Sub Cultures, Cultures and Class 57

Sub Cultures, Cultures and Class 57
their material and social class position and experience. But the members hip of a sub-culture cannot protect them from the determining matrix of experiences and conditions which shape the life of their class as a whole In what follows, we shall try to show why this double articulation of youth sub-cultures - first, to their 'parent' culture (e.g. working-class culture), second, to the dominant culture - is a necessary way of staging the analysis. For our purposes, sub-cultures represent a necessary, 'relatively autonomous', but inter-mediary level of analysis. Any attempt to relate sub-cultures to the `socio-cultural formation as a whole' must grasp its complex unity by way of these necessary differentiations
B. Dominant and subordinate cultures
In this section, we discuss briefly some of the broad shifts in class relations over the post-war period as a whole, before coming to the specific question of the sub-cultures. One determining level of change is the way production was reorganised and modernised in the post-war period, and the impact of this on the division of labour, on occupational cultures, on forms of working-class response, defence and resistance. The war and post-war situation accelerated changes already in train in the inter-war period. One general result was a widening of the gap between 'old' and 'new' sectors in the economy - old and new industries, old and new areas and regions! On the one hand, the 'new' industries, based on modern technical and electronic processes or tied to the consumer and export drives; on the other hand,,..he 'declining' industries, the legacy of the first industrial revolution. The impact of this partial and unplanned `rationalisation', first on skills and the division of labour, secondly on the economic life of regions and areas, was profound but quite 'uneven'. Some areas - the South-East especially - spurted ahead; others - sometimes whole industries and regions - were impelled into a long decline.... What matters here is not some general idea of 'social change and the working-class' but, rather, the particular social and cultural composition of those sectors of the working-class whose concrete situation is being restructured by quite specific economic forces. Here, changes in the economic mode of production register on a particular complex of trades, skills, workshops, a particular 'mix' of occupational cultures, the specific distribution of different class strata within them. The wider economic forces then throw out of gear a particular working-class complex: they dismantle a set of particular internal balances and stabilities. They reshape and restructure the productive basis, which forms the material and social conditions of life, the 'givens', around which a particular local working-class culture has developed. They disturb a particular historical network of defences and 'negotiations' ....

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Sub budaya, budaya dan kelas 57 bahan dan posisi kelas sosial dan pengalaman mereka. Tapi hip anggota sub budaya tidak dapat melindungi mereka dari matriks menentukan pengalaman dan kondisi yang membentuk kehidupan kelas mereka secara keseluruhan dalam apa yang berikut, kita akan mencoba untuk menunjukkan mengapa artikulasi pemuda sub-budaya-pertama, ini ganda (misalnya kelas buruh budaya) budaya 'orangtua' mereka, kedua, untuk budaya yang dominan - adalah cara yang diperlukan untuk pementasan analisis. Untuk kami tujuan, mewakili sub-budaya yang diperlukan, 'relatif otonom', tetapi tingkat antar-mediary analisis. Setiap upaya untuk berhubungan sub-budaya 'pembentukan sosial budaya secara keseluruhan' harus memahami kesatuan kompleks dengan cara ini differentiations yang diperlukan B. dominan dan bawahan budaya In this section, we discuss briefly some of the broad shifts in class relations over the post-war period as a whole, before coming to the specific question of the sub-cultures. One determining level of change is the way production was reorganised and modernised in the post-war period, and the impact of this on the division of labour, on occupational cultures, on forms of working-class response, defence and resistance. The war and post-war situation accelerated changes already in train in the inter-war period. One general result was a widening of the gap between 'old' and 'new' sectors in the economy - old and new industries, old and new areas and regions! On the one hand, the 'new' industries, based on modern technical and electronic processes or tied to the consumer and export drives; on the other hand,,..he 'declining' industries, the legacy of the first industrial revolution. The impact of this partial and unplanned `rationalisation', first on skills and the division of labour, secondly on the economic life of regions and areas, was profound but quite 'uneven'. Some areas - the South-East especially - spurted ahead; others - sometimes whole industries and regions - were impelled into a long decline.... What matters here is not some general idea of 'social change and the working-class' but, rather, the particular social and cultural composition of those sectors of the working-class whose concrete situation is being restructured by quite specific economic forces. Here, changes in the economic mode of production register on a particular complex of trades, skills, workshops, a particular 'mix' of occupational cultures, the specific distribution of different class strata within them. The wider economic forces then throw out of gear a particular working-class complex: they dismantle a set of particular internal balances and stabilities. They reshape and restructure the productive basis, which forms the material and social conditions of life, the 'givens', around which a particular local working-class culture has developed. They disturb a particular historical network of defences and 'negotiations' ....