ریچارد هوگارت یکی از چهرهای مطرح و پیشرو در رشتة «مطالعات فرهنگی» است. او در آثار خود به موضوعاتی مثل فرهنگ عامه، رسانههای همگانی، ادبیات، فرهنگ طبقه کارگر، و بسیاری دیگر از موضوعات پرداخته است. بسیاری از آثار او مانند «زندگینامههای خودنوشت» تجربههای شخصی او را در زندگی بیان میکند. چون او در یک خانواده متعلق به طبقه کارگر متولد شده و بالیده بود همواره از تجربههای خود در آثارش استفاده میکرد. به همین دلیل، آثار وی رنگ تجربههای زندگیاش را دارد. او وجوه مختلف این تجربه را به شکلهای متنوع در آثارش بررسی کرده است. نزدیک به 25 اثر از او منتشر شده است که در این جا سعی میکنیم بخشی از آثار او را بیشتر معرفی کنیم. ترتیب قرار گرفتن کتابها صرفاً بر اساس تاریخ انتشار است.
- کاربردهای سواد(1957)
- زندگی و زمان: عادتی محلی (1989)
- شیوة زیستن کنونی ما(1995)
- اولین و آخرین چیزها (1999)
- در میان دو جهان (2001)
- رسانة همگانی در جامعهای تودهای (2003)
- زندگی روزمره و زبان روزمره(2003)
- عهدهایی برای به یاد سپردن: اندیشههایی در زمان گذشته (2005)
ریچارد هوگارت یکی از چهرهای مطرح و پیشرو در رشتة«مطالعات فرهنگی»است. او در آثار خود به موضوعاتی مثل فرهنگ عامه، رسانههای همگانی، ادبیات، فرهنگ طبقه کارگر، و بسیاری دیگر از موضوعات پرداخته است. بسیاری از آثار او مانند «زندگینامههای خودنوشت» تجربههای شخصی او را در زندگی بیان میکند.چون او در یک خانواده متعلق به طبقه کارگر متولد شده و بالیده بود همواره از تجربههای خود در آثارش استفاده میکرد. به همین دلیل، آثار وی رنگ تجربههای زندگیاش را دارد. او وجوه مختلف این تجربه را به شکلهای متنوع در آثارش بررسی کرده است. نزدیک به 25 اثر از او منتشر شده است که در این جا سعی میکنیم بخشی از آثار او را بیشتر معرفی کنیم. ترتیب قرار گرفتن کتابها صرفاً بر اساس تاریخ انتشار است.
کاربردهای سواد (1957)یکی از مهمترین آثار هوگارت به حساب میآید.هوگارت این اثر را، در سال 1957، پس از شروع کارش در دانشگاههال، و همچنین تدریس در کلاسهای سوادآموزی بزرگسالان نوشته است. این کتاب در شکلگیری رشتة«مطالعات فرهنگی» تأثیرگذار بوده است. مباحث اصلی این کتاب از تجربههای شخصی و چالشهای او در زندگی خانوادگیاش شکل گرفته است. همانگونه که در بخش مقدمه گفته شد،اندیشههای هوگارت زیر تأثیر زندگی او در خانوادهای بوده که به طبقه کارگر تعلق داشته است.
این کتاب شامل دو بخش کلی است:
بخش یکم: این بخش شامل مطالبی دربارة تفسیر زندگی طبقه کارگر و فرهنگ آنان و زمینههایی است برای مباحث اصلی کتاب (رضایی،1386).
بخش دوم:این بخش بدنة اصلی کتاب را تشکیل میدهد. باید یادآور شد که هوگارت نخست این بخش از کتاب را نوشته است، و پس آن، بخش نخست را بدان افزوده است. موضوع اصلی این بخش ارتباط طبقه کارگر با رسانه، فرهنگ و ادبیات است.
در واقع، هوگارت کوشیده است تغییراتی را که در جامعه در حال شکلگیری بوده است در این کتاب گزارش و بررسی کند. همانطور که خود هوگارت هم عنوان میکند:«در ابتدا هدف از این کتاب ارائه دستورالعملی برای معلمان در زمینه آموزش بزرگسالان بود» (رضایی، 1386: 355). سپس،وی این ایده را گسترش پیدا میدهد و موضوعات دیگر را نیز مطرح میکند.
زندگی و زمان: عادتی محلی
زندگی و زمان (1989) نام مجموعهای است شامل سه جلد کتاب. هر کدام از این کتابها روایتگر بخشی از زندگی هوگارتاند و در فاصله کمی از هم منتشر شدهاند. این مجموعه، با در برداشتن اطلاعاتی دربارة زندگی هوگارت در سالهای مختلف، نوعی زندگینامه محسوب میشود.
او در کتاب زندگی و زمان: عادتی محلی (1989)، که جلد نخست این مجموعه است، در 223 صفحه، اتفاقات زندگی هوگارت را بین سالهای 1918 تا 1940 گزارش می دهد. این کتاب اتفاقات دوران مدرسه، روابط هوگارت با دوستان و معلمانش در مدرسه و به طور کلی اتفاقات آن دوران از زندگیاش را دنبال می کند. همچنین در این کتاب، مانند بسیاری دیگر از آثار او، هوگارت موقعیت طبقه کارگر انگلستان را بررسی میکند.
شیوة زیستن کنونی ما
پس از کتاب کاربردهای سواد، کتاب شیوه زیستن کنونی ما (1995) یکی از مهمترین و مشهورترین کتابهای هوگارت محسوب میشود. با توجه به سال انتشار این اثر، میتوان این کتاب را در زمرة آثاری قرار داد که شامل نقد مسائل جامعة انگلستان در شروع دورة «تاچریسم» میشود. آموزش، هنر، برنامهسازی در رسانههای همگانی مانند رادیو و تلویزیون، تغییراتی که در زبان و به طور کلی در فرهنگ به وجود آمده، بهخصوص نحوة برخورد با طبقات، معنای «انگلیسی بودن»، و جایگاه روشنفکران در زندگی انگلیسیها ازجمله مباحثی است که هوگارت در این کتاب دنبال میکند. در واقع، همه این موضوعات همزمان با موجی از جنبشهای آزادیخواهانه در قرن بیستم، رفتهرفته در کتاب روشنتر میشود و در کنار هم قرار میگیرند (باب مور، 1996، «نقدی گسترده»).
اولین و آخرین چیزها
ریچارد هوگارت در اولین و آخرین چیزها (1999) سعی میکند پرسشهایی حساس مطرح کند، بدون آنکه مدعی دانستن پاسخ دقیق و کامل این پرسشها باشد. این پرسشها دربارة این موضوعاتاند: مشکل ایمان و اعتقاد، طبیعت جامعه و طبقات اجتماعی در سالهای اوج سرمایهداری، اهمیت خانواده و دوستان، ارزش و اهمیت ادبیات.
این کتاب که در 234 صفحه نگاشته شده است چندین بخش دارد که عنوان برخی از آنها عبارت است از:
- «شایدهای بزرگ»؛
- «دربارة عشق به دیگران و عشق به خود»؛
- «زندگی در زمان حال»؛
- «جامعه طبقهطبقه شده».
زندگی روزمره و زبان روزمره
کتاب زندگی روزمره و زبان روزمره (2003) در 181 صفحه نگاشته شده است و همانطور که از اسم آن بر میآید به موضوع زبان میپردازد. اما عوامل مختلفی را که میتواند بر زبان تأثیر بگذارد نیز بررسی کند. به طور دقیقتر، میتوان گفت که هوگارت در این کتاب به سؤالات مشخصی توجه دارد:
- چه قدر زبان روزمره، بهخصوص در انگلستان، در بین طبقات مختلف اجتماعی متفاوت است؟
- اگر هر گروهی از زبان خاصی استفاده کند، چه چیزی تعیینکننده این زبان خاص است؟ شغل، سن، و جایگاه در طبقات اجتماعی؟
- چطور این شیوههای گفتار مختلف نمایانگر فرهنگ، نگرانیها، و شرایط افرادیاند که از آن استفاده میکنند ؟
نویسنده در این کتاب بحث خود را با این موضوع آغاز میکند که چگونه به اهمیت زبان پی برده است. او ویژگیهای کلی زبان مشخص میکند و در ادامه با جستجو در زمان به بررسی عبارتهایی میپردازد که طبقة کارگر در زندگی خود از آنها استفاده میکند. در بخشهای بعدی کتاب نیز، او به شناسایی شیوة گفتار و نکات و اختلافات ظریفی روی میآورد که در نحوة گفتار طبقه کارگر انگلستان وجود دارد. در واقع، موضوع در اینجا تفاوتهایی است که این طبقه با آنها شناخته میشوند. عنوان بخشهایی از کتاب عبارتاند از:
- «مشخصهها و ویژگیهای زبان»؛
- «طبقات و گروهها»؛
- «فقر و زبانش»؛
- «کنار آمدن با فقر».
در میان دو جهان: سیاست، ضد سیاست، غیرسیاسی
ریچارد هوگارت، در طول سالهای فعالیت خود، به چهار حوزة اصلی پرداخته است: 1) برنامهسازی در رسانهها (رادیو و تلوزیون)؛ 2) سیاستهای بخش هنری؛ 3) آموزش؛ 4) فعالیتهای اجتماعی. از نظر او این چهار حوزه ویژگیهای مشترکی دارند. کتاب در میان دو جهان (2001) مجموعة مقالاتی است که به موضوعات فرهنگ و جامعه، ادبیات و سانسور کردن، و همچنین آموزش پرداخته است. این کتاب میتواند به دلیل مطرح کردن بیپردة موضوعات مهم در دوران معاصر مورد استفاده متخصصان و علاقهمندان به مطالعات فرهنگی، ارتباطات و آموزش قرار گیرد.
کتاب به دو بخش کلی تقسیم شده است. بخشهای جزئیتر کتاب عبارتاند از:
- «فرهنگ و جامعه»؛
- «آیا موزهها سیاسی هستند؟»؛
- «سیاست و هنر و ادبیات»؛
- «دولت در برابر هنر و ادبیات»؛
- «سطوح آموزش»؛
- «تصاویری از گذشته دور».
رسانة همگانی در جامعة تودهای
کتاب رسانة همگانی در جامعهای تودهای2 (2003) در 224 صفحه نگاشته شده است. موضوعی که نویسنده در این کتاب به آن می پردازد راههایی است که رسانههای همگانی از طریق آنها، در قرن بیست و یکم، مخاطب را از سویی به سمت فهم بیشتری از زندگی مدرن سوق میدهند، و از سویی دیگر، او را از این کار بازمیدارند. در واقع، او این تناقض را بررسی میکند که دسترسی آسان به انواع مختلف و متنوعی از اطلاعات لزوماً نمیتواند به معنای رسیدن به درک بهتری از جهان اطراف باشد.
این حجم اطلاعات فقط در شرایطی میتوانند منجر به دانش شوند و مفید باشند که بتوان به آنها نظم داد و آنها را تبدیل به سرمایه کرد. تأکید اصلی این کتاب بر برنامهسازی در رادیو و تلویزیون، و حجم اطلاعات برآمده از آنهاست.او با انتقاد از سیاستهایی که تنها هدف برنامهسازی را سرگرمی میداند بحث خود را در این کتاب پی میگیرد.
عهدهایی برای به یاد سپردن: اندیشههایی در زمان گذشته
کتاب عهدهایی برای به یاد سپردن در سال 2005 و زمانی که هوگارت 86 ساله بود منتشر شد. او در این کتاب با بازگشت به گذشته و نگاه دوباره به آن، ویژگیهای انسانیای را، که بیش از همه برای او معنا داشته است، یادآور میشود. او، مثل گذشته، به موضوع «استفاده از زبان» و «ادبیات» میپردازد. و همچنین موضوعاتی دیگری مثل کارکردهای خاطرات، اهداف آموزش، محبت، و خیرخواهی را نیز بررسی می کند. در ادامه، او وقایع و عقاید عمومی را که مورد علاقهاش بود و ارتباط آنها با زندگی شخصی و خانوادگیاش را توضیح میدهد.
- رضایی، محمد، (1386)، مطالعات فرهنگی: دیدگاهها و مناقشات، تهران: جهاد دانشگاهی.
- Hodgson, J., “Richard Hoggart, Review”, 2007, National Association for The Teaching English., http://www.nate.org.uk/,تاریخ دسترسی آبان 1393.
- McGrath, J., “Richard Hoggart’s Legacy and the New Uses of Literacy”, 2014,Roman Littlefield International, http://www.rowmaninternational.com/news/richard-hoggarts-legacy-and-the-new-uses-of-literacy, تاریخ دسترسی آبان 1393
- Moore, R., (1996), “Extended Review”, British Journal of Social Education, 17(4), 521-530.
- Simkin, J., “Richard Hoggart”, 2014, http://spartacus-educational.com/HIShoggart.htm, تاریخ دسترسی مهر1393.
بررسی زندگی و آثار ریچارد هوگارت
مفاهیم و موضوعات مهم
هوگارت و کاربردهای سواد
آثار ریچارد هوگارت
ریچارد هوگارت یکی از چهره های مهم و تأثیر گذار در مطالعات فرهنگی است. او بنیان گذار «مرکز مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر» در دانشگاه بیرمنگام بوده و همچنین به تدریس در دانشگاه هایی مانند هال و بیرمنگام پرداخته است.او به موضوعاتی مثل ادبیات انگلیسی، فرهنگ عامه انگلستان، و رسانه های همگانی در آثار خو پرداخته است. هوگارت فرهنگ طبقه کارگر را خود نیز عضوی از آن بوده است را موضوع اصلی مطالعات خود قرار داده است. انتشار کتاب «کاربردهای سواد» در سال 1957، اتفاق مهمی بود که توانست توجه زیادی را برانگیزاند و به عنوان مهم ترین اثر او بسیار مورد توجه قرار بگیرد. پس از انتشار این کتاب فعالیت های او گسترش یافت و زمینه پیشرفت او فراهم شد. او عاملی تأثیر گذار در شکل گیری و موجودیت رشته «مطالعات فرهنگی» است.
ریچارد هوگارت در 1918 در لیدز انگلستان به دنیا آمد. پدرش را که در حال خدمت در جبهه جنگ بود، در یک سالگی از دست داد و مادرش نیز زمانی که او هشت سال داشت درگذشت.پس از این او ناچار شد جدا از خواهر و برادرش به زندگی خود همراه با مادربزرگش ادامه دهد. بعدها هوگارت زندگی همراه با مادربزرگش را با وجود سختی هایی که داشته است به عنوان اتفاق خوبی یاد میکند که موجب شد که به یتیم خانه منتقل نشود. در زمانی که در مدرسه راهنمایی مشغول به تحصیل بود مورد توجه یکی از معلم های خود قرار گرفت که این موجب شد بتواند بورسیه تحصیلی برای ورود به مدرسه «دستور زبان» را بگیرد. این اتفاق مهمی بود که شرایط این را فراهم کرد که او از معدود افرادی از طبقه کارگر باشد که بتواند از بورسیه برخوردار شود و همین نیز باعث شد که لقب «پسربچه بورسیه ای» در میان گروه همسالانش به او داده شود. پس از اتمام دبیرستان نیز توانست بورسیه دانشگاه لیدز را دریافت کند و تا مقطع کارشناسی ارشد به تحصیل در رشته ادبیات انگلیسی در این دانشگاه پرداخت.
ریچارد هوگارت درحالی که مشغول به فعالیت بر پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد بود، همراه با ارتشِ انگلیس به جنگ جهانی دوم پیوست و به شمال افریقا و ایتالیا اعزام شد. در سال 1946 به انگلستان بازگشت و فعالیتش را در دانشگاه هال را آغاز کرد و در کنار افرادی دیگر چون ریموند ویلیامز به تدریس در کلاس های آموزش بزرگسالان نیز پرداخت. حضور در این کلاس ها که در واقع کلاس های سوادآموزی بودند نقطه عطف مهمی برای هوگارت محسوب میشود، او عنوان میکند که با حضور در این کلاس ها متوجه تفاوتی که بین جامعه آکادمیک و افرادی از طبقه کارگر در این کلاس ها حضور داشتند میشود. تجربه حضور در این کلاس ها برای هوگارت زمینه ای است برای نوشتن کتاب مهم و تأثیر گذار کاربردهای سواد در سال 1957 که یکی از مهم ترین آثار او محسوب میشود. پس از انتشار این کتاب، ریچارد هوگارت در حال پیشرفت بود و خود را در جایگاه مناسب و مهمی میدید که به او این امکان را میداد که بتواند از طریق فعالیت هایش چشم انداز فرهنگی متفاوتی را ایجاد کند. یکی از این اقدامات، نقش داشتن او در تأسیس شبکه بی بی سی2 بود. شبکه ایی تلویزیونی که به پیشنهاد او، باید در اختیار عموم مردم قرار گیرد و همچنین نباید شامل تبلیغات زیادی باشد و همراه با پیشنهادات آموزشی باشد. این اقدام در راستای انتقاداتی بود که او از فرهنگ و تأثیرات تولیدات فرهنگی در آن زمان داشت. همان چیزی که آن را فرایند «آمریکایی شدن» مینامید. او اعتقاد داشت که فرهنگ اصیل طبقه کارگر انگلستان با این فرایند در حال تغییر است.
او در سال 1960، همراه با چهره های آکادمیک دیگر جزو شاهدانی بود که در محکومیت ممنوعیت و مجازات ناشر کتاب«عاشق لیدی چترلی» نوشته جی.اچ.لارنس شرکت کردند. این کتاب، درباره روابط جسمانی مردی از طبقه کارگر با زنی از طبقه مرفه جامعه است. این دادگاه برای محکوم کردن ناشر این کتاب به دلیل غیر اخلاقی بودن و تخطی از قوانین برگزار شد. که افراد زیادی از جمله هوگارت، با حضور تأثیر گذار خود منجر به محکوم نشدن ناشر شدند. این اقدام تأثیر زیادی در شروع آزادی بیان و ممنوعیت سانسور در بریتانیا داشت.
هوگارت در سال 1962، به دانشگاه بیرمنگام منتقل شد. حضور او در دانشگاه بیرمنگام زمینه های لازم را برای تأسیس مرکز مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر پدید آورد. او از سال 1962 تا 1969 ریاست این مرکز را بر عهده داشت . در ابتدا در این مرکز موضوعات مهم مورد مطالعه عبارت بودند از: مطالعات فرهنگی و به خصوص مطالعات فرهنگی بریتانیا، خرده فرهنگ ها، فرهنگ عامه،و مطالعات رسانه. در واقع رویکرد غالب در این مرکز، نگاه میان رشتهایی به مطالعات فرهنگی بوده است. همان طور که خود هوگارت در مصاحبه ای با رادیو بی بی سی4 عنوان میکند: «این ایده در ابتدا، در این باره بود که بتوان به انواع مختلفی از پدیده های حاصل از زندگی مدرن مثل مجلات زنان، روزنامه، و رمان های مدرن نگریست. این ایده اساسی و مرکزی تشکیل این موسسه بود.»
در سال 1968، هوگارت همکاری خود را با استوارت هال در این مرکز آغاز کرد. در ادامه کار و همچنین در در دهه 70 میلادی، او احساس میکند که ناهمانگی ها و سلایق متفاوتی در حال شکل گرفتن است که این باعث میشود تصمیم به ترک دانشگاه بیرمنگام و مرکز مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر بگیرد. همچنین او با پیشنهادی که برای مقام «معاون مدیر کل» در یونسکو دریافت میکند موافقت کرده و به پاریس میرود. اما حدود 5 سال بعد استعفا میدهد. هوگارت در سال 1978 کتابی را منتشر میکند به نام«یک ایده و مروِجّان آن» که انتقادی از سازمان یونسکو است.
بین سال های 1978تا 1984سرپرستی کالج گلداشمیت بر عهده میگیرد. و به فعالیت های خود در زمینه نوشتن ادامه میدهد.
- نگاه او به «فرهنگ عامه»
- مکتب بیرمنگام و مکتب فراکفورت
یکی از نکاتی که در بیان اندیشه هوگارت میتوان به آن اشاره کرد، تأکیدی است که هوگارت در آثار خود بر فرهنگ عامه و به طور مشخص فرهنگ طبقه کارگر دارد
مرکز مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر با رویکردی جدید در دهه 60 میلادی شکل میگیرد که ریچارد هوگارت به عنوان بنیان گذار این مرکز و استوارتهال به عنوان فردی تأثیر گذار که بعدها ریاست مرکز را به عهده گرفت نقشی موثر در این زمینه داشته اند. بر خلاف مکتب فرانکفورت، که به فرهنگ عامه نگاه از «بالا» به «پایین» داشته است، در مطالعات فرهنگی بریتانیا اعتقاد بر این است که باید بتوان کارگران و سلایق آنها در زمینه مصارف فرهنگی و به همان صورتی که وجود دارد را شناخت و بررسی کرد. در این باره هوگارت در مصاحبه ای میگوید: « اگر شما به بسیاری از تولیدات فرهنگ عامه پسند نگاه کنید، در بعضی از آنها صورت قاطع زندگی را میتوان تشخیص داد- مثلا بیتلها در بهترین حالتشان یا بعضی از کاریکاتوریستها در دوران خودشان». او از این دفاع میکند که همه این موضوعات را میتوان به عنوان بخشی از فرهنگ عامه مورد مطالعه قرار داد (رضایی،357:1386 ). در دهه 70 میلادی و پس از این گرایشات است، که دیدگاه به فرهنگ دچار تغییر شده و فرهنگ همگانی تر میشود. در این دوران آثار عامه پسند نیز داری ارزش زیبایی شناسی میشوند در حالی تا پیش از این این طور نبوده است.(فاضلی،1391،«تیره تبار مطالعات فرهنگ»).
مفاهیم و موضوعات مهم
با توجه به این که او در رشته ادبیات انگلیسی تحصیل کرده است در تمام آثارش ادبیات را به عنوان یک دغدغه دنبال کرده است و از وجوه مختلف به ارتباط ادبیات با جامعه پرداخته است. یکی از مفاهیم مهم او نیز مرتبط با همین موضوع است. سواد نقادانه و یا همان چیزی که آگاهی انتقادی نامیده میشود به این معناست که افراد در جامعه تا چه اندازه توانایی نگاه دقیق به مسائل و موضعات و فراتر رفتن از و دقیق تر شدن شدن. رواج آگاهی انتقادی که هوگارت از آن نام م یبرد در واقعه توانایی نکته سنج بودن و مطرح کردن سوالاتی درباره موضوعاتی است در جامعه در جریان دارد(رضایی، 1386).
ارتباط هنر با جامعه و چگونگی تأثیر کذاری آن بر جامعه نیز یکی از مفاهیم و موضوعاتی است که در آثار هوگارت به آنها پرداخته شده است. او در واقع مفهوم هنر در اتباط آن با جامعه بررسی میکند. در نظریات او بیشتر بر موضوع امکان گفتگو در بین افراد و در جامعه توجه شده است و اساساً هنر به عنوان عاملی که میتواند این توانایی را در افراد یک جامعه ایجاد کند. و در این راستا او نقش آموزش را بسیار مهم میداند(پورنگ،1383، «منتقدان فرهنگ»). این کاملاً در فعالیتهایی که درسیاست گذاریها برای برنامه سازیهای مختلف در رسانهها مثل بی بی سی داشته است نمایان است.
ریچارد هوگارت و کاربردهای سواد
شاید کمتر بتوان در میان نقدها و نظرات مختلفی که درباره ریچارد هوگارت وجود دارد به مطلبی برخورد که در آن بحثی درباره کتاب کاربردهای سواد نباشد. اغلب یادداشتها و مطالب درباره او با همین کتاب و اهمیت آن است که شروع میشود. انتشار این کتاب در سال 1957 در زمان پس از جنگ جهانی دوم و شرایط حاکم بر جامعه توانست بسیار مورد توجه قرار گیرد. هوگارت نیز مانند منتقدان اولیه انگلیسی در کتاب کاربردهای سواد به نقد زیبایی شناسانه گرایشات فرهنگ عامه پرداخته است.
این کتاب از دو بخش تشکیل شده است. در بخش اول هوگارت به بیان تجربیاتی از زندگی خود به عنوان بخشی از طبقه کارگر پرداخته است و در بخش دوم نیز به بحث درباره ارتباط طبقه کارگر با رسانه و همچنین فرهنگ و ادبیات پرداخته است. این کتاب در واقع زندگی طبقه کارگر در بین سالهای 1930 تا 1950 به تصویر میکشد . سعی دارد که تأثیرات تغییرات اجتماعی در حال شکل گیری در آن دوران را به تصویر بکشد.
سایر آثار هوگارت
تعدای از آثار او عبارتاند از:
- سخن گفتن با یکدیگر: درباره جامعه،1970
- فقط ارتباط: درباره فرهنگ ارتباطات،1972
- شیوه زیستن کنونی ما، 1995
- اولین و آخرین چیزها،1999
- رسانه همگانی در جامعه ایی توده ایی،2004
- عهدهایی برای به یاد سپردن: اندیشههایی در زمان گذشته، 2005
- پورنگ، حمید، (1383)، «منتقدان فرهنگ،»کتاب ماه علوم اجتماعی، شماره 72،ص81- 84.
- رضایی، محمد، (1386)، مطالعات فرهنگی، دیدگاهها و مناقشات، تهران: جهاد دانشگاهی.
- فاضلی، نعمت الله (1391)، «تیره و تبار مطالعات فرهنگی، بحثی در باب جریانهای اجتماعی ظهور مطالعات فرهنگی»، سوره اندیشه، شماره 62 و 63، ص151-155.
- فکوهی، ناصر، گفتگوی مرضیه جعفری و مهران هژبر با ناصر فکوهی: نگاهی انتقادی به رابطه فرهنگ«فاخر»و فرهنگ «مبتذل»، 8 دی 1393، وب سایت انسان شناسی و فرهنگ، http://anthropology.ir/node/26343، دسترسی بهمن1393.
- کلانی، مانی، «درباره مطالعات فرهنگی»، 3 تیر 1393، وب سایت انسان شناسی و فرهنگ، http://anthropology.ir/node/23618، دسترسی بهمن 1393.
- Bailey, M., “Richard Hoggart: Cultural Critic and Educationalist”, 2014, Open Democracy, https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/michael-bailey/richard-hoggart-cultural-critic-and-educationalist-24-september-1918-10-ap, دسترسی دی 1393
- Ezard, J., “Richard Hoggart obituary”, 2014, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/10/richard-hoggart, دسترسی مهر 1393
- Grossberg, L., (2015), “A Special Editorial”, Cultural Studies, 29(2), 105-7.
- Hilliard, Ch., (2014), “Whose Candyfloss”, London Review of Books, 36(8), 35-37.
- Hodgson, J, “Richard Hoggart, Review”, 2007, National Association for The Teaching English, http://www.nate.org.uk/, دسترسی آبان 1393
- McGrath, J, “Richard Hoggart’s legacy and New Uses of Literacy”, 2014, Roman & Littlefield, http://www.rowmaninternational.com/news/richard-hoggarts-legacy-and-the-new-uses-of-literacy , دسترسی مهر 1393
- Simkin, J., “Richard Hoggart”, 2014, http://spartacus-educational.com/HIShoggart.htm ,دسترسی مهر 1393
موضوعات و مفاهیم مهم در اندیشه ریچارد هوگارت
فرهنگ عامه در مطالعات فرهنگی بریتانیا
فرهنگ عامه در اندیشه هوگارت
ریچارد هوگارت با تأسیس «مرکز مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر» در دانشگاه بیرمنگام زمینه برای شکلگیری مطالعات فرهنگی به عنوان حوزه و رشته ای مستقل در بریتانیا فراهم کرد. در واقع تأسیس این مرکز شروع اندیشه ای بود که در ادامه منجر به شکلگیری «مکتب بیرمنگام» شد که حاصل از اندیشههای هوگارت و هم عصران و همکاران او مثل ریموند ویلیامز، تامپسون و استوارت هال بود. ریچارد هوگارت در طول سالهای فعالیت خود موضوعات مختلفی مثل فرهنگ عامه، فرهنگ طبقه کارگر، رسانه های همگانی، ادبیات و هنر را مورد بررسی قرار داده است. او با انتشار کتاب کاربردهای سواد توانست بیش از پیش مورد توجه قرار گیرد. کتابی که به عنوان یک اثر کلاسیک ارزشمند شناخته میشود که از دل تجربیات هوگارت به عنوان عضوی از طبقه کارگر بر میآید. در انیجا سعی میکنیم مفاهیم و موضوعات مهم اندیشه او را شرح دهیم.
مفهوم هنر در اندیشه هوگارت
یکی از موضوعات اساسی هوگارت در آثارش ارتباط میان هنر و جامعه بوده است. مفهوم هنر در نظریات او بیشتر بر موضوع امکان گفتگو و روابط میان افراد و ایجاد فرهنگ انسانیت مشترک تأکید دارد.برای رسیدن به چنین وضعیتی است که هوگارت آموزش را امری میداند که از طریق آن افراد تشویق به زندگی کامل تر و درک رابطه با دیگران میشوند.(پورنگ، 1383، «منتقدان فرهنگ»، ص81)
در ادامه مفهوم هنر در اندیشه هوگارت، میتوان به «آمریکایی شدن» نیز اشاره کرد. او در کتاب مهم خود کاربردهای سواد با به تصویر کشیدن و توضیح ویژگیهای طبقه کارگر به این نکته اشاره میکند که در دهه 50 میلادی نوع جدیدی از هنر که با «آمریکایی شدن» همراه بود در حال شکلگیری بود. فرایندی که فرهنگ طبقه کارگر را که تهدید میکند.
در ادامه همین موضوع نیز مفهوم «سواد نقادانه» و یا «آگاهی انتقادی» مطرح میشود، هوگارت معتقد است مردم در یک جامعه باید بتوانند در برابر مسائل و مضوعات مختلف پرسشهایی را مطرح کنند. این به این معناست که افراد بتوانند با ذهنی نکته سنج با مسائل روبرو شوند(رضایی، 1386؛354).
فرهنگ عامه در مطالعات فرهنگی بریتانیا
برای توضیح بیشتر این مفهوم در اندیشه هوگارت لازم است کمی به کلیات اندیشه مطالعات فرهنگی بریتانیا بپرازیم. مطالعات فرهنگی بریتانیا که چهرههای بنان گذار آن روشنفکران طبقه کارگر بودند، سعی کردند مفهوم فرهنگ را تا حدی گسترش دهند که الگوهای زندگی روزمره را نیز شامل شود. و همچنین نگاه «بالا» به «پایین» را که در مکتب فرانکفورت مطرح بود، نپذیرفتند. در ادامه هوگارت نیز تحت تأثیر لیویس که از طریق آثار و فعالیتهای خود سعی بر آن داشت که نقد را به عرصه عمومی تری منتقل کند،به نقد زیبایی شناسانه پرداخت. اما تأکید او بیشتر بر فرهنگ طبقه کارگر بود که از آن برخواسته بود. هوگارت در کتاب کاربردهای سواد(1957) به سقوط و افول فرهنگ طبقه کارگر اشاره دارد و این در واقع فرهنگی است که در دهه 30 میلادی وجود داشته است. و پس از جنگ جهانی دوم مورد تهدید قرار گرفته است و در حال نابودی است(تامپسون، 1390؛7).
- پورنگ،حمید، (1383)، «منتقدان فرهنگ»، کتاب ماه علوم اجتماعی، شماره 72، ص 81-84.
- تامپسون، کنت، (1390)، «مطالعات فرهنگی، نظریه انتقادی وحاکمیت فرهنگی»، ترجمه یونس شکرخواه، فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی مطالعات دانشگاه تهران، شماره پاییز و زمستان.
- رضایی، محمد، (1386)، مطالعات فرهنگی: دیدگاهها و مناقشات، تهران: جهاد دانشگاهی.
- فکوهی، ناصر، گفتگوی مرضیه جعفری و مهران هژبر با ناصر فکوهی: نگاهی انتقادی به رابطه فرهنگ«فاخر»و فرهنگ «مبتذل»، 8 دی 1393، وب سایت انسان شناسی و فرهنگ،http://anthropology.ir/node/26343، دسترسی بهمن 1393
- Hilliard, Ch., (2014), “Whose Candyfloss”, London Review of Books, 36(8), 35-37.
- McGrath, J., “Richard Hogarth’s legacy and New Uses of Literacy”, 2014, Roman & Littlefield, http://www.rowmaninternational.com/news/richard-hoggarts-legacy-and-the-new-uses-of-literacy. دسترسی مهر 1393
- Simkin, J., “Richard Hoggart”, 2014http://spartacuseducational.com/HIShoggart.htm ,دسترسی مهر 1393.
مأخذشناسی ریچارد هوگارت
کتابشناسی ریچارد هوگارت در زبان فارسی (کتابها)
کتابشناسی ریچارد هوگارت در زبان انگلیسی(مقالات)
کتابشناسی ریچار هوگارت در زبان انگلیسی( کتابها)
آثار ریچارد هوگارت (کتابها)
آثار ریچارد هوگارت (مقالات)
درباره ریچارد هوگارت در زبان فارسی(کتاب ها):
- جانسون، لسلی، (1387)، منتقدان فرهنگ: ازماتیو آرنولد تا ریموند ویلیامز، ترجمة ضیاء موحد، تهران: طرح نو.
- رضایی، محمد، (1386)، مطالعات فرهنگی: دیدگاهها و مناقشات، تهران: جهاد دانشگاهی.
درباره ریچارد هوگارت در زبان انگلیسی(کتابها):
- Baily, M; Clarke, B; K.Walton, J., (2012),Understanding Richard Hoggart: A Pedagogy of Hope, John Wiley & Sons.
( درک ریچارد هوگارت: پروارندن یک امید)
- Bailey, M; Eagleton, M., (2013), Richard Hoggart: Culture and Critique, London: Cultural and Communications Press.
(ریچارد هوگارت: فرهنگ و نقد)
- Edgar, A; Sedgwick. P., (2002), Cultural Theory: The Key Thinkers, London: Routledge.
(نظریه فرهنگی: متفکران اصلی)
- Inglis, F., (2013), Richard Hoggart: Virtue and Reward, Malden :Polity.
(ریچارد هوگارت: نیکی و پاداش)
- J.Owen, S., (2008), Re-reading Richard Hoggart: Life, Literature, Language, Education, Newcastle:Combridge Scholars.
(خوانش دوباره ریچارد هوگارت: زندگی، ادبیات، زبان، آموزش)
- 5. J.Owen, S., (2008), Richard Hoggart and Cultural Studies, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
(ریچارد هوگارت و مطالعات فرهنگی)
درباره ریچارد هوگارت در زبان انگلیسی( مقالات):
- Fowler, D., (2007), “From jukebox boys to revolting students: Richard Hoggart and the study of British youth culture”, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(1),73-84
- Gibson, M; Hattley, J., (1998), “Forty years of cultural studies: An Interview with Richard Hoggart”, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 1(1), 11-23.
(چهل سال مطالعات فرهنگی: مصاحبه ای با ریچارد هوگارت)
- Grossberg, L., (2015), “A Special Editorial”, Cultural Studies, 29(2), 105-7.
( سرمقاله ویژه)
- Gregg, M.,(2003), “A Neglected History: Richard Hoggart’s Discourse Empathy”, Rethinking History: The Journal of Theory and Practice,7(3), 258-306.
(تاریخی فراموش شده: گفتمان
- Hall, S., (2007), “Richard Hoggart, The Uses of Literacy and The Cultural Turn”, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(1), 39-49.
( ریچارد هوگارت: کاربردهای سواد و تغییر فرهنگی)
- Hartley, J., (2015), “Housing Cultural Studies: A memoir of Stuart Hall, Richard Hoggart and Terence Hawkes”, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(2), 185-207.
(چارچوب مطالعات فرهنگی: یادداشتی درباره استوارت هال، ریچارد هوگارت و ترنس هاکس)
- Hartley, J., (2007), “Richard Hoggart and The International Journal of Cultural Studies - 10 years on”, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(1),5-9.
(ریچارد هوگارت و نشریه بین المللی مطالعات فرهنگی)
- Inglis, F., (2007),“Richard Hoggart: The intellectual as Politician”, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(1), 21-28.
(ریچارد هوگارت: روشنفکری در مقام سیاستمدار)
- MacGuign, J.,(2006), “Richard Hoggart: Public Intellectual”, International Journal of Cultural Policy, 12(2),199-208.
(ریچارد هوگارت: روشنفکری مردمی)
- Moore, R.,(1996), “Extended Review”, British Journal of Social Education, 17(4), 251-350.
- Nixon, J., (2007), “Richard Hoggart’s Legacy for Democratic Education”, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(1),63-71.
(میراث ریچارد هوگارت برای آموزش دموکراتیک)
آثار ریچارد هوگارت(کتابها):
- Hoggart, R., (1951), Auden: An Introductory Essay, London: Chatto & Windus.
(آدن: مقاله ایی مقدماتی)
- Hoggart, R., (1957), The uses of literacy, London: Chatto & Windus.
- Hoggart, R., (1957), W. H. Auden, London: British Council.
(دبلیو. اچ. آدن)
- Hoggart, R., (1963),Teaching Literature, London: National institute of Adult Education and Department of Adult Education.
- Hoggart, R., (1967), The Literary Imagination and the Study of Society,London: Contemporay Cultural Studies.
( تخیل ادبی و مطالعه جامعه)
- Hoggart, R., (1969), Contemporary Cultural Studies: An Approach to the Study of Literature and Society, Birmingham : University of Birmingham (Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies).
(مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر: رویکردی به مطالعه ادبیات و جامعه)
- Hoggart, R., (1970), Speaking to Each Other: About Society, London: Chatto & Windus.
( سخن گفتن با یکدیگر: درباره جامعه)
- Hoggart, R.,(1970), speaking to Each Other: About Literature. London: Chatto & Windus.
(سخن گفتن با یکدیگر: درباره ادبیات)
- Hoggart, R., (1972), Only Connect: On Culture and Communication, London: Chatto & Windus.
(ارتباط: درباره فرهنگ و ارتباطات)
- Hoggart, R., (1978), An Idea and Its Servants: UNESCO from Within,New Jersey: Transaction Publisher.
(یک ایده و مروّجان آن)
- Hoggart, R., (1982), An English Temper, London: Chatto & Windus.
( خُلق و خویی انگلیسی)
- Hoggart, R;Janet, Morgan., (1982), The future of Broadcasting, London : Macmillan.
(آینده ی برنامه سازی در رادیو تلویزیون)
- Hoggart, R., (1987), An Idea of Europe, London: Chatto & Windus.
(اندیشه ایی درباره اروپا)
- Hoggart, R., (1989),Life and Times,Vol.1,London: Chatto & Windus.
- Hoggart, R., (1990), Life and Times, Vol. 2,London: Chatto & Windus.
- Hoggart, R., (1992), Life and Times,vol 3,London:Chatto & Windus.
( زندگی و زمان )
- Hoggart, R., (1994), Townscape With Figure: Farnham, Portrait of An English Town, London: Chatto & Windus.
( فارنهام، تصویری از یک شهر انگلیسی)
- Hoggart, R., (1994),A Measured Life: The Times and Places of an Orphaned Intellectual, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
- Hoggart, R., (1995), The Way We Live Now, London: Chatto & Windus.
(شیوه زیستن کنومی ما)
- Hoggart, R., (1999), First and Last Things, London: Chatto & Windus.
(اولین و آخرین چیزها)
- Hoggart, R., (2001), Between Two Worlds: Essays, The University of Michigan.
(در میان دو جهان، مجموعه مقالات)
- Hoggart, R., (2002),Between Two Worls: Polotics, Anti-polotics, and TheUnpolitical, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
( در میان دو جهان: سیاست، ضد سیاست و غیر سیاسی بودن)
- Hoggart, R., (2003), Everyday Language and Everyday Life, New Jersey: Transaction Publisher.
(زبان روزمره و زندگی روزمره)
- Hoggart, R., (2004), Mass Media in a Mass Society, A&C Black.
( رسانه همگانی در جامعه ای توده ایی)
- Hoggart, R., (2005), Promises to keep: Thoughts in Old Age, London: Bloomsbury Academic.
(عهدهایی برای به خاطر سپردن: اندیشههایی در سالهای گذشته)
آثار ریچارد هوگارت(مقالات):
- Hoggart, R., (1953), “The Force of Caricature”, Oxford Unoversity Press, 3(4), 447-62.
( قدرت کاریکاتور)
- Hoggart, R., (1963), “A Question of Tone: Some Problems in Autobiographical Writing”, Critical Quarterly, 5(2), 13-90.
( پرسشی درباره لحن: مشکلاتی در نگارش زندگی نامههای خودنوشت)
- Hoggart, R., (1964), “Schools of English and Contemporary Society”, The American Scholar, 33(2), 237-55.
(مکتب انگلستان و جامعه معاصر)
- Hoggart, R., (1966), “Literature and Society”, The American Scholar, 35(2), 277-89.
(ادبیات و جامعه)
پرونده اینترنتی ریچارد هوگارت
ریچارد هوگارت چهره شاخص مطالعات فرهنگی، در سال 1918 در لیدز انگلستان متولد شد. او به خانوادهایی فقیر و از طبقه کارگر تعلق داشت. همین موضوع، عاملی بود تا او زندگی طبقه کارگر و فرهنگ حاکم بر این طبقه را در مطالعات و آثار خ,د پیگیری کند. اوج شهرت و مطرح شدن او به عنوان یک چهره دانشگاهی پس از انتشار کتاب کاربردهای سواد (1957) بود. انتشار این کتاب توانست توجهات زیادی را به خود جلب کند، کتابی کهبه عنوان یک اثر مهم و کلاسیک توانست جایگاه ثابتی را به خود اختصاص دهد. علاوه بر این تأسیس«مرکز مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر» نیز یکی از اقدامات موثر او در شکل گیری و رشد رشته مطالعات فرهنگی محسوب میشود.
در این پرونده آثاری که در آنها به ریچارد هوگارت و زندگی نامه، آثار و اندیشه او پرداخته شده است و در شبکه اینترت قرار گرفته است را جمع آوری کرده ایم. در ابتدا پرونده اینترنتی فارسی و در ادامه پرونده اینترتی انگلیسی ارائه شده است.
فهرست مطالب فارسی
- زندگی نامه و آرای ریچارد هوگارت/ همشهری آنلاین
- ریچارد هوگارت: فرهنگ توده وار/ راسخون
- نظریههای فرهنگی/ وبلاگ
-درباره ریچارد هوگارت
زندگی نامه و آرای ریچارد هوگارت/ همشهری آنلاین
ترجمه میثم سروش
ریچارد هوگارت (Richard Hoggart) تحلیلگر و مورخ انگلیسی فرهنگ طبقه کارگر، آموزش و رسانههای همگانی، یکی از تاثیرگذارترین شخصیتها در شکلگیری و بسط مطالعات فرهنگی در بریتانیاست. که با نگارش کتاب معروف کاربردهای سواد (1) (1957) و بر عهده گرفتن مدیریت مرکز مطالعات فرهنگی معاصر بیرمنگام (2) در نخستین سالهای تاسیس این مرکز نقش مهمی در این زمینه ایفا کرد.
هوگارت در خانوادهای از طبقه کارگر در لیدز بهدنیا آمد و پس از گذراندن خدمت سربازی در جبهه جنگ به تدریس ادبیات انگلیسی در کلاسهای آموزش بزرگسالان در دانشگاههال (3) مشغول شد. برخی بر این باورند که این تجربه نه تنها برای موقعیت شغلی و دانشگاهی هوگارت بلکه برای بسط و گسترش مطالعات فرهنگی به معنای دقیق کلمه، تجربهای حیاتی بود. برخی از نخستین نمایندگان اصلی مطالعات فرهنگی از جمله ریموند ویلیامز (4)در ابتدا در کلاسهای آموزش بزرگسالان تدریس میکردند و عملا با کسانی که به دلایل اقتصادی یا مسائل دیگر نمیتوانستند به نهادهای آموزشی رسمیتر راه یابند در تماس بودند. بنابراین مطالعات فرهنگی تا حدی بر اثر تلاش این افراد برای برقراری پیوندی میان نقد ادبی (و علوم اجتماعی و سیاسی) و کسانی که آن سوی مخاطبان عادی دانشگاهی قرار داشتند، به وجود آمد.
کاربردهای سواد که نوعی گردآوری اسناد [و مصداقهای] فرهنگ طبقه کارگر پیش از جنگ و تحلیل آنهاست، چنین خوانندگانی را مخاطب قرار میدهد.
هوگارت فنون مطالعات ادبی را وارد این فرهنگ میکند اما وی آنها را [عمدتا] در مورد محصولات و مصنوعات فرهنگی (نظیر روزنامهها، مجلات و موسیقی و ادبیات عامهپسند) به کار میبندد. زندگی طبقه کارگر از طریق روابط متقابل و پیچیده اجزای آن (مانند مشروب فروشیها، کانونهای کارگری، ورزش، نقشهای خانوادگی، جنسیت و زبان، و حتی عناصر به ظاهر واپسگرایانه و منفی این نوع زندگی از قبیل خشونت) آشکار میشود.
بدین ترتیب هوگارت تلاش میکند فهم فرهنگ را از توجه انحصاری به فرهنگ والا دور کند.
لیکن، تحلیل او از فرهنگ طبقه کارگر پس از جنگ نشان میدهد که وی هنوز از برخی جهات تحت تاثیر لیویس (5) و حتی آرنولد (6) است.در حالیکه آرنولد به ظهور فرهنگ "مبتذل"(7) شهری در اواسط سده نوزدهم تاسف میخورد، هوگارت بر افول فرهنگ طبقه گارگر در دوران پس از جنگ [جهانی دوم] بر اثر نفوذ فرهنگ تجاری و فرهنگ آمریکای شمالی تاکید میورزد.
برای نمونه، او فرهنگ کافه تریاهای دهه 1950 و به تبع آن زندگی زنان و مردان جوان طبقه گارگر را که معطوف به چنین فرهنگی ست، مبتذل و بیارزش میشمارد.
کاربردهای سواد [اعتبار زیادی برای هوگارت به ارمغان آورد] و او را عملا به مرجع عمومی در زمینه فرهنگ عامه و رسانهها تبدیل کرد از جمله میتوان به حضور او در محاکمه ناشران رمان معشوق خانم چترلی(8) برای دفاع از متهمین اشاره کرد.
در نهایت باید گفت که هیچ یک از آثار بعدی هوگارت به این اندازه تاثیرگذار نبودند، اگرچه از لحاظ فعالیت نهادی وی علاوه بر اینکه مدیریت مرکز بیرمنگام را (از سال 1964 تا 1968) بر عهده داشت، معاون مدیر کل سازمان یونسکو و رئیس کالج گلداسمیت لندن (9) نیز بوده است.
1- The Uses of Literacy
2- Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies
3- University of Hull
4- Raymond Williams 1921- 1988 : نظریهپرداز فرهنگی و منتقد ادبی اهل ویلز
5- F. R. Leavis 1895- 1978 : منتقد ادبی و تحلیلگر نخبهگرای فرهنگی بریتانیا
6- Matthew Arnold 1822- 1888 : شاعر و منتقد فرهنگی بریتانیا
لینک دسترسی مطلب: http://www.hamshahrionline.ir/details/51092
تاریخ دسترسی: 25/11/93
ریچارد هوگارت: فرهنگ توده وار/ راسخون
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
نویسنده: سید محمد مهدی زاده
رسانه علیه فرهنگ اصیل
ریچارد هوگارت(1)، نظریه پرداز فرهنگ معاصر انگلیسی، نقطه ی تمرکز اندیشه اش را بر تحلیل زندگی، اخلاق و فرهنگ طبقه کارگر در مقابل خطرِ گسترشِ فرهنگِ توده وار یا آن چیزی که وی «بربریت باشکوه» مینامید، گذاشت.
به زعم وی، ویژگی اصلی فرهنگ قدیم طبقات پایین، احساس همبستگی و پیوندی بود که آن فرهنگ میان مردم ایجاد میکرد. از آن جا که آن فرهنگ برخاسته از علایق و تلخیها و شیرینیهای زندگی آنها بود، آیینه ی تمام نمای کلیت زندگی شان نیز به شمار میرفت. فرهنگ قدیم، فرهنگِ جماعتی است؛ در حالی که فرهنگ سرگرمی مدرن، فرهنگ توده ای است؛ یعنی برخاسته از علایق جماعت نیست (بشیریه، 58:1379). هوگارت، کارکرد رسانههای جمعی را دخل و تصرف در فرهنگ اصیل و رواج فرهنگی مصنوعی، بی رنگ و رو و پیش پا افتاده میداند. فرهنگ برآمده از رسانههای جمعی، فرهنگ توده وار است که سیراب کننده ی روح نیست، بلکه تجارت زده و انتزاعی است.
لزلی جانسون(2) با اشاره به آراء هوگارت در نقد فراوردههای رسانههای جمعی مینویسد: «اغلب سرگرمیهایی که رسانهها برای توده ی مردم تدارک میبینند، «ضد زندگی»، پر از زرق و برق، دارای جاذبههای سوء و فاقد مسئولیتهای اخلاقی هستند. سرگرمیها مبلّغ این نظرند که پیشرفت یعنی به دنبال مالکیتهای مادی رفتن، برابری یعنی یکسان بودن ارزشهای اخلاقی و آزادی یعنی زمینه ای برای ارزشهای بی قید و بی پایان» (جانسون، 209:1378).
هوگارت در کتاب کاربردهای سواد(3) رشد فزاینده ی افراد باسواد و ثروتمند در انگلستان در دهه ی 1930 را علت فقدان احساس تعلق به گذشته میداند. وی میگوید اگر هنوز بعضی از گروههای جوان بعضی از آوازهای پدربزرگها و مادربزرگها را میخوانند، به این خاطر است که این آوازها را مستقیماً از آنها آموخته اند و برای آموزش و یادگیری این آوازها تلاشی نکرده اند.
او علت این وضعیت را غیرطبقاتی شدنِ فرهنگ میداند؛ چنان که اذعان میدارد طبقه ی کارگر همگام با گروههای بسیار مرفه، به لحاظ فرهنگی بی طبقه شده است؛ زیرا رسانههای جمعی همانند اشعار و آوازهای عامه پسند، قادر به مرزبندی طبقاتیِ مخاطبان نیستند. رسانههای جمعی، حقیقتاً به معنای واقعی کلمه، وسایل پخش عمومی هستند (لافی، 45:2007).
کاربردهای سواد اَشکال احساسی، جعلی و سطحی سرگرمیهای جمعی را زیر سؤال میبرد. وی بعداً (2004) مضامینِ مربوط به رسانههای جمعی را به توده یعنی جامعه ی به لحاظ فرهنگی محروم و فاقد حس تعلق و هویت، تعمیم داد. راه حل پیشنهادی او چنین است: وسایل پخش باید در سطح محلی باشد و مردم در اداره و تأمین محتوای آن مشارکت داشته باشند (همان: 46).
هوگارت خود را مدافع ترویج حساسیت و آگاهی انتقادی از طریق آموزش جهت مقاومت مردم در برابر اغواگریهای دخل و تصرف کنندگان در ارتباطات توده ای میداند. به گفته ی او، هدف آموزش باید انتقال فرهنگ باشد، اما نه به معنای محدود آن که کسب آداب و رسوم خاص است، بلکه به معنای «رشد تخیلی مسئول و پاسخگو» (جانسون، 207:1378). راه حل هوگارت، گریز از مدرنیته ی پیشرفته و بازگشت به عصر نوستالژیک سنتهای طبقاتی است؛ عصری که بزرگترها بر گروه همآلان و نفوذهای رسانه ای، غلبه و برتری داشتند.
پی نوشتها :
1. R. Hoggart
2. L. Johnson
3. The uses of literacy
منبع : مهدی زاده، سید محمد، (1389)؛ نظریههای رسانه: اندیشههای رایج و دیدگاههای انتقادی، تهران: نشر همشهری، چاپ اول 1389.
لینک دسترسی مطلب: https://nn22.rasekhoonblog.com/article/show/726268/
نظریههای فرهنگی/ وبلاگ
نظریهای که در مطالعه آکادمیک فرهنگ از آن استفاده میشود.این نظریه نه فلسفی است و نه مختص یک رشته خاص بلکه بیشتر نوعی تازه و مشخصا پسا مدرن از نظری پردازی فرا رشته ای و پسا ساختارگرایانه است.بعضی استدلال میکنند که اشکال قدیمی تر تامل روشمند در مدر نیزاسیون و پسا مدرنیزاسیون فرهنگی نیز به همین معنا نظری و دست کم به طور ضمنی فرا رشته ای هستند.
بنیان مطالعات فرهنگی را میتوان در سه چهره "ایی پی تامپسون :ریجارد هوگارت و ویلیامز یافت.
ویلیامز در نخستین اثرش "فرهنگ و جامعه" به بررسی چهار معنای مهم مربوط به این واژه میپردازد.نوعی وضعیت ویژه ذهن وضع رشد فکری کل یک جامعه علوم انسانی و سبک کلی زندگی یک گروه یا یک ملت. ویلیامز بین کاربستهای طبیعی و انسانی این واژه ،معانی ضمنی مثبت و منفی آن ،کاربرد آن به عنوان اسم نوعی فرایند یا اسم نوعی صورتبندی ،کاربستهای سیاسی رادیکال یا ارتجاعی آن تمایز قایل شد.ساختار احساس مفهومی در نظریات ریموند ویلیامز و پیروانش که واسطه بین هنر و فرهنگ و نشان دهنده پیوند منظم متون و نظامهای نشانه ای مختلف است. مقصود از آوردن وازه احساس در این ترکیب زندگی در مکان خاصی در برهه ای از زمان است.این مفهوم هم متضمن سویههای تجربی بی واسطه و هم متضمن آن دسته از ابعاد فرایند هنری است که مختص یک نسل است.
ادوارد تامپسون در کتاب ایجاد طبقه کارگر انگلیس نوعی تاریخ از پایین را نوشت و در آن زندگی ،تجربیات ،باورها ،نگرشها و کردارهی طبقه کارگر یا مردم معمولی انگلیس را مورد توجه قرار داد.به علاوه ،از طریق این آثار ،مارکسیسم تاثیرات اولیه خود را بر ظهور رشته مطالعات فرهنگی نمایان میسازد .
ریچارد هوگارت نیز در کتاب خود کاربردهای سواد فرهنگ طبقه کارگر انگلیس را مورد مطالعه قرار میدهد .هوگارت با این مفهوم احساس همدلی و وحدت بیشتری با مردم و تودهها دارد تا روشنفکران.جامه شناسی فرهنگ را که گاهی جامه شناسی هنرها میخوا نند گرایشی است در حوزه مطالعات فرهنگ.شروع مطالعات فرهنگی را میتوان به انتشار کتاب "کاربردهای سواد"اثر ریچارد هوگارت و "انقلاب طولانی "و فرهنگ جامعه ویلیامز نسبت داد .هوگارت و ویلیامز تحت تاثیر سنت منتقدان فرهنگ هستند که نمونه آنها آرنولد و اف.ار .لیوس بودند آرنولد با برداشتی از فرهنگ به سراغ نقد اجتماعی پرداخت.آرنولد با دادن نظریه ای در جامعه انگلیس زمان خود بر سه گانه دولت ،فرهنگ،آموزش تاکید کرد.او تاکی داشت که دولت تنها نیرویی است که میتواند هدایت جامعه به سوی آرمانهای بلند جمعی را به عهده بگیرد.و از طریق آموزش مردم ،سنت برگزیده را به مردم آموزش دهد. در بحث آرنولد فرهنگ بهترین گفتهها و اندیشههای جستجو برای کمال تلقی میشود .در بحث آرنولدفرهنگ برای طبقات فرو دست جایی ندارد.
جامعه شناسی فرهنگی نیز از اساس ریشه در جامعه شناسی دارد.اما این گرایش با مفهوم چرخش فرهنگی یا چرخش به سوی فرهنگ رابطه نزدیکی دارد .در جامعه شناسی فرهنگ ،فرهنگ به کلیه باورها ،ایدهها ،ارزشها و موارد مشابه اطلاق میگردد.از اینرو میتوان جامعه شناسی فرهنگی را در کنار سایر حوزههای جامعه شناسی نظیر حقوق،آموزش و غیره قرار دادکه بر جنبههای فرهنگی زندگی روزمره تاکید دارد .بسیاری از کسانی که ذیل جامعه شناسی فرهنگی قرار میگیرند با مطالعات فرهنگی آشنا هستند اما آنها مطالعات فرهنگی را رشته ای موثر و کارا نمی دانند.در بحث مطالعات فرهنگی و تفاوت آن با جامعه شناسی همان طور که قبلا از دیدگاه سیدمن بررسی کردیم در تصور از امر اجتماع است که درک امر اجتماع در مطالعات فرهنگی نوعی چرخشی نشانه شناختی یا چرخش متنی صورت گرفته است.واقعیتهای اجتماعی به منزله حوزهای از نشانهها ،متون معنادار در نظر گرفته میشوند در این جا امر اجتماعی فرهنگی تصور میشود که به واسطه نشانهها سازمان مییابد.
از دید ویلیامز ایده فرهنگ نوید رهایی را در بر دارد ،از دیدهارتمن باب این سوال سرنوشت ساز که آیا مضمونی حقیقتا پر مایه و بلند نظرانه از فرهنگ امکان پذیر استبسته میباشد.از نظر ویلیامز ،عمده ترین تمایز همان است که بین کاربرد این واژه در هنر و ادبیات و در علوم اجتماعی وجود دارد .
منابع:درآمدی بر نظریه فرهنگی معاصر /آندرو میلنر و جف برایت.ترجمه :جمال محمد
درآمدی بر نظریه فرهنگی /فیلیپ اسمیت.ترجمه:حسن پویان
لینک دسترسی مطلب: http://mojgank.blogfa.com/87122.aspx
تاریخ دسترسی: 25/11/93
فهرست مطالب انگلیسی:
- معرفی و شناخت ریچارد هوگارت
- Richard Hoggart/ Wikipedia(ریچارد هوگارت)
- The Uses of Decency/ The Guardian (کاربردهای شایستگی)
- Richard Hoggart Obituary/ The Guardian(در سوگ ریچارد هوگارت)
- Richard Hoggart/ Spartacus Educational (ریچارد هوگارت)
- Hoggart Papers/ The University of Sheffield( مقالات هوگارت)
- Richard Hoggart: Cultural Critic and Educationalist/ Open democracy (کارشناس و منتقد فرهنگی)
- Fred Iglis on Richard Hoggart/ Times Higher Education ( درباره ریچارد هوگارت از نظر فِرد اگلیس)
- A Special Editorial, Herbert Richard Hoggart/Taylor Francis Online( سرمقاله ویژه، هربرت ریچارد هوگارت)
- Still Learning from The Scholarship Boy/Working-Class Perspectives
(هنوز هم از پسر بچه بورسیه ایی یاد میگیریم)
- Who Is Richard Hoggart?/ Goldsmiths University of London ( ریچارد هوگارت کیست؟)
- درباره آثار ریچارد هوگارت
- Whose Candyfloss?/ London Review of Books
- Richard Hoggart’s Legacy and New Uses of Literacy/ Roman & Littlefield International.
(میراث هوگارت و کاربردهای جدید سواد)
- The Uses of Literacy: Aspects of Working Class Culture/The Independent(ابعادی از فرهنگ طبقه کارگر)
- The Working Class Hero/ The Guardian(قهرمان طبقه کارگر)
معرفی و شناخت ریچارد هوگارت:
Richard Hoggart/ Wikipedia
Herbert Richard Hoggart FRSL (24 September 1918 – 10 April 2014) was a British academic whose career covered the fields of sociology, English literature and cultural studies, with emphasis on British popular culture.
Hoggart was born in the Potternewton area of Leeds, one of three children in an impoverished family. His father, a soldier, died when Hoggart was a year old, and his mother died when he was eight. He grew up with his grandmother in Hunslet, and was encouraged in his education by an aunt. He gained a place at Cockburn High School which was a grammar school, after his headmaster requested that the education authority reread his scholarship examination essay. He then won a scholarship to study English at the University of Leeds, where he graduated with a First Class Degree. He served with the Royal Artillery during World War II and was demobilised as a Staff Captain.
He was a Staff Tutor at the University of Hull from 1946 to 1959, and published his first book, a study of W. H. Auden's poetry, in 1951. His major work, The Uses of Literacy, was published in 1957. Partly autobiography, the volume was interpreted as lamenting the loss of an authentic working class popular culture in Britain, and denouncing the imposition of a mass culture through advertising, media and Americanisation.
He became Senior Lecturer in English at the University of Leicester from 1959 to 1962. Hoggart was an expert witness at the Lady Chatterley trial in 1960, and his argument that it was an essentially moral and "puritan" work, which merely repeated words he had heard on a building site on his way to the court, is sometimes viewed as having had a decisive influence on the outcome of the trial.
While Professor of English at Birmingham University between 1962 and 1973, he founded the institution's Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies in 1964 and was its director until 1969. Hoggart was Assistant Director-General of UNESCO (1971–1975) and finally Warden of Goldsmiths, University of London (1976–1984), after which he retired from formal academic life. The 'Main Building' at Goldsmiths has now been renamed the 'Richard Hoggart Building' in tribute to his contributions to the college.
Hoggart was a member of numerous public bodies and committees, including the Albermarle Committee on Youth Services (1958–1960), the Pilkington Committee on Broadcasting (1960–1962), the Arts Council of Great Britain (1976–1981) and the Statesman and Nation Publishing Company Ltd (1977–1981). He was also Chairman of the Advisory Council for Adult and Continuing Education (1977–1983), and the Broadcasting Research Unit (1981–1991), as well as a Governor of the Royal Shakespeare Company (1962–1988).
In later works, such as The Way We Live Now (1995), he regretted the decline in moral authority that he held religion once provided and attacked contemporary education for its emphasis on the 'vocational' and 'cultural relativism' for its tendency to concentrate on the popular and meretricious.
One of his two sons was the political journalist Simon Hoggart, who predeceased him by three months, and the other is the television critic Paul Hoggart. He is also survived by a daughter, Nicola. In The Chatterley Affair, a 2006 dramatisation of the 1960 trial made for the digital television channel BBC Four, he was played by actor David Tennant.
In later life he suffered from dementia. He died on 10 April 2014 at the age of 95.
لینک مطلب :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hoggart
تاریخ دسترسی: 24/10/93
The Uses of Decency/ The Guardian
Orphaned at eight, Richard Hoggart was raised in 'Dickensian' conditions but eventually went to Leeds University. He drew from his experiences in a ground-breaking book on working-class culture and became a hero of the 1960s liberal intelligentsia. He remains a passionate opponent of condescension in the media, as his new book - which he describes as a swansong – reveals.
The publication of The Uses of Literacy in 1957 propelled Richard Hoggart, then an extramural lecturer at the University of Hull, to the forefront of the changes that swept British culture from the sclerotic 1950s into the swinging 60s. The book was a groundbreaking study of working-class culture and a critical appraisal of the changes wrought by the commercial forces - "publications and entertainments" as he puts it in the subtitle - that impinge upon it. Not only did it anticipate the opening-up of the cultural landscape, it also contributed to a critical and popular climate far more receptive to the subsequent explosion of books, films and art about working-class subjects by working-class artists. Hoggart soon found himself well placed to make important interventions that helped remake the cultural landscape. He was the driving force behind the Pilkington committee, which eventually led to the founding of BBC2. More dramatically, he was the star defence witness at the Lady Chatterley obscenity trial.
"Richard Hoggart was a hero of the liberal literary intelligentsia in the 1960s," recalls David Lodge, who worked under him as a young lecturer at Birmingham University. "Uses of Literacy is still in print and is still studied and read, but in those days it was a kind of Bible for first-generation university students and teachers who had been promoted by education from working-class and lower middle-class backgrounds into the professional middle class." Such was the seismic impact of the book that it is not surprising that Hoggart has not produced anything quite like it since. But he has continued to offer principled critique of contemporary culture as a writer, administrator, academic and committee man. His observations on the state of public broadcasting remain trenchant. Hoggart is a lifelong member of the Labour party but recently considered resigning over "something most people would regard as negligible. I thought the government's attitude towards the Communications bill was quite inadequate and I do wish there was a George Orwell around who could burn Blair's jacket politically and intellectually." In a Guardian article he called the bill "one of the most ill-conceived legislative proposals for many decades that would continue wrecking one of our major cultural achievements of the last century, that of creating a sound, independent democratic structure for broadcasting". He drew on Ezra Pound, RH Tawney and Shakespeare to reinforce his argument and compared "vapid programmes" to "mild drugs" in that they have "increasingly to spice themselves up" - to beat the competition rather than make better programmes.
Of last week's resignations at the BBC he says: "I don't think Greg Dyke was a great Director General in terms of public service. He did do some very good things, and the outstanding achievement was the creation of BBC4. But I got the feeling he was doing that to buy off criticism of some other pretty awful programmes. You can't justify The Weakest Link by putting on some decent arts programmes and I don't think he really grappled with the issues behind the BBC."
It is some sort of backhanded compliment to the weight still placed on Hoggart's views that Peter Bazalgette, chairman of Endemol UK, the producer of Big Brother and the recent controversial sleep-deprivation programme Shattered, was prompted to take issue with what he saw as the assumptions behind Hoggart's views. "One is a sort of misplaced utopianism: that all programmes should be morally improving and none should be merely diverting," complained Bazalgette. "Another is that to enjoy programmes whose sole purpose is entertainment you must be stupid, depraved or educationally deficient."
Cambridge professor Stefan Collini has written about Hoggart's work and says Hoggart "is not so much concerned with the standard dumbing-down argument, but much more with the way the most powerful forces at work in a commercialised culture constantly drive provision down to an assumed lowest common denominator. There are many people in television and elsewhere who will think he is outdated and represents a past orthodoxy, but I don't think that is quite true. He has kept the argument against condescension very much alive and is particularly against the view that a mass audience can only appreciate pap."
Hoggart writes on broadcasting in his latest book, Mass Media in a Mass Society, published this month, "as well as some other of my favourite themes", he says, "relativism, popularising, levelling". Hoggart has likened his career-long preoccupations to a delta with four or five main tributaries. "Their common source is a sense of the importance of the right of each of us to speak out about how we see life, the world; and so the right to have access to the means by which that capacity to speak may be gained. The right, also, to try to reach out to speak to others, not to have that impulse inhibited by social barriers, maintained by those in power politically or able to exercise power in other ways." Collini points out that Hoggart "keeps returning to an ethical appraisal of contemporary culture and his touchstone is to take it back to family life and common decencies as he knew them as they arose from his own working-class experience".
Going as far back as Uses of Literacy, Hoggart has drawn on his own experiences, most famously in the chapter "Scholarship Boy", in which he dealt with the deracination of the clever poor boy uprooted from his class by education. "It's not just writing about your own experience," he explains. "It's writing about everything else that comes through your prism. The people I have learned most from are Orwell and Samuel Butler."
Although he acknowledges he is a "centripetal" writer - not centrifugal like Shakespeare or Tolstoy - he usually uses his own biography to highlight more general trends and circumstances and calls his three-volume memoir, written from 1988-92, "a cultural autobiography in which you see the author in terms of what he represents in a particular culture at a particular time and place. In this case a working-class person from a very class-bound society and the efforts it takes to get out of it. I don't want to exaggerate it, but you had to climb hand over hand and I see myself in that book as representative of what affected many people. It's a subject that is very tied up with class and education and money and geography and whatever happens, you always partially have one foot in what you were."
Richard Herbert Hoggart - he was Bert to friends and family as he grew up - was born in Leeds in 1918. His father, who had served in the Boer war, was a house painter, who served in the first world war in the pay corps. He died in 1920 of brucellosis, "which was commonly called Maltese fever", says Hoggart, who, with his brother and sister, was brought up by his mother in a "stone cottage with a small yard and outside loo. It really was something out of Dickens. She managed on £1 a week, which was what the local social security, as it is called now, gave her. She also had tokens she could exchange in one shop for groceries."
When he was eight, Hoggart returned home from school one day to find his mother collapsed on the floor. She died of TB shortly afterwards and one of his few memories of this time is of holding hands with his siblings at her funeral where he heard an aunt say that "orphanages are very good nowadays". But the children were distributed among members of the family and he says he "got the best deal" in going to live with his grandmother, although for several years he had to share a bed with an uncle. His primary school was Jack Lane, where he failed the 11-plus - as did Keith Waterhouse at the same school a decade later - because of a poor maths paper. The headmaster appealed to the education officials, pointing out how good Hoggart's English essay was and arguing that the maths teaching was inadequate. Hoggart was awarded a grammar-school place; one of several key interventions he cites in his life, along with the social worker who persuaded his grandmother he should stay on at school by increasing her allowance, and a particularly supportive professor at university.
Just before he won a scholarship to Leeds University in 1936 - "the only choice was the local university," he says, "Oxbridge was never even mentioned"- Hoggart's aunt gave him elocution lessons because he couldn't pronounce his Rs or Ls. When he arrived he was quickly taken up by Professor Bonamy Dobree, then a young lecturer and fringe member of the Woolf and Lawrence literary circles. "He picked out talented young English undergraduates to encourage and he gave me my first coddled egg and my first taste of gin," says Hoggart. "I was a very hard-working student and because there were no books in the house I would spend long periods in the reading room of the library. I discovered Swinburne for myself there, and other poetry, which was wonderful."
Hoggart began courting fellow student Mary Holt France, who went on to become a teacher, in his second term at Leeds. They married in 1942 and have three children: Guardian journalist Simon, Nicola, who teaches children with special needs and now lives near them in Norwich, and Paul, who was a further-education lecturer but is now a television critic for the Times. They have eight grandchildren. He says his family is the first priority in his life, "which I suppose comes from the fact that I didn't have a family".
Hoggart got the only first in English in his year - he was introduced to TS Eliot at the degree ceremony - and was offered a two-year scholarship to do a PhD at Cambridge. But the second world war was looming and so, within a week of graduating, he started an MA on Swift which he completed in nine months. Two months later, in 1940, he was called up to the Royal Artillery and took part in the invasion of North Africa. Although he served for six years and saw action, the example of bravery he cites comes from his time when seconded as a junior intelligence officer. His rank obliged him to attend the execution of a British soldier who had murdered a fellow serviceman. "It would have been my job to take my pistol and finish off the victim if for some reason the firing squad didn't kill him outright", he says. "But a more senior officer, a solicitor from the West Country, took my place, saying it was unfair and I should not have to do such a thing. I thought that showed real moral courage." Hoggart later served in Naples - "Leeds in Technicolor" - before returning to England and finally being demobbed in 1946 as a staff captain.
On his return, Hoggart applied for nine assistant lectureships. "Nothing grand," he says, "I didn't even apply to Leeds." Eight universities turned him down without interview, as did the John Lewis department store where he had also applied as graduate trainee. But Hull took him on in the extramural department and he stayed at the university for the next 13 years. Jean Hartley, who went on to found the Marvell Press, which first published Philip Larkin, was a student of Hoggart's as a 15-year-old in 1948. "He was the most inspirational teacher and was tremendously encouraging," she says. "He gave very imaginative homework, like, 'describe something in the town in the style of Graham Greene'."
Hartley says the students were mostly women, some of whom had very little formal education. "But he was a scrupulous marker and didn't patronise us or pull his punches. We were all in awe of him so it was fascinating to read Uses of Literacy years later because we had no idea until then that his background was probably more underprivileged than most of ours."
Hoggart's first book, the first book-length study of Auden's poetry, was published in 1951 while he was at Hull. He had started it while serving in Naples, where all he had to work with were copies of the poems, but he still produced 30,000 words. He says it is today inconceivable that a young lecturer could write the first book on an established poet. "I sent the book to Chatto where Cecil Day-Lewis asked me to lunch. And he was very nice considering I had criticised his poetry in the book. He didn't mention it at all."
Edward Mendelson, who went on to edit Auden's poetry and become his literary executor, saw Hoggart lecture on Auden in America in the late 50s. Mendelson says that he recently "turned over some pages of the book, and was startled by how much Richard Hoggart had seen about Auden that no one had seen before, and that few people had seen since, and how much of it seemed to have been written yesterday, not half a century ago". In the preface to the book, Hoggart says it is "addressed to people with no special literary training, but with an interest in the quality of our lives today, and a readiness to examine whether the reading of poetry has an important relation to that interest". This has been his audience throughout his career. He says the people he speaks for are those whom "Matthew Arnold called the 'saving remnants'. Arthur Koestler called them the 'anxious corporals' who always had a Penguin paperback sticking out of the back of their battledress and Dr Johnson called them the 'common reader'. They are always a minority, but they go right through our history."
Hoggart describes the impulse to write his next book, which turned out to be The Uses of Literacy, as being like an "intellectual tapeworm" inside him. It started as a textbook for adult tutors about popular fiction and tabloid newspapers. "But halfway through I realised that I wasn't dealing with the culture these books and newspapers were trying to hit," he says. "So I started to write about working-class culture as I knew it." Chatto accepted the book but its lawyers claimed it was libellous and that the newspapers Hoggart had analysed and a writer "of sex and violence novels" he had cited might sue. "Some of the libel advice was actually ridiculous," he says. "But I ended up writing my own dirty literature for the book. And it wasn't a bad pastiche," he laughs. "I probably could have made some money from it."
The late playwright Dennis Potter, who went from a Forest of Dean coalmining family to study at Oxford around the time the book was published, called it "a great book and an emancipated one". He wrote a few years later about being uncertain whether to be ashamed or proud of his background at Oxford and drew comfort from Hoggart as "one of the few Englishmen who look straight at what they are writing about, so much so that his prose itself rarely embroiders, slithers, side-tracks or evades. He changes the arrogant political rhetoric of 'what kind of a people do they think we are?' to 'what sort of people do we think we are?'"
Soon after publication, Hoggart was asked to contribute to the Albemarle report on youth services and in 1958 he moved to Leicester University as a senior English lecturer. Two years later he joined the Pilkington committee inquiry into broadcasting and drafted the final report, which recommended that the proposed third television channel (BBC2) should be given to a public, not private, broadcaster. Also in 1960, Hoggart was asked by Allen Lane of Penguin, who had published the paperback Uses of Literacy , to help in the obscenity trial of Lady Chatterley's Lover. "I agreed to speak if necessary but when I got a call I really didn't know what to expect," Hoggart recalls. "Then I was met at the Old Bailey by one of the defence team, who told me I'd better get in there and dig in hard because the prosecutor, Griffith-Jones, who was snobbish and a bully and everything I come out in spots about, had just made a distinguished woman professor cry."
Kenneth Tynan, writing at the time, identified Hoggart's testimony as a turning point. "Mr Hoggart is a short, dark, young Midlands teacher of immense scholarship and fierce integrity. From the witness box he uttered a word that we had formerly heard only on the lips of Mr Griffith-Jones; he pointed out how Lawrence had striven to cleanse it of its furtive, contemptuous and expletive connotations, and to use it 'in the most simple, natural way: one fucks'. There was no reaction of shock in the court, so calmly was the word pronounced, and so literally employed."
With Hoggart's profile raised, Birmingham University offered him a chair. He accepted with two conditions; that he didn't move for two years because of his children's education and that he would want to start a centre to study contemporary cultural studies. "The Lady Chatterley trial made me think there should be a body that was interested in English not just as it was academically defined, but also as it applied to the general culture," he says. "At that time the definition of English studies was very rigid and yet outside there was a culture that was not derisory but was little understood and said something about the human spirit." Lane made a financial contribution and the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies was founded at a time of academic experiment when the traditional English syllabus was redesigned.
"But students who came and thought they would be dealing purely with new theories were disappointed," says Hoggart. "We were still in the English department and we'd start them off with two hours dealing with a late Yeats poem." Hoggart has watched Cultural Studies grow into an industry and a highly theoretical discipline. "I don't want to attack it," he says. "But it has changed a lot." He has never been particularly comfortable with or intellectually sympathetic to theory of any kind and it is a distinction he draws between himself and two other former extramural teachers, the Marxists Raymond Williams ( Culture and Society, 1958) and EP Thompson ( The Making of the English Working Class, 1964), with whom he and Uses of Literacy are so often bracketed. "None of us knew the others were writing their books at the time," he says. "And while there are some things in common, in fact we were running on parallel lines." Williams reviewed Uses of Literacy warmly, but, Hoggart says, "he thought you should write based on good theoretical foundations and so he objected to the Scholarship Boy chapter as a piece of near-fiction personal impressionism".
As the 60s progressed, the currents running in English studies became increasingly uncongenial to Hoggart and so in 1970, drawing on his facility for administration and committee work, he accepted the deputy director-general post at Unesco in Paris. Coincidentally, the same week he was asked to go to New York University to discuss the Albert Schweitzer chair and was also offered the vice-chancellorship of the University of Queensland. His Unesco brief was wide and included peace, racism, human rights and culture. The personal characteristics habitually attached to him - decent, honest and straightforward - meant that operating in an environment then rife with accusations of bureaucratic skulduggery and corruption was particularly testing. But Hoggart stayed for five years and, while he now thinks of the period as an "interlude", he did take pride that "most of the countries I respected" later said he did a good job. On his return to Britain in the mid-70s, he became warden of Goldsmiths College in south-east London. He continued serving on public committees, but as the Wilson/Callaghan years ended and the Thatcher period began, the increasingly polarised politics saw him marginalised. There was a tempestuous period as chairman of the New Statesman and then a bumpy ride as vice-chairman of the Arts Council. Sir Roy Shaw, then executive head of the council, says Hoggart is "a very good committee man and was the outstanding office-holder at the Arts Council during my time, but unfortunately the government dropped him. Mrs Thatcher didn't regard him as one of us, which of course he wasn't."
Shaw has known Hoggart since the late 40s and says that although he has had a wide-ranging and high-level career, "he has never become in any way pompous, no matter how important his job was. He always stayed an ordinary bloke, although in fact he was always an extraordinary, ordinary bloke." Others who know him say that as the archetypal scholarship boy who has been incorporated into the establishment, Hoggart is both proud of his success while being determined not to be assimilated. He has stuck to a series of principles, such as refusing a knighthood and then a peerage in the 70s, not using private medicine despite a long-term knee injury, flying economy class while at Unesco and even balking at selling a house for more than he had paid for it. "He is a decent, old-fashioned socialist and that's how he lives his life," says one old friend. "He is the real thing."
This approach has seen Hoggart accused of being chippy, too alert to social slights, romanticising working-class life and being over-wary of business and commercial enterprise - he certainly says the word "executive" with magnificent disdain. "I was driven by my childhood to get on," he explains, "but not in the sense of becoming a millionaire or anything like that. The ambition was to do something useful and interesting and somehow involving my writing. And I did have an impulse to criticise because there was a lot to criticise. I was brought up in a world where just about everyone assumed they would stay there all their lives and I resented that deeply. There are two types of life; the first is the escalator life, where you move inexorably upwards, the other type is the carousel where you go round and round. One of my arguments is that there are enough people making it their business to ensure that people stay on the carousel." He says that unlike EP Thompson, whom he knew, liked and admired, he has never been a joiner or a public protester. "I tend to be a bit leery of people making public causes in the streets," he says. "The hairs rise on the back of my neck when I see a group of teachers chanting. I can't bear that kind of thing. It seems to me populism of the worst kind. I can deal better with these things by writing about them. That's how I try to persuade others. I'm not saying my way or Edward's way is better or worse, that's just my character."
Collini says: "It is often overlooked that he is very much a writer with a strong sense of writerly craft. Those who are inclined to dismiss him as unsophisticated or someone cultivating a professional working-class voice are not reading him carefully enough." Lodge sees his style of writing as intensely personal. "As a critic he belongs to an English tradition that is descriptive and intuitive and conversational in manner. But his conversational manner isn't senior common-room and patrician. It is gritty, salty, northern, educated working class. It aims to persuade by the vividness of the prose and its manifest sincerity. It's a kind of critical discourse that has now almost completely disappeared from academic publications."
Hoggart describes his latest book as a coming-together of all that he has published in the past. "It is a kind of swansong and perhaps does cover a lot of old ground, although I think I have developed it. But I did want to bring these things together and I also realised that I need to write. It really is the best substitute for bowls or going to the pub in retirement. Without it I should be bereft. I've known for a while now that I'll die with my boots on and my hands on the computer."
Life at a glance
Richard Herbert Hoggart
Born: Leeds, September 24 1918. Education: Jack Lane Primary School; Cockburn Grammar School; Leeds University. Married: 1942 Mary Holt France; two sons, one daughter. Career: 1940-46 Royal Artillery; '46-59 Hull University; '59-62 Leicester; '62-73 Professor of English, Birmingham; '70-75 Deputy Director-General Unesco, Paris; '76-84 Warden, Goldsmiths College, London. Some books: 1951 Auden; '57 The Uses of Literacy; '64 The Critical Moment; '66 Technology and Society; '70 Speaking To Each Other; '78 An Idea and its Servants; Life & Times -'88 A Local Habitation, '90 A Sort of Clowning, '92 An Imagined Life; '94 Towns-cape with Figures; '95 The Way We Live Now; '99 First and Last Things; 2001 Between Two Worlds; '02 Everyday Language & Everyday Life; '04 Mass Media in a Mass Society.
لینک مطلب: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2004/feb/07/politics
تاریخ دسترسی: 24/10/93
Richard Hoggart Obituary/ The Guardian
Pioneer of cultural studies, he wrote the groundbreaking book The Uses of Literacy.
Richard Hoggart, who has died aged 95, opened his autobiography by saying: "This is an attempt to make, out of a personal story, a sense rather more than the personal." Virtually all his writing had the same touch, and across a spread of 40 years it produced some of the most penetrating, vivid and durable cultural commentary of the time.
Hoggart's classic, The Uses of Literacy (1956), is firm in its place among the great books of the 20th century. It gave an immensely detailed picture, lit up with knowledge and affection, of British urban working-class people in the years spanning the second world war. Hoggart caught them at the point where their lives, values and culture were being changed by postwar advertising, mass media influences and Americanisation. He was one of them and always remained so in his loyalties.
The book was at once recognised not only as "an exquisitely drawn portrait" but for its rarer trait of "complete intellectual honesty", which was to remain Hoggart's hallmark and helped him become one of the most watchful, formidable consciences of his age. Warning of a gradual process of cultural debasement – "as dangerous in its way as in totalitarian societies", the book influenced the social and political insights of a generation. It proved decisive in popularising cultural studies as an international academic discipline. It also gave him a very busy life.
When he reread the book 25 years later he said, ruefully, "Good God". This was not, he stressed, because he saw it as a work of any genius but because he realised how much time he had had, as a young, undiscovered lecturer, to write it. In his 40 working years he held down six senior full-time jobs with hardly a break. He wrote 15 books and edited more. He was an active pamphleteer, speaker and reviewer. He was also a Reith lecturer and a decisive witness in the 1960 Lady Chatterley trial, which liberalised British pornography laws and was instrumental – through the Pilkington Report on Broadcasting, which he largely wrote – in creating BBC2 as a quality television channel.
He worked untiringly on cultural quangos for lifelong causes, which included public libraries, adult education and the arts. He was Arts Council vice-chairman until Margaret Thatcher sacked him in 1982. At home he was a conscientious DIY man. Several friends saw his workload as evidence of unfocused energy. The poet Philip Larkin felt he should have stuck to writing. But Hoggart said he never had the nerve to go freelance because of his insecure early life. He admitted to the lack of a clear sense of direction coupled with "a drive to go on, usually to the point of overworking".
Late in life he wondered if his readiness to serve on committees was a byproduct of a childhood that had left him "unusually glad to find myself wanted". Yet he was sceptical about the idea that these compulsions had stopped him from producing another Uses of Literacy. "Did you really expect that I would?" he asked an interviewer. "I didn't. That's the sort of book that – if you're lucky – you can write once in a lifetime."
He never found writing easy. All his book chapters went through multiple drafts, and sometimes this made them discursive and digressive; he had a weakness for lists and for over-elaborating on the importance of Woolworths in working-class life. He called the process "panning for gold". At its best it produced 24-carat material, from The Uses of Literacy to Townscape with Figures (1994), his retirement portrait of Farnham, Surrey. An anthology of the best of Hoggart, culled from all his other volumes, would produce a work longer than The Uses of Literacy.
He could often be a more responsive and warmer essayist than George Orwell, with all of Orwell's eye for the main point. He tried to be rigorously unsentimental. But one can still hear, across the decades, the great proud lift in his voice as he wrote the last sentence of his famous passage about liberty, equality and fraternity among the working classes: "As for fraternity, they have lived that out day by day for centuries," he wrote.
The hallmark of his writing was a sensitivity rare in English prose: an almost unfailingly respectful attention (or "reverence", as he sometimes put it) to the speech and writing of people in all walks of life, coupled with a poet's sense of the nuances of such language. He treated the commonplaces of life as though they could bear the intense scrutiny that a literary critic would bring to a great work of literature. And often they could bear this weight, as his work proved. In 1998 he wrote the introduction to the Guardian's yearly anthology of its writing. What he generously said about the paper is true also of his own life's effort: "A newspaper such as this has to have above all a hinterland, a background, body, bottom, moral texture, rather than merely a daily succession of rhetorical 'ooh-ahs'. It says implicitly: 'There is more to life ...' "
The grandson of a boilermaker, Hoggart was born in the Potternewton district of Leeds, one of three children in an extremely poor family. His father, a housepainter and regular soldier both in the Boer war and in the 1914-18 conflict, died of brucellosis when his son was only a year old. "When I see – or see film of – a driven bird flying to its nest and anxiously, earnestly feeding the open mouths, the image of our mother comes to mind," Hoggart wrote. "When you have seen a woman standing frozen, while tears start slowly down her cheeks because a sixpence has been lost ... you do not easily forget."
His mother died of a chest illness when he was eight. The children were split up. He was taken to live with a loving, widowed grandmother in an overcrowded Hunslet cottage which had one pretension – the only mains-connected bathroom in the street. The household's driving force was his fierce Aunt Ethel, a tailor who, when a headteacher picked him out as a promising pupil, began to realise he might break out of their class.
He grew up healthy, mainly cheerful, and tough. His elder brother, Tom, became the first Hoggart to go to a grammar school. Richard was the second, helped by hardship grants from bodies such as the Board of Guardians and the Royal British Legion. He failed the 11-plus maths paper, but got a scholarship on the strength of his English essay, supported by a plea from his elementary school headteacher. Although at the age of 13 he had a brief nervous breakdown through overwork, he went on to win a distinction at the equivalent of O-level maths.
That close squeak helped shape his support, as an adult, for comprehensive schools. His scholarship, as he later discovered, was one of only 30 available prewar for a catchment of 65,000 children of his age. While Cockburn grammar school eventually took the boy out of Hunslet, he never let it take Hunslet out of the boy. The ways of his aunts and their extended society, with their acknowledged limitations, gave him an unbreakable bond of affection and an inexhaustible resource on which to draw.
In 1936 Hoggart won one of 47 Leeds University scholarships available to his generation of 8,000 18-year-olds. At a freshers' party he met his future wife, Mary, the daughter of teachers. He got a rare first in English but while doing an MA thesis was called up to fight in the second world war. This meant six years in the social mix of the Royal Artillery as an anti-aircraft gunner. Serving in North Africa and Italy, and working in education and intelligence, he ended in the junior officer class as a staff captain.
Afterwards, like Raymond Williams and EP Thompson, he became part of the postwar explosion in adult education as an extramural tutor at Hull University for 13 years. In 1951 he published his first book, a full-length study of WH Auden's poetry. Then The Uses of Literacy changed his life. About some trends the book proved uncannily far-seeing. Writing a year after the launch of commercial television, well before Rupert Murdoch and multichannels, he argued: "There are many who can take cultural debasement remarkably easily. They are not closely acquainted with the mass-produced entertainment which daily visits most people. In this way it is possible to live in a sort of clever man's paradise, without any real notion of the force of the assault outside."
The Uses of Literacy caught the experience of a subsequent generation of scholarship boys, far bigger than his own, who had graduated from grammar schools since the 1944 Education Act. Hoggart, though no ideologist, was haphazardly bracketed as part of the cultural "new left" with Williams, Thompson, Perry Anderson, Arnold Wesker, John Osborne, Alan Sillitoe, Stuart Hall and others regarded as prophets of a resurgent class. He put the class terms "them" and "us" into political currency.
After publication of his great work, he took up position as a senior lecturer in English at the University of Leicester, cherished for his accessibility to students, and in 1962 became professor of English at the University of Birmingham. There, with Hall, he founded and was first director of the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, which set out to tackle the old British separation between high culture and "real" life, between the historic past and the contemporary world. The project blended three approaches: historical-philosophical, sociological and – most important to Hoggart – literary–critical. In its early days it was described as "an experiential, even autobiographical way of examining culture and class-consciousness". After Hoggart left, it took on a neo-Marxist direction.
In 1969, at the age of 51, he was offered three jobs at once: an Australian vice-chancellorship, a New York professorship and an assistant director-generalship at Unesco. Hoggart puzzled friends by choosing Unesco. He travelled three times round the world but was appalled by what he regarded as the misconduct, bureaucracy, infighting and laziness he found within the organisation. In 1975 he resigned and wrote a critical book about it, An Idea and Its Servants (1978).
More vice-chancellorships and chairs were offered. But he chose for family reasons to be warden of Goldsmiths College in London, a "good-hearted place" in which to end his career. He set up its National Centre for Orchestral Studies and continued to "overwork" on official committees. As a close to a career, it was a diminuendo. His scrupulous, exploratory, fraternal style was never cut out for a great public role. Yet his books carry on selling and his ideas have entered the bloodstream of English discussion.
He is survived by Mary and their children Nicola and Paul, three granddaughters, five grandsons, a great-granddaughter and a great-grandson. Their son Simon, the Guardian's parliamentary sketch writer, died in January.
لینک مطلب: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/10/richard-hoggart
تاریخ دسترسی: 11/11/1393
Richard Hoggart/Spartacus Educational
Richard Hoggart, the son of a housepainter, was born in Leeds on 24th September, 1918. His father died when he was only a year old. His mother brought up her three sons in extreme poverty. His mother died seven years later and the children were split up. Richard now went to live with a widowed grandmother in Hunslet.
The headteacher of his junior school identified him as an intelligent child and gave him special help. As John Ezard has pointed out: "His elder brother, Tom, became the first Hoggart to go to a grammar school. Richard was the second, helped by hardship grants from bodies such as the Board of Guardians and the Royal British Legion. He failed the 11-plus maths paper, but got a scholarship on the strength of his English essay, supported by a plea from his elementary school headteacher. Although at the age of 13 he had a brief nervous breakdown through overwork, he went on to win a distinction at the equivalent of O-level maths." Hoggart later discovered that there were only 30 available places at Cockburn High School for a catchment of 65,000 children of his age.
In 1936 Hoggart won one of 47 Leeds University scholarships available to his generation of 8,000 18-year-olds. At university he met his future wife, Mary. He got a first in English but while doing an MA thesis was called up to fight in the British Army in the Second World War. He served in North Africa and Italy and eventually became a intelligence officer and by 1945 had reached the rank of staff captain.
The Uses of Literacy
In 1946 he became a tutor at the University of Hull. Later he lectured in English at the University of Leicester. In 1957 Hoggart published The Uses of Literacy: Aspects of Working Class Life (1957). In the book Hoggart described how the old, tightly-knit working-class culture of his boyhood was being destroyed by the influence of American culture and was “full of corrupt brightness, of improper appeals and moral evasions”. He added: “The hedonistic but passive barbarian who rides in a fifty-horse-power bus for threepence, to see a five-million dollar film for one-and-eightpence, is not simply a social oddity; he is a portent.”
Nicholas Wroe has argued: "The publication of The Uses of Literacy in 1957 propelled Richard Hoggart, then an extramural lecturer at the University of Hull, to the forefront of the changes that swept British culture from the sclerotic 1950s into the swinging 60s. The book was a groundbreaking study of working-class culture and a critical appraisal of the changes wrought by the commercial forces... Not only did it anticipate the opening-up of the cultural landscape, it also contributed to a critical and popular climate far more receptive to the subsequent explosion of books, films and art about working-class subjects by working-class artists."
David Lodge added: "Richard Hoggart was a hero of the liberal literary intelligentsia in the 1960s... Uses of Literacy is still in print and is still studied and read, but in those days it was a kind of Bible for first-generation university students and teachers who had been promoted by education from working-class and lower middle-class backgrounds into the professional middle class."
Obscene Publications Act
Hoggart was also involved in the campaign against the 1857 Obscene Publications Act. In 1959, the Labour Party MP, Roy Jenkins, introduced a private member's bill, that aimed to change the act. Jenkins persuaded Parliament to pass a new Obscene Publications Act. Before 1959 obscenity had been a common-law offence, as defined by the lord chief justice in 1868, extending to all works judged to "deprave and corrupt" those open to "such immoral influences". Under the new act works were to be considered in their entirety and could be defended in terms of their contribution to the public good; after 1959 those convicted of obscenity would also face limited (in contrast to previously unlimited) punishments of a fine or up to three years' imprisonment.
As a result of this legislation, Sir Allen Lane, the chairman of Penguin, agreed to publish an unexpurgated edition of Lady Chatterley's Lover, a novel that had been written by D.H. Lawrence in 1926. The initial print was 200,000 copies. Alerted to Penguin's intention to publish the novel, Sir Theobald Mathew, the director of public prosecutions, decided to prosecute the firm under the act of 1959. It was a move welcomed by Sir Reginald Manningham-Buller, the Conservative government's attorney-general, who expressed the hope that "you get a conviction".
Mervyn Griffith-Jones was selected as the prosecuting counsel in the trial that was held at the Old Bailey between 20th October and 2nd November 1960. Michael Beloff has commented: "From the outset Griffith-Jones's hostility to the unexpurgated edition was apparent to those observing this high-profile test case of the new legislation." One observer, the journalist, Sybille Bedford, commented on a "voice quivering with thin-lipped scorn".
In his opening statement Griffith-Jones advised jury members that they must answer two questions: first, whether the novel, taken as a whole, was obscene in terms of section 2 of the new legislation ("to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read the matter contained in it") and, second, if this proved so, whether publication was still justified for the public good. "You may think that one of the ways in which you can test this book, and test it from the most liberal outlook, is to ask yourselves the question, when you have read it through, would you approve of your young sons, young daughters - because girls can read as well as boys - reading this book. Is it a book that you would have lying around in your own house? Is it a book that you would even wish your wife or your servants to read?" C. H. Rolph later argued that the question "had a visible - and risible - effect on the jury, and may well have been the first nail in the prosecution's coffin".
Richard Hoggart was one of several academics, including Raymond Williams, Graham Goulder Hough, Helen Gardner, Vivian de Sola Pinto, Kenneth Muir and Noel Annan, that appeared for the defence. Hoggart described the book as “highly virtuous if not puritanical”. They were accompanied by thirteen authors and journalists, including Rebecca West, E. M. Forster, Francis Williams, Walter Allen, Anne Scott-James, Dilys Powell, Cecil Day Lewis, Stephen Potter, Janet Adam Smith; John Henry Robertson Connell and Alastair Hetherington. Other defence witnesses included John Robinson, the Bishop of Woolwich.
In his closing speech, Mervyn Griffith-Jones questioned whether the opinions of university lecturers and writers were those of the "ordinary common men and women" who would read Penguin's cheap paperback edition, and reiterated that the novel contained depictions of sexual activity of the kind that could only be found "some way in the Charing Cross Road, the back streets of Paris and even Port Said". Griffith-Jones's efforts were in vain and on 2nd November, 1960, the jurors returned a verdict of not guilty, so opening the way for the legal distribution of novels that had previously been considered obscene. The book went on sale on 10th November, at 3s. 6d., and by the end of the first day the complete run of 200,000 copies had been sold. Within a year of its publication, this edition of Lady Chatterley's Lover had sold more than 2 million copies.
Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies
Hoggart moved to the University of Birmingham. In 1964 he established the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS). As the Guardian pointed out: "The foundations of cultural studies lay in an insistence on taking popular, low-status cultural forms seriously and tracing the interweaving threads of culture, power and politics. Its interdisciplinary perspectives drew on literary theory, linguistics and cultural anthropology in order to analyse subjects as diverse as youth sub-cultures, popular media and gendered and ethnic identities... Hall was always among the first to identify key questions of the age, and routinely sceptical about easy answers. A spellbinding orator and a teacher of enormous influence, he never indulged in academic point-scoring. Hall's political imagination combined vitality and subtlety; in the field of ideas he was tough, ready to combat positions he believed to be politically dangerous. Yet he was unfailingly courteous, generous towards students, activists, artists and visitors from across the globe, many of whom came to love him."
One of his first recruits was Stuart Hall and in 1968 Hall became director of the CCCS unit. Hall later argued that Britain experienced a real revolution in the 1960s: "Remember 1968, when everyone said that nothing changed, that nobody won state power. It’s true. The students didn’t win. But since then life has been profoundly transformed. Ideas of communitarianism, ideas of the collective, of feminism, of being gay, were all transformed by the impact of a revolution that did not succeed… So I don’t believe in judging the historical significance of events in terms of our usually faulty judgment of where they may end up.”
As The Daily Telegraph pointed out, Hoggart disagreed with Hall's Marxism: "Hoggart wrote in the 19th-century tradition of radical idealism, with its strong sense of moral values. He was a tireless enemy of independent broadcasting - and of the public schools, which he saw as perpetuating social privilege. Yet he was also essentially conservative in his dislike of change; hawkish in foreign affairs; and thoroughly elitist in his disdain for modern mass culture."
In 1969 Hoggart left university life to become assistant director-generalship at Unesco. According to John Ezard: "Hoggart puzzled friends by choosing Unesco. He travelled three times round the world but was appalled by what he regarded as the misconduct, bureaucracy, infighting and laziness he found within the organisation." Hoggart resigned in 1975 and wrote a critical book about the organization entitled, An Idea and Its Servants: UNESCO from Within (1978). Hoggart was also Warden of Goldsmiths College (1976-1984) and a member of the Arts Council of Great Britain.
Other books by Hoggart include:
Richard Hoggart died on 14th April, 1914.
لینک مطلب: http://spartacus-educational.com/HIShoggart.htm
تاریخ دسترسی: 11/11/1393
Hoggart Papers/The University of Sheffield
The collection comprises a substantial part of the personal and working papers, manuscripts and associated correspondence relating to the life and work of Richard Hoggart, university teacher and professor of English literature and cultural studies, academic administrator, writer, broadcaster, literary critic, cultural analyst and international civil servant, whose work has spanned the second half of the twentieth century and continued into the early years of the twenty-first.
Born in 1918 into a working-class family in Hunslet, Leeds, and orphaned at an early age, Herbert Richard Hoggart gained a scholarship to Cockburn High School and went on to study English at the University of Leeds where he gained a first-class degree and an M.A. Subsequently drafted into the army during the Second World War he served as an officer in North Africa and Italy, being discharged in 1946. The extensive biographical entry in Who's Who shows that during the active and varied career which followed, devoted to academic and public affairs, he has been a Lecturer in the Department of Adult Education at the University of Hull, a Senior Lecturer in English at the University of Leicester, and Professor of English and Director of the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, which he founded, at the University of Birmingham, an Assistant Director-General of UNESCO and finally Warden of Goldsmiths´ College, University of London. But in addition to these mainstream roles he has undertaken a great many other prominent activities, largely in the public sphere, particularly in the fields of the arts, cultural matters, broadcasting and education. Amongst other positions he has served as: a member of the Albemarle Committee on Youth Services, a member of the Pilkington Committee on Broadcasting, Reith Lecturer, Chairman of the Broadcasting Research Unit, Vice-Chairman of the Arts Council, Chairman of the Statesman and Nation Publishing Co., Chairman of the Advisory Council for Adult and Continuing Education and member of the British Board of Film Classification Appeals Committee. He has published many books, articles and reviews, his latest full-length title being (at the time of writing) Mass Media in a Mass Society: Myth and Reality which appeared in 2004, has appeared in and contributed to numerous broadcasts and has lectured extensively around the world. Amongst the many academic distinctions awarded to Richard Hoggart over his lifetime by universities in several countries is the Honorary LLD presented to him by the University of Sheffield in 1999.
لینک مطلب: http://www.shef.ac.uk/library/special/hoggart
تاریخ دسترسی: 11/11/1393
Richard Hoggart: Cultural Critic and Educationalist /Open Democracy
Richard Hoggart, who has died aged 95, was one of Britain’s foremost post-war public intellectuals and cultural commentators. A literary critic by training, he published over thirty books and contributed to numerous policy documents, the sum of which represents an extensive and consistent engagement with normative questions and public discourses that continue to inform contemporary debates on a wide range of subjects, including popular culture, media literacy, educated citizenship, and social democracy.
Born in Leeds in 1918, Herbert Richard Hoggart was orphaned at the age of eight and subsequently raised as an only child by five adult relatives (his grandmother, two aunts, an uncle, and an older cousin) in a terraced back-to-back in Hunslet. Once a thriving working-class neighbourhood located just south of the city centre, the local habitation of Hunslet was to profoundly influence Hoggart’s later interest in working-class cultural habits, social rituals, and changing attitudes. His childhood was also to shape his enduring attachment to working-class cultural ideals and social practices and his emphasis on communal values and neighbourliness.
Like the lives of many working-class people who grew up in the urban north of England during the interwar period, Hoggart’s childhood was characterised by economic hardship and ‘having to make do’, an austere way of life that often depended on unofficial acts of charity, goodwill, and fellowship. As Hoggart himself noted more than once in his writings, ‘you had to stick together’. To fail to help one’s neighbours in times of need could result in their suffering and public humiliation, which could, in turn, all too easily befall one’s own family. Hence Hoggart’s oft-cited admiration for the friendly society tradition, a nineteenth-century, working-class mutual insurance institution built upon common need, public trust, mutual honesty, and social responsibility, in short, an individual and collective willingness to improve each other’s lot.
Hoggart’s childhood also explained his commitment to ‘the sense of family attachment’. Despite the emotional upheaval of having been orphaned and the isolation from his older brother and younger sister, Hoggart recalled the relief he felt when it was decided that he and his siblings would be cared for by the extended family rather than being sent to an orphanage: ‘We were “family” and we stayed family.’ This sense of ‘belonging to somebody’ resonated strongly in Hoggart’s writings. Time and again, he eulogised the family as a place in which we learn to love others, and not just to love ourselves. A family ‘can give us unique access to our own emotions, can constantly open the heart; if we will let it’. In other words, like neighbourliness, family life teaches us to be empathetic; in so doing, it broadens and enriches our social being and interpersonal connectedness.
This was lived experience that Hoggart took for granted, but it was to be challenged in the 1970s by academic sociologists who based an interpretation of family ‘structure’ in the Industrial Revolution on the assumption that industrialisation brought a transition from ‘normative’ to ‘calculative’ modes of working-class behaviour, only to be convincingly contradicted in their turn by the pioneer oral historian Elizabeth Roberts, whose research vindicated Hoggart’s ‘inherited’ knowledge. Family life, as Hoggart understood, thus provides a basis for a form of social responsibility that extends beyond contractual rights and obligations to a sense of shared moral and affective commitments, of feeling ‘members one of another’.
If ‘hearth and home’ was instrumental in shaping Hoggart’s deep-rooted sense of communitas, the world of ‘education and learning’ was to prove equally important in terms of his future commitment to critical discrimination in social and cultural matters. Despite failing the eleven plus examination he was educated at the local grammar school, thanks to a headmaster who thought Hoggart had talent and insisted the Local Education Authority (LEA) admit him to Cockburn High School. Financial assistance from the local Board of Guardians provided him with the opportunity to continue studying for his Higher School Certificate, a prerequisite qualification for entrance into university. Further assistance in the form of an LEA scholarship enabled him to take up a place in the English Department at Leeds University, where he was taught by Bonamy Dobree.
Under the tutelage of Dobree, Hoggart extended and refined his literary and analytical skills. Dobree also introduced Hoggart to different forms of social conduct and manners, many of which would have been unfamiliar to someone from a working-class background. The combination of cultural development and changing social habitus was to fill Hoggart with a deep ambivalence and uncertainty. On the one hand, education (meant here in the broadest possible sense) provided him with unimagined opportunities for learning and upward social mobility. On the other, education exacerbated his self-consciousness about class, not least his self-confessed obsession with his own cultural proficiency compared to that of his peers, many of whom were solidly middle class.
The experience of being betwixt and between two social classes, the consequent sense of loss and self-doubt, left Hoggart feeling ‘anxious’ and ‘uprooted’. This sense of unease and dissatisfaction was present throughout his childhood (a result of being ‘marked out’ among his peers from an early age), but it was accentuated as he became progressively detached from the vitality of his working-class past. Not unlike one of Matthew Arnold’s ‘aliens’, he was no longer one of ‘us’, but nor did he feel himself to be one of ‘them’, something he was to reflect upon when writing about his experience of being a ‘scholarship boy’:
Almost every working-class boy [sic] who goes through the process of further education by scholarships finds himself chafing against his environment during adolescence. He is at the friction-point of two cultures . . . As childhood gives way to adolescence and that to manhood this kind of boy tends to be progressively cut off from the ordinary life of his group . . . He has left his class, at least in spirit, by being in certain ways unusual; and he is still unusual in another class, too tense and over-wound . . . He is sad and also solitary; he finds it difficult to establish contact even with others in his condition.
This deep-rooted sense of alienation led Hoggart to transcend some of the ideas, customs, and habits both of the class to which he nominally belonged as a child, and the professional class he was to later join as an adult; he chose instead, adopting Arnold’s example, to be led ‘by a general humane spirit, by the love of human perfection’, to perfect one’s ‘best self’ not only for oneself, but also for the greater good. This also explains Hoggart’s refusal to follow any form of Marxism, despite his obvious socialist leanings: his version of socialism was ethical, rather than materialist, driven by a sense of fairness and shared entitlement, perhaps a secularized form of Christian Socialism. Hence his insistence that ‘we should feel members one of another, but also retain all we have of sparky, spikey individuality’.
After completing his undergraduate studies (and a rushed MA thesis on Jonathan Swift) Hoggart embarked on five years active service in wartime North Africa and Italy. Towards the end of the war he became involved in adult education, which also served as an opportunity to rekindle his three main intellectual interests: politics, documentary, and literature. His initial exposure to the world of adult learning was through the Army Education Corps and the Army Bureau of Current Affairs. It was here that Hoggart first witnessed the liberating experience of uneducated adults giving meaning to their lives in and through the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. As it was for many of his contemporaries who had a strong moral sense of social purpose (for example, Raymond Williams, E.P. Thompson, Roy Shaw, S.G. Raybould, Asa Briggs, to name but a few), the ‘Great Tradition’ was as much a calling as it was a career.
Not surprisingly, much of Hoggart’s writing during the immediate post-war period was for adult education journals, such as The Tutor’s Bulletin, Adult Education, and The Highway. Many of the articles were simply about ‘aims’, ‘first principles’, and ‘methods of teaching’. However, literature (poetry in particular) remained his main love. Apart from the writings of William Shakespeare, William Blake, Thomas Hardy, Henry James, George Orwell, D.H. Lawrence, and even the supposedly more ‘middlebrow’ J.B. Priestley, Hoggart was greatly influenced by a handful of living poets, among them T.S. Eliot, W.H. Auden, Dylan Thomas, Cecil Day Lewis, Stephen Spender, and Louis MacNeice.
Foremost amongst these was W.H. Auden, whose work Hoggart had first encountered in the 1930s. Although Auden’s reputation was waning by the late 1940s, his poetry continued to captivate Hoggart, who began writing a study of his work. The resulting book was published by Chatto & Windus in 1951. Auden: An Introductory Essay was not only Hoggart’s first monograph but also the first book-length analysis of the poet’s work. It marked the beginning of Hoggart’s career as a public intellectual too. Following some good reviews in literary journals and newspapers, Hoggart started to receive invitations to contribute to edited publications and to speak at conferences. He was even asked to broadcast a programme about Auden for the BBC.
Despite the success of this first substantial venture into literary criticism, or what F.R. Leavis once referred to as the ‘common pursuit of true judgement’, Hoggart’s approach to his subject was to change radically over the next few years. Partly as a result of his own intellectual restlessness and isolation from the mainstream but also because of his experience of teaching adult learners who readily challenged received wisdoms and pedagogic conventions, Hoggart began to rethink the importance of literature (or, more precisely, literacy), particularly in relation to the rapidly changing milieu of popular culture (or what he was to famously call ‘the newer mass art’) in what is undoubtedly his most celebrated and important publication, The Uses of Literacy.
Originally entitled The Abuses of Literacy, the book started out as a series of related essays and lectures about changes in working-class culture, especially in relation to publications aimed at a ‘mass’ market (for example, newspapers, magazines, sex and violence paperbacks). Unlike many of his contemporaries, who dismissed all forms of popular literature and art as vulgar and corrupting, Hoggart argued that it was important for literary critics and educationalists to base their judgements about the likely effects of such cultural forms on a more detailed understanding about ‘what people might make of that material’. Even those colleagues whom Hoggart admired, and who had written extensively on the popular arts (the Leavises for example), failed to understand the changing relationship between literature and society, because of their elitism and misplaced nostalgia for a mythical ‘organic’ pre-industrial culture.
Yet, along with the advances that had undoubtedly enhanced the overall quality of working-class life during the first half of the twentieth century (improved living and working conditions, better health provision, and greater educational opportunities), Hoggart saw a simultaneous undermining of traditional working-class attitudes and social practices, a worsening of a certain valuable ‘way of life’ that genuinely concerned him. He much preferred what he famously referred to as an urban culture ‘of the people’ to the ‘culturally classless society’ that he described as emerging from the 1940s onwards. Notwithstanding these concerns, Hoggart did not lament the complete decline or disappearance of an older working class, consistently maintaining that working-class people ‘still possess some of the older and inner resistances’.
My argument is not that there was . . . an urban culture still very much ‘of the people’ and that now there is only a mass urban culture. It is rather that the appeals made by the mass publicists are for a great number of reasons made more insistently, effectively, and in a more comprehensive and centralized form today than they were earlier; that we are moving towards the creation of a mass culture; that the remnants of what was at least in parts an urban culture ‘of the people’ are being destroyed; and that the new mass culture is in some ways less healthy than the often crude culture it is replacing.
An effective response to this process demanded the development of a set of analytical tools that would enable critics to interpret new technologies, media, and forms of social organization, and Hoggart argued that ‘the methods of literary criticism and analysis’ ought to be made ‘relevant to the better understanding of all levels of writing and much else in popular culture, and of the way people responded to them’. His objective was not merely to identify or even explain contemporary cultural practices, though, but to discriminate between them, to distinguish the ‘healthy’ and ‘less healthy’, and his work upheld the Arnoldian belief that people ought to have access to the ‘best’.
After brief spells as an extra-mural lecturer at the University of Hull, and as Senior Lecturer in English at the University of Leicester, Hoggart was offered a chair at the University of Birmingham. It was here that he established the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) in 1964, an interdisciplinary postgraduate research centre that sought to synthesize literary studies with sociological ideas and analytical methods. Though Hoggart’s personal instinct was to teach students a literary approach to understanding popular cultural texts (written and visual) the Centre soon established a reputation as a hotbed for critical theory, sustaining active, sometimes volatile, debates on Marxism, feminism, post-colonialism, and other politically engaged methods of analysis. The work of the late Stuart Hall was exemplary in this respect, and though he and Hoggart’s different approaches to popular culture complemented one another, and it was Hoggart who had recruited Hall, the latter’s influence on the Centre was to take it in a very different direction to that originally envisaged by Hoggart, who, by the 1970s, had in any case become increasingly occupied with cultural policy and administration.
In between publishing Uses, the setting up CCCS and his eventual departure for UNESCO (1971–1975), Hoggart was engaged in various civic duties. One of the earliest examples of his meteoric rise to fame as a public intellectual was the Lady Chatterley’s Lover trial in 1960, during which Hoggart appeared on several occasions as an expert witness for the defence, the publisher, Penguin Books. When asked if he thought the book ‘vicious’, Hoggart replied by famously declaring the book (and its author D. H. Lawrence) as ‘virtuous’, ‘if not puritanical’. Flummoxed by this paradoxical description, the prosecution soon collapsed and Hoggart was widely celebrated as the person that had turned the case around in favour of the defence, resulting in admiration and critical acclaim from literary figures. What’s more, it was his first of many run-ins with that body of people (for example, the clergy, social do-gooders, columnists, moralists) he was to call the ‘Guardians’.
The defining moment in Hoggart’s career was arguably the part he played in debating and influencing the recommendations of the Pilkington committee (1960-1962). Set up under the chairmanship of British industrialist Sir Harry Pilkington, in order to consider the future of broadcasting in light of the introduction of independent television in 1956, the resulting report severely criticised ITV for being too commercial and trivial in its programming; and it was largely because of this that the BBC was awarded a second channel. More crucially, whilst the report was unanimous in its recommendation, it was widely felt that Hoggart had exercised an undue influence during the course of the committee, prompting the press to dub the report the ‘Hoggart Report’. Even with Pilkington’s best efforts to assure the public that the report’s findings were based on facts, the report was rounded upon by the national popular press, which thought the report ‘nannying’, ‘elitist’, ‘grundyish’, ‘superior’, ‘schoolmarmish’.
The one sentence that all critics seized upon was the statement that reminded broadcasters that they were ‘in a constant and sensitive relationship with the moral condition of society’, which many took to epitomise the moralising tone of the report. However, Hoggart defended this particular clause on the grounds that it was intended to give broadcasters a ‘responsibility difficult to define but not easy to shrug off’. It was also a reference to the not unreasonable claim that, ‘the quality of the life of a society as expressed in its texture — its assumptions and values as bodied out in its habits and ways of life … will be reflected and to some extent affected by broadcasting as by other forms of mass communication’. It was an argument that Hoggart pursued whilst chair of the independent, plurally funded Broadcasting Research Unit throughout the 1980s, by which point he was a minority voice in his efforts to ensure that democratic broadcasting remained at the forefront of public and academic debate.
After retiring as Warden of Goldsmiths College (1976-1984), Hoggart continued to write from his home in Farnham, including a three-volume autobiography (collectively entitled Life and Times), which has been widely celebrated as a rich account of English life in the twentieth century. In it, he discussed the particular value and functions of the arts, the cultural expression of ‘Englishness’, and the ideas and aspirations of his generation, who witnessed unprecedented politico-economic turmoil and socio-cultural change. The three volumes established Hoggart’s reputation as an exceptional autobiographer and social chronicler who used his own life to analyse the experienced complexity of wide-ranging processes of cultural change.
Similarly, though he became increasingly preoccupied with the uncertainties of old age and thoughts of death, his final publication, Promises to Keep (2005), can be read as a critical commentary on the condition of England and a call to keep ‘going on going on’, with ‘hope’, with ‘love’ and with ‘charity’. And while his general argument may seem dated, sometimes patronising, and occasionally contemptuous, his criticisms against inter alia ‘dumbing down’, ‘levelling’, ‘relativism’ and ‘popularism’, represent an increasingly important engagement with the idea of public culture as a primary facilitator of democracy. This is particularly important in light of the current political climate, where the governmental usage of financial markets and private corporations would seem to be the preferred technique for regulating socio-cultural relations and processes.
Altogether, the uses of Hoggart are considerable and his work continues to inform our understanding of a variety of historical and contemporary lived cultures, literary forms and institutional practices. Whereas other cultural commentators have long since given up on the idea of ‘a culture for democracy’, Hoggart’s writings appeal to the best in each of us and remind us of that which we ‘do not yet know, and might not like, but should know for its sake and ours’. Above all, not unlike the example of Hector in Alan Bennett’s The History Boys, Hoggart’s gift is to teach us that culture and education are best understood as social, dialogical processes to which we all contribute, no matter how fleetingly. Hoggart’s own legacy is nothing but exemplary. ‘Take it, feel it, and pass it on’.
لینک مطلب: https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/michael-bailey/richard-hoggart-cultural-critic-and-educationalist-24-september-1918-10-ap
تاریخ دسترسی: 11/11/1393
Fred Iglis on Richard Hoggart/Times Higher Education
A leading light in the study of culture fought many battles that now need to be fought again
In his epoch-making book, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, Alasdair MacIntyre contends that in a time when it is so difficult to agree on a commonly held system of ethics, when our moral vocabulary is so fragmentary and disputable, the best way to live a good life – one of which one may be proud and one to be acknowledged as worthy and admirable by others – is to make of it something that has the properties of a work of art. That is to say, a good life will have a formal shapeliness, imaginative force, originality, purity. It will be as beautiful as time and chance permit, it will tell truths and shame the hordes of darkness.
What George Eliot calls “hidden lives” may certainly be works of art. But for a public life, lived in the glare of fame with all its attendant spite and sentimentality, to be a work of art demands of its author rare strength, natural grace, terrific stamina and more than a touch of innocence.
These opening cadences make it clear that in my judgement – and in the judgement of innumerable others who lived faithfully a hidden life – Richard Hoggart’s life indeed displayed the properties of a magnificent narrative fresco, telling how one might live well and with exemplary goodness in the years between the end of the First World War and the uneasy, incoherent first decades of the new millennium.
In any rehearsal of his life story it is bound to be hard to avoid plangent or wistful chords. No one, of course, would want to speak wistfully of the extreme exigencies of Hoggart’s early life set in acute poverty down by the dull canal and round behind the gashouse in Potternewton, in 1920s Leeds. Nor can one do anything other than shut one’s eyes in horror at eight-year-old Richard, then known by his first name, Herbert, coming home from school one day to find his mother, only in her thirties, coughing her tubercular life away on the rag rug in front of the living room range.
Her three children were distributed around the extended family; Bert went to Hunslet to a house full of women consisting of his grandmother, two aunts – one of them a volcanic termagant – cousin Ivy aged 20, and an amiable, mostly plastered, unemployable uncle. There he learned compelling class lessons, taught by way of home’s dense crowdedness, strict timetable, solid just-sufficient menu, sudden loud quarrels and patched-up peace. These heavy presences shaped, at best, beautiful qualities in its people: resilience, tolerance and quiet acceptance for sure, but also courage, intimacy, steadiness, loving kindness, and those mighty pillars of its best politics, solidarity, mutuality, defiance, dutifulness.
Hoggart himself would have wriggled a bit at an encomium such as this, and always preferred to uncover goodness in hidden lives from which one can take away, as W. H. Auden put it, the capital letters from the big words that make us afraid. Nonetheless, he built his life on those virtues, while adding to them the natural cheer and openness of his disposition.
It is part of Hoggart’s enormous achievement that all those who would recognise his name, whether or not they had read The Uses of Literacy, would know something of these originary virtues and the circumstances that nourished them. It was a happy if an obvious idea for Penguin to put an L. S. Lowry painting on the cover of a later edition of his great book. Lowry’s quiet, orderly, civic crowds are perfectly of a piece with the unpolitical, maternal safety of Hunslet, keeping at bay the hideous dangers of a politics almost wholly indifferent to the welfare of individual families such as the Hoggarts.
It has long been an axiom for the proper understanding of an intellectual oeuvre that life and work be kept methodically apart. The severity of this principle has however been much softened by historian Quentin Skinner’s insistence, guided by R. G. Collingwood, that a thinker’s thought can only be understood as answers to questions in the thinker’s mind, questions posed by the very particular circumstances of the historical life that is the subject matter to hand. The life’s work is to work out those life puzzles.
The life Hoggart studied and the life he lived can by this token not be told apart. Nor was it a merely personal topic; he wrote not about himself but about his social class, and about the way that that class – with an extraordinary lack of bitterness or resentment – bore the routine oppressions of pre-war capitalism.
Capitalism, not accidentally, is a word that scarcely ever appears in Hoggart’s work. When politically minded people first read The Uses of Literacy, they were baffled by the absence of strikes and blackened faces. On the contrary, what Hoggart recreated so affectingly was the patience, even the docility, of the British working class; the form of its patient, cheerful playtime – the club, the high tea, the jokes and dogged commonplaces – and then its sudden, selfless access of energy on behalf of those of its numbers who had the necessary talent and willpower to leave the rest behind.
This is the deep history of British emancipation during the 20th century, and my commemoration of this one life, which did so much to make that history intelligible and even admirable, also tolls a surly, sullen bell. For Hoggart’s embodiment of a moral fable going far beyond his individual success warns us that the hoped-for progress of his nation and its fissiparous peoples towards a common good and equally shared fulfilment has stalled; it has been, for a season, stopped in its tracks. Bloodthirsty old capital and horrible class greed have warped into inhuman distortion what once seemed, here at home, the feasible prospect of a goodish society.
When Hoggart, much inspired by his grandmother and his unforgettable teacher, Mr Harrison, took off from Hunslet and won admission to the University of Leeds, he discovered his path alongside Mary France, first and last love, poetess and teacher, by way of the incomparable liberation great literature always has on offer to those who find her. This conversion (for that is what it is) went with the young officer to war in North Africa and Italy. There, he learned the lessons of the equal fellowship of all poets, and had this life-shaping instruction confirmed daily by the routine terrors of enemy bombing, of (for Hoggart himself) fearful burns incurred and healed during the Sicilian invasion, and of renewing the pledge to the arts in the unexclusive company of the multilingual arts club in occupied Naples.
The superordinate pattern in the fresco of Hoggart’s life then outlines a diminutive figure going to its proper destination as a teacher in adult education, presager of The Open University and guardian of its nation’s culture by way of evening classes for all classes, not in search of training for a job but for enlightenment, moral enrichment even, for a loss of one’s mere local self in the thrilling freedoms and fearful, exhilarating truths to be found in, say, King Lear, Bleak House or Lines Composed a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey.
Out of these dogged and beautiful passages his great book began to take its several shapes in the writing space he contrived in the ramshackle garage shed hung with old carpets for a bit of warmth, in Marske-by-the-Sea in North Yorkshire, his beloved Mary indoors, little Simon and baby Nicola interrupting composition, Paul still to arrive.
The figure on the ground of the fresco is now fully formed but never still. Hoggart, inevitably, moved from outside the university walls to its heart, but always heading for its outlaw accommodation. After extramural teaching up and down the coast of northeast England, and straight lecturing at the University of Leicester, when he moved to a chair at the University of Birmingham, it was in order to design the guerrilla uniform of the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, whose very interdiscipline was to be the content and methods of all his own thought and writing, and the vast association of other writing that it had plainly implied. For a while, his centre seemed an image of the future of social thought and cultural criticism, including sociology, politics, ethics, literature, aesthetics, film and television in a common pursuit of true judgement as to old and new lives, and their meanings.
So when the offer came of appointment as assistant director general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation it deepened and confirmed the pattern of a life. He left the Birmingham centre in the commanding care of Stuart Hall, moved alike by a natural delight in being chosen for a part on the world stage, by his lively sense of public duty and by, goodness knows, an overpowering sense that he could now test out his tough and tender feeling for the sheer variety of human culture on a global scale.
In the event, Hoggart’s human sympathies were less enlarged than when, between 1970 and 1975, his stern principles of bureaucratic straightness were put to the test. Time and again, he ran up against gross venality, flagrant corruption and, for some colleagues, the danger of murderous reprisal from their home governments. All he could do was stick to his own guns and keep up the struggle to protect and conserve the amazing beauties of the wide world.
Finally, when meeting head-on unignorable and lying injustice, he took from his desk his long-prepared letter of resignation and came home to write his unservile affirmation of Unesco’s formative vision, An Idea and its Servants: UNESCO From Within.
For his last job, as is still keenly remembered by the college, he became warden of Goldsmiths, University of London. One or two people have spoken of this as a falling-off of his ambitions and talents. Not so. It perfectly fits our picture. Goldsmiths, spread out on its packed and tidy campus, is one best miniature of the British effort to conceive the good society. It provides a medley of courses and teaching, ranging from painting, sculpture and dance, to teacher training, instrumental music and computing, and claims to have the biggest media studies department in the country, started by Hoggart of course. The college is also a Babel of nations and tongues, Asian, African, Eastern European, Latin American, Italian, Cockney, Geordie, Irish, Scots, Welsh…there could not have been a happier expression of Hoggart’s lifelong fidelity to the ideals of a people’s education. He brought the college right up to the gates of full membership of the university, opposed for years by antique academic snobbery, and after eight years of 10-hour days, he retired.
He framed this vast and vivid picture of his life with 20 more years of writing and 11 more books, including his great three-decker autobiography, meanwhile much honoured and invoked in public life. Only his very last years were blemished and made incomplete by gradual dementia until, just last month, he died at 95. The work of art made by his life is now entire, and magnificent.
As with all great works of art, we then ask, what shall we do with it? Let us say, it is like a rich deposit of moral energy laid down in veins in our cultural morphology. Who is there who will draw on that energy? For many battles that Hoggart and his generation fought – for equal access to the riches of culture and education; for a decent respect between classes, colours, genders; for a generous and humane covenant between state and citizen – these battles are having to be fought again. What Hoggart’s hero, William Cobbett, named Old Corruption is back in ravenous business and the signs of the times are not propitious for beating down the vile monster.
Our academic duty is plain enough to read, however, and we cannot fail to read it in the life of Richard Hoggart. In any case, we are all of us pressed into service. The study of culture, as Hoggart’s old friend, Edward Thompson, used to say, is a way of struggle.
لینک مطلب: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/fred-inglis-on-richard-hoggart/2013087.fullarticle
تاریخ دسترسی: 11/11/1393
Who Is Richard Hoggart/ Goldsmiths University of London
Richard Hoggart was an trailblazing cultural theorist and former warden of Goldsmiths. His seminal book, 'The Uses of Literacy', was first published in 1957 and had an enormous impact on academic conceptions of mass media and cultural change.
Born in Leeds in 1918, Richard Hoggart was the warden of Goldsmiths between 1976 and 1984.
He was the first literary critic to take the working class seriously. He also played a critical role in the founding of Cultural Studies and in fundamental changes to how English and Media are studied. All three subject areas now thrive at Goldsmiths, and enjoy a global reputation. Hoggart was also a star witness for the defence at the obscenity trial of DH Lawrence’s ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’ in 1957.
Writing about his work in his autobiography, he said:
”The main currents of my interests have been: the right of wider access to higher education, the need for wider access also to the arts as themost scrupulous explorations we can make of our personalities and relationships, and of the nature of our societies; and, as a support to all this, the best uses of mass communications.”
Richard Hoggart died at the age on 95 in April 2014. His legacy lives on at Goldsmiths.
لینک مطلب: http://www.gold.ac.uk/richard-hoggart-building/whoisrichardhoggart/
تاریخ دسترسی: 12/11/1393
A Special Editorial, Herbert Richard Hoggart/ Taylor Francis Online, Cultural Studies Journal
It is with great sadness and affection that this journal remembers Richard Hoggart and acknowledges all that he did for cultural studies. Hoggart will always have a place of honour in the history of the field, particularly as it emerged in Great Britain. He was one of its founding figures, and the Uses of Literacy was one of the extraordinarily original texts that called cultural studies into existence. It was his vision and effort that established the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies and brought Stuart Hall to Birmingham. In our histories, we too often forget the imagination, courage and passion that it must have taken to put his reputation and career on the line for a project that few academics understood and even fewer supported.
In some ways, his biography propelled him into cultural studies. Born into an impoverished family in Leeds, Hoggart was raised by his grandmother and aunts. He was, to use a phrase he made famous, a ‘scholarship boy’, caught between two cultures and not quite belonging to either. The problems of family and community, of belonging and culture, never left him. His experiences in adult education after the war strengthened his sense of the importance of education and culture in the everyday lives of ordinary people, and he was fascinated by the role that culture was playing in the social transformation of English society. He started out as an Auden scholar, but his sense that culture, education and ideas mattered in a broader sense was perhaps the founding commitment of his vision of cultural studies.
According to the doxa of cultural studies, Hoggart's relation to the project ended when he left the Centre in 1969 to become Assistant Director-General of UNESCO. His institutional separation was reinforced by his discomfort with the Centre's turn to Marxism and structuralism, as abstract theories, as political definitions and as driving forces. But I have always thought that this story undervalues his contributions and fails to see his continuing commitment to his own version of cultural studies, a version that we expunge to our detriment. His long and prolific career as a writer always remained committed to meeting a unique combination of demands: to treat the ordinary and the quotidian with affection, warmth and respect, always tempered by careful attention and critical judgement.
I believe this sense of cultural studies guided him his whole life, and that he continued to write to further its project, even if no longer in the name of cultural studies. From the Uses of Literacy on, Hoggart was occasionally accused of nostalgia for an authentic sense of community and culture, but I think this charge is wrong-headed. The extraordinary accomplishment of the Uses of Literacy was to give expression to a deeply humane and humanistic sense of moral, intellectual and political possibility grounded in the lived realities of ordinary people, in the context of a rigorous effort to explore the concrete processes of cultural and social transformation. Hoggart believed that people make history but that ideas, knowledge and critical understanding were necessary if people were to be capable of being agents rather than objects of historical change. He was not blind to the need for theory although it had to be, as it should be in cultural studies, embedded within and engaged with the real world of lived relations. He feared, I believe, that theory was becoming the currency with which we measure the intellectual and political significance of our investigations.
Nor was Richard blind to matters of power, but he had a decidedly pragmatic and negotiated approach to the political. He was what I would call an ethical socialist, following in the tradition of the Fabian Society, who believed in the power of institutions and the importance of institutional leadership and change. He opposed both the sectarianism that accompanied many of the new theoretical and political directions of cultural studies (and other left formations), and the cultural debasement brought about by the new capitalist cultures. He was not interested in nostalgically defending the past but in keeping alive a vision of the possibilities of human and humane relations, a commitment to the importance of community and traditions in tempering the rush and shock of contemporary change, and in strengthening a democratic and educative possibility in both social policy and everyday life. He believed in the power of the state and of other cultural institutions to affect the directions of historical change and their impact on people’s lives.
For that reason (and no doubt others), Hoggart chose to enter into public service, devoting himself to culture, education and the arts. His faith in institutions was enacted in his decision to go to UNESCO rather than accept one of the attractive academic positions on offer; it defined his service to public broadcasting, including his key membership on the Pilkington Committee on Broadcasting, where he took a strong stand against the commercialization of television and the manipulative practices of advertising. But he was equally committed to the arts – he has the distinction of having been sacked from the Arts Council of Great Britain by Margaret Thatcher – and he served as a Governor of the Royal Shakespeare Company. And he was equally committed to institutions of education, exemplified in his service as Chair of the Advisory Council for Adult and Continuing Education, and in his eventual return to the academy as Warden of Goldsmiths.
Perhaps even more importantly, Hoggart chose to be a public, political intellectual. It began with his decision to write the Uses of Literacy, defining his own sense of responsibility to a broader public and to the demands of history, and continued in his moving and effective testimony in the 1960 trial over Penguin’s publication of Lady Chatterley’s Lover, which indirectly helped to fund the Centre. (I have to say that I love the fact that he is played by David Tennant in the film version of the trial, ‘The Chatterley Affair’!) Throughout his life, he continued to serve, in his writings and lectures, as a keen social chronicler and cultural critic, as a contributor to the democratic possibilities of the conversation of culture, as a participant in the processes of communication and dialogue that he thought constituted the possibility of what Raymond Williams called ‘the long revolution’. He wrote and spoke with a voice that was simultaneously humble and intelligent, warm and unsentimental. His was the voice of an urgent and humane pedagogy.
I hope that people will continue to read the canonical Uses of Literacy but as something more than a required founding text. There is much we have to learn from this and his other writings, from Speaking to Each Other and Only Connect to his three-volume autobiography, to Townscape with Figures and The Way We Live Now, to Everyday Language and Everyday Life, and Mass Media in a Mass Society. One need not agree with his analyses; one may not share his distinctive literary-critical voice; one may be irritated by his refusal to engage with contemporary theory. And one may all too easily and quickly reject his deep humanism and the touches of nostalgia for another more humane way of living, but I believe that doing so diminishes the project and possibilities of cultural studies, its sense of history and political imagination. And it diminishes as well the full measure of his contributions to cultural studies and contemporary cultural struggles. And I encourage people to use this journal as a forum for keeping Hoggart’s writings, thought and life as a public intellectual and institutional actor a visible, important and continuing ingredient of cultural studies.
