraditionsofMarxistthinking.Marx'swritingbelongs,ofcourse,tothenineteenthandnotthetwentiethcentury.Butoneofthewaysinwhichhisworkwasrecoveredandre-readinthe1960swasinthelightofhisargumentthat'men(sic)makehistory,butonlyonthebasisofconditionswhicharenotoftheirownmaking'.Hisre-readersinterpretedthistomeanthatindividualscouldnotinanytruesensebethe'authors'oragentsofhistorysincetheycouldonlyactonthebasisofthehistoricalconditionsmadebyothersintowhichtheywereborn,andusingtheresources(materialandculture)providedtothemfrompreviousgenerations.Marxism,properlyunderstood,theyargued,displacedanynotionofindividualagency.TheMarxiststructuralist,LouisAlthusser(1918-89)arguedthat,byputtingsocialrelations(modesofproduction,exploitationoflabourpower,thecircuitsofcapital)ratherthananabstractnotionofManatthecentreofhistheoreticalsystem,Marxdisplacedtwokeypropositionsofmodernphilosophy:'(1)thatthereisauniversalessenceofman;(2)thatthisessenceistheattributeofeachsingleindividualwhoisitsrealsubject':Thesetwopostulatesarecomplementaryandindissoluble.Buttheirexistenceandtheirunitypresupposeawholeempiricist-idealistworldoutlook.Byrejectingtheessenceofmanashistheoreticalbasis,Marxrejectedthewholeofthisorganicsystemofpostulates.Hedrovethephilosophicalcategoryofthesubject,ofempiricism,oftheidealessencefromallthedomainsinwhichtheyhadbeensupreme.Notonlyfrompoliticaleconomy(rejectionofthemythofhomoeconomicus,thatis,oftheindividualwithdefinitefacultiesandneedsasthesubjectoftheclassicaleconomy);notjustfromhistory;...notjustfromethics(rejectionoftheKantianethicalidea);butalsofromphilosophyitself.2This'totaltheoreticalrevolution'was,ofcourse,fiercelycontestedbymanyhumanistictheoristswhogivegreaterweightinhistoricalexplanationtohumanagency.WeneednotarguehereaboutwhetherAlthusserwaswhollyorpartlyright,orentirelywrong.Thefactisthat,thoughhisworkhasbeenextensivelycriticized,his'theoreticalantihumanism'(thatis,awayofthinkingopposedtotheorieswhichderivetheirargumentfromsomenotionofauniversalessenceofManlodgedineachindividualsubject)hashadconsiderableimpactonmanybranchesofmodernthought.Thesecondofthegreat'de-centrings'intwentieth-centuryWesternthoughtcomesfromFreud's'discovery'oftheunconscious.Freud'stheorythatouridentities,oursexuality,andthestructureofourdesiresareformedonthebasisofthepsychicandsymbolicprocessesoftheunconscious,whichfunctionaccordingtoa'logic'verydifferentfromthatofReason,playshavocwiththeconceptoftheknowingandrationalsubjectwithafixedandunifiedidentity--thesubjectofDescartes's'Ithink,thereforeIam'.ThisaspectofFreud'sworkhasalsohadaprofoundimpactonmodernthoughtinthelastthreedecades.PsychoanalyticthinkerslikeJacquesLacan,forexample,readFreudassayingthattheimageofth