When someone response to his surrounding (surrounding means stimulation~ Stimulate উদ্দীপনা) that

means the things or item or event or situation that stimulate individual. How do we response on
see the leaves of the tree. This response is two type one responses by perceive somethings and
another is without or beyond our thinking. When we like something we don't think about that
why we are like this. For example, on a sunny day walking on the road that time starting raining
its make me feel good, here there is no thinking. Without any rational and intellectual processing,
the way we respond to the stimulation that is called feeling. How we response to our
surroundings. Surrounding means two types of surroundings one is natural surroundings and
another is cultural surroundings. We are always midst of cultural world. The world that is called
culture.

"The tree of knowledge is not the tree of life" ~ Lord Byron 'sorrow of knowledge' poetic drama
Manfred [Act 1 scene 1]

If you want to understand cultural you have to respond to structure of feeling of that particular
time. From the outside it seems to be very difficult as much as you read you will miss the little
details of it.

## What, according to Raymond Williams, is 'structure of feeling? How does this concept
help us understand culture?

Before starting the point 'structure of feeling ' first you have to know that what is feelings. If you
don't know about feelings, you can't understand 'structure of feeling'. So, feeling means how we
respond to our stimulation. It's response to our surroundings. Surrounding means two types of
surroundings one is natural surroundings and another is cultural surroundings. We are always
midst of cultural world. The world that is called culture.

According to Raymond Williams, 'structure of feeling' refers to the underlying and intangible
aspects of a particular cultural period. It represents the collective emotions, attitudes, and values
that shape the way people experience and perceive the world during a specific time. It is not a
formal or consciously learned construct, but rather an inherent part of the social fabric and
communication within a community. The structure of feeling is expressed and embodied in
various cultural forms such as art, literature, music, and fashion, providing insights into the lived
experiences and deep connections of a particular period. It evolves and changes with each new
generation, as they respond to the unique circumstances they inherit, while still carrying some
continuities from the past. Williams emphasizes the significance of understanding the structure
of feeling through the documentary culture of a period, which includes records, artifacts, and
creative expressions, especially when direct witnesses are no longer available.

## How does 'structure of feeling' concept help us understand culture?

The concept of "structure of feeling," introduced by cultural theorist Raymond Williams, helps
us understand culture by emphasizing the dynamic and lived experience of a particular time and
place. It refers to the underlying, often unspoken, patterns of thought, emotions, and sensibilities
that shape a society's collective consciousness and shape its cultural expressions.

Williams argued that culture is not simply a collection of art, literature, and other artifacts. It is
also the way that people experience the world, the way that they feel about it, and the way that
they relate to each other. 'Structure of feeling' is the way that these experiences, feelings, and
relationships are organized.

The concept 'structure of feeling' is not something that can be easily articulated or described. It is
more of a mood or atmosphere than a set of ideas. It is something that is felt rather than thought.
However, it can be inferred from the way that people express themselves in art, literature, and
other cultural forms.

The concept 'structure of feeling' can be helpful for understanding culture in a number of ways.
First, it can help us to understand how culture changes over time. The structure of feeling is
always in flux. It is constantly being created and recreated as people experience new things, have
new feelings, and form new relationships. This means that culture is never static. It is always
evolving.

Second, the concept of structure of feeling can help us to understand how different cultures
interact with each other. When two cultures come into contact, their structures of feeling may
clash or merge. This can lead to conflict or to new and creative forms of culture.

Third, the concept of structure of feeling can help us to understand how individuals experience
culture. Each individual has their own unique structure of feeling. This is shaped by their
personal experiences, their social class, their gender, their race, and other factors. The structure
of feeling helps to explain why individuals respond to culture in different ways.

The concept of structure of feeling is a complex and challenging one. However, it is a valuable
tool for understanding culture. It can help us to see culture as something that is dynamic,
interactive, and personal.

!!!! Or you can try this!!!!

By exploring the structure of feeling, we gain insight into the cultural mood, the prevailing
sentiments, and the sensibilities of a specific period. It helps us understand how people relate to
one another, their environment, and themselves. It sheds light on the unarticulated norms, desires,
fears, and aspirations that influence social behavior, artistic expressions, and societal changes.

The concept of the structure of feeling encourages us to consider culture as a dynamic, evolving
entity rather than a fixed set of beliefs or practices. It helps us grasp the complexities and
nuances of a particular cultural moment and recognize the multiple influences and forces at play.
By examining the structure of feeling, we can better understand how culture shapes and is shaped
by individuals and society as a whole.
## What are the two definitions of culture mentioned in "In from culture Hegemony"?

Basic idea about three definition of culture by Raymond Williams

[Raymond Williams proposed three different definitions of culture: ideal, documentary, and
social.

Ideal culture is a state or process of human perfection, in terms of certain absolute or universal
values. This definition of culture is often associated with the concept of the "high arts," such as
literature, music, and art.

Documentary culture is the body of intellectual and imaginative work, in which, in a detailed
way, human thought and experience are variously recorded. This definition of culture is more
inclusive than the ideal definition, as it includes a wider range of human activity, such as popular
culture, folk art, and everyday life.

Social culture is a particular way of life, which expresses certain meanings and values in art,
learning, institutions, and behavior. This definition of culture is the most inclusive of the three,
as it encompasses all aspects of human society.]

!!! Basically Just understand the three concept then you can write anything
from here!!!!
~~~"From Culture to Hegemony," Raymond Williams discusses two definitions of culture: the
ideal definition and the documentary definition.

Ideal Definition of Culture: According to the ideal definition, culture refers to the highest forms
of human intellectual and artistic achievements. It encompasses literature, art, music, philosophy,
and other forms of high culture that are associated with refinement, sophistication, and aesthetic
excellence. This definition often emphasizes the cultural achievements of the elite or ruling
classes and is focused on the preservation and appreciation of esteemed cultural artifacts.

Documentary Definition of Culture: In contrast, the documentary definition of culture

emphasizes a broader understanding that encompasses the whole range of human practices,
beliefs, and expressions. It includes everyday life, popular culture, folk traditions, language,
customs, and other aspects of lived experiences. This definition recognizes that culture is not
limited to the elite or exclusive domains but is created and experienced by all members of a
society.

Social Definition of culture: In social definition of culture, culture is a description of a particular

way of life which express certain meanings and value not only in art and learning but also in
institutions and ordinary behaviour. The analysis of culture is clarification of the meanings and
value implicit and explicit in particular way of life, a particular culture.

Each definition alone is not enough to analyses a culture. For example, in Sophocles Antigone,
we find the absolute value of reverence for the dead in terms of ideal analysis. But the reverence
as an absolute value is limited in the play by the term of particular kingship system and its
conventional obligations – Antigone would do this for a brother but not for a husband.

A documentary definition is not enough too.as it sees value only in written and printed records
and marks this area from the rest of man’s life in society.

Again a social definition which treats either the general process of art and learning as a mere by
product, a passive reflection of the real interests of the society, is also unacceptable.

William then combines three definitions given below.

Culture is the study of relationship between elements in a whole way of life. the analysis of
culture is the attempt to discover the nature of the organization which is the complex of these
relationship. The analysis begins with the discovery of a pattern or code and ends with the
discovery of relationships between these patterns in an organization as a whole.

Three levels of culture- lived culture of a particular time and place

Recorded/ period culture- From whole body of activity; certain things are selected for value and
emphasis.

Culture of selected tradition- a continual selection and re-selection of ancestry.

We approach through our selection – through our own experience without even making effort to
see in something like its original form.

If cultural value/ work can have related to its original organization in which it was exposed. The
more clearly we see its time value.

Williams argues that the documentary definition of culture is more inclusive and accurate in
capturing the diverse range of cultural practices and experiences within a society. It emphasizes
the lived culture of the masses and acknowledges the significance of everyday cultural activities,
popular entertainment, and subcultural expressions. By expanding the definition of culture,
Williams seeks to challenge the notion that culture is solely associated with the privileged few
and instead highlights its broader social and historical dimensions.
## How are they Contradictory? (How Ideal definition of culture and documentary definition
of culture are contradictory to each other)

Here are some ways in which the ideal definition of culture and the documentary definition of
culture are contradictory:

Ideal culture is seen as a state of human perfection, while documentary culture is seen as a
description of a particular way of life. Ideal culture is often seen as something to strive for, while
documentary culture is seen as something to observe and understand. Ideal culture is often based
on universal values, while documentary culture is often based on specific cultural values.

Ideal culture is often seen as something that is shared by all humans, while documentary culture
is often seen as something that is unique to a particular group of people.

Ideal culture is often seen as static, while documentary culture is often seen as dynamic. Ideal
culture is often seen as something that does not change, while documentary culture is often seen
as something that is constantly evolving.

Ideal definition places value on a limited range of cultural forms, often associated with the
privileged few. On the other hand, the documentary definition acknowledges the cultural
practices of all members of society, including those from diverse backgrounds and social classes.

##How three definition of culture are complementary to each other?

The ideal, documentary, and social definitions of culture are complementary to each other
because they all provide different perspectives on what culture is and how it works.

The ideal definition of culture sees culture as a state of human perfection, in terms of certain
absolute or universal values. This definition emphasizes the importance of shared values and
beliefs in creating a cohesive and harmonious society.

The documentary definition of culture sees culture as the body of intellectual and imaginative
work, in which, in a detailed way, human thought and experience are variously recorded. This
definition emphasizes the importance of art, literature, and other forms of expression in
documenting and preserving human culture.

The social definition of culture sees culture as a description of a particular way of life. This
definition emphasizes the importance of social relationships and interactions in shaping culture.

All three of these definitions are important because they each provide a different way of
understanding culture. By considering all three definitions together, we can get a more complete
picture of what culture is and how it works.
Here are some examples of how the three definitions of culture can be complementary to each
other:

* A study of the ideal definition of culture might look at how different cultures have different
values and beliefs about what is considered "perfection." This study could then be used to
explain why different cultures have different ways of doing things.

* A study of the documentary definition of culture might look at how different cultures have
different forms of art, literature, and other forms of expression. This study could then be used to
explain how different cultures understand the world around them.

* A study of the social definition of culture might look at how different cultures have different
social relationships and interactions. This study could then be used to explain how different
cultures function.

By considering all three definitions of culture together, we can get a more complete picture of
what culture is and how it works. This can help us to understand ourselves and the world around
us better.

## What do Adorno and Horkheimer mean by 'culture industry'? Why do they consider
'enlightenment ‘as 'mass deception'?

Culture industry is a main phenomenon of late capitalism, one which encompasses all
products end from of light entertainment from Hollywood filmy to elevator music. All these
forms of popular culture are designed to satisfy the growing needs of mass capitalistic
consumers for entertainment.

Products of the culture economy take the appearance of artwork but are in fact depend on
industry and economy, meaning they are subjected to the interests of money and power. All
products of culture industry are designed for profit. This mean that, every work of art is
turned into a consumer product and is shaped by the logic of capitalist to rationality (i.e.
whatever sells the best). Movie based on box office collection. Art is no longer autonomy,
but is rather a commodified product of the economic relation of production.

Main argument: the commodification of culture is the commodification of human

consciousness. Culture industry destroys autonomy thinking and criticism, serving to
preserve the ruling order. It provides easy entertainment which destroys massed from the
wrong and sickness of ruling order. Culture industry taken over reality (people see reality
through them). Culture industry serves to keep worker busy.
“Amusement has become an extension of labor under late capitalism.” P.C offers worker a
refuge and distraction for work but in fact causes them to further only freedom. Culture
industry has to really offer freedom from thinking.

Culture industry positions the masses as objects of manipulation. This turns people into
passive and subordinated subjects unable to fully take critical responsibility for their own
action, a thing which is crucial for a functioning democracy. People therefore gladly give in
a help maintain the system by taking part in it.

In culture industry there is a production line mentality in producing cultural products.

Though all film, music or books seems different, they follow the same recycled formula.
People feel there is satisfaction for everyone but it’s all variations of something.

Main feature of culture industry: all products are produced under the same scheme allows
them to be relatable and effortlessly destroyed. This is how culture industry conformity
with something seeming different.

Finally, people under capitalism suffer the same fate of art under culture industry. They
are reduced to the exchange value with no unique traits as the enlightenment dreamed.

Totalitarianism of Nazi Germany is compared to culture industry.

Adorno and Horkheimer, in their work "Dialectic of Enlightenment," use the term "cultural
industry" to refer to the mass production and commercialization of culture within capitalist
societies. They argue that the cultural industry encompasses various forms of mass media,
entertainment, and popular culture that are standardized, manufactured, and consumed by the
masses.

According to Adorno and Horkheimer, the cultural industry operates as a system of control and
domination, aiming to homogenize and manipulate people's tastes, preferences, and desires. They
view it as a mechanism that perpetuates the capitalist system and reinforces social conformity,
reducing individuals to passive consumers who are stripped of critical thinking and creative
agency.

Adorno and Horkheimer argued that the culture industry is characterized by three main features:

Standardization: The culture industry produces a standardized set of cultural goods that are
designed to appeal to the widest possible audience. This standardization is achieved through the
use of mass production techniques, which allow for the rapid and efficient production of large
quantities of cultural goods.
Predictability: The culture industry produces cultural goods that are predictable and familiar.
This predictability is achieved through the use of formulas and clichés that are known to appeal
to consumers.

Integration: The culture industry produces cultural goods that are designed to integrate people
into the existing social order. This integration is achieved through the use of cultural goods that
promote conformity, obedience, and consumerism.

Adorno and Horkheimer believed that the culture industry is a form of mass deception because it
prevents people from thinking critically about the world around them. They argued that the
culture industry promotes false needs and desires, which distract people from their real problems.
This, in turn, makes people more compliant with the existing social order.

Adorno and Horkheimer consider "enlightenment" as "mass deception" because they argue that
the ideals of the Enlightenment, which emphasize reason, rationality, and progress, have been
distorted and co-opted within capitalist societies. They contend that the Enlightenment's goal of
human emancipation and the pursuit of knowledge have been subverted by the forces of the
cultural industry and capitalist system.

Adorno and Horkheimer assert that the cultural industry, through its mass production and
standardized cultural products, creates an illusion of freedom, choice, and progress. They argue
that these cultural products, such as mass media, entertainment, and advertising, manipulate and
shape people's desires and preferences, turning them into passive consumers driven by false
needs and superficial desires.

According to Adorno and Horkheimer, the cultural industry promotes a culture of conformity,
where individuals are encouraged to conform to predetermined tastes, norms, and lifestyles. This
conformity prevents critical thinking and individual autonomy, trapping individuals within a
cycle of mass-produced cultural products that reinforce dominant ideologies and maintain the
existing social order.

In this context, Adorno and Horkheimer see the Enlightenment ideals of reason and rationality as
co-opted and used as tools of manipulation. They argue that the capitalist system exploits the
human desire for enlightenment and progress, turning it into a mass deception that perpetuates
social control and domination.

By characterizing enlightenment as mass deception, Adorno and Horkheimer critique the way in
which the capitalist system and the cultural industry distort and manipulate the ideals of reason
and progress, ultimately hindering genuine emancipation and perpetuating a false sense of
freedom within society.

The culture industry is a system of mass production and distribution of cultural goods. It is
characterized by its ownership by large corporations, its use of mass production techniques, and
its focus on profit. Adorno and Horkheimer argued that the culture industry was a form of "mass
deception" that manipulated people and prevented them from thinking critically about the world
around them.

Regarding their notion of "enlightenment" as "mass deception," Adorno and Horkheimer critique
the way enlightenment ideals and rationality have been distorted and co-opted by capitalist
societies. They argue that instead of fostering true emancipation and liberation, enlightenment
has been commodified and turned into a tool for manipulation and oppression. The cultural
industry, by producing standardized and shallow cultural products, creates an illusion of freedom
and choice while actually perpetuating a mass deception that stifles critical thinking and
reinforces dominant power structures.

In summary, Adorno and Horkheimer consider the cultural industry as a means of mass control
and standardization, and they see enlightenment ideals as being subverted and used for deceptive
purposes within the capitalist system. Their critique emphasizes the ways in which culture and
media can shape and limit individual autonomy, perpetuate conformity, and maintain social
inequalities.

!!! Additional Things for understanding the concept!!!

Here are some examples of cultural industry products:

Movies, Television shows, Music Magazines, Books, Video games, Advertising so on.

## English industry

What factors contributed to the rise of English as a global language? How does
English industry further enhance this status?

Explain Your Understanding of 'English Industry’. What are the myths working
behind the growth of this industry?

How do the 'myths' of English Industry, maintain the interests of the industry?
Industry- heavy machinery, large establishment, large quantity of production of goods
exceeding the needs of the owners and ultimately driven by profit.

Rise of English as global language:

1. Conquering and colonizing different parts of the world. Australia, Canada, New Zealand,
the USA- settled, killed or removed local inhabitants, forced society.

2. Colonized- locals to work for government or to get official recognition learn English.
 3. Slave trade – Caribbean islands as hubs for slave trade brought from various parts of
Africa. Lexifier language or creole language.

4. Official language

5. Language of the current political and economic power.

~~Marketing and industrialization of English

~~ English is no longer remains to be merely a language, rather it gets entangled with economic,
commercial as well as ideological issues or agendas in hands of corporations and government.

English as usual is the name of the language. But thing is not act so simple, actually issue is
complicated or complex. Because English has become an industry. And industry what are the
Main components? It has owner, then it has workers (labor) then it has products and there is
strategy to sell products that you organize the content, control and regulate the market. And you
generate problems multiplication of problems so these are the components or organization or
structural composition of an industry. All these components you can find in English industry.
Therefore, English is called an industry. English has turn to be an industry. That means in our
discussion we are focusing on commoditization, Commercialization, of the language called
English. English has become industry and it indicates Not only for interest but also for promotion
ideological Hegemony. For example, English and Christianity coined and invent in colonial era
and still it is so. Christianity and teaching of English

~~Proselytize- try to persuade other people to accept your beliefs. Persuade other to change his
beliefs.

Mainly church is the place for teaching English at the old time. So with teaching the language
they also taught moral or beliefs of Christianity. And they considered in colonial masters a
Superior. And they manage as well as their religion always persuading. Therefore, colonization
was a mission for them to civilized the savages (the barbaric people) and it's not sufficient if you
not teach the language only also you have to do the proselytizing. To preach the values and
beliefs of Christianity. In that way you can get them civilized, educated. Because Christianity it's
the superior than other religions. Christianity is Superior because it's the religion of powerful
people. That was also connected to their politics of control and domination. You teach people
your language and religion also. That will ensure a particular domination and Will ensure the
control.

How teaching of English and preaching of Christianity is connected?

So English, the phenomenon of English in our part of the world is not a linguistic family. It is
political, historical, cultural. We need to understand this piece of insight. And this is called
linguistic is a model the term linguistic is a model, the superiority, the proclamation or
declaration of the superiority of languages, teaching people that languages and thereby

There is there is a very interesting and increasing factor increasing. I hope you know this word. It
is intriguing, intriguing factor. Here Hegemony has a particular, I mean conversation. Hegemony
is about control, but this control is not forced.

It is not a control by force but through producing or generating the concept first. Your controller
captures this concept from both the Padmavati. So you learn language English again English
because you are convinced that through learning this language you will be able to develop
yourself.

This language will open up opportunities, immense opportunities for yours, right? You will gain
material practical in your life to learn this language. So this conviction, this consent for learning
the language is generated fast. So therefore you are controlled willingly.

Consent is there, it is not that, not the control through applying its force, not through the
application of force. This is, I mean called consent. It is domination. But domination is through
consent. That is the politics about it. So linguistic hegemony English has become immutable and
inversionist that need to learn the language.

And the control the issue on the part of the owners of the call owners we have to transfer or
linguistics. Domination of on language over other languages. You will get material by learning
the language. It domination through consent.

Linguistic Hegemony - First of all, Domination one language over other language

2. This domination is established by calling language superior than other

3. This domination is established through generative consent of the people who are dominated
not by force

History of English language about one-hundred-year-old, but English as Lingua Franca or global
language is only about 400 years old phenomenon.

Native English Speaker- North America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia

Settler colony - Colonizers went there and settled there permanently occupied the land settled
them with their family

Lord Babington Macaulay - British Writer His writings or speech 'Minute or Education ' 1835 in
this book he says we need group of people of Indian of black in color but taste of English. It's
possible by teaching than English.

This Hegemony motivate you to learn. You will dominate by not by force by willingly
Clark and Critics - Antonym to each other Clark passively received a things don’t ask any
questions about it but if you are a critic it's an ability to encode any message you can find put the
hidden meaning of it.

How would we or how should we reevaluate or examine our English status as practitioner of
English in an innovation way, cultural or sociocultural way

What is our status on a colonial place practitioner?

Emergence of English language or lingua franca means language for communication in global
context.

Everyone learns this. How this entangled with colonialism. After the colonialization it reach
globally. Before that it was absent. It also gives us some insight. Insight - the status of language
depends on military, economic and political strength of those language, speakers of that language.
Before colonialization and after colonialization status of English language. After British gaining
the military strength, political strength, economic power then this status happens on English
language. One language will be superior does not depend on the intrinsic (অন্তনননিত) quality.

English industry is billion-dollar industry. Products of English industry Grammar, English

language tasting material IELTS-TOEFL, training center, exams, English literally book (fiction,
drama)

Colonialism don't colonize the land it's colonize the mind.

~~~Myth of Standard English Language

1. Myth of individual progress and national development

 English is the language of science, technology and development

 Textbooks, teacher,

 Students, migrants, refuge

 Research in English- journal

 Local, international, multinational corporations

 Low- price edition for developing countries

2. Myth of standard language

 Grammar books, textbooks, language, tests

 No technical difference between dialect and a standard language

  Selection of dialect as standard language on the basis of some political or socio-
economic factors

 Pakistani English or Nigerian English wrong but American English right or ok

 “To conclude” is right but “to boldly/finally/quickly are wrong”. In the same way I
can see right but I am seeing wrong

 BANA English to codify and standardization the language……. Not African-

American

 TOEFL/IELTS

 linguistic

3. Myth of native speakers.

 Asian-Canadians are not chosen in middle east

 As the selectors are also native

English industry is the controller of English Industry owner. Industry components owner, labor,
products, the create market for selling products. We call English language as English industry
because it has all the comments of an industry. It's striking to the premise of circulating and
establishing 3 myths. We call it myth but we are convenience about it. So it's no longer myth in
your mind. That is the Hegemony. For example, English and development, English and progress
they are synonymous to each other. If you learn English you are developed, process personally.
And national development also possible through learn English. English and development is
connected they build up this thing. And all of the people believe this. Because English is the
technology of all things. Science, technology, literature, is the key to entered into those world
more likely a key. Language of science, language of technology is developed. So market will be
expanding. Then Standard language (Concept of standard language dialect). This English
language is one of dialect of England and pick this and make it standardization. It's called
marketing strategy. And without English industry. English language is a product, products of an
industry, to launch this product it must be concert then it makes standardization (that means only
correct language). So if you want to go to those county your language should be standard. To
standard your English you have to pass TOFEL, IELTS. Myth of standardization.

Math of native speakers - Native speakers are the always best teachers of English. They
established this myth. In China for teaching English they appoint Native English Speakers.
BANA- Native speaker’s country Britain, North America, Australia
## Identify and Violence by Amartya Sen (2006)

~~ What is the connection between identity and Violence?

~~ Significance the sub title 'The Illusion of destiny'.

~~What is the meaning of 'solitarist approach'?

~~ What is the reverence of the book Samuel P. Huntington's Book?

Amartya Sen gets Nobel prize on economics.

This profound philosophical book.

Composition of the title itself, (Identity and Violence). Identity turn on violence and these are
join together and this indicates a relationship between identity and Violence. Amartya Sen
arguments is that a kind of Identity politics that we are doing that. This way we form our identity;
we perceive our identity that is personalize that is its proposition. Therefore, there is a necessary
co relation between identity and Violence. Identify leads to violence why? Amartya Sen
argument is that there is interrelationship between identity and Violence. It's because of the
minor Identity politics called a Way or perceive our identity. The present Identity politics is
characterized by 'solitarist approach'- the notion that one has a singular, pure and fixed,
unchangeable identity. And the notion that one certainly belongs to a particular affiliation (union)
which is. That is Identity politics, it means the way to form Identity. Inner encourage to form
Identity. For example, Amartya Sen arguments is that every individual has a set of identity
markers to which he simultaneously belongs. At one time he has many Identity but contemporary
identity politics emphasizes that you need to take one particular Identity, that leads to conflict,
violence and continuation of the world. You must have acknowledged that you have diversity of

How your identity is fixed? Language, religion, ethnicity, civilization those all of your singular
identity (Solitarist approach)

For example, India. Amartya Sen given many references from the book of Samuel P. Huntington
book The clash of civilizations and Remaking of the world order (1996)

Amartya Sen is negatively criticized this book. Criticism of the means discussion, interpretation.
So it's a neutral term. Amartya Sen is pointed out the limitations and profound. He talks about
the clash of civilizations and the approach is simple and savage. For example, until we point out
that in a coming day there will be a clash between civilizations not between State. And it
prominent of the world in three terms as Islamic civilizations and western civilizations. Amartya
Sen question is very basic he asked whether it should appropriate to term civilizations with this
name Islamic or Western. Because you acknowledged the essential plurality of this civilizations.
For example, Huntington comes India turns at Hindu civilizations. So Amartya Sen point is that
simple and savage approach to civilizations. Because then you believe to acknowledge the plural
identity of the people. India doesn't only accommodate the people who are Hindu by religion but
there are lots of other community or religious community in India. So many Dialects identities,
so diverse people are so diverse in the way of their attitude and their way of believe. It is just
unjust that kind of Civilization that Hindu civilization. Amartya Sen is actually pointed out that it
is called Hindu civilization and it is also called Muslim civilization. Because India is not only
biggest Hindu country but also the largest Muslim country. It is India has been made by the
people of so many communities. That you cannot give credit on one community and then a
Civilization after the community. So he is share wrong and mistaken identity for the civilization.
Because you do not acknowledge that plurality of affiliation and go by Solitarist approach. And
western and Islamic civilization so there is no civilization is called Islamic or Western
civilization. What is an Islamic civilization? There are many people belongs from Muslim
background but there not faith in religion. So his is point is every communism community are
heterogeneous. there are many people of different countries are believing in Islam but they are all
are different from each other. By their lifestyle for habits. Western you cannot just conceive
Western in a form. There are so many form, so many places of West. You cannot think west as
something homogeneous. You need to singular. Find you go by singular approach or solitary
approach. Then you reach the route of violence. So therefore is a relationship between violence
and Identity. The illusion of destiny is the subtitle of the book of the clash of Civilization and
remarking of the world. Illusion of destiny meaning you have this illusion of this pure identity.
And you fight for that. Amartya Sen is pointed out your fight for establish your identity. That we
are fight. Because you think that you fight for achieving singular pure identity. Amartya Sen
understand it illusion there is nothing call your identity. People are fond of this identity, natives.
Something of your own. But Amartya Sen is definitions unsettle the conventional unsteady of
yours. Term as native, it is also with various things. You also composite of all these. Therefore,
your native indigenous (আনিবাসী) this are all illusion (illusion of destiny). You think you are
fighting for your identity, established your identity but this something which you don’t mean to
do. Identities are 'robustly plural ‘. Solitarist approach can be a good way of misunderstanding.
Solitarist approach leads you to violence.

1. I am Muslim which is my one and pure identity. We are fight for this. When we are Muslim
means others are non-Muslims. Amartya Sen tells against this concept. Solitarist approach means
only one identity you take and try to established make or create violence. Simultaneously you are
many Identity markers. When you assert for one and fight for it create violence. That is Illusion
that you fixed, permanent. And you have Fight with those who are against of your fixed, pure,
identity. Your identity and you are superior. As well as who doesn't want to hold your permanent
or pure identity you are starting fighting with them. But when you understand that I have many
Identity then you share your identity to others. At that time there will be no violence or clash or
fight. You have to write about 'solitarist approach' and 'clash of civilizations'.

¥^ Relevance of the Samuel P. Huntington’s book - Homogeneous concept of civilization. He

believes only one identity Like Islam civilization, Hindu civilization. But there are different
countries where Muslims lived and they are totally different form others. Stereotype-a fixed idea,
^ Reductionist - which is reduced something

Huntington name of the clash of civilization.

Amartya Sen is pointed out that how a faulty definition. Because you cannot have generalized
community by one concept. They are different in many ways, food habit, cloth, attitude etc.
Because community are heterogeneous. In west there are Alfred Hitler as well as there are Noam
Chomsky. Huntington doesn't believe on heterogeneous concept of civilization or community.
When one civilization builds with many more community then how you can give this name only
one things.

This Solitary approach to identity gives birth to violence.

We are belonging to diverse identity markers.

## How are the different ways of categorizing and analyzing culture? How comprehensive are
they? (It's mainly indicates the category of culture such as High culture, Low culture)

How cultural studies fill a kind of affinity with marginalize section of society?

Culture: culture originated as a result of human evolution and the development of cognitive
abilities. Humans possess a unique capacity for symbolic thought, language, and social learning,
which allowed for the transmission of knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors across generations. This
led to the development of shared systems of meaning, norms, values, and practices, giving rise to
cultural patterns and traditions. In short culture refers to whole way of thinking. It's an
inclusive term (whole way of living). Culture means cultivation, so from agriculture culture
is come. In the way you have taken care of your agricultural products for good result in the
same way culture not create in one days it takes many time like a crops need some time for
its final result. Education is important for culture. The idea of cultivation remains
unchangeable. So culture refers urban educated, sophistication society.

High culture: High culture refers to the artistic, intellectual, and cultural products and activities
that are considered sophisticated, refined, and typically associated with the upper classes or
educated elites. It encompasses various forms of art, literature, music, theater, philosophy, and
other intellectual pursuits that are valued for their complexity, depth, and aesthetic qualities. In
easy way, the culture of high class people is called high culture or the people who are high
position in politically, culturally, and socially in a given socially context so their culture
known as high culture claim that high culture or people who belongs to high class, these
people culture is called high culture. So cultural dominance come economic and social,
political context. High culture refers to a cultural form that is supposed to be of high
standards in terms of aesthetic and intellect. When the fact remains that the text and the
institution which even we understand that of high standard we should not miss the point of
source that point regarding the connection between the high class and high culture. And
how the cultural practices of high class in the society are known to us as high culture. So we
have the understand the politics of power. The definition of high culture is determined or
controlled by the controllers of society. "Control of resources", leads to "Cultural
controls", leads to "control politics" then politics control resources then it’s become
economical.

The ruling class of the society always domain of culture. And their culture promotes as
high culture. High culture to be found in power structure of the society. It's essentially the
culture of high class of the society. The people who are politically occupied higher position
in the society. Economically, politically, socially, culturally. They are the rulers. High
culture is formed or created and promoted by the dominant section of the society.

For example, folk song, music, they have philosophical thought so why it's on low culture.
But High class people don't think it as a high culture for this reason it's not high culture.

Shakespeare bound text is high culture use for academic’s discussion by the promoter of
high culture is identified as high culture. but its other version like film/ anything count as
low culture (pop culture). They consider only one form of something as high culture and
other version they consider low culture.

**Matthew Arnold definition of culture: According to Matthew Arnold, Culture refers

"the pursuit of perfection" by means of getting to know "the best that has been thought
and said in the world" [culture and anarchy book] Important for Viva

Perfection indicates improvement

The best - western philosophy/thought/creative literature attempt to establish to dominate

the culture. Use superlative degree means something is inferior. For this reason, using
superlative on a statement is problematic.

**Arnoldian notion of culture is obviously an elite ideal of individual human refinement. It

is exclusionary (বাদ দাওযা), essentialist (think one is right), elitist (elite) as well as
supremacist in its conceptualization(concept).

It creates anarchy because of the elite people and working class people. Working class
people protest for their existentialism crisis. Arnold views negative to other culture. It's not
acknowledge other culture as a culture.

He terms other Cultural form as anarchy. He is very negative about other forms of culture.
Culture for him must be a journey for attaining perfection. And this perfection is
characterized by a sophistication sensibility and institutional education your acquaintance
with western literature and philosophy otherwise you cannot belong to them. This is the
way to attaining culture.

"Romanticism"- Imaginaries, inclusive, social and political movement.

Poetry - spontaneous overflow of powerful emotion. This emotion should be collected on

tranquility. When you are calm, composed, when you are solitary then you write it.
Recollect in spontaneous overflow.

Shift intellectual to imagination. Intellectual means elite and property of group of people.
Imagination means all people inclusive, ordinary. We can have noted cultural studies in
romanticism because it's inclusive. In Cultural studies all form is included. High culture,
low culture all things culture studies think culture.

" Poet is a man speaking to man"- Preface to lyrical Ballad "Wordsworth"

Romanticism re-evaluates the status of low culture. It tells us to re-examine our convention
wisdom about poetic diction and our conceptualization of literature as High art.

Poetic diction - poets can use words from people’s everyday interaction. Preface to lyrical
Ballad Wordsworth. He challenged special vocabulary.

Therefore, we locate the position of cultural studies regarding culture in romanticism. And
which re-evaluates the status of low culture. That means it includes low culture also. And
we can find a very close affinity between romanticism and Cultural studies.

Cultural studies share with romanticism.

Culture means high culture and Anarchy means low culture.

Issues of social class:

The role of market:

Commoditization of culture:

Commercialization of culture:

For example, case of paheli baishak. It belongs to pop (popular means low Culture). But
it’s become high culture to bring it urban area. And its became high culture. Their purpose
is the only Commercialization. By this high class people is gets benefited. High culture
people used low culture for their own benefit of earning money and make low culture as
high culture.

How Culture categories are overleaping?

It means at one time one things can belongs to different categories of culture. For example,
of Shakespeare. His binding text is High culture but other version considered as low
culture.

Categories low culture: Mass culture, pop or popular culture, sub culture.

Pop culture means popular culture. It's same like its name. Implication is that it's created
by the people. And practice and consumed by the people. And we have to believe that it's
not fully correct. Because there are also market and capitalist system. Commoditization
and Commercialization involved. People are not certainly in the control of popular culture.
It's mainly control by the High class people who control the market. But normal people
had to give the idea in their mind that it's the normal people who are controlling it. People
are manipulated by them. It also can have said Hegemony. You think that you are choosing
but this is an illusion. They try to impose if then they said it its pop or popular as if people
can think that they are making it. As well as they also decide our choices. Here normal
people has a little role play by high culture people.

Popular culture doesn't emerge from within the people. The prominent role and the creator
of popular culture is basically mass media and market and capitalist system. They have
very limited role in the formation, production, circulation, consumption of popular culture.
Massive role is capitalist system and market. Name is the irony.

Mass culture: not created by mass created by mass media. Mass culture is a Cultural form
that is produce and circulated by the mass media. Mass is the receiver or consumer. For
example, Bollywood.

Mass culture and pop culture difference is role. In mass culture full role play by mass
media. But in pop or popular culture it's is little bit few. Full mass culture is under mass
media. In pop culture there is a little role people. পপু লার কালচারর একটু হরলও মানু রের ররাল থারক ককন্তু
মাসকালচার র পু ররাটাই মাস কমকিযার দখরল ।

Sub culture: small unit, minority Culture. Subversive (alternative thinking) alternative way
of living. For example, food habit, dress habit or style, literature, music etc. A group of
people who are bored by the conventional ways of living or mainstream of culture. They
have formulated for them alternative way of living, alternative ways, alternative ideas,
alternative dress style, alternative ideology. Established literature tradition one time those
was sub culture. For example, absurd theater. It was different from classical theater and
Shakespeare's theatre.

A sub culture doesn't remain as sub- culture for a very long time. Because of the
intervention of media. Because of the interrelation of market. By the time being it's
becoming pop/ mass culture by mass Media. Any revolution of the beginning sub culture.
## Write an essay on Cultural studies perspective of reading text.

According to cultural studies, reading a text involves more than simply deciphering its
literal meaning. It requires a critical and contextual approach that takes into account the
social, historical, and ideological dimensions that shape the text and its reception. Here are
some key principles for reading a text from a cultural studies perspective:

1. Contextual Analysis: Cultural studies emphasizes the importance of understanding the

broader context in which a text is produced. This includes considering the social, political,
and historical circumstances that influenced the creation of the text. Analyzing the cultural
context helps uncover the ideologies, power dynamics, and social structures that may be
embedded in the text.

2. Power and Ideology: Cultural studies recognizes that texts are not neutral but are
influenced by power relations and ideological positions. Analyzing a text involves
identifying the dominant ideologies and values it promotes, as well as the power dynamics
it reflects or challenges. This includes examining how the text positions different social
groups, reinforces or subverts existing power structures, and conveys certain worldviews
or cultural perspectives.

3. Audience Reception: Cultural studies emphasizes the active role of the audience in the
interpretation and reception of texts. It recognizes that readers bring their own experiences,
beliefs, and cultural backgrounds to the reading process, which can shape their
understanding and reception of the text. Analyzing a text involves considering how
different readers or audiences might interpret and respond to it based on their social,
cultural, and historical contexts.

4. Cultural Codes and Meanings: Cultural studies explores the cultural codes, symbols, and
meanings embedded in texts. It looks beyond the surface-level content and considers how
the text uses language, imagery, and symbols to convey specific cultural messages or values.
This includes examining the use of metaphors, stereotypes, cultural references, and other
linguistic or visual elements that contribute to the text's meaning and resonance.

5. Intertextuality and Influence: Cultural studies recognizes that texts are interconnected
and influenced by other texts and cultural forms. Analyzing a text involves considering its
intertextual references, allusions, and influences from other cultural products, such as
literature, films, art, or popular culture. This helps to understand how texts are part of a
larger cultural discourse and contribute to the shaping of cultural meanings and narratives.

Overall, cultural studies encourage a critical and contextual approach to reading texts. It
involves analyzing the social and cultural forces that shape texts, considering the power
dynamics and ideologies at play, and recognizing the active role of readers in interpreting
and responding to texts. This approach allows for a deeper understanding of texts and their
significance within broader cultural contexts.

##Cultural Studies

Characteristics of Cultural Studies

Just because cultural studies are practically impossible to define, it does not mean that
anything can be cultural studies or cultural studies can be anything. The history of cultural
studies has provided it with certain distinguishable characteristics that can often be
identified in terms of what cultural studies aims to do.

1. Cultural studies aims to examine its subject matter in terms of cultural practices and
their relation to power. Its constant goal is to expose power relationships and examine how
these relationships influence and shape cultural practices.

2. Cultural studies is not simply the study of culture as though it was a discrete entity
divorced from its social or political context. Its objective is to understand culture in all its
complex forms and to analyze the social and political context within which it manifests
itself.

3. Culture in cultural studies always performs two functions: it is both the object of study
and the location of political criticism and action. Cultural studies aim to be both an
intellectual and a pragmatic enterprise

4. cultural studies attempts to expose and reconcile the division of knowledge, to overcome
the split between tacit (that is, intuitive knowledge based on local cultures) and objective
(so-called universal) forms of knowledge. It assumes a common identity and common
interest between the knower and the known, between the observer and what is being
observed.

5. Cultural studies is committed to a moral evaluation of modern society and to a radical

line of political action. The tradition of cultural studies is not one of value-free scholarship
but one committed to social reconstruction by critical political involvement. Thus, cultural
studies aim to understand and change the structures of dominance everywhere, but in
industrial capitalist societies in particular.

What is culture from others’ definitions?

American anthropologist Margaret Mead (1901-1978) says that:

” Culture is the learned behavior of a society or a subgroup”

Raymond Williams (1921-1988), one of the founders of cultural studies says that

” Culture includes the organization of production, the structure of the family, the structure
of the institutions which express or govern social relationships, the characteristic forms
through which members of the society communicate”

Clifford Geertz (b. 1962), Professor of Social Science at Princeton University says that

“Culture is simply the ensemble of stories we tell ourselves about ourselves”

We conclude that:

Culture is the ensemble of social processes by which meanings are produced, circulated and
exchanged.

Cultural studies as politics

It remains difficult to pin down the boundaries of cultural studies as a coherent, unified,
academic discipline with clear-cut substantive topics, concepts and methods that
differentiate it from other disciplines. Cultural studies have always been a multi- or post-
disciplinary field of enquiry which blurs the boundaries between itself and other ‘subjects’.
Yet cultural studies cannot be said to be anything. It is not physics, it is not sociology and it
is not linguistics, though it draws upon these subject areas. Indeed, there must be, as Hall
(1992a) argues, something at stake in cultural studies that differentiates it from other
subject areas. For Hall, what is at stake is the connection that cultural studies seek to make
to matters of power and cultural politics. That is, to an exploration of representations of
and ‘for’ marginalized social groups and the need for cultural change. Hence, cultural
studies are a body of theory generated by thinkers who regard the production of theoretical
knowledge as a political practice. Here, knowledge is never a neutral or objective
phenomenon but a matter of positionality, that is, of the place from which one speaks, to
whom, and for what purposes.

Disciplining cultural studies

Many cultural studies practitioners oppose forging disciplinary boundaries for the field.
However, it is hard to see how this can be resisted if cultural studies want to survive by
attracting degree students and funding (as opposed to being only a postgraduate research
activity). In that context, Bennett (1998) offers his ‘element of a definition’ of cultural
studies:

Cultural studies are an interdisciplinary field in which perspectives from different

disciplines can be selectively drawn on to examine the relations of culture and power.
‘Cultural studies is concerned with all those practices, institutions and systems of
classification through which there are inculcated in a population particular values, beliefs,
competencies, routines of life and habitual forms of conduct’ (Bennett, 1998: 28).

The forms of power that cultural studies explore are diverse and include gender, race, class,
colonialism, etc. Cultural studies seek to explore the connections between these forms of
power and to develop ways of thinking about culture and power that can be utilized by
agents in the pursuit of change.

The prime institutional sites for cultural studies are those of higher education, and as such,
cultural studies are like other academic disciplines. Nevertheless, it tries to forge
connections outside of the academy with social and political movements, workers in
cultural institutions, and cultural management.

Diaspora: In one line we can say that same cultural people live in different area of the world.
For example, one Bangladeshi live in USA or UK or any other country of the world/ or some
group of Bangladeshi live in USA or UK they follow Bengali culture but follow the government
of the which country they are now live in. this is the straight forward definition of diaspora.
There are certain reason for diaspora. And mainly we can find three types of diaspora.