My relation to Richard Hoggart was probably not typical. He was the director of the Centre during my time there in the late 1960s; I took his seminars, listened to his contributions during many of the Centre’s activities and had many valuable conversations with him. He took a generous interest in my researches into U.S. youth culture and popular music, and even helped me gain access to the BBC record library. And when I needed help making a life-changing decision, he opened his home, his life and his whiskey, to point me in what I am sure was the right direction. I visited with him whenever I could, and I stayed in touch with him even when we could not visit, and even when, late in his life, I was not sure he remembered me. I will miss Richard, the man, the teacher and the voice; the intellectual conversations around culture and social possibilities will be diminished by his loss.
لینک دسترسی: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rcus20/current#.VNseYi7dX2t
تاریخ دسترسی: 22/11/1393
Still Learning from The Scholarship Boy/Working-Class Perspectives
2014 is still young, but we have lost a handful of British working-class scholars and activists who have been pivotal for working-class studies and politics, starting with cultural studies legend Stuart Hall, who died in February. In March, Tim Strangleman noted that we lost two British politicians who have been especially important voices for the working class, Tony Benn and Bob Crow. And in April we lost Richard Hoggart, the infamous Leeds “scholarship boy” who was orphaned at eight but managed to study and work his way into an elite British academic class. He was one of the original founders of the Birmingham Center for Cultural Studies and his important 1957 work, The Uses of Literacy, is one of the founding texts of working-class studies.
Richard Herbert “Bert” Hoggart was born in Leeds in 1918, where his father, a veteran of Boer war, died just two years later. Hoggart was raised by his mother until he was 8, at which point his mother died of tuberculosis. At Hoggart’s mother’s funeral, an aunt quipped that “orphanages are very good nowadays,” but fortunately for Hoggart, he was sent to live with his grandmother.
Though Hoggart failed math, he eventually won a scholarship to Leeds University. He served in North Africa during WWII, and after the war he applied for nine assistant professorships and one job in the John Lewis department store. Eight universities turned him down, but the University of Hull hired him, and Hoggart he stayed there for 13 years. After an influential book on W.H. Auden in 1951 and The Uses of Literacy in 1957, Hoggart started the Birmingham Center for Cultural Studies in 1964 and hired Stuart Hall as his deputy director.
Hoggart’s legacy is important for us, because without Hoggart, it could be argued, there would be no working-class studies. The Uses of Literacy, exemplifies some of the core ideas and approaches at the heart of our field, starting with the idea of taking the working class and its culture seriously. As Sue Owens notes, The Uses of Literacy, “put the working class on the cultural map, not as objects of middle-class scrutiny but as people with a culture and a point of view of their own.”
According to Stuart Hall, Hoggart defined culture as “how working-class people spoke and thought, what language and common assumptions about life they shared, in speech and action, what social attitudes informed their daily practice, what moral categories they deployed, even if only aphoristically, to make judgments about their own behaviour and that of others —including, of course, how they brought all this to bear on what they read, saw and sang.” Hall’s summary would serve as a good description of much of the work now being done within working-class studies.
In The Uses of Literacy, Hoggart also provides a blueprint for the working-class academic memoir, the kind of writing that acknowledges that those who are born into working-class families but ascend to academia never completely shed a certain psychic pain and sense of dislocation. Hoggart wrote about how the scholarship boy is cut off from his parents and his community by the community’s perception that “E’s bright.” This kind work today is represented at its best by Barbara Jensen’s Reading Classes: On Culture and Classism in America and the essays in This Fine Place so Far from Home: Voices of Academics from the Working Class.
Hoggart’s work seems especially relevant in post-economic collapse America. While the Britain of his youth was terribly class bound, perhaps we are nearly as class bound today in the US, where class mobility is at an all time low. And, though class mobility was a necessity for Hoggart personally, it was also a sore spot. He hated prejudice against working-class people, but he did not celebrate the absorption of working-class culture into mainstream, Americanized consumer culture. He hated rock n roll, 1950s British “milk bars” (what in the US we called the soda counter in a drug store), and Hollywood films.
Oddly, Hoggart was at once a cultural conservative, privileging literature and literary criticism, and an institutional radical. In founding the Birmingham Center for Cultural Studies, he cleared the way for literature’s decline as the primary focus of English departments. According to the British writer Michael Bailey, “Hoggart argued that ‘the methods of literary criticism and analysis’ ought to be made ‘relevant to the better understanding of all levels of writing and much else in popular culture, and of the way people responded to them.’”
Though Hoggart was an institutional radical, he was not an activist. He claimed that he was different from E.P. Thompson in that he tended to “be a bit leery of people making public causes in the streets.” He wasn’t a public protester, and he had strong feelings about those who were: “The hairs rise on the back of my neck when I see a group of teachers chanting.” He believed he could make his greatest contribution as a writer.
In this sense, Hoggart has made an important contribution indeed, with such books as Teaching Literature (1963), Higher Education and Cultural Change (1966), Contemporary Cultural Studies (1966), Speaking to Each Other (1970), Only Connect: On Culture and Communication (1972), An English Temper (1982), and most recently, Mass Media in a Mass Society: Myth and Reality (2004).
Interestingly, Hoggart argued that the common thread in his written work was the idea that everyone has the right to be heard: “Their common source is a sense of the importance of the right of each of us to speak out about how we see life, the world; and so the right to have access to the means by which that capacity to speak may be gained. The right, also, to try to reach out to speak to others, not to have that impulse inhibited by social barriers, maintained by those in power politically or able to exercise power in other ways.”
Hoggart is now gone, just a few years shy of what would have been his 100th birthday (in 2018). But how many of us, and how many of our working-class students, today have a voice because this tenacious scholarship boy dared to transcend his class and then continued to fight for the right of working-class people to maintain and study their own way of life?
لینک دسترسی: https://workingclassstudies.wordpress.com/tag/richard-hoggart/
تاریخ دسترسی: 22/11/1393
درباره آثار ریچارد هوگارت:
Whose Candyfloss?/ London Review of Books
Richard Hoggart made much in his writings of the scholarship child’s uprootedness and anxiety, but his own dislocation had its limits. Although he went from a primary school in a poor part of Leeds to grammar school and on to university, Hoggart never really made what the novelist Storm Jameson, a generation ahead of him at the University of Leeds, called the ‘journey from the North’. After serving with the Royal Artillery in North Africa and Italy, he returned to Britain in 1946 and got a job in adult education, shuttling up and down the North Yorkshire coast to teach English literature. Several years later he moved to Hull as a lecturer at the university. After Hull it was Leicester, and then Birmingham.
Hoggart’s unmetropolitan trajectory was part of what made him famous. The Uses of Literacy, published in 1957, established him as an authority on the working class and its future. Through a combination of memoir and literary criticism (of popular fiction, songs and newspapers), he identified characteristics of ‘traditional’ working-class culture: supportive, neighbourly, sentimental, reflexively translating social or political questions into personal terms. He also purported to show that 1950s affluence and the ‘newer mass art’ – both of which were bound up with Americanisation – threatened this culture. Gangster fiction and sex-and-violence novels fostered moral emptiness; glossy magazines and pop songs invited consumers into ‘a candyfloss world’.
The book’s ideas took shape as Hoggart tried to win his evening-class students over to new ways of reading literature and to seeing advertising as something that could also be ‘read’. He was one of a large number of men and women who committed themselves to furthering the postwar expansion of secondary schooling and adult education and to the larger ambition of making art and literature part of ordinary life in a more democratic Britain. Many in this cohort who taught English drew their critical approach and teaching method – and their sense of belonging to a cause – from Scrutiny, the Cambridge journal driven by F.R. Leavis. Hoggart had no personal connection with Leavis and his circle, and did not share all their literary valuations: his first book was about Auden, whom Scrutiny had anathematised. In his teaching, though, he followed Leavis’s example. He focused on ‘the words on the page’, not background material, and made his students analyse pairs of unattributed poems and prose passages, pressing them to discriminate (a key word) between the living and the hollow.
The Uses of Literacy, like Raymond Williams’s Culture and Society, which appeared a year later, was a product of the tension between its author’s Leavisian methods and his un-Leavisian politics. The highly personal survey of working-class culture in the first half of The Uses of Literacy was a critique of the work of Queenie Leavis, whose Fiction and the Reading Public was less about readers than about the ways mass culture exploited them. Criticism of popular culture, Hoggart said, had to attend to the ‘wider life’ of ‘the people’ and ‘the attitudes they bring to their entertainments’. Where the Leavises saw manufactured sentiment, Hoggart discerned authentic values and emotional styles.
Hoggart made a case for the existence of a working-class ‘culture’, an argument that ran counter to the more literary and exclusive definition of culture propounded by the Leavises. Williams’s Culture and Society was a very different kind of book – a history of ideas about culture from the Industrial Revolution onwards – but Williams too insisted on the cultural resources of working-class life. In his manifesto Mass Civilisation and Minority Culture (1930), F.R. Leavis declared that human consciousness depended on the minority who could appreciate ‘Dante, Shakespeare, Donne, Baudelaire, Hardy’ and recognise their present-day successors. Williams suggested deleting Dante, Donne, Baudelaire and Hardy, and adding, among other things, committee procedure and the nature of wage labour.
After The Uses of Literacy, Hoggart’s main contributions to British culture were as a public intellectual, committee member and administrator. He gave an institutional home to cultural studies by establishing a centre for it at the University of Birmingham after he took up a chair there in 1962. As warden of Goldsmiths College in London he oversaw the creation of an influential media studies programme and an overhaul of teacher training. Between Birmingham and Goldsmiths he worked for Unesco in Paris. He never wrote anything else as ambitious as The Uses of Literacy, but the quieter books of his later career are wry and observant, and have a grace that might surprise anyone put off by memories (or rumours) of the moralism of The Uses of Literacy. His autobiographical trilogy – A Local Habitation (1988), A Sort of Clowning (1990) and An Imagined Life (1992) – dwells on the texture of everyday existence, the class nuances of habits of speech and thought, and the idiosyncrasies of places and people. Extended character studies, such as the one of Bonamy Dobrée, Hoggart’s mentor at Leeds, sit alongside deft cameos, like that of the Local Education Authority director who took an interest in the undergraduate Hoggart. (‘“I tell you what,” he said. “Come back in a week and let me know how you’ve got on. Off you go, lad.” The director of education as bluff Yorkshire mill-owner; another one from Central Casting .’) Unsurprisingly, Hoggart’s powers of observation and empathy weaken as the gap between observer and observed widens, most noticeably in his musings on students and the permissive society.
Memoirs of such length and depth can be a mixed blessing for a biographer: they are a resource but also cast a shadow. This is certainly the case with Fred Inglis’s book, which leans very heavily on the autobiographical volumes. Anecdotes that Hoggart supplies in his measured style, the punchlines and angular phrases carefully spaced out, are retold by Inglis with chatty extravagance. Inglis adds some astute judgments and possibly imagined details: Hoggart says the depot of a haulage firm where he worked as a night clerk was warmed by ‘a big old stove’; in Inglis’s book it becomes a ‘vast, gothic cast-iron stove’. But there isn’t much new information here. Inglis makes only sporadic references to the large and well-catalogued collection of Hoggart’s papers at the University of Sheffield, and none to other resources such as Hoggart’s correspondence with Dobrée or the archives of his publishers, Penguin and Chatto and Windus. The Hoggart shown here is almost always the public or published face.
So we don’t get much about Hoggart’s personal life (as an adult, anyway) or the relationship between work and family. Inglis is frank about this. ‘Recreating the necessarily private magnificence of the Hoggarts’ family life is impossible to me,’ he writes. ‘I don’t know enough and I haven’t the talent. But its actuality cannot be doubted.’ There is a contrast here with Inglis’s biography of Raymond Williams, published in 1995, which offered judgments about Williams’s marriage and his need to withdraw into a chilly inner world. (Critics accused Inglis of pretending to know more than he did.) Because he has spent only limited time in the archives, Inglis can’t say much about Hoggart’s professional life either. We don’t see the books and projects taking shape, or overhear exchanges between teacher and student.
Much of what Inglis has to say about the context of Hoggart’s life and work is clearly based on his own recollections of the times or on books read some time ago. This is one of the ways in which Inglis’s book unexpectedly resembles Our Age, Noel Annan’s group portrait of the post-1945 great and good: new characters are introduced with a splashy description; rankings matter (so and so was the best sociologist of the time); there are frequent hints that the author knows the people being described; and swathes of social, cultural and intellectual history are surveyed from memory. The effect is to reproduce received wisdom – or to make eccentric judgments sound like received wisdom.
In his account of Hoggart’s star turn in the Lady Chatterley’s Lover trial in 1960 – Penguin had been charged under the Obscene Publications Act for putting out an unexpurgated edition of Lawrence’s novel – Inglis dwells predictably on the Establishment snobbery personified by the prosecuting counsel, Mervyn Griffith-Jones. No one, as Inglis says, can resist quoting his rhetorical question to the jurors: was Lawrence’s novel the sort of thing they would wish their wives or servants to read? But the routine satirising of Griffith-Jones makes it harder to see what an achievement Hoggart’s performance was. Inglis thinks the prosecutor was ‘rattled’ by Hoggart’s characterisation of Lawrence’s attitude to sexuality as ‘puritanical’, and that he made a mis-step when he told Hoggart off for ‘lecturing’ the court: ‘You are not at Leicester University at the moment.’ Sybille Bedford, sitting in the gallery, felt that Griffith-Jones stressed the word ‘Leicester’. Hoggart too recalled a slight pause before Griffith-Jones named the university, ‘as if he had to recover the name of so insignificant a place from the depths of his memory’. Griffith-Jones’s attempts to needle Hoggart and his bafflement at the description of Lawrence as a puritan were probably premeditated, an attempt to establish solidarity with the jury through plain-speaking anti-intellectualism. In any case, the idea of Lawrence as a puritan wasn’t a wild one. Frieda Lawrence had called Lady Chatterley’s Lover ‘the last word in Puritanism’, claiming that ‘only an Englishman or a New Englander could have written it.’ Griffith-Jones presumably knew this, since the quip appeared in the preface to an American edition he had been supplied with.
Hoggart’s testimony in the trial further enhanced his standing at Penguin (The Uses of Literacy, like other popular non-fiction books of the time, such as Culture and Society and Michael Young and Peter Willmott’s Family and Kinship in East London, was read by most people in the Pelican edition). He became a member of Allen Lane’s brains trust. Hoggart turned to the publisher for funding when he was setting up the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) a few years later. Lane had to be persuaded by his senior adviser W.E. Williams, whose influence at Penguin was of a piece with the part he played elsewhere in the democratisation of British culture (he was successively secretary of the British Institute of Adult Education, director of the Army Bureau of Current Affairs and secretary general of the Arts Council). The way Hoggart remembered it, Williams said to Lane: ‘Oh, give him what he asks, Allen. You’ve made a fortune by riding cultural change without understanding it.’
In his inaugural lecture at Birmingham, Hoggart outlined a programme for CCCS that would combine the critical appraisal of films, popular fiction and the press with empirical research on the way mass culture was produced and consumed. The lecture was printed in the teachers’ journal Use of English, whose editor was Denys Thompson, a grammar school headmaster and former Scrutiny co-editor. Thompson was the person who did most to extend F.R. Leavis’s brand of literary criticism into the terrain of mass culture and to embed Scrutiny’s approach in secondary education. He didn’t see eye to eye with Hoggart, especially on the question of whether any good could come of television, but he took a latitudinarian approach and recognised that Hoggart and the late Stuart Hall, whom Hoggart had made his deputy at CCCS, were engaged in responsible and ‘discriminating’ investigations of mass-cultural forms. This broadly Leavisite project didn’t last for long. Within a few years, CCCS researchers, including Hall (who did most to define the centre’s culture, Hoggart having more to do with the English department and the university at large), became convinced that literary criticism couldn’t give them the theoretical understanding of culture and society that they needed. They looked instead to Weber, Durkheim and Karl Mannheim; structuralism and ‘Western Marxism’ came later. By the early 1970s, the centre’s research had become increasingly sociological and ethnographic, focusing on youth subcultures as sites of resistance to the dominant culture. CCCS retained a quorum of researchers in media studies and even literature, but they too were concerned with the operations of power and ideology; judgments about literary merit were beside the point.
Inglis’s account of the eclipse of Hoggart’s version of cultural studies is bitter and brief. It would have been good to hear more. Inglis himself read English at Cambridge in the late 1950s, supervised not by Leavis but by one of ‘the whole-hog admirers of later years’, in Denys Thompson’s phrase. He became a teacher, and in the late 1960s and 1970s was a prominent young champion of a Leavisian conception of English against the prevailing linguistic approaches to the subject in schools, according to which literature was one form of language use among many, to be studied alongside – or subordinated to – everyday kinds of writing and talking. He lectured in education at several universities before taking up a post in cultural studies at Warwick in 1989. His career, at least between the 1950s and the 1980s, illustrates, like Hoggart’s own, the ways in which a methodologically and politically restless ‘English’ reverberated between traditional centres of intellectual authority (Cambridge above all) and institutions such as adult education bodies, secondary modern schools, training colleges, newer universities and polytechnics.
As cultural studies became both more radical and more theoretical, its practitioners dissociated themselves from Hoggart. He was often compared unfavourably with Williams, a proper socialist and a proper theorist (recent champions of Hoggart such as Sue Owen have, in turn, played up his credentials as a theorist). And his celebration of a ‘women-centred’ world of working-class nurture became an object of feminist critique. Carolyn Steedman turned Hoggart’s genre-of-one against itself in Landscape for a Good Woman (1986), which works outwards from a scholarship girl’s memoir of a single mother who was ambivalent about her children and longed for ‘fine clothes, glamour, money; to be what she wasn’t’. In The Uses of Literacy, glamour was part of the candyfloss world that menaced working-class culture: it wasn’t part of that culture. Steedman’s objection wasn’t just to Hoggart’s moral assumptions, but also to his belief in the simplicity and passivity of ‘emotional life in working-class communities’. It was impossible to think seriously about the psychology of class and gender, about how working-class girls became working-class women, without breaking with Hoggart.
Inglis doesn’t go after Steedman, but other feminists appear here as bossyboots. At Goldsmiths, Inglis writes, Hoggart
recoiled, as well he might, from the sanctimonious and puffed-up play of pieties put on display by a group of fierce feminists offended by a drawing, part of the artist’s exhibition in the senior common room, of a big and beautiful female pudenda (belonging to the artist’s wife). The Warden condemned in the college newsletter the objectors’ ‘crass failure to respond to the beauty of line in the drawing, let alone its tender subject’.
No ‘man of his time’ talk here. Inglis isn’t a biographer who makes excuses or concessions in the hope of holding on to readers who may be sympathetic to some aspects of his subject but sceptical about others. He wants his readers to agree that Hoggart is ‘someone who has met the moral duty of the citizen to look out hard for the best parts of our history and has sought to make them tell in later generations’. For him Hoggart is the exemplar of a living tradition as well as a figure of historical significance. But while it makes sense to place Hoggart in a long debate about ‘the condition of England’, as Inglis does, his view of his society and his way of talking about it were part of a particular historical moment: the moment of army education, of the Butler Act, of Penguin, of Leavisism. Inglis’s gloominess about the state of the media and public life in contemporary Britain suggests that he doubts whether it is possible any longer to speak from the position of cultured authority that Hoggart occupied from the 1950s to the 1980s. It is also debatable how useful the tradition of cultural criticism in which Hoggart worked is for thinking about educational opportunity and the value of the arts and intellectual life now, in a very different media ecology and a more diverse Britain. For Inglis the story of the common room artwork illustrates Hoggart’s liberalism, but it also points to some of the limits of that mid-20th-century mode of thinking about culture and society.
لینک مطلب: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/christopher-hilliard/whose-candyfloss
تاریخ دسترسی: 12/11/1393
Richard Hoggart’s Legacy and New Uses of Literacy/ Roman & Littlefield International
Richard Hoggart, the innovative literary critic and pioneer of Cultural Studies, died aged 95 on 10th April 2014. Although several tributes have since appeared in the UK and US media, their scarcity and brevity have been somewhat disproportionate to Hoggart’s influence not just on academia, but on culture itself.
In this post, I want to reflect in a bit more depth and detail on Hoggart’s legacy. In writing this, my hope is simply to promote interest in what may be less familiar aspects of Hoggart’s work and their relevance to the present day. I also want to discuss some of Hoggart’s later, lesser known writings, and revisit some often-overlooked arguments in Hoggart’s most famous book, The Uses of Literacy (1957).
Hoggart was one of the first academics from a working-class background to make working-class life itself central to his research. Most unusually for a literary critic, his work bore an equal influence on both scholars and literary authors.
In first half of The Uses of Literacy, Hoggart wrote in close, often bleak detail about daily working-class life as he had known it in the Leeds districts of Potternewton and Hunslet. In the second half, he discussed the relationship of the working-classes to media, culture and literature. Hoggart critiqued how the working-classes were sentimentalised in songs, radio shows, and magazine stories – the cheapest forms of entertainments, which were all that most could afford. These, he asserted, failed to engage with the emotional and economic realities of working-class existence, and thus failed to speak for or even to the majority of the population. He also attacked tabloid newspapers for their overblown chumminess to readers, stressing that most such publications were increasingly being controlled by massive publishing magnates.
Although, by the 1950s, literacy rates for the working-classes stood at an unprecedented high, the majority of people, Hoggart argued, were being culturally short-changed. His intended title was ‘The Abuse of Literacy’. On being informed by lawyers that his manuscript was the most libellous they had ever seen, Hoggart redrafted the work (omitting many references to specific publications) and retitled it The Uses of Literacy: Aspects of Working-Class Life With Special Reference to Publications and Entertainments.
Hoggart and Literature
The cumbersome, dry title of Hoggart’s best-known work could hardly contrast more with the book’s content. In a series of beautifully-written chapters, Hoggart evoked the sounds, tastes, anxieties, philosophies and conversations of working-class life as he had known it in his Leeds upbringing. Parts of the study were drawn from an unfinished novel he had begun writing around 1946 (the manuscript of which has, sadly, never been recovered).
