Dick Hebdige, intellect or practical semiotician?
Dick Hebdige Mastered in Contemporary Cultural Studies and is best known for his influential book, Subculture: The Meaning of Style, originally published in 1979. Subculture: The Meaning of Style elaborates further on earlier studies in Birmingham on youth subcultures. Much of this research was concerned with the relation between subcultures and social class in postwar Britain, Hebdige saw youth cultures in terms of a dialogue between Black and white youth. He argues that punk stems from Black Cultures (Reggae, Rastafarian) response to discrimination in British society in the 1970’s that lead to separatism. While previous research suggested a homology between the different subcultural styles (clothes, music, hairstyle, drugs), Hebdige puts forward that the subculture of punk borrowed from previous subcultures such as rastafarian, hippy and beatnik. He also compares the similarities to the Teddy boys, Mods, Rockers and Skin heads that preceded the punk era. Hebdige argues that punks only homology was derived from chaos be it through a thoroughly ordered style of chaos. He makes this argument with the use of semiology and the use of literary theory of the times.
Subculture: The meaning of style was criticized due to Hebdiges use of semiology which gave the impression of omniscience narration throughout. Through exploration of Hebdiges use of semiology, homology, ideology and Hegemony, this essay aims to reinforce Hebdiges theories and conclude whether or not Hebdiges critics hold fast in their judgement.
To explore punk as a subculture it is necessary to define ideology. Hebdige draws from the work of Althusser when he Defines ideology as a system of representation, between consciousness, tying in with semiology, neutral objects/materials carry with them unconscious representation, ideological assumptions. Althusser suggests that class is not inherent, but culturally produced, that our desires, beliefs and behaviour are products of our ideologies. Punk accentuates these representations by confronting the public ideologies of certain objects, be it objects of taboo or applying new meaning to said objects (semiology), usually implying chaos or anti establishmentarianism. Such objects can be as mundane or ordinary as a safety pin yet used appropriately this object can hold great meaning and significance and represent a cultural/social status. Social relations and processes are then appropriated by individuals only through the forms in which they are represented to those individuals. Commonalities, ideologies, beliefs and social views relate the individual to their cultural counterparts and therefore form the cultures foundations. To categorise these factors it is necessary to homologise the culture of punk as an example and draw from it a conclusion.
To homologise the punk subculture it is necessary to outline the aspects that form said culture and its homology. The Mohawk haircut, the clothes pegs and safety pins attached to ripped clothes, the repetitive distorted music, are all signifiers of the punk homology. Hebdige outlines the semiotics behind this homology to establish ideology.
“The domain of ideology coincides with the domain of signs (semiology) as they equate with one another. Whenever a sign is present, ideology is present too. Everything ideological possesses a semiotic value”. Volosinov, 1977.
Though the importance of semiotics has been stated repeatedly by different theorists, Hebdiges use of semiology was criticised as being omniscient. Why? The unmistakable evidence of semiology is produced throughout life. Where there is ideology there is symbology and Punk is a prime example of symbology.
Could it be that the symbology of class warfare through semiotics and symbology be met with disdain?
Perhaps Punk as an example of cultural behaviour was frowned upon due to its reputation?
Hebdidge theorised that Punks hegemony played a major role in establishing the reputation of punk and can further give the reader better perspectives into these questions.
‘Hegemony refers to the predominant influence, both legitimate and natural, exercised by a provisional alliance of certain social groups exerting ‘total social authority over other social groups by ‘winning and shaping consent so that the power of the dominant classes appears’ Hall, 1977.
Bertolt Brecht States that ‘Society cannot share a common communication system so long as it is split into warring classes’. Punk revels in this hegemony and expresses it through its homology and semiology. The torn up clothes, the messed up hair, the amphetamines and the basic guitar distortion oriented music, all served as representation of disorder through its opposition to the status quo.
Punks chaos stems from a disharmony and rebelliousness against the bourgeois and it's social and cultural policies. The social pariah was idolised to those relating to the distorted reflections of all the major post-war subcultures. These ‘subcultures’ were blended to create the homology of punk. The less socially desirable, Subcultural aspects of the mods, rockers, Rastafarians, skin heads, teddy boys, beatniks and even the hippies were appropriated to fit the disharmony of punk. The dread and cool of the rasta, the mods brashness and British persona, Glam rocks contribution of narcissism and gender confusion and American Proto-punks minimalistic aesthetic provided the unstable mix required to truly dictate the style of punk. This mix, according to Hebdige, was a formula conceived by class warfare and literature and was reflective of the times. The hot summer of 1976, the Notting hill carnival riots of the black youth, record bankruptcies and the shock resignation of the prime minister saw Great Britain in disrepair, all aspects of class consciousness (Marx) and their union. The youth of the generation moved toward a common angst at the state of affairs. The sex pistols riot on itv's today show reflected the youths feeling and launched the photogenic punk culture into the tabloids. Punk overthrew the alienation previously encountered by the reggae and rock scene and drew into the spotlight a terrifying new literature of depravity.
What is imperative to take into account with Hebdige’s studies is that he outlines the literature adopted by the punk subculture took on a nihilistic aesthetic and swearing became the message communicated to the masses. Punk was portrayed as two fingers up to authority. Even the style of literature was profane and suggested disobedience. The Media would enforce the view of Punk as a scourge much to the credit of Punk. The sex pistols album cover 'never mind the bollocks' contained a portrait of the queen with her eyes and mouth covered by a black bar with the album name cut out of newspaper and pasted on top. The same black bar was used in detective comics to censor profanity and a criminals identity suggesting an outlaw element while the ransom note styled writing suggested the same. This image was heavily endorsed and the use of font type and language effectively conveyed the message of punk across the nation. The popularity of the punk through literature and media would however, inevitably lead the mythologisation of punk and secure its semiological elements in culture forever.
Hebdige draws attention to the mythology of subcultures as a whole and backs this up with evidence of punks predecessors (skin heads, teddy boys etc). It is important to note this as it represents the disarmament of hegemony (rebelliousness) of which Punk thrives on. This leads to a second-order semiological system (Barthes). A subcultures descent into mythology begins with assimilation into the mainstream media. Once a subcultures shock value is dissipated and recedes into normality, its acceptance by the mainstream becomes it's devaluation. It makes way for the next subculture to emerge while it's homology remains in the form of myth. Literature and media maintains punks position as myth in the cultural and social mind while all the while seeking the next subculture to deconstruct and turn into myth. This in itself can be traced back to semiology in so much as the subcultures traits/homology can again be borrowed by the next subculture to emerge, drawing from and combining the meanings of those symbols to form a new semiology that best portrays the new subcultures ideologies.
The style of a subculture is determined by the homology of a social/cultural group. The homology of a group is defined by its ideologies and it's ideologies are conveyed to subculture followers through its semiotics. It's semiotics are therefore it's style e.g. Safety pins, ripped jeans etc. ergo the style of a subculture is entangled with the ideologys, behavioural patterns, homology and hegemony of said subculture. It is the physical manifestation of all of these values. Hebdige's use of punk to exemplify this point seems an obvious choice as punks ideologies and semiotics are blatantly intrinsic to the observer and therefore make for an interesting cultural research subject. Hebdige may not directly attribute his research to punks homology and suggests class warfare as a preferable theory to punks formation but his inescapable use of it combined with semiology makes for a formidable theory. His omniscient attitude seems to stem from steady research of culture and a firm grasp on semiotics. It is difficult to account for criticism of his work in this respect but as all good writing goes, objectify, subjectify and leave your bias at home.
- Literary Theory: An Anthology, Second Edition, Edited by Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan, Blackwell Publishing, 2004.
- Dick Hebdidge, Subculture: The meaning of style, First published in 1979 by Methuen & Co. Ltd.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subculture:_The_Meaning_of_Style
