«NOTES ON DECONSTRUCTING

THE POPULAR»
Stuart Hall
1981
What does deconstructing mean?

What does the title suggest?

Deconstruct means to dismantle, to dissect

The title implies that the notion popular will be critically examined and
the commonplace ideas regarding the meaning of the word popular will
be challenged.
Hall gives a historical account of the development of British popular
culture with reference to the social tensions in the late 19th and early
20th centuries in order to show how these tensions shaped popular
culture.
Key concepts in Hall’s essay are:

struggle, resistance, acceptance, containment, autonomy, capitulation,

dominant, subordinate, power, transformation, cultural domination,
cultural implantation, hegemony, masses
In his essay, he refers to the changing attitude of the working class,
which was once rebellious and confrontational.

During the 1930s (the economic depression), a «militant, radical,

mature culture of the working class» was non-existent.
Hall examines different meanings of the concept popular, some of which he disagrees
with:
1. Manipulative aspect of commercial popular culture
Based on this meaning of popular, working class people are depicted as «passive
consumers» («cultural dopes») who take everything that is offered. This view suggests
that there is no original working class culture, but as Hall argues, «the notion of the
people as purely passive» is «a deeply unsocialist perspective.»
Popular culture is shaped by the dominant class (e.g. impositions of new cultural
definitions and representations through TV shows – Coronation Street – in the process
of reconstructing the «realities of working class life»)
Mass manipulation
Cultural implantation See page 75
To Hall culture is a battlefield, a way of struggle between the
dominant and the subordinate.

Popular culture keeps shifting between pure autonomy and

capitulation.
2. Hall refers to the anthropological definition of popular – that is,
«the mores, customs and folkways of the people.»

He finds this definition restrictive because individuals do not have the

same hobbies and/or interests.
3. He views popular culture in a continuing conflict with the dominant
culture.
According to him, cultures are not conceived as separate ways of life but as
ways of struggle.

Popular culture is an ongoing process.

Cultural forms, signs and practices may change in time as a result of the
new meanings inscribed on them (e.g. Swastika, a Sanskrit word (‘svasktika’)
with a positive implication, meaning «well-being», «good luck»)
The Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) theorised that
humans make a separation between a word and what that word
means.
All words in a language, body language, signs and symbols are signifiers.

Signifier: the expression, the material embodiment

Signified: the meaning, the concept conveyed by the signifier SIGN
Hall refers to «new cultural apparatuses» and «scholarly apparatus».
These tools, as Hall states, are based on power relations which divide
the culture into its «preferred» and «residual» categories. In other
words, these apparatuses function as manipulative tools in terms of
setting socially acceptable practices of culture and distinguishing them
from the «valueless» part - the part which is rendered «valueless» by
the dominant/ruling ideology.
Hall’s engagement with these apparatuses brings to mind the French
scholar Louis Althusser’s (1918-1990) theorisation of the ideological
forces that control and maintain the structure of society through the
means of production. To Althusser, these ideological forces often lead
to the repression and oppression of one social group – i.e. the
subordinate class.
In his essay «Ideology and Ideological State Apparatus» (1970), Althusser states that an
ideology always exists in an apparatus and in its practice, or practices, therefore the existence
of ideology is «material» (Althusser, Lenin and the Philosophy of Other Essays 112).
In other words, the ‘ideas’ or ‘representations’ which tend to make up ideology do not have
an ideal or spiritual existence, they have a material form in society, a form which can be
observed at two levels:
• The State Apparatus (SA) contains the Government, the Administration, the Army, the
Police, the Courts, the Prisons. The State Apparatus constitutes Repressive State
Apparatuses (RSA) (Althusser, Lenin and the Philosophy of Other Essays 143). Althusser
argues that RSA belong to the public domain and they function ‘by violence’.
• Ideological State Apparatuses (ISA) contain “a certain number of realities which present
themselves to the immediate observer in the form of distinct and specialized institutions”
such as family, religion, politics and culture (Althusser, Lenin and the Philosophy of Other
Essays, 143). Althusser states that Churches, Parties, Trade Unions, families, some schools,
most newspapers, etc. are private (Lenin and the Philosophy of Other Essays 144). Therefore,
he indicates that ISA belong to the private domain and they function ‘by ideology’ .
Both Raymond Williams and Stuart Hall examined culture in relation to the
sociopolitical practices of the ruling ideology. Although Williams agreed with
the Marxist view of culture which situates culture in a close relationship with
the system of production, he disagreed with the idea that the masses were
deliberately left ignorant. Williams also disagreed that the masses had same
interests and tastes, but he nonetheless explored culture within a power
relationship with the ruling/dominant class.
Stuart Hall was against the social construction of the masses as passive
consumers, but he views popular culture as a practice influenced by the
dominant cultural production which is regulated by ideological state
apparatuses like family, religion, institution, educational system, and media –
apparatuses which give us an identity.
According to Hall, this sense of identity formed via cultural apparatuses
is strengthened by cultural practices.

See page 78
In line with Gramsci, Hall agrees with Marx’s view that the class which
seizes material power also seizes ideological power or the power of
ideas. To overcome this hegemony, it would be necessary to develop a
counter-hegemony formed by working class to promote the creation of
of a new culture.
Hall argues that popular culture is a site defined by a struggle for and
against the culture of the powerful.
According to Hall, popular culture is a struggle for a culture of the
powerful
and
it is against the culture of the powerful