Youth Subcultural Theory: A Critical Engagement with the Concept, its Origins and Politics, from the Chicago School to Postmodernism

Top Cited Papers
Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Initially, I will suggest that the postmodernist understanding of youth subculture relies on a determinist interpretation of the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) position, which denies the immense diversity in the CCCS theorization that draws on Barthes, Gramsci, Althusser, Levi-Strauss and Lacan. I shall critically examine the development of postmodern subcultural theory, which is premised on the work of three key social theorists: Max Weber, Jean Baudrillard and Michel Maffesoli. Postmodernists have extracted ideas from these thinkers and combined them to argue against what is described as CCCS’ ‘theoretical orthodoxy’ and also to construct new terms such as ‘neo-tribe’ and ‘lifestyle’ to replace the concept of subculture. I suggest that postmodernism's reluctance to focus on social structure promotes an individualistic understanding of the social. The work of the Chicago School and the CCCS gave priority to the collective, whereas postmodern subcultural writing is preoccupied with the individual resulting in a weak understanding of the group context of youth cultural practices. The postmodern interventions offer some useful critical insights, but their new theorization lacks substance and critical application to young people's social, economic and cultural realities. Furthermore, I will argue that under postmodern analysis, subculture returns to a conservative Mertonian interpretation of individual adaptation that corresponds to recent political neo-liberal economic and social policies. I will demonstrate that a contradiction is apparent between the postmodern dismissal of the CCCS’ model of resistance and their own argument that youth are engaged in creative and emancipatory activities.

This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit: