Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 14:15:54 -0400
From: Ralph Dumain <rdumain-AT-igc.org>
Subject: Re: Ralph's comments on DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT: THE


Could you provide some key sources for this New American sociology of 
culture?  What do you think it contributes to the understanding of cultural 
forms and contents beyond the social and economic organization of 
culture?  To what extent can judgments be made on purely sociological 
grounds?

Should the priority of the social critic be on culture overtly linked to 
social movements and dissent? Are there any deeper concerns to be addressed 
that don't seem so obvious?  Is the real "truth content" of ostensible 
protest what it seems, or is it something else?

What do you think can be done with Adorno's notion of "truth content" of 
art?  Is there any way of making a judgement that could be verified by others?

I think much of cultural studies is misguided, and now that cultural 
theorists are attacking jazz at last, there is much mischief being 
done.  I'm not aware of the type of sociological analysis you refer to.

At 10:46 AM 7/21/2003 -0400, Neil McLaughlin wrote:
>Recent American sociology, in an area sometimes called The New American
>Sociology of Culture, has produced an enourmous outpouring of literature
>on alternative music, theatre, art ect, as well as empirically grounded
>organizational analysis of the political economy of contemporary culture.
>This work is methodologically sophisticated in ways that go far beyond
>anything produced by the Frankfurt School.
>What this literature lacks sometimes is the critical stance and the
>ability to stand outside the academic specialization of the sociology of
>culture to ask the kinds of questions Ralph is asking.
>Overall, where are there places of dissent in contemporary culture, and
>where might this link up to movements for social change?
>I am on this list partly because the critical theorists asked these
>questions sharply in ways that are useful, even if Adorno and Horkheimer
>did not finish their lives as radicals asking these kinds of questions,
>something Steve Eric Bronner's work reminds us.
>But their efforts as empirical researchers of culture are so outdated and
>shallow, I
>really wonder what the value of their methodological approach is, other
>than as an important part of 20th century intellectual history?
>Moreover, I do think that task of taking critical positions on culture
>today is something best undertaken by those playing the role of
>"social
>critics" either from within or from outside the modern university.
>Academic disciplines or research programs don't perform such a task very
>well, because of the nature of modern universities and the dynamics set in
>motion by academic competition ( where theory and methods and
>specialization by topic tend to crowd out the role of social critic).
>Nor did the critical theorists successfully come up with a model of social
>critic on culture that keeps one leg in the world of scholarship where
>the disciplined empirical study of culture goes on.
>
>
>So two cheers for the culture industry chapter...
>
>
>Neil G. McLaughlin                      KTH-620
>Associate Professor                     McMaster University
>Department of Sociology                 Hamilton, Ontario
>E-mail: nmclaugh-AT-mcmaster.ca            L8S 4M4
>Phone (905) 525-9140 Ext. 23611         Canada