However, there was much more to Hoggart’s reminisces than mere description. His most distinctive technique was to adopt a literary-critical style of analysis to features of daily existence under poverty. In The Uses of Literacy, Hoggart treated what people ate, spent, enjoyed and feared not merely as symbolic, but as the lived consequences of much wider social and political forces.
Alan Bennett specified The Uses of Literacy as a crucial inspiration in his starting to write, because Hoggart had shown how seemingly ordinary working-class life can be made ‘the stuff of literature’. Hoggart’s influence is similarly apparent in the poems of Tony Harrison, one of whose most celebrated pieces, ‘Them and Uz’ [sic] references a chapter in Uses of Literacy and is partly dedicated to Hoggart.
Given Hoggart’s sometimes excessive hostility to mass culture, his work also showed influence in some more surprising areas. Tony Warren, creator of Coronation Street, told Hoggart personally that The Uses of Literacy was a key inspiration for the series.
Later generations of authors have commended him, too. The novelist and biographer D. J. Taylor recently paid tribute to Hoggart as a ‘hero’, whose work he first read in the 1980s, and whose death left him feeling desolate. (Taylor had also conducted Hoggart’s last interview, for a 2007 Guardian profile).
The New Uses of Literacy
As a tutor in Cultural Studies, some of the most original and successful work I have ever seen by students has been in direct response to The Uses of Literacy. I have recommended the book to students on modules including Life Writing, Poetry, Television Studies, Media & Politics, New Media and (though Hoggart would probably have disapproved) Theory.
Many students have told me in tutorials – though less often in seminars – that Hoggart’s commentary working-class home life still chimes with their own backgrounds. Yet while this sense of recognition might explain why I’ve seen so many students choose to focus on The Uses of Literacy in assignments, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it should so often lead to them producing some of their best work. Indeed, too close a sense of identification could be a disadvantage. But I think that what is happening here is simpler.
In short, The Uses of Literacy, though still resonant, is also in many ways dated. In the 21st century, Hoggart’s arguments can still be incisive, but only if we critically adapt them towards more contemporary examples. It is, however, worth doing this.
The Uses of Literacy and current politicians
One of Hoggart’s most pertinent discussions in The Uses of Literacy concerned ‘personalization’. In particular, this involved singers, radio presenters and comedians overblowing their credentials as ‘ordinary working people’. Since the working classes constituted the majority, personalization, as Hoggart discussed at length, was an insidious means of appealing to a maximum audience.
This process of personalization continues to be evident around us, but two things have changed since The Uses of Literacy was published. First, the exaggeration of ordinariness is no longer clearly based on working-class identity. It is now more likely in the media to take the form of a celebrity allowing his or her faults to be publically shown. In this process, public figures can be made to appear transparent and trustworthy.
The second change with personalization is that it’s not just entertainers whose PR crews carefully hone an image of ordinariness. It is now much more apparent in politicians, Nigel Farage being an obvious example. Widely publicised photographs of Farage holding a pint of beer conform to an older tradition in election-time iconography. But more sinister is his tactic of appearing humbly and “amusingly” tongue-tied at least once in most of his filmed appearances (a habit proven winsome by Bush and, subsequently, Boris Johnson).
The relevance of Hoggart’s observations in The Uses of Literacy here is that they illuminate elements of how powerful individuals seek trust. Increasingly, politicians are entertainers. This can be less a matter of appearing on, say Have I Got News For You than of performing in a superficially hapless manner for a moment or two in most public appearances, guaranteeing repeated showings of a politician’s seemingly harmless, supposedly genuine side.
Of course, various writings in Media Studies, old and new, can expose such processes of the mass media; but The Uses of Literacy is a particularly prescient example.
The Uprooted and Anxious: When Experience and Expectation Clash
One of the most enduring sections of Uses of Literacy remains Hoggart’s chapter on the ‘uprooted and anxious’. The uprooted are those who are born into working-class families, but later find themselves working and/or living in middle-class settings. Hoggart wrote extensively on how working-class experiences are often asymmetrical to middle-class expectations. The result for many, he suggested, was an often painful self-consciousness surrounding manner, dress and conversation; for many, this could lead to painful introversion.
The uprooted are epitomised in Hoggart’s 1957 text by ‘The Scholarship Boy’ – a figure based on his own experience as a working-class grammar-school boy and later, university student and academic. But Hoggart was writing in the decade after the 1944 Butler Education Act. In making the Eleven-plus compulsory in most state schools, this Act led to unprecedented numbers of working-class youngsters attending grammar schools and universities. It also meant, Hoggart warned, that the British education system was sifting out the most critically-minded (and thus, potentially radical) youngsters from the working-class, to be groomed by the grammar-school system towards bourgeois ideals.
Hoggart later said he received more correspondence from readers about his narrative of the scholarship boy than he did about any other aspect of his work. On one occasion, a troubled young man travelled from Germany to Hoggart’s home, convinced that the author was the only person in the world who understood the anxieties he was facing.
Although Hoggart concentrated particularly on class and education (and in a clearly gendered way), his discussion of uprooting can still provide a valuable counterpart to theories of social identity and ‘passing’. His commentary can also be made relevant to further aspects of the self, including nationality; race; sexual identity; and gender. (My own current research adapts aspects of Hoggart’s commentary to consider factors of class as part of the social anxieties faced by adults with Asperger Syndrome and ‘high-functioning’ autism. I am also discussing the process of autism diagnosis in adulthood as a form of uprooting).
Hoggart was almost forty when he wrote of his own ‘scholarship boy’ complex, and his acute awareness of how his background differed from those of many of his academic peers never seemed to fully leave him. His later autobiographies gave far less detail on his achievements than his insecurities. In his last memoir, written as his memory was beginning to fail – Hoggart suffered with dementia in his final years – recollections of how working-class self-consciousness sometimes damaged his confidence still keenly punctuate the narrative.
Writing of an academic conference in which he participated decades into his career, Hoggart recalled: ‘I felt like a mongrel among thoroughbred bulldogs.’ Hoggart suggested that a working-class background might render some students and academics uneasy with face-to-face scholarly debate, because ‘they do not so easily distinguish between a quarrel and an equable argument, and fear the second may develop into the first.’
Quarrels and ‘rows’, Hoggart once said, were a continual, ‘terribly unhappy’ part of his childhood in a small house shared with his Grandmother, two aunts (one of whom ‘had a violent temper’) and an uncle (who ‘took to the bottle’).
A limitation of Hoggart’s writing on class was that it focused somewhat insularly on his personal observations. Consequently, as in his discussion of academic quarrels, he sometimes appeared to be generalising patterns that may have actually been more particular. Writing The Uses of Literacy, Hoggart utilised his experiences of living or working mainly in Leeds, but also areas of Hull, Manchester and Sheffield. Had he spent time in Liverpool, where his late mother was raised, his definitions and discussions of working-class life might have been more diverse regarding nationality, race and religion. A most problematic gap in his discussion of the working-classes was his failure to consider immigrant workers.
It is also telling that most authors to claim Hoggart as an inspiration have been male. A most anachronistically unquestioning section of The Uses of Literacy is Hoggart’s portrait of working-class women. His lengthy discussion of working-class mothers begins by stating that these are individuals of whom ‘once can have little but admiration’. But while Hoggart’s commentary on working-class housewives was undeniably loving – and he was raised without a clear father figure – it was, in places, conspicuously presumptuous and patriarchal. For example, Hoggart asserted in The Uses of Literacy that the father’s position as the boss and ‘master of the house’ was a tradition which housewives would not want to see changed.
Aside from Hoggart’s overlooking how this made working-class women the most burdened people of all, such passages exemplify a deeper problem in The Uses of Literacy. At times, Hoggart celebrated the strength and dignity of the oppressed and the exploited, rather than questioning the wider systems that kept people in such positions.
Hoggart and the Left
Hoggart’s first book was Auden: An Introductory Essay (1951), one of the first extended studies of the poet. Although clearly admiring of W. H. Auden’s work, Hoggart’s monograph criticised him on one particular point. While he appeared broadly sympathetic Auden’s Marxist stance in some of the poet’s 1930s works, Hoggart asserted that Auden was nonetheless guilty of a ‘bourgeois idealisation of working-class life.’
This observation proved prescient. Within The Uses of Literacy (his second book), Hoggart gained himself several critical enemies by characterising most Marxists as ‘middle class’, and reasserting that they overestimated the radical sympathies of the working class.
Numerous Marxist critics (most scintillatingly, Colin Sparks) would later attack Hoggart’s assumption that the working-classes were predominantly apolitical. But in this way, Hoggart’s harshest Marxist critics may have missed the point. Although not a Marxist, Hoggart was himself firmly Left-wing, and reiterated throughout The Uses of Literacy that he was, quite urgently, concerned about a seemingly widespread passivity amongst the working classes. He referenced his own background, and scrutinised the relationship between mass media and working-people, because he felt the reasons for supposed apoliticism needed to be better understood.
Hoggart wrote in 1990: ‘I am a once-born socialist and will remain one’. He quietly belonged to the steadily expanding tradition of alternative honours in British society, refusing a knighthood, and later, a peerage. But Hoggart’s ideals often seemed decidedly more moderate than what might be expected of a ‘once-born socialist’. His late son, Simon Hoggart, wrote in 2013 that his father had rejected communism once the tyrannies of Stalin and Mao had been exposed. Richard Hoggart wrote in 1978 that he considered himself ‘a reformer rather than a believer in revolutionary change’. He demonstrated commitment to these ideals through relatively orthodox routes of committees and quangos.
However, Hoggart was often the most radical (and influential) member of such organisations. In 1976, he became Vice Chair of the British Arts Council – a post from which Margaret Thatcher sacked him in 1981. Hoggart had an impressive track record of swaying panels towards his views on culture and its importance for the working classes.
Hoggart’s influence on culture and its study
In 1960, Hoggart was one of nine academic witnesses called to the Old Bailey to defend Penguin Books against charges of obscenity. Penguin had recently attempted to publish an unexpurgated edition of D. H. Lawrence’s 1928 novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover. It was Hoggart who most boldly and successfully defended the novel.
He was similarly influential in the creation of BBC2. As part of the Pilkington Committee on Broadcasting (1960-62), Hoggart successfully argued that the next television channel introduced in Britain should be non-commercial, and should offer educational alternatives to mainstream programming.
He was also one of the two major pioneers of Cultural Studies as an academic discipline in Britain. On being appointed Professor of English at Birmingham University in 1962, Hoggart, with Stuart Hall, co-founded the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies. Defining what ‘Cultural Studies’ actually meant, Hoggart explained in 1963 that it should involve a combination of historical, sociological, philosophical and, at the core, literary approaches to texts. And, as Hoggart had shown in The Uses of Literacy – not unlike Roland Barthes in France, writing at the same time – anything can be a text, and used to illuminate wider social and political patterns.
Hoggart’s Later Years
In 1984, Hoggart retired from his final academic post as Warden of Goldsmith’s College, London, and continued writing prolifically. However, in contrast with his two main contemporaries in Cultural Studies, Stuart Hall and Raymond Williams, Hoggart resisted close engagement with literary and cultural theory. By the 1980s, this refusal meant that Hoggart’s work lagged behind not only the thinking of fellow academics, but many students, too.
By 2003, The Uses of Literacy was, for the first time, out of print in the UK. Nonetheless, Hoggart’s Mass Media in a Mass Society was published in 2004. Its most substantial chapter compared media responses to the deaths of five women from 1997-2002: Princess Diana, Jill Dando, Paula Yates, Princess Margaret and the Queen Mother. Although his commentary on these representations was actually quite vague in discussing gender itself, Hoggart’s various observations in this little-known chapter on media and class may still interest researchers focusing on media coverage of death and celebrity.
An abiding feature of Hoggart’s work, whether in print or on committees, was his tendency to support – sometimes riskily – his arguments by citing personal experience. In this way, most of Hoggart’s work was, in some deep sense, autobiographical.
Yet, in his acclaimed three-volume autobiography Life and Times – subtitled A Local Habitation (1988), A Sort of Clowning (1990) and An Imagined Life (1991) – most of Hoggart’s narrative is actually less devoted to himself than to those who surrounded and influenced him.
In The Uses of Literacy, Hoggart cited the sayings of his Grandmother, local shopkeepers, and singers in working-men’s clubs as readily as he did quotes from Shakespeare, Arnold and Orwell. Defending Lady Chatterley’s Lover in court, Hoggart referred to his former workmates on a building site with as much pertinence as he did to Lawrence himself. Though the academic and autobiographical often merged in Hoggart’s work, both elements contained a serious commitment to the cultural welfare of others – most immediately, the working classes.
However, towards the end, Hoggart utilised personal experience and observation to reflect on another vast, yet problematically marginalised social group: the elderly. Hoggart’s final published writing appeared in September 2005, the month of his 87th birthday. This was a fourth memoir, Promises to Keep: Thoughts in Old Age, but – somewhat symbolically – it was not presented as a nominal addition to Hoggart’s Life and Times series. Promises to Keep was not merely a record of further (and nearer) memories, but a quietly questioning, tacitly anxious reflection on memory itself. It also presented a series of haunting observations on a society and culture yet to adequately recognise the individuality, needs, and sheer numbers of people past the age of 80.
Hoggart lived to see the beginnings of a renewed interest in his achievements. International conferences on his work took place at the University of Sheffield in 2006, and Leeds Metropolitan University in 2009. Hoggart has since been the subject of scholarly books by Michael Bailey & Mary Eagleton, Sue Owen, and Fred Inglis. In 2010, Penguin reissued The Uses of Literacy.
Richard Hoggart died on 10 April 2014, leaving behind a far-reaching legacy of eccentric, uneven, but in so many ways, vital work.
لینک مطلب: http://www.rowmaninternational.com/news/richard-hoggarts-legacy-and-the-new-uses-of-literacy
تاریخ دسترسی: 12/11/1393
The Uses of Literacy: Aspects of Working Class Culture/ The Independent
Richard Hoggart was once described as "today's Ruskin" and is given to quoting Ruskin's maxim that "the greatest thing a human soul ever does in this world is to see something and tell what it saw in a plain way". It is this unadorned style that makes this work so gripping, holding a window up to working-class life while also asking, "What is the working class?"
Hoggart was born in the back-to-backs of Leeds to an impoverished widow mother who died when Hoggart was eight, leaving him in the care of his grandmother. He went to grammar school and secured university scholarships, rising to become an academic. In this book he skilfully threads together personal recollection with theoretical reflection, drawing on apt quotations from historical thinkers.
First published in March 1957, The Uses of Literacy feels just as resonant more than 50 years later, with an entertaining foreword by Hoggart's son, Simon, and a probing, passionate introduction by the writer Lynsey Hanley, who writes: "Without self-respect, [Hoggart] argues, you are open to the denigration and exploitation by those who see opportunities in human vulnerability." Divided into two halves, "An Older Order" and "Yielding Place to the New", the book vividly evokes the lives of working-class people between the 1930s and 1950s, capturing the causes and effects of rapid social transition. The book was originally to be titled "The Abuses of Literacy", and this is a pervasive theme. Hoggart attacks "mass publicists" for creating a "hedonistic group individualism", and tackles the way that popular culture is regarded by those who produce it.
Despite the social and economic transformations, thousands still recognise the life depicted – we should be closer to a classless society, but are not. This book holds reasons why that might be so – and the poignant chapter on the "scholarship boy" is not to be missed.
لینک دسترسی: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/the-uses-of-literacy-aspects-of-workingclass-life-by-richard-hoggart-1811039.html
تاریخ دسترسی: 22/11/1393
Working-Class Hero/ The Guardian
From angry young man to grand old man of cultural studies, Richard Hoggart influenced generations of writers and thinkers with The Uses of Literacy. To mark 50 years since publication, DJ Taylor meets the author.
Fifty years ago this month, an obscure lecturer in Hull University's adult education department was surprised to find his opinions prominently displayed across the pages of several popular newspapers. No doubt about it, the Daily Herald declared, in a lead review of his newly published The Uses of Literacy, Richard Hoggart was "an angry young man". Following up the story 24 hours later, it printed a quiz-cum-questionnaire inspired by Hoggart's thesis and affecting to explore contemporary social attitudes. Mystified, but not ungrateful, Hoggart moved on to the next stage of a career that would see him become assistant director general of Unesco and the grand old man of what might be called English literary sociology.
A modern equivalent of the Herald splash would be a full-page profile of, say, Terry Eagleton in the Daily Mirror. But this was the 1950s, a time when writers - particularly writers with strong views about post-war social development - were objects of intense public scrutiny. The "Angry Young Man" had been climbing his way up the tabloid north face since the opening night of John Osborne's Look Back in Anger nine months before. Serious newspapers, meanwhile, had identified a phenomenon known as "the limited revolt of the intellectual against the welfare state". There was also something called the "New Left", of which the Angry Young Men were supposed to be a part, and a rash of "declarations", in which young writers aired their views on Suez, the Bomb and other Eden-era talking points. All this realised a torrent of publicity in which, for a brief moment, highbrow contributions to the field of cultural studies by middle-aged academics - Hoggart was already edging 40 - were guaranteed a coverage usually reserved for milk bars and Tommy Steele.
Half a century later, Richard Hoggart and I are sitting in the front room of his small house on the margins of Norwich city centre talking about The Uses of Literacy's reception, and in particular the large number of grand academic panjandrums piqued into disputing its merits. "FR Leavis couldn't ignore it, of course," Hoggart recalls, "but he did say that he thought I should have written it as a novel." And what about Mrs Leavis, the redoubtable QD, herself a sharp operator in the Hoggart field? "Oh, she said, 'Richard Hoggart has climbed to wealth and success on my shoulders.'" Then there was the Cambridge lecture after which a Leavis acolyte produced the deadly insult - made even more deadly by its framing as a rhetorical question - "Are you the would-be intellectual's JB Priestley?"
You imagine that Hoggart gave as good as he got in this exchange. At 88 - wiry, white-haired and animated - he gives a distinct impression that he wouldn't suffer a fool gladly. Appearing at a time when English Cultural Studies, that distinctive compound of literature, sociology and moral uplift pioneered by Raymond Williams and EP Thompson, was just getting into its stride, The Uses of Literacy whipped up a terrific cross-disciplinary storm. Not only did it define an area of cultural enquiry that had hitherto barely existed; it also established a context that no discussion of the new wave of late-1950s northern writers - John Braine, Alan Sillitoe, Stan Barstow, Sid Chaplin - could ignore. Above all, there was its timeliness. Suez's shock-waves were still resounding through the body politic; the "affluent society" had just been proven to exist; mass communications were revolutionising print and visual media; and here was a former scholarship boy, a classic deracinated intellectual in the Lawrence mould, examining, in warm and punctilious detail, some of the fatal consequences of affluence on the processes of ordinary life.
It is important not to oversimplify what was quite a complex position. With regard to the social commentators of the following decade, Hoggart was not simply wringing his hands over the decay of a certain kind of working-class life and its incremental replacement by the shiny barbarism of mass-produced goods, American gangster films and Tin Pan Alley. His argument, as he patiently explained, is not that there was in England one generation ago an urban culture still very much "of the people" and that now there is only a mass urban culture. Rather it is, as the mass publicists say, that we are moving towards the creation of a mass culture; that the remnants of what was at least in part an urban culture "of the people" are being destroyed; and that the new mass culture is in some important respects less healthy than the often crude culture it is replacing.
Neither is his attempt to answer the question "Who are the working classes?", which occupies the opening section of the book, straightforward sociology. It blends scraps of literature, popular song, cheap journalism, personal observation and scenes from Hoggart's own early provincial life into an almost psychological investigation. This is aimed not at discovering how much the working classes earn or to what they aspire, but - a more fundamental enquiry - how they think. For all his interest in communality, Hoggart is careful not to make too many claims for working-class solidarity. The landscape he describes is more or less homogenous, tight-knit, rooted in the world of the family hearth, the back yard and the street corner, remote from considerations of public life, unambitious, laisser faire, but infused with a strange spirit of "decency" - to Hoggart, as with Orwell, the desideratum of human life.
Opposed to this, and relentlessly breaking it down, are not merely the wool-pulling suavities of the ad-man and sensationalist literature, but less immediate factors such as the educational opportunities that, ironically, had allowed Hoggart and thousands of people like him to make their way in the world. Along with the composite portraits of "mother" and "father", the scholarship boy, promoted out of his natural milieu by intellect but denied any satisfaction in his new life by social uncertainty, is one of the most finely observed of Hoggart's working-class types. As for the final picture, Hoggart's "ordinary people" are growing richer, less constrained by their environment, more likely to quit the monotony of factory or foundry, better able to spend their leisure time as they choose. And yet it seemed to the author "that the changes described in the second half of the book are, so far, tending to cause the working classes to lose, culturally, much that was valuable and to gain less than their new situation should have allowed". To reduce the argument to its most basic level, thraldom at the hands of the Means Test and the Public Assistance Committee was about to give way to thraldom at the hands of mass entertainment.
All this seems uncannily prophetic of developments in late 20th-century mass culture. "I just thought it said some things that needed saying," he says now. But the impact of the Hoggart thesis on later students of post-war Britain cannot be overestimated. No survey of 1950s social trends - see for example the recent studies by Dominic Sandbrook and Peter Hennessy - lacks its half-dozen references to Uses or omits subservience to the Hoggart line. Almost singlehandedly, he established a tradition which every working-class novelist who followed in his path seemed to illustrate or magnify. Thorpe the declassed lecturer in David Storey's Flight into Camden (1960), Billy Fisher's comic turn in the pub variety contest in Keith Waterhouse's Billy Liar (1957), Arthur Haggerston's mother in Sid Chaplin's The Day of the Sardine (1962) singing popular songs as she goes about her housework: each of these vignettes of northern working-class life has an echo, or an amplification, in Hoggart. When the knowledgeable undergraduates in AS Byatt's Still Life (1985), set in the Cambridge of the late 50s, sit down to discuss working-class culture they do so in terms effectively established by Hoggart. Simultaneously, his influence extends to altogether remoter rungs of the cultural ladder. Leafing through the HMV CD racks not long ago, I came across an American rock band called Death Cab For Cutie. