discourse ideology discourse ideology

28
7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 1/28 Discourse, Ideology, Discourse, Ideology, Discourse, Ideology... Author(s): Trevor Purvis and Alan Hunt Reviewed work(s): Source: The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Sep., 1993), pp. 473-499 Published by: Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of The London School of Economics and Political Science Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/591813 . Accessed: 29/10/2012 00:43 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at  . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp  . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].  . Wiley-Blackwell  and The London School of Economics and Political Science are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The British Journal of Sociology. http://www.jstor.org

Upload: aliihsanozcan

Post on 13-Apr-2018

303 views

Category:

Documents


10 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 1/28

Discourse, Ideology, Discourse, Ideology, Discourse, Ideology...Author(s): Trevor Purvis and Alan HuntReviewed work(s):Source: The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Sep., 1993), pp. 473-499Published by: Wiley-Blackwell  on behalf of The London School of Economics and Political ScienceStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/591813 .

Accessed: 29/10/2012 00:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

 .JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of 

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

 .

Wiley-Blackwell and The London School of Economics and Political Science are collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access to The British Journal of Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org

Page 2: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 2/28

TrevorPurvisandAlanHunt

Discourse, deology,discourse, deology,

discourse, deology.. .

ABSIRACI

Modernsocial heory s awashwithtalkof'discourse'and'ideology'.Sometimes he twoconceptsareusedinterchangeablyndatothertimestheyarecounterposed.The paperseeksto makesenseof thepartplayedbytheseconcepts ncontemporary ebates.Itproposesanexercise n retrievalwhichsuggeststhatour twokeytermsformdistinct heoreticalraditionswhich,whiletheycanbedistinguished,canbothbe madegooduseof. Wefirstengagewiththedebateoverideology within modern western Marxism and explore the

suggestivedistinctionproposedbyLarrainbetweenanegativeand apositiveconceptionof ideology.NextweexploreFoucault's ersionof discourse heory.Ourthirdinvestigationocuseson theworkofErnestoLaclauandChantalMouffewhoopt fora rupturebetweendiscourseand ideology;their solutionwill be contrastedwiththeGramscian ositionespousedbyStuartHall theapproach losest othesolutionwewillpropose thatretains heconcept deologywhilstbenefiting romtheadvances ecuredbydiscourse heory.

The theoryof ideologyweproposesupplementsdiscourse heory

ratherthan opposing it. It is a versionof ideologytheorythat isdifferentfromthatbequeathedbyMarx.Retainedandmovedintocentralprominence s a keyfeatureof the critical hrustof Marx'saccount,namely, tsfocuson the way n whichthe interpellation fsubjectpositionsoperatessystematicallyo reinforceandreproducedominant social relations - it is this that is described as the'directionality'f ideologytheory.Thisdirectionalityscapturedbyemploying deologicalanalysis o focusupon the effectsof discur-sivepractices,whichweterm'ideologyeffects'.

I. DISCOURSE:FOROR AGAINSI IDEOLOGY?

Modernsocialtheoryis awashwithtalkof 'discourse' nd 'ideology'.Sometimesthe two conceptsare used interchangeably nd at other

/X5' V JIUMe #0. 44 I.s.sz #{J. 3 vSepl&r 1993

Page 3: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 3/28

474 TrevorPurvisandAlanHunt

timestheyarecounterposed. stheircurrentusageamatterof stylisticpreferenceorevenanintellectualad?WouldAlthussersay' hesame

if we substituted'discourse'on each occasionhe used 'ideology'?WouldwehaveadifferentFoucaultf histextsweretoberepublishedwith'ideology' ubstituted or 'discourse'?This paperseeksto makesenseof thepartplayedbytheseconcepts ncontemporary ebates.Itproposesanexercise nretrievalwhichsuggests hatourtwokeytermsform distinct theoreticaltraditionswhich, while they can be dis-tinguished,can both be madegood use of. We do not hold out thepromiseof erectinga neat distinctionbetweenthem;ratherwe willarguethattheybothhavea distinguishableheoretical oleto playin

theanalysisof socialrelations.Conceptsof the socialare never fully referential, n the sense ofidentifyingaverbal ignthatstands ororrefersto (andthuscomestorepresent)some unambiguouslydentifiable eatureof an externalreality.Ratherwhatconceptsdoistoputahandleon,orgiveemphasisto, someaspectof the complexof interconnections ndrelations hatconstitutethe social. In this sense ideology and discourserefer topretty much the same aspectof social life - the idea that humanindividualsparticipaten formsof understanding, omprehensionor

consciousness f therelationsandactivitiesnwhich heyareinvolved;aconceptionof thesocial hathasahermeneuticdimension,butwhichisnotreducible o hermeneutics.Thisconsciousnesssbornethroughlanguageandothersystemsof signs,it is transmittedbetweenpeopleand institutionsand, perhaps most importantof all, it makesadifference;hat is, the way in which people comprehendand makesense of the social world has consequencesfor the directionandcharacterof theiractionandinaction.Both'discourse' nd 'ideology'referto theseaspectsof social ife.

The concepts 'discourse'and 'ideology'also differ in importantrespects.Forexample,theydo not standalonebutareassociatednotonly with other concepts but with different theoreticaltraditions.Thus,while'ideology'wasnot inventedbyMarx, thasincontempor-aryusage becomecloselyassociatedwith the Marxist raditionandtakesits place withinwhat we suggest is the broadproblematicofmodernwesternMarxism,namely,the attemptto understandhowrelationsof dominationor subordinationare reproducedwithonlyminimal esortto directcoercion. Discourse' n theotherhandtakesits

place and derives its significancefrom its central role in thelinguisticurninmodernsocial heorybyprovidingatermwithwhichtograsptheway nwhich anguageandotherformsof social emioticsnot merelyconvey socialexperience,but play some majorpart inconstitutingsocial subjects(the subjectivitiesand their associatedidentitites),heirrelations,andthefieldinwhichtheyexist.

The task of distinguishing ideology and discourse does not,unfortunatelyor our immediateconcerns,involvefixed and stable

Page 4: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 4/28

Discourse, deology. . 475

theories that can be brought into proximityand then comparedandcontrasted.Our task s made more difficultby the fact that, as we will

show, the theoretical traditions of which they are part have, likeancient glaciers, been shifting remorselessly,towards each other.Stickingwith our glacialanalogy,some commentatorshave assumedthat the two have merged, more or less peacefully, and thus theirconceptualapparatus an now be used interchangeably; thers haveadopted a more catastrophic cenarioand have assumedthat the twotraditionshaveto fightout a bitterand protracted truggleuntilone orthe other is left crushed such that only small tracesof their passageremain n the intellectualdebris hat they leave behind.

We do not offer an intellectualhistoryof the two traditions.Ourreasons for refusing, or perhaps more accurately avoiding, thisapproachare not only that the very project hat used to be called the'historyof ideas' is itself riven by such strenuous conflicts as to beinherentlycontroversial.Our reasons are, in fact, more prosaicandmanifest he limitsof our competenciesand the scope of our presentproject. In place of anything more ambitiouswe will organize thispaperby undertaking hree, whatmaybe called,symptomatic tudies.We willfirstengage withthe traditionof ideology heoryby examining

the trajectoryof the debate over ideology within modern westernMarxism.We will enter that now extensive debate stimulatedby thesuggestivedistinctionmadebyJorgeLarrainbetweena negativeand apositiveconceptionof ideologywithin he Marxist radition. Next wewill explore the version of discourse theory elaborated by MichelFoucault.Our third investigationwill concern the point of contact,whether convergent or catastrophic, of the two traditions thatemerges in the work of Ernesto Laclauand Chantal Mouffe whichopts for a rupturebetweendiscourseand ideology.That solutionwill

be contrastedwith the Gramscianpositionespoused by StuartHall-the approachclosestto the solutionwe will propose- that retains heconcept ideology whilst benefiting from the advances secured bydiscourse theory. Our justification or this selection, implied by theclaim that our studies are symptomatic, s that these strandsare notonly widely influential in their own right but set up contrastingengagements between the figures of ideology and discourse. Theinterrogationof these three bodies of work will provide us with theopportunity to propose, if not a resolution, then a potentially

productive xchangebetween he alternative raditions.Before embarkingon these explorations here are two preliminarymatters.Readersmay be assisted f we providean indicationof whatwe hope is a serviceable, f provisional,distinctionbetween deologyand discourse.We will then brieflysketch, that is assert rather thanargue for, a generalframework f our theoreticalposition.

Page 5: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 5/28

476 TrevorPurvis and Alan Hunt

II. PRELIMINARIES

We propose the following as a provisionaldistinctionbetween theconcepts ideology and discourse. The concept 'ideology' typicallyfigures in inquiriesthat are concerned to identify the way in whichforms of consciousness condition the way in which people, toparaphraseMarx,becomeconsciousof their conflicting nterestsandstruggleover them.2Ideologythus implies he existenceof some linkbetween 'interests'and 'forms of consciousness'.Central to such aconception s the contention that interestsare identifiable n a formthat is distinguishable rom the form in which these interests are

experienced.Discourse,on the other hand, focuses attention on the terms ofengagementwithinsocialrelationsby insisting hat all socialrelationsare lived and comprehendedby their participantsn termsof specificlinguistic or semiotic vehicles that organize their thinking, under-standingand experiencing.The concept of 'discourse' emainsself-consciouslyneutralor skepticalaboutwhetherdiscourseas a form ofexistence s connectedwithelements,suchas are invokedby notionsofinterest, hatare external o the discursive ontentof livedexperience.

The distinction we have drawn, it should be noted, makes noattemptto say what either ideologyor discourse is'.We have soughtmerely to offer a distinction rather than definitions. Instead ofattempting o map all the differences that distinguishdiscourseandideology we want to suggest a short form of a general distinction,which we stress is both tentativeand provisional.If'discourse' and'ideology'both figure in accountsof the general field of socialactionmediatedthrough communicativepractices, hen 'discourse' ocusesupon the internal features of those practices, in particular their

linguistic and semiotic dimensions. On the other hand, 'ideology'directsattention owards heexternal aspectsof focusingon the way nwhich ived experience s connected o notionsof interestand positionthat are in principledistinguishablerom lived experience.

Our adherence to some versionof an internal/external istinctionrequiresan intellectual ommitment o some versionof philosophicalrealism,whatwe willcall soft-realism.We wantto find a philosophicalframework hat allowsus to hang on to 'truth' with a small 't') andinterestsas not being reducible o subjectivepreferencewhilstpassing

on 'Truth' (with a capital 'T'). We do not purport to offer aphilosophicallyworkedout position,but descriptivelyt aspires o thekind of 'third way' position that RichardBernstein captures in hisphrase betweenobjectivism nd relativism'.3 ur soft-realism s 'soft'in that it readilyaccepts the typicalpostmodernist laim that know-ledge claimscan never be verifiedand that there is no vantagepointexternal to discourse from which truth-claims an be validated.Yetour position is 'realist' n that we insist that there is a non-discursive

Page 6: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 6/28

Discourse,deologzy.. 477

realm thatcan be known even though thatknowledgecan neverbemore than fallible,alwaysliable to be displaced by some 'better'

account.We seeourprojectof retrieval sbeing partof a moregeneralquestfor a theory of 'theThird Way'.Sucha viewrejectsthe catastrophicscenarios,currentlycanvassedn the name of postmodernism,whichinsist hatwe mustfinallyabandonanyaspirations o retainagripon aknowable ndobjective eality,andgive upanyintellectual rpoliticalprojects hat bearanymarkof the Enlightenment.Rather he ThirdWayaspires o takeseriously hechallengeof postmodernismwithitsundermining of objectivistepistemologyand representationalac-

counts of language. It is in this light that we engage withdiscoursetheorywith the hope of supplementing,andeven of furtherdevelop-ing, thetraditionof ideologytheory.

I II IDEOLOGY:CRII ICALOR S<,IOL6sICAL?

In his study of Marx'stheory of ideologyJorge Larrainmakesadistinctionbetween a positiveand negativeconception of ideology.

The snegative'ne whichrefersto somekindof distorted hought,andthe 'positive'conceptionfocuses on the constructionof socialcon-sciousness.His generalthesisis that,whilstthe positiveversion hascome to havepreponderantnfluence n the subsequent rajectory fthe Marxist heory of ideology, the negativeconceptionis the onewhichprovides he mostcritical dge to Marx'shought.

[T]hecriticaland negativeconnotationsof theconceptof ideologyare . . . alwaysused for thecritiqueof a specifickind of errorwhichis connected in one way or another with the concealmentor

distortionof a contradictory nd invertedreality.It is in thissenseboth a restrictedand historicalconcept:restrictedbecause it doesnot encompassall kinds of errorsand becausenot all the rulingideas are affected by it; historicalbecause it depends on theevolutionof contradictions.4

He arguesthatthe negativeconceptiondoesnot necessarilynvolveaview of ideologyas mereillusionnor is it reducible o a conceptionofideology as 'falseconsciousness'.The critical hrustof Marx'sviewofideologystemsfrom itsfocusonwhatMarxcalled the anguageof reallife'5 n which the ideasproducedbysubordinate lassesexpressandreproducethe dominantmaterialrelationsand the interestsassoci-ated therewith. Larrain's nterpretation of Marx'sconception ofideologytreats tas a misrepresentationalheory.

Ideology is a particularform of consciousnesswhich gives aninadequateor distorted pictureof contradictions, itherby ignor-ingthem, or bymisrepresentinghem.fi

Page 7: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 7/28

478 TrevorPurvis and Alan Hunt

This 'negative' conception of ideology is perhaps most clearlyelaborated n TheGermandeologyn which Marx'susage of the term

variously efers to that realmof consciousness n which men [sic]andtheir relationsappearupside-downas in a camera bscura',s 'reflexesand echoes of their life-process'or as 'phantoms'.7The persistentthread hatruns throughall of these references s one of mystification,resulting n a 'negative' onceptionof ideologyentailing he notion of

* * * * * * a Z-

mlsconceptlon,mlsperceptlonor mlsrecognltlonor an lncompeteknowledgeof socialreality.

We propose to do some additionalwork on Larrain'sdistinction.What we want to emphasize is a conception of ideology that goes

beyond the general claim that all thought is sociallyconstructedwhich s true but insufficient.What he conceptof ideologyadds s thecontention that ideology exhibits a directionalityn the sense thatideology alwaysworks to favour some and to disadvantageothers.Thus the criticalprojectof a theoryof ideology s concerned o explainhow the forms of consciousness eneratedby the lived experienceofsubordinateclasses and social groups facilitate he reproductionofexistingsocialrelationsand thus impedesuchclassesand groupsfromdeveloping forms of consciousness hat reveal the nature of their

subordination. In its simplest and most pervasive form ideologypresents the existing social relationsas both naturaland inevitable;particular interests come to be disassociated from their specificlocationand come to appearas universaland neutral.

In order to insertthis idea of the directionality f ideologywe needto amend Larrain's erminology- if only for the reason that thenegative-positivedistinctionsounds too value laden. But more im-portantly we think the designations 'critical'and 'sociological'aremore helpful in capturingthe thrust of our argument.The critical

conceptionof ideologydelimitsa realm n whichsocialknowledgeandexperienceare constructed n such a wayas to 'mystify' he situation,circumstanceor experience of subordinate classes or dominatedgroups.Its focus is thus upon the socialeffectsor consequences,whichleads us to suggest that the most incisiveway in which the conceptideologycan be employed s to identify ideological ffects'. It shouldbe stressed hatthisviewdoes not involveany implications f negationor reversal hat figure so strongly n Marx'soptical metaphorof thecamera bscura.

The sociological onceptionof ideologyfocuseson a pluralconcep-tion of ideologyas the outcomeor resultof the specific ocialpositionof classes,groups or agents. Ideology is the result of objective ocialposition and, most significantly, s a sphere or arena of struggle, aconception hat opens the theoreticaldoor to notionsof a multiplicityof competing 'ideologies', but does not imply a correspondenceaccount in which every social class articulates ts own specific ideol-ogy'. But the plurality f competing deologiesare thus linkedto some

Page 8: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 8/28

Discourse, deology. . 479

conceptionof socialpositionand objective nterests. n this sociologialsense ideology is 'real',or material,ratherthan fictionalor delusory,

and is thus unavoidable n that it simplydescribes he frameworkofmeanings and values within which people exist and conduct theirsocial ives.

It is this 'positive', r as we prefer 'sociological', onception hat hasprovided the major vehicle for the elaboration of the theory ofideology, which itself has been a central feature in modern westernMarxism.It involves a closer attention to the actual terms in whichsocial and economic struggleswere fought over. We will argue that,despite the obvious merit of this second variant, it has had the

unintended consequence of pushing aside or marginalizing thecritical onceptionof ideology.One significant eatureof the primacyof the sociologicalvariant for contemporaryMarxistshas been atendency to blur or to conflatethe concepts ideology and discourse.Our contention s that it is both possibleand desirable o retain thisconception of ideology as the vehicle of 'lived experience', and toreinstatesomethingof the earlier 'negative'or, as we prefer, criticaltradition.

The most immediate problem with Marx's invocation of the

mystifying properties of ideology is that it relies upon a set ofepistemological assumptions constructed around a 'truth'/'falsity'distinction.In its most extreme form this gives rise to the dubiousnotionof 'falseconsciousness'hathad such a prevalence n post-MarxMarxism. We are most emphatic in not wanting to revive thattradition.It would undoubtedlybe easy to dispense, in the name ofpurging Marxof the rationalism f the truth/falsitydistinction,withthe negativeor critical onceptionof ideology.Yet at the sametime wewantto argue that the 'mystification'hesis nvolvesan importantand

criticalpotential hat it is important o retainand develop.The reason hatwe think t worthdoing work o retain, n acceptable

form, Marx's ritical onceptionof ideology s that it makespossibleaconceptof 'ideology' hat is not reducible o 'discourse'.An importantconsequenceof this delineation s to insist that a serviceable oncep-tion of ideology s not about ideas'or 'thinking' ven though it was nthe context of a philosophicalproblematicorganized around themind/being distinction in which Marx developed his conception.Ideology s concernedwiththe realmof the lived, or the experienced,

rather than of'thinking'.8An importantexample through which tomake this point is provided by the notion of 'common sense'. It isprecisely he 'spontaneous' ualityof commonsense, its transparency,its 'naturalness',ts refusal to examine the premisseson which it isgrounded, its resistance o correction, ts quality of being instantlyrecognizablewhich makescommon sense, at one and the same time,'lived', spontaneous' nd unconscious.We live in commonsense - wedo not think t.

Page 9: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 9/28

480TrevorPurvisandAlanHunt

IV. MARXAND LANGUAGE:I HE MISSINGDIMENSION

Twentieth-centuryocial heoryhaswitnessedanupsurgeof attentiono languageand communicativenteraction.Linguistics, emiotics,emanticsand, more generally,discoursetheory,have becomekeyociinsocialandphilosophicalhoughtandhavebeencentral hemesn the work of some of the century'sforemost intellectuals:Witt-enstein,Habermas,Chomsky ndFoucault-to namebutafewof theost nfluential.As RaymondWilliamshaspointedout 'Marxism asontributederylittleto thinkingabout anguage tself'9uchof theinadequacy f Marx's pproach olanguage tems romhephilosophicalontext nwhichMarx

worked;hisconceptionof anll-embracingconfrontationbetweenidealismand materialism ndis wncommitmentothelatterresulted napreponderant mphasisponhe materialntegumentof social ifeanda parallel uspicionofhementalor ideationaldimensions.Thus the generalemphasisonherole of productive abourin the constitutionof socialsubjectsesultednwhatsometimescameoverasa ratherphysicalisttrand nis hilosophicalmaterialism.nterestingly,however,Marx's ilencenhequestionof languagewasnotcomplete; n TheGermandeology,eind a critical,but all-too-brief,recognitionof its importance.anguages conceivedas an essentialelementof the social,asone ofourrimaryaspects.AsWilliams'ummarizesMarx

The distinctively umanmodeof thisprimarymaterialproductionas been characterizedn three aspects:needs, new needs, andumanreproduction.... The distinctivehumanityof thedevelop-entis thenexpressedbythe fourth'aspect',hatsuchproductionsfrom hebegznninglsoa socialrelationship. t then involves romhe beginning,as a necessary lement,thatpractical onsciousnesshat slanguage.l°

Thus,n TheGermandeologyanguageappearsnot as secondary oroduction,ut ratheras necessarilycontemporaneouswithall thatefineshespecificity f thesocial.What istinguishesdiscourse heory romMarx'sheoryof ideologyshathelatter srooted nanactionheoryhat sorganizedaround heualismf actionand consciousness.Discourse heoryis one of theajoronsequencesof the linguisticurn,that marksa breakfromctionheoryand focuseson the centralityof the

'linguisticconsti-ution'f thesocial.Thusourtwokeyconceptsarerooted n radicallyifferentepistemological trategies; hey are thusalways n tension.heeyquestion swhetherthistensioncanbe turnedto productivese.Thus,atherthanbeingwhollyabsentfromMarxism ll thistime,anguageasrelegatedto a peripheralrole.Culture,particularlynheistinctiveormof thenovel,wascentral o thefirstwaveof critical

Page 10: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 10/28

Discourse,deology. .481

theoryand then in EnglishMarxism hroughthe workof RaymondWilliams. Subsequentlycommunication' asbeencentral o thelong

trajectory f Habermas'workon the fringesof the Marxistradition.It is not so much the absence of a developed theorizationof

languagethatis significant.Rather t is thatoutsidethe over-embrac-ing concept of 'superstructure'Marxismhas never found even anadequate abelwithwhichto set aboutdeveloping a regionaltheory.Perhaps t is a significant estimony o the profound,and inherentlylimiting,impactof Marx'sbase/superstructuremetaphorthat thisabsencehasonlybecomeapparentwiththeriseof thedirectchallengeembodiedin post-structuralistocialtheory.The blindspot imposed

bytheconcept of 'superstructure'tems n no smallmeasurefromitsover-inclusivenesswhichreachesout to embracenot only language,communication ndculturebuttheinstitutional exusof thestateandpolitical nstitutions.The conceptsuperstructure as functionedas aresidualcategory nto whichalmostall that is outside the sphereofproductionwas,albeitunwittingly, elegated.

It is our contentionthatthe theoreticalcrisisof Marxism s not somuch that of its economism,its reductionismor its determinism.Rather,beneath tsaspirationso providea totalizing ocialtheory, s

the residualnatureof theconcept superstructure'hatforcesit to doservice as the repositoryfor such diverse forms of socialityandrenders tincapable f generatingadequateconceptsanddelineationsto meetthechallenges hatwecallupon it to provide.It isnotjustthatthe imageryof base-and-superstructurerovidesus with a constrain-ing metaphorical mbrace,butratherthat itsone-sidedness, he verydevelopmentand richnessof the one side,the economicbasis, eavesall the restconstricted,conflatedand hopelesslyunderdeveloped.Itmay well be that the most significantimplicationof the vices of

economism,reductionismand determinism s not thatthey concen-trateone-sidedlyon economicrelationsandpractices,butratherthatthey impedeand even excludean adequatetheorizationof so manyothermanifestations f humansociality.

The lineageof westernMarxismhasbeen concerned to overcomethisone-sidedness n Marx'segacy.In orderto explorethisroutewepropose a briefre-examinationof the crucial nterventionsof LouisAlthusser.

V. AL'I'HUSSERAND 'I'HEOPENING'I'OWARDSDISCOURSE

No single figure looms as large as does Louis Althusser in theexplosion of western Marxism.His interventionsestablishednewstandards f theoretical igourandsophistication.Hiswritingsare,onthe one hand, innovativeand yet, at the same time, exhibit a deepconcern to sustain a commitmentto an 'orthodoxy'with Marxism.

Page 11: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 11/28

482TrevorPurv2s ndAlanHunt

While he has more recentlysuffered a fall from favour with theeneral turn againststructuralism,many of his insightsremainofentralimportance;nowhere sthismoretruethan

withrespect o theebateover

ideology.We will review Althusser'streatmentof ideology in terms ofarrain'sdistinctionbetween a negative and positive conception.lthusser ffersa versionof a negativeconceptionbydistinguishingetweendeologyand science.Here ideologyis conceivedas imper-ect,theoreticallyunrefined,and henceflawedknowledge.Science sonceiveds trueknowledge,transformed hroughtheoreticalprac-ice. woconsequences houldbenoted:firsthisconcernsarelocatedithin n epistemologicaltraditionof truth/falsityand

second he

etainsMarx'sproblematicof 'ideas'which expresses itself in aronouncedtendencyto concentrateupon stheoreticalideologies'as

odiesf, moreor less,completesystemsof thought.n termsof his positiveor sociologicalconceptionwe find a quiteifferentAlthusserfor whomideologyis 'livedexperience'.Withinhisframeworkhe advancesa conceptionof subjectsasconstitutednndhroughideology;ideologyis conceivedas a fieldwithinwhichpposinglassesengagein andexpresstheirconflictswithinalterna-ivercompetingideologicalformations.t is the

articulationbetween Althusser'snegative and positiveonceptionshatis particularlypertinent orourdiscussion.Hismostmportantcontribution o the studyof ideologiesis his conceptofinterpellation',he mechanismthroughwhich ideologyconstituteseoplessubjects(subjectivity subjection).Morespecifically,what sfreatestnterest for the present discussion,is the connectionetweenAlthusser'sretention of the ideology/sciencecouplet -nrefinedflawed)knowledgeversusrefined(complete)knowledge-ndhe notion of individualsbeing 'interpellated'n and

through

deologynd therebyconstitutedas subjects.We suggest the keyeaturef interpellationsnotonlythe'hailing' ythepowerful other'

'Heyou'thepolicemanhailsthepedestriannAlthusser'sexample),utquallyimportantstheprocessof recognitionbytheinterpellatedubject;recognition which attests to the dual mechanism ofubjectionndsubjectivity.'2Weuggest that Althussermay be read as coming close to theistinctionhathascome to be designatedby the

ideology-discourseouplet.e startsfrom an insistenceon the materiality f ideology;utheres an important

hiftwhich, n itssimplest orm,is fromtheroductionof'ideas' to the productionof'subjects'withinthe livedxistencef individualsandtheirpractices.Butwhat s missing romlthussers any developed theorizationof linguisticpracticeasaterialpracticesnot reducibleto a mere 'reflection'of the lived

xistencef individuals.Thisisanabsolutely rucialcomponent, orifhisacunas notfilled,ultimatelypractice anonlyfinditstheoretical

Page 12: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 12/28

Discourse,deology.. 483

grounding n the materiality f productiveandreproductiveactivity,that s in areductionism: recisely hatdeficiency hathe setout to free

Marxism rom.We do not wish to read more into Althusserthan his work canaccommodate.The metaphoricalusage of the imageryof interpell-ation as 'hailing' that is the metaphorof being hailedverballyandthereby constituted as social subjects through our recognition/misrecognition f the 'call'-is central ohisconception.Interpellationdoes more than 'hail',it situates or places subjectswithin specificdiscursivecontexts. The politicianwho, for example, invokes thecurrentconcernsof 'worriedparents'about he roleof 'satanic ults' n

child abuse not only brings into playa set of normativepresuppo-* * . * * *. 4 * . * * * 4

sltlons azout parentzood, ltSresponslDIlltlesnd ltSanxletles, Dut talsoinsertsanexternalcausation hat sbothmysterious nddemonicfor the all too commonpracticesof'normal'parenthood hat arethedeeplydisturbing ealityof childabuse.Oragain,theinterpellation fthe 'ordinary axpayer'bringsinto play a set of discoursesabouttheforms of politicalcalculationwhich are presupposed to motivatetaxpayershatcelebrate elfishness n politicaludgementand thatsetup the possibilityof opposition to 'welfarescroungers'and other

undesirables. n otherwords nterpellationneeds to beunderstoodasinvolvingmorethan the meremutualrecognitionof'hailing';beyondthat are more complex processes whereby subjectsand subjectpositionsare bothconstitutedandchanged.

There is a direct linkbetweenAlthusser'snterpellationhesisandtheconceptof discourse hat is too striking o be ignored.Thisaspectof Althusser's ersionof ideologycanbeappropriately nderstoodaswhatwehavecalled the sociological ariantof ideologytheorythatis,as we will argue in more detail below, entirely compatiblewith

discourse heory.WhatAlthussserachieves swellcapturedbyStuartHall.

Althusser'srevisions[to the theoryof ideology] . . . sponsoredadecisivemoveawayfrom the 'distorteddeas'and 'falseconscious-ness'approach oideology.Itopenedthegate to amorelinguistic r'discursive'onceptionof ideology. It puton the agendathe wholeneglected ssueof howideologybecomes nternalized,how wecometo speak spontaneously'.'3

It is this 'discursiveconceptionof ideology'that makes possibleare-readingof Althusser- one that permitssomethingcloser to therecognitionof the rolethatdiscoursehas to play n theconstitutionofthesocialand of socialsubjects.

We arrive at the following reading of Althusser: it is throughdiscourse that individuals are interpellatedas subjects;ideologyrepresents those specific forms of discourse whose contents are

Page 13: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 13/28

484 Trev()r urvis and Alan Hunt

inadequate to articulate the interests of those social categories (classes,groups, etc.) who are constituted through those discourses.

The political provenance of this position needs to be spelt out. Thediscursive practices through which subjects are constituted andrepositioned mayhave, but do not necessarily have, ideological effects.These discursive practices exist as potential arenas of contestation thatmay run the gamut from positive alternative to negative refusal-'bloody-mindedness' that simply refuses the interpellation and rejectsidentification with it. There is always a possibility of opening up 'newdiscursive spaces' that aim to unite disparate and dispersed discursiveelements into cohesive popular social movements. These may come to

articulate alternative discourses whose attractive capacity underminesthe previously dominant discourses and wins new adherents: in otherwords, to advance Gramsci's project of counter-hegemony.

Vl. WHA I IS DISCOURSE?

Our account of the vicissitudes of the Marxist theory of ideology hasunderlined the existence of significant limitations as well as un-

doubted potential. It has been the mission entrusted to the concept'discourse' to overcome these deficiencies and to realise this potential.We start by drawing a provisional distinction between ideology anddiscourse. Discourse theory urges us to shake off the organization ofthe world into two great realms of the mental and the material. Theconcept facilitates the escape from the pervasive influence of thethought/being opposition in the grand trinity of oppositions that hasformed the philosophical background for the project of the socialsciences: nature/culture, individual/society and mind/body. One at-

tractive way of effecting a breach with these pervasive dualities is tostart with language as a defining character and condition of sociality. Itprovides an uncomplicated way to think of 'the social' as somethingdistinct from the mere aggregate of individuals.

Discourse theory is best understood as an attempt to ground whatwe understand by 'the social' in a primary attribute of the social historyof the species. Language, as a starting point, has another importantadvantage; it exhibits both persistence over time and widespreaddiversity and thus exemplifies both the generality and the specificity

that characterizes the distinctively social aspect of the species. It is notour intention to trace the intellectual history of how various strands inlinguistic theory came to form the different strands of contemporarydiscourse theory. Our project is to offer a preliminary and inten-tionally non-technical account of discourse theory. This we will thenemploy to examine the part played by discourse theory, explicitlyconceived as an alternative to ideology theory, in the work of MichelFoucault.

Page 14: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 14/28

Discourse, deology. . 485

What is discollrse? 'Discourse' refers to the individual socialnetworks of communication hrough the medium of language or

non-verbalsign-systems.Its key characteristic s that of putting inplacea system of linkedsigns.Whilst he more important xamplesarespeech systems or written language (texts), discourse can be non-verbal; or example, practices n whichmalesopen doors for females,rise when femalesenter rooms,etc. are elementsof a discoursewhoseorganizingframework s a strict sexual division of labour, in whichfemalesare both secondarybut valorisedas in need of male care andprotection.

StuartHalloffers the followinggeneraldefinitionof discourse: sets

of ready-made and preconstituted experiencings displayed andarranged through language'.'4What the concept tries to capture isthat people live and experience within discourse in the sense thatdiscourses mposeframeworkswhich imitwhatcan be experiencedorthe meaning that experience can encompass,and thereby influencewhatcan be said and done. Eachdiscourseallowscertainthings to besaidand impedesor preventsother thingsfrom being said.Discoursesthus provide specific and distinguishablemediums through whichcommunicative ctiontakesplace.

The key epistemological ssumption nvolved s the contention hatlanguage,speechand writingcan neverbe fullyreferential.The pointcan be made in a number of ways but perhaps the most useful is toinvoke Saussure;5 the sign has two elements, the signified (thethought or mental image)and the signifier(a sound or visible magesuch as a spokenor writtenwordor phrase).The connectionbetweensignified and signifier is never fixed in that the sign is alwaysto agreater or lesser extent arbitrary.The openness of the connectionbetween signifiedand signifierhas the consequence hat language s

alwaysmore thandenotative as n pointinga fingerat a physical ntityand saying cat').As a consequence meaning' s never fully referentialand is always ontestable.This openness s particularly pparentwhenwe recognize the linguistic devices or tropes that play such animportantpart in the processof signification.For example, the socialsciences are replete with metaphors such as the one which is sowidespread hat ts metaphorical ature s not recognized: he organicmetaphor in which 'society' s thought and theorised as if it were abody. Technical discourses often try to limit such openness by

employing articulatedrules to stabilize he connection between signand meaning. It is for this reason that scientificdiscourses n theirdevelopmentexhibit more or less sharp paradigmshifts of the kindidentifiedby Kuhn, in which particular onceptsare abandonedandnew ones introduced, whereas normal speech change occurs moregraduallyby barelyperceptible hifts n the usage of the same sign.

Discourse provides a vehicle for thought, communicationandaction; a discourse has its own internal organization,but only in

Page 15: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 15/28

486 TrevorPurvisand Alan Hunt

specialized or technical discourses does it exhibit any strong co-herence. A discourse is a system or structure with variably open

boundaries between itself and other discourses. This suggests the ideathat discourses 'channel' rather than 'control' the discursive possibili-ties, facilitating some things being said and others being impeded.Although there are rival versions of the concept 'discursive formation'(we will consider Foucault's usage below) we suggest that such a con-cept is necessary for more or less stable aggregated discourses. For ex-ample, sociology can be pictured as a system of competing discoursesof the social which conduct themselves according to identifiable butvariable procedural rules. On the other hand there are popular dis-

courses about the social. In these popular discourses there are differ-ent ways in which social divisions, sexuality, social values, etc. are pic-tured. In one of the most richly textured accounts of populardiscourses, Pierre Bourdieu reveals the contrasting class dimensionsof the discourses of everything from moral values to table manners,from political affiliation to sporting interests in French society. fi

One aspect of discourses that has received insufficient attention isthe relation between the conditions of their production and the man-ner of their deployment. Foucault, for example, has done more than

anyone to stress the significance of the production of professional dis-courses. What he does not provide is an account of what we have called'popular discourses'. Thus when it comes to his central concern withthe discourses of sexuality we suggest that it is useful to identify com-peting popular discourses that, whilst strongly influenced by a chang-ing balance of forces between the professional discourses, are neverreducible to the professional discourses. This provides an importantopening for a theory of ideology to go beyond charting the shiftingdiscursive deployments and to move towards a causal account of the

shifting balance of forces in order to explain the ideological etrects ofthese ever-present and often subterranean discursive struggles.

Two related questions have troubled many who have grappled withdiscourse theory. Is the concept of discourse so broad that all com-municative practices are necessarily discursive? In its alternative ver-sion the question is: Is there anything external to discourse? WhileDerrida did not hesitate to pronounce that 'there is nothing outside ofthe text','7 the majority of proponents of discourse theory have re-fused to embrace the view that there is nothing outside of discourse.

This is true of Hindess and Hirst who inaugurated the English-language encounter between Marxism and discourse theory and, withsweeping finality, displaced ideology with discourse, but who never-theless explicitly resisted the view that there is nothing outside dis-course.'8 In very similar terms Foucault insists on maintaining a dis-tinction between discursive and non-discursive realms.l9 On the otherhand, Laclau and Mouffe, as we will see below, reject the distinctionbetween the discursive and the non-discursive.20

Page 16: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 16/28

Discourse,deology. . 487

It is not our intention to propose any resolutionof this highlyabstract,butnonetheless mportantssue;ratherwethink tpertinent

tocommentontheconditions hatgenerate hesequestions thisdoesnotmakethemgo awaybutit helpsto showwhytheycometo assumesuchsignificance.Allefforts to specifya uniquepointof entryto 'thesocial',whether tbethroughdiscourseorthrough deology,mustrunthe risk of a run-awayexpansion ('there is nothing outside ofdiscourse', power is everywhere',etc.) by virtue of the attempttoembrace thesocial'withina unifyingconceptualization. t ispreciselythe commonrecognitionof the unboundedcharacterof 'the social'thatimpelsthe logicof the totalizingdrifttowardsan over-inclusive-

ness that,paradoxically, eprivesthe favouredconceptualization fspecificity.Wesuggestthatthemoreprudentstrategy storefuseboththe totalizingandtheabolitionist trategy; atherweshouldattendtothe implicationsof the boundariesproposed or refused by eachversionof thediverseattempts o theorizediscourse.Thiscautionwillprovide our own approachto an interrogationof Foucault'sde-ploymentof discourse heory.

VII. MICHELFOUCAULI: DISCOURSEVERSUSIDEOLOGY

The engagementbetweenFoucaultandMarxisms noteasyto follow.Foucault,whilstmakingoccasionaldeferentialbowstowardsMarx,speaks in highly generalizedterms of a rather vulgar Marxism.Significantly e did not engagewiththe contemporaryrendsin thewidely nfluentialexplosionof hightheorythatcharacterizedFrenchMarxismn the 1960sand 1970s.

Our interpretation eeksto reducethe distancebetweenMarxismand Foucault.An importantstrandof the readingof discourseasbeing opposed to ideologyrestson the counterposingof AlthusserandFoucault. twasFoucaulthimselfwhoinsisted

I wouldlike to say,firstof all,whathasbeen the goal of myworkduring the last twenty years. It has not been to analyse thephenomenaof power.. . Myobjective,nsteadhasbeen to createahistoryof the different modes by which, in our culture,humanbeingsaremadesubjects.2'

But there is a pertinentdifferencebetweenAlthusserand Foucault:Althusser'sprojectis firmlylocatedwithin the problematicof thereproduction of domination. For Foucault there is a perennialhesitation.On the one hand he espouses a clear commitmenttounravellingdomination,buton theother he isconcerned oavoidanyhomogenizationof domination.WhileFoucaultseeksto avoidtheseproblemsby insistingon a clear separationbetweendiscourseand

Page 17: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 17/28

TrevorPurv?sand AlanHunt88

ideology, Althusser makes an as yet unnamed 'theory of discourse' acomponent of his theory of ideology.22

Foucault engaged explicitly neither with Althusser, his old teacher,nor with Poulantzas for whom the problem of power was also central.Foucault's strategy of engagement with Marxism was to avoid oper-ating on its terrain by eschewing the project of general theory itself. Ifwestern Marxism has been an engagement with the impasse ofclassicalMarxism, then Foucault'swork can be conceived as a responseto the difficulties encountered by western Marxism.

The specific field of Foucault's encounter with western Marxismthat concerns us is his self-conscious attempt to avoid not just the

concept of ideology, but the field designated by that concept. ForFoucault the emergence of the modern disciplinary society

is both much more and much less than ideology. It is the productionof effective instruments for the formation and accumulation ofknowledge - methods of observation, techniques of registration,procedures for investigation and research,apparatuses of control.23

These processes he views as significantly 'material', in a sense notcaptured by the concept ideology which is locked into the problematic

of ideas or consciousness. Ideology 'alwaysstands in virtualoppositionto something else which is supposed to count as truth'.24

The problem is not changing people's consciousness . . . but thepolitical, economic, institutional regime of the production oftruth.... The political question, to sum up, is not error, illusion,alienated consciousness or ideology; it is truth itself.25

Discourses are notrepresentations of a more or less distorted reality.Rather discourses should be understood as 'economies' (with their

own intrinsic technology, tactics, effects of power, which in turn theytransmit). In other words power is inscribed withindiscourses, notoutside them. In addition he views the concept of ideology as lockedwithin a theoretical humanism of the Subject.

As regards Marxism,I'm not one of those who try to elicit the effectsof power at the level of ideology. Indeed I wonder whether, beforeone poses the question of ideology, it wouldn't be more materialistto study first the question of the body and the effects of power on it.

Because what troubles me with these analyses which prioritiseideology is that there is alwayspresupposed a human subjecton thelines of the model provided by classicalphilosophy, endowed with aconsciousness which power is then thought to seize upon.26

Thus discourse is not simply that which masks, rather it

is the thing for which and by which there is struggle, discourse is thepower which is to be seized.27

Page 18: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 18/28

Discourse, deology. . 489

Foucault, sets up discourse in opposition to ideology. But if wereintroduceour distinctionbetweencriticaland sociological oncep-

tions of ideology the issue is not so simple. Foucault'srejection oftheoreticalhumanismand his rejectionof the truth/falsity ichotomyplaces him in unambiguous opposition to any notion of criticalideology. On the other hand, his view of discourseas the medium ofstrugglemirrors he central hrustof thatfeatureof Marx's onceptofideology as the terrain in which people become conscious of thisconflict and fight it out. In this respect Foucault'sconception ofdiscourse s verysimilar o the 'sociological' ersionof ideologythatwehave argued has been the main thrustof the treatmentof ideology n

westernMarxism.Thus despite the oppositionthat Foucaultsets up with his distinc-tion between discourse and ideology the gulf is not as wide as hesuggests. There are, we suggest, important respects in which theaccount of ideology in western Marxism may be preferred toFoucault's reatmentof discourse.His accountof discourseremainedmarkedly tructuralist.Discoursesare characteristicallyprofessional'whichemanatefrom institutionalized ites of production.The conse-quence is that these discoursesare 'imposed' n that they generate

subjectpositions nto which people are 'inserted' hrough discourse.The paradoxical ffect is thatwhilstone of his mostprominent hemesis the thesis hatwherethere s power, here is resistance, he natureofthis resistance is itself conceived as the production of alternativediscourses.

Another feature of his structuralist ccount of discourse s that itgives rise to rather flat and totalizing historicalaccounts in whichdominantdiscourses mpose their own rationalitiesupon the discur-sive possibilities of participants.There is a marked absence of

attention to tensions, let alone contradictions,withindiscourses hatprovidethe rawmaterial or the discoursesof resistance.The featureof his work most relevant for our concerns is his attempt tounderstand he linkbetweendiscourseand social nstitutions.Eachsetof social practicesare located within and are structuredby what heterms a 'discursive ormation'.The originalityof Foucault's oncep-tion is that it involves more than the aggregationof discourses ntosome relativelypersistent ield. Foucaultprovidestwo advancesoverthe use we have so far made of the conceptdiscursive ormation.First,

he insiststhat the systemof discursive tatementswhich constituteaformation are not merely a unity but also enshrine a 'dispersal'.28Second, the concept 'discursive ormation'focuses attention on itsconditionsof existence. In simple terms he directsattentiontowardsthe conditions hat make that formationpossible.He shifts attentionaway rom the internaldynamicsof the constituentelementsof signs,signifiersand signified. His account of discursiveformation breakswith the internal preoccupations f structural inguistics n order to

Page 19: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 19/28

490 Trevor urvis ndAlanHunt

focus upon the external or socialconditionswithin which discoursesare formed and transformed.It does not overstatehis positions to

insistthat Foucault's heoryof discourse s a non-linguistic heory. Inan important ense whatFoucaultproposedwasa rigorously ocial,oreven materialist,examination of the formation of discourses. Weemphasize the importanceof his projectand, most significantly, tscongruenceor compatibilitywith the theoryof ideology.

Foucault, n an important ense, went furtherthan Marxhad doneto laythe basis or a rigorously elational ccountof ideology.Whatheoffers is the possibilityof an account of the emergence of ideologyfrom a complex of socialand institutionalpractices.And in so doing

he makes t possible o avoid the tendency, hat has dogged Marxism,to succumb o teleological xplanationsof 'causes'or 'origins' uch asappeals o the needs of the capitalist lassor to the ruse of capital.

What Foucault offers is a frameworkfor undertakingconcretehistorical studies of the conditions and circumstances hat madepossible he emergenceof some new set of institutionalpractices, heprison, the asylum,etc. It is in this context that we can now see whyFoucault, despite verbal flourishes suggesting that 'everything isdiscourses' ould not sustainsuch a position;and at the same time he

resisted he slide into relativism. t is the attempt o securean accountof the contributionof discursive formations to the emergence ofinstitutionalpractices, specifying their institutionaland relationalpreconditions, hatholds in checkthe relativism hathe comesso closeto embracing.

Thus we can make sense of the distinctionthat Foucault makesbetween discursive and non-discursivepractices; the latter beingconceivedas 'primary elations' xisting

independentlyof all discourseor all objectsof discourse, that]maybe described between institutions, techniques and social forms,etc.29

It is not that he thinks that there is somewhere a realm outsidediscourse,becauseall practicesand institutions unction through themedium of discourse.Rathersocialpracticesand institutionsare notreducible o discourses; hey have their conditionsof possibility hatare not provided or by discoursealone.

We are now in a position to explain why it is that Foucault's

discourse heory ailsto providea satisfactory ccountof the resultsorconsequencesof discourses or social practice n general and oppo-sitional struggles in particular what we have termed 'ideologicaleffects'.30His epistemologicalcommitmentto local knowledge, hisconcern to exclude any suggestionof linear social progress'and hisdeep suspicion of grand theory are reasons for this omission. Hisaccount of the transition rom one mode of dominationto anothertends to advancea ratherbleakaccount n whichresistance nly seems

Page 20: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 20/28

Discourse, deology. . 491

to give rise to new and ever more pervasiveforms of domination.However, we suggest that the omission of an explicit concern with

'effects'or causalconsequenceshas a more circumstantialxplanationand, as such, is more easily remedied. There is a certain trade-offbetween two different, but not contradictory,motives. Foucaultfocusedhis attentionon the conditionsof possibility or the conditionsof existence)of specifichistorical utcomes.Whatwere the conditionsthat gave rise to the 'invention' f the asylumor the prison?He tendednot to askthe 'result' r 'effect'questions:whatwere the consequencesof asylums,prisons,etc.? But our point is that there is nothing in hisanalysisof discourse hat impedeseither of these enquiriesor inhibits

the explorationof questionsof both cause and effect.The significance of the interpretation of Foucault's theory of

discourse which we propose is that while he was undoubtedlymotivated by a concern to secure a clear break from the wholetradition of ideology theory, nevertheless, the advances that hesecured are not incompatiblewith that tradition. Indeed, we havegone one step further, in suggesting that he actuallyprovides somesignificant penings by providinga framework or a fully sociologicalaccount of ideology through the interplay and interconnectionof

. .. . . .

dlscourseand Instltutlonapractlces.

VIII. POSI-MARXISMAND DISCOURSE

One of the distinctive eaturesof contemporarypost-Marxisms thedisplacementof the conceptof ideology by that of discourse.It is notso much that the concept ideology is abolished or abandoned, butrather that its use would be to invoke those features of Marxism, n

particular its reductionism and its economism, with which theexponents of post-Marxism eek to break.We will suggest that oncethis breakor rupture s effected, then the concept of ideologycan bereinstatedwithoutapology; t can be reintroducedwithoutany needfor too many parentheticalremarks about what ideology does not

mean. We focus our attention on Laclauand Mouffe because theyoffer the most developedaccountof post-Marxist iscourse heory.

It is important o recall that in the course of the long march fromMarxism o post-Marxism,ErnestoLaclaumade a significant ontri-

bution to the sociological onceptionof ideology3'and that ChantalMouffe had explored the potential of Gramsci'sconception ofhegemony.32They did much to further the break, initiated byGramsci,withthe notionof ideologiesas pre-formed ystemsof 'ideas'that politicalprotagonistswielded as weapons in the class struggle.Laclau nsistedthat mentalelements,concepts,etc., do not have anynecessaryclass or political mplications e.g. that 'nationalism's nottied to any particular lassposition).

Page 21: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 21/28

492 TrevorPurvzsand Alan Hunt

The key link betweenthis earlierworkand their currentposition sprovidedby the conceptof 'articulation'.n its simplest orm t focuses

on the way n whichdiscoursesand ideologiesemerge by bringing ntoproximityand combination lements that do not have any pre-givenclassor political ignificance. t is the way n whichdifferentelementsare combinedthat gives each specificdiscourse ts ideological igrlifi-canceor effects.33

One of the more interesting theoretical contributionsmade byLaclauand Mouffe s to have ocated he theoryof articulationwithinamore fully developed-accountof discourse.They refuse Foucault'sdistinctionbetween he discursive nd the non-discursive; ather hey

view all objectsof inquiryor knowledgeas discursive.But they insistthat the discursivityof all objects of knowledge has no necessaryconnection with the perennial philosophicaldebate about whetherthere is an external reality hat exists independent of consciousness.Of course earthquakes ccur,and their occurrence s independentofconsciousness; ut it is theirconstruction n discourse hat determineswhether they are 'movementsof tectonicplates'or manifestations f'the wrathof the gods'. To extend their point, we should refuse theslogan everything s discursive';t obscures he muchmore nteresting

claimthat all knowledge s locatedwithindiscourse.Discourse s constitutive f socialrelations n that all knowledge,all

talk, all argument takes place within a discursivecontext throughwhichexperiencecomesto have,not only meaning or its participants,but sharedand communicablemeaningwithinsocialrelations.Laclauand Mouffe significantly larify Foucault'sdistinctionbetween dis-course and discursive formation. A discursive formation is neverentirely closed' n the sense of providinga unitaryor boundedsystemthat permitsonly some statementsand excludes others. As Foucault

saysof medicaldiscourseif one wished to define this discourseby a codified and normativesystemof statement,one would haveto recognize hatthis medicinedisintegrated s soon as it appeared.34

Rather, every discursiveformation is in some degree open, and ischaracterisednot by unity (although one should not ignore theprojects of unification,the pursuit of coherence that plays such acrucialpart in the historyof all disciplines),but by dispersion, hoice,

.. . . . . .

dlvlslonand opposltlon.What is the significanceof this counter-intuitive isruptionof the

unityof discursive ormations? t is partof an epistemological trategythat refuses to continuethe search or fixed groundsof knowledgeorguaranteesof meaningand it is also partof the retreat rom totalizingnotionsof Ideology as Weltanschauung. ut beyondthis generalpointthere are two further implications. The first refers us back to'articulation'.t remindsus of the alwaysprovisionalway n whichthe

Page 22: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 22/28

D^scourse, ideology. . . 493

elementsof discoursearearticulated uchthatmeaning s neverfullysecured. The most immediate consequence being that different

discoursescan occur withinthe same discursiveformation.This inturn leadsto the second,andmorepolitical,pointthatdiscoursesarealways ubject o the playof alternatives ndof struggle.

Any discourse s constitutedas an attemptto dominatethe field ofdiscursivity, o arrest he flowof difference,to constructa centre.35

Thisopen andcontestedconceptionof discourseplaysa significantpartin Laclauand Mouffe'sprojectof securing he finalexpulsionofeconomism from the historyof Marxism.The significanceof their

insistenceuponthediscursivenatureof socialrelations anbe seenintheirworkingoutof the thesisthatdiscourses onstitute subjects'.Nosubjectpositioncan be fully fixed by reference to some given set ofdifferences. They apply this idea with good effect in a critiqueofessentialist feminism which holds that there is some pre-givenmechanismof women'soppression or that there is some feminineessence. The latter position detractsfrom, or even incapacitates,attention o thediversepracticeshatconstitute hehistoricallypecificformsof thesex/gendersystem.

However, the emphasison the articulationof dispersedelementsinto specific discursiveconfigurations,whilst providing a usefulcorrectiveagainstessentialism,s not without ts ownlimitations.Thequestion obe addressed s: Arethereany imitsuponthecombinationof the elementsthat cancome togetherwithinanyspecificdiscourse?To answer this question it is necessary to return to Foucault'sdiscussionof discursiveformations.He holds out the promiseofproviding rulesof formation'hatspecifytheconditionsof existenceof eachformation.In sodoinghe introducesaset of concepts hatare

never fullydeveloped;he refersto 'surfacesof emergence', authori-tiesof delimitation' nd'gridsof specification'.36 hat sinvolved sanattemptto specifythe way in whichnon-discursive lements, suchasthe institutional rameworkwithinwhich a discourseemerges, setlimitsto itssubsequentdevelopment.LaclauandMouffereintroduceAlthusser's oncept of 'overdetermination'.With regard to the ques-tion of how sexualdifferencesshould be theorizedthey argue that'overdeterminationmong the diversesexualdifferencesproducesasystematic ffect of sexualdivision'.37 ut in thiscontext'over-deter-

mination'seems to function as an alternateto 'articulation'withoutgetting any closer to advancing a solution to the really difficultquestion of whether there are any limiting conditions upon thepossiblecombinationsof the dispersedelementswhose articulationspecifiesanyparticular iscourse.

The problem hat sposed,but notsatisfactorilyesolved,byLaclauandMouffe, is to find a wayof goingbeyondthe identification f theproblemof 'articulation'nd'overdetermination'.What sneededare

Page 23: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 23/28

494 Trevorurvis ndAlanHunt

theappropriateermswithinwhich obeabletospecify heconstraints

thateffect the emergenceof discursive ormations.To addressthis

issuewe now need to retraceour stepsin orderto considerwhetherGramscimay not alreadyhave opened up the broadoutlinesof a

solution.Thisistobefoundnotinareworking f Gramsci'sonceptof

hegemonywhereLaclauand Mouffeseek it, but ratherthroughhis*

notlonot commonsense.

IX. GRAMSC,IAND HALLON COMMONSENSE

In Gramsci'siscussionof 'commonsense'and culture,the strategic

roleof language n theconstruction f a hegemonicprojectemerges.

[P]hilosophy s a conceptionof the world and ... philosophical

activitysnottobeconceived olelyasthe'individual'laboration f

systematicallyoherentconcepts,butalsoandaboveallasacultural

battle to transformthe popular 'mentality'and to diffuse the

philosophical nnovations hat will demonstrate hemselvesto be

'historicallyrue'to the extent that they becomeconcretely i.e.

historically nd socially- universal.Givenall this, the questionof

language ngeneralandof languages nthetechnical ensemustbeputin the forefrontof our investigation.38

Onemustbecarefulnottooverstate hecasehere.Languagesnota

major ocalpointin Gramsci'snalyses.Butonecanclaim hathewas

acutelyawareof itsimport,eventhoughhe neverdevotedsubstantive

attention to the connection between language, ideology and he-

gemony.Partof thereason orthisunder-theorizationmaystemfrom

the conceptualoverlapthatexistsbetweentheseconcepts.As Stuart

Hallnotes

Gramsciuses the term 'ideology'... in what may now seem aclassicalsense, as systemsof ideas, but in a broad context: 'on

condition hattheword susedinitshighestsenseasaconceptionof

the world that is implicitlymanifestin art, in law, in economic

activity ndinallmanifestationsf individual ndcollectiveife.'He

seesitalsointermsof historicalunctions: tsrolein 'preservinghe

ideologicalunityof anentiresocialblock';of providing ndividuals

and groups with their various 'conceptionsof the world', that

influenceand modifytheir actions;and, aboveall, as a meansto

'organizehumanmassesandcreate heterrainonwhichmenmove,acquireconsciousness f theirposition,struggle,etc.'39

Therearetwopossiblereadingsof theseformulations.The first, sa

broadreadingthat focuseson the role of discourse n constituting

what Lovejoyreferred to as unconsciousmental habits.40Beliefs,

attitudesandpresuppositions retacitlypresupposedwithinalinguis-

ticpractice ather hanformallyarguedfor.Thusdiscourse,although

Page 24: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 24/28

Discourse,deologw.. 495

it is not a concept that Gramscihimself used, provides ways ofthinking,that seem so natural hatthey are not scrutinized.But the

secondreading,which s what is novelin Gramsci'sreatment, s thatthere emerges a more substantial r embodiednotion of discourse.This isrevealedonce werecognize ust howcloseGramsci'sonceptofcommonsense,and byimplicationdiscourse',s toAnthonyGiddens'conceptionof'structure'defined as

the rulesand resources,recursivelymplicated n the reproductionof socialsystems.Structure xistsonly asmemory races, heorganicbasisof humanknowledgeability ndas an instantiationnaction.4l

Commonsense (or populardiscourse) s both the mediumof socialactionandconstitutive f thesocialrelations hattheyreproduce.

Whilecommonsensehas these,almoststructural, ualitiesGramscisucceeds nencompassing nactivesense of 'common ense',exempli-fied in his positiveconnectionwith'good sense',which is his wayofinsistingthatcommonsense is not alwaysreactionary r traditional.What we encounterhere is the difficulty hat Foucault ried to dealwiththrough his injunction hatpowerinduces resistance,butneverquite convincesus how resistance s possible given the ever more

pervasivegrip of disciplinarysociety. The problem is: if we viewcommonsense as providingthe taken-for-grantedmedium of livedexperience,howis anyalternativepossible?How canwe escapefromthe bleakscenario n whichdominantdiscourses o constructus thatresistanceseems impossible?Where can resistance, good sense'oroppositioncomefrom?Gramsci's nswer sincomplete nthathismostdirect answer presupposed the existence of an already-existingalternativeagent, the 'modern Prince', the revolutionarypartycapable, through its organic connections with the oppressed, of

discovering, rticulating ndleadingresistance.Whilstweareanxiousto retain a commitment o the possibilityof strategicpolitical nter-vention,we are more equivocal han wasGramsciaboutthe idea ofrevolutionaryagency. And yet it remains true that resistanceispossible and does emerge from the most unprepossessingcircum-stances.

It is Gramsci'smphasison the importance or politicalpracticeofthe generationof transformativecommonsense' that has been acentraltheme in StuartHall'swork.Transformative apacity s no

longer conceived,as for example in Leninism,as the attainmentofsomehigherormoreelevated evelof consciousness.Boththe riseandnowthe fall of Thatcherism n Britainhaveservedas majorvehiclesforhisstudiesover thelastdecade.Whatheaddressed s howaregimewhoseaims are so clearlyantithetical o the interestsof both labourand the new social movements, has been able to construct andmaintain its politicaldominance, and then to lose it so rapidly.Drawingheavilyon Gramsci nd recentadvances n discourse heory,

Page 25: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 25/28

496 TrevorPurvzsandAlan Hunt

Hall has provided some of the most provocative nsightsinto therelationshipbetweendiscourseand ideology.

However,Hall'swork eadsto the same kind of conceptualoverlapbetween ideology and discoursethat sparkedour originalconcernwith the connectionbetweenideology and discourse. For instance,Hall defines ideologyas

the mentalframeworks the languages,the concepts,categories,imageryof thought, and the systems of representation whichdifferentclassesand socialgroupsdeploy n order to makesense of,define, figureout and renderintelligiblehe waysocietyworks.42

At another point he points out that 'the whole discourse ofThatcherism ombines deologicalelements nto a discursive hain insuch a way that the logic or unity of the discoursedepends on thesubjectaddressedassuminga numberof specificsubjectpositions'.43This is an invaluable step in theorizinghow discoursescombinedisparate ocialelementsto securethe dominanceof a historicalbloc.Yet Hall's ormulationails omakeclearwhat t is about heprocessofcombinationof discursive lementsthat rendersthe resultantdistinc-tively deological.

Similarly,n the course of a partialcritiqueof Althusser'snotion ofthe constitutionof social subjects hroughthe process of interpell-ation, Hallarguesthat

[A]nyone who is genuinely interested in the production andmechanisms f ideologymustbe concernedwith the questionof theproductionof subjectsand the unconsciouscategories hatenabledefinite formsof subjectivityo arise. It is clearthat thediscourses fthe New Right have been engaged precisely n this workof theproductionof new subjectpositions and the transformationof

. . .. AA

su Jectlvltles.

Here he speaksof both the productionand mechanisms f ideology,butthen seemsto imply hatdiscourses thatmechanism.Hall'sproblemwith establishinga distinctionbetween the two terms wouldseem tostem from a dualisticviewof ideologyas bothprocessand effect. Wesuggest that a more attractive uggestion,towardswhichour argu-ment has been pointing, is a reformulation hat establishesa distinc-tion betweendiscourseasprocessand ideologyaseffect.

X. RECOVERI NCJ DEOLOCJY

Our explorationof the majorepisodes in the encountersbetweenideologyanddiscoursepermits he recoveryof a constructive ole fora theory of ideology. The theory of ideology that we suggestsupplements discourse theory rather than being opposed to or

Page 26: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 26/28

Discourse,deology.. 497

opposedbydiscourse heory.Itis aversionof ideology heory hat sinmanyrespectsdifferentfromthatbequeathedby Marx.Displaced s

the ideas/being distinctionwith its major epistemologicalconse-quence, the decentring of the humanist subject manifest in theproblematic f consciousness, ndexpelled is theoppositionbetweentrue and false consciousness.But retainedand moved into centralprominence s a key feature of the critical hrust of Marx'saccount,namely, its focus on the way in which the interpellationof subjectpositionsoperatessystematically o reinforceand reproducedomi-nant social relations - it is this that we have described as thedirectionality f ideologytheory.Wesuggest that thisdirectionalitys

capturedbyemploying deologicalanalysis ofocusupon theeffectsofdiscursivepractices,hence ourconcentration n 'ideologyeffects'.

The concepts of 'discourse' and 'discursive formation', dis-tinguished in the way we have extractedfrom Foucault,identifyprocesseswhichare alwayssemiotic,that is they involve the produc-tion of meaningsandtruth-claims.However heseprocessesarealwaysmorehansemioticbecause heyinscribe ignswithinsocialpractices sa conditionof existenceof the meaningsandsubjectivities roduced.The implicationof this ratherabstractpresentationcan be exempli-

fiedbyreturning o theexample usedabove (p. 485) of the common-place,butcontested,practice n whichmalesroutinelyopen doorsforfemales.To avoida simpleequationbetweendiscourseandlanguagethesemioticsof dooropeningare not,of course,dependenton spokenwords, but in the exaggeration of opening, stepping aside andushering through; these social practicesmake up the discoursefdoor-opening.Thisbehaviouronlytakes tssocialmeaningas partof adiscursiveformationonsistingof a groupof dispersedritualised enderroles and their associateddiscourses.However this discursivefor-

mationonlyacquires tsfullideologicalffecthrough tsironicreversalof the systematic elationsof subordinationhatcharacterizepatriar-chal socialrelations.This effect is 'ideological' n that it pertainstorelationsof domination/subordination,acilitates heirreproductionand, finally, reunites the critical and sociologicaldimensions ofideology by the mystification n which the apparent deferentialtreatmentof women masks the structuralnequalities hat underlieand are the condition of such practices.Thus what makes somediscoursesdeological s theirconnectionwithsystemsof domination.

Ideologicaldiscourses ontain ormsof significationhatareincorpor-ated into lived experiencewhere the basicmechanismof incorpor-ation is one wherebysectionalor specific nterestsare representedas

* a

unlversa lnterests.

Our contention is that the distinction we have drawn betweendiscourseandideologyprovidesa generalframeworkortheanalysisof discursive ields and theirpotential,but not necessary,deologicaleffects.1'hus weconcludethat whilst here isanimportantdistinction

Page 27: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 27/28

498 TrevorPurvis and Alan Hunt

between the concepts discourse and ideology there is no necessaryoppositionbetween them, but rather there can exist a connectionof

supplementation nd expansion.

(Dateaccepted: anuary1992) TrevorPurvisDepartment f SociologyUniversity f Lancaster

andAlan Hunt

Department f Law and SociologylAnthropologyCarletonUniversity,Canada

NO1ES

1. J. Larrain,Marxi.smnd Ideology,London,Macmillan,1983.

2. Note that we completelyexcludeanyconcernwithIdeology, deologywiththe capital 'I', conceived as systems ofideasor worldviews.

3. R. Bernstein, BeyondObjectivismand Relativi.sm:cience,Hermeneutic.sndPraxi.s xford,BasilBlackwell,1983.

4. J. Larrain,Marxism nd Ideology,London,Macmillan,1983, . 42.

5. K. Marxand F. Engels The Ger-manIdeology KarlMarx-FrederickngelsCollected oris, Vol.5) New York,Inter-nationalPublishers,1976, .36.

6. Larrain,bid.,p. 27.7. K. Marxand F. Engels, bid.,p. 36.

8. This emphasis on 'lived experi-ence' was one of the major advancessecured by Althusser,even though hesomewhat detracted from this recog-nitionbyhis use of the term imaginary'odistinguish he realm of ideology fromthat of 'real relations'; Ideology andIdeologicalState Apparatuses',n Leninand Philo.sophynd OtherE.ssay.s,ondonsNew Left Books,1971.

9. R. Williams,Marxi.smndLiterature,

Oxford, Oxford UniversityPress, 1977,p.21.

10. R. Williams,bid.,pp. 29-30.11. R. Williams, bid.,and Problemsn

Materiali.smnd C8ulture,ondonsVerso,1980.

12. L. Althusser, bid.,p. 174.13. S. Hall, The Problem f Ideology

in B. Matthews ed.), Marx1()0Year.s n,

London, Lawrence & Wishart, 1983,p.64.

14. S. Hall, '(ulture, the Media andthe Ideological Effect ' inJ. Curran etal.(eds), Mass C8ommunicationsnd Society,Edward Arnold, London,1977, p. 322.

15. F. de Saussure, Course n GeneralLinguistics,London, Fontana,1974.

16. P. Bourdieu, Distinction,London,Routledge,1984.

17. J. Derrida, Of Grammatology, alti-more, John Hopkins University Press,1974, p. 158.

18. B. Hindess and P. Hirst, Mode ofProduction nd Social Formation,London,Macmillan,1977.

19. M. Foucault, The Archaeologyof

Knowledge,New York, Pantheon Books,1972.

20. E. Laclauand (,. Mouffe, Hegemonyand Socialist Strutegy, Londons Verso,1985, pp. 105-114.

21. M. Foucault, 'The Subject andPower', in Dreyfus and Rabinow MichelFoucault, hicago, University of (hicagoPress,1982, p. 208.

22. By the mid-70s Pecheux was mak-ing this link between ideology and dis-

course explicit; M. Pecheux, Langllage,Semantics nd Ideology,St. Martins Press,New York,1982.

23. M. Foucault, Power/Knowledge,Brighton, Harvester Press,1980, p. 102.

24. Ibid.,p. 118.25. Ibid.,p. 133.26. Ibid., p. 58.27. M. Foucault, 'The Order of

Page 28: Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

7/27/2019 Discourse Ideology Discourse Ideology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/discourse-ideology-discourse-ideology 28/28

Discourse, ideologzy. . . 499

Discourse', in R. Young (ed.), UntyingheText,London, Routledge,1981, pp. 52-3.

28. M. Foucault, The ArchaeologyfKnowledge,ew York, Pantheon books,1972, p. 38.

29. M. Foucault, ibid.,p. 45.30. See above .478.31. E. Laclau, Politic.snd Ideologyn

Marxist heoryondon, Verso,1977.32. (J. Mouffe, 'Hegemony and Ideol-

ogy in Gramsci' in Gramscind Marxi.stTheory,ondon, Routledge,1979.

33. (^ramscidescribed this process ofre-articulationin the following terms

[C]riticismmakes possible a process ofdifferentiation and change in therelativeweight that the elements of the

old ideologies used to possess. Whatwas previously secondaryand subordi-nate, or even incidental, is now taken

tobe primary- becomes the nucleus of

a new ideological and theoretical com-plex.

A. Gramsci, Qusderni el carcere, urin,Gerrantana,1975, Vol. 2, p. l 058.34. M. Foucault, The Archaeologyf

Knowledge,ew York, Pantheon Books,1972,p.34.

35. M. Laclau, and (j. Mouffe, ibid.,p.112.

36. M. Foucault, ibid., p.4142.37. M. Laclau and (J. Mouffe, ibid.,

p. 117.38. A. (J rams s Selectionsrom the

Prison NotebookZsondon: Lawrence &

Wishart,1971, p.348.39. S. Hall, 'The Toad in the Garden:

Thatcher Among the Theorists' in (J.

Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds), Marxismandthe Interpretationf Culture,Urbana,Universityof Illinois Press,1988, p.55.

40. A. Lovejoy, The Great ChainofBeing,Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Uni-versityPress,1936, p. 7.

41. A. (^iddens, The ConstitutionfSociety,erkeley, Universityof CaliforniaPress,1984, p. l 6.

42. S. Hall, 'The Problem of Ideology',op.cit.,p. 59.

43. S. Hall, 'The Toad in the Garden',

op.cit.,p. 49.44. S. Hall, op. cit.,, ibid.,p.46 (em-phasis added).