Post by jjnickell on Feb 17, 2016 1:34:53 GMT
I found myself really enjoying Hall's piece and, while I agree with most of what he has to say, I am struggling with what I perceive to be a contradiction in his work. When extrapolating Althusser's early definition of ideology with which he seems to agree, Hall pays particular attention to the phrase "the real conditions of existence." Here, Hall states: "Social relations do exist. We are born into them. They exist independent of our will. They are real in their structure and tendency. We cannot develop a social practice without representing those conditions to ourselves in one way or another; but the representations do not exhaust their effect" (p. 105). However, when speaking more generally about the definition and function of ideology, Hall writes, "We are not entirely stitched into place in our relation to the complex field of historically-situated ideological discourses exclusively at that moment alone, when we enter the 'transition from biological existence to human existence' (Althusser, 'Freud and Lacan,' 1970/1971, p. 93). We remain open to be positioned and situated in different ways, at different moments throughout our existence" (p. 106). Aren't these positions rather mutually exclusive? How can we be born into social relations and be unable do develop a social practice without representing those conditions to ourselves, yet find our existences to be open and unstitched?
Granted, Hall spends much of this essay pointing to contradictions in Althusser's work; given that both of these assertions are predicated on statements from Althusser, perhaps that is what he is doing here. Clarification? Opinions?
Moreover, much of the content of these articles pertain to the formation of subjects - a process that renders us as subjects to be passive. Still, I am struck by the implications of Hall's use of passive voice in these excerpts. For example, consider the phrase "We remain open to be positioned and situated in different ways." Are we ever capable of positioning ourselves? How can we reclaim that power? Maybe I need to read more of Hall himself, but Althusser at least seems more concerned with pointing to structures of power rather than creating space by which we might access that power ourselves - as Butler points out (p. 9), Althusser indicates that he himself is reproducing the same social relations he describes simply by having an audience read his writing.
Granted, Hall spends much of this essay pointing to contradictions in Althusser's work; given that both of these assertions are predicated on statements from Althusser, perhaps that is what he is doing here. Clarification? Opinions?
Moreover, much of the content of these articles pertain to the formation of subjects - a process that renders us as subjects to be passive. Still, I am struck by the implications of Hall's use of passive voice in these excerpts. For example, consider the phrase "We remain open to be positioned and situated in different ways." Are we ever capable of positioning ourselves? How can we reclaim that power? Maybe I need to read more of Hall himself, but Althusser at least seems more concerned with pointing to structures of power rather than creating space by which we might access that power ourselves - as Butler points out (p. 9), Althusser indicates that he himself is reproducing the same social relations he describes simply by having an audience read his writing.
