Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 22:50:09 +0200 (EET)
From: J Laari <jlaari-AT-cc.jyu.fi>
Subject: Re: _Learning to Labour_


Willis & Learning

We had Willis as course book once. That's when I read it. Willis was 
very path-braking and mind-blasting in early eighties: he delivered 
fresh angle to class-related questions in a time when more traditional 
structural-statistical approaches still dominated (at least up here). 

Jon:

"I wonder about the datedness of the book, especially given the new face 
of much working class labour in the West, at least, with the rise of 
structural unemployment and the growth of the service sector."

Jerry:

"Yeah, I think it's a pretty good book too. It seems to me, though, that 
the empirical work and sampling methods and size on which the book is 
based is rather limited and lacking in cross-cultural and international 
comparisons." 


Jerry might be right. I think the value of the book was its concentration 
on those practices where working-class culture and mentality gets 
reproduced. Book surely was innovative, and lots of work - and 
methodologically more rigorous work, perhaps - have been done since 
Learning, but it broke the ice. It's one kind of classic. 

In late seventies and early eighties there was still common agreement (at 
least among marxists) that, for example, sub-culture nearly necessary meant 
working-class culture or at least was closely related to it. I'm afraid 
this kind of out-dated suppositions might be found in Learning. 

When it comes to newer trends Jon mentioned, there surely are some kind 
of changes to working-class culture too, but it might be that basic 
orientations and attitudes are the same? 

Yours, Jukka L


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------