In response to Gans

The Culture–structure Binary

Bibliographic Data

ID7802163
AuthorsRobert J McKee (College of Southern Nevada, corresponding author)
Year2012
Volume19
Issue5
Pages632-638
Publication date2012-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueIdentities (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1070-289X • E-ISSN: 1547-3384
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/1070289x.2012.736862
OpenAlexW1995473220
LanguageEN
References cited39

Gans (2012 Gans, H. 2012. Against culture versus structure. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 19(2): 125–134. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Against culture versus structure. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 19 (2), 125–134) makes four assertions in his claim that ‘Contemporary sociology is saddled with a culture–structure binary but the fault for its existence lies mostly with cultural sociology ... and the culture–structure binary should be abandoned’. I argue that (1) defining culture, while problematic, is insufficient reason for abandoning the concept. (2) Marx, among others, proffered a dialectical view of culture that is not structural only or interpretive only. (3) Gans ignores the social and political impact of cultural studies, specifically the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies. And (4) culturally oriented research has been used extensively to shape and analyse the varying approaches by public policy-makers to critical social issues

Culture of the United States · Dialectic · Epistemology · Political culture · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Social science · Sociology · Sociology of culture · Anthropology · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Cultural Industries and Urban Development · Cultural Studies · Law · Philosophy · Social and Cultural Dynamics

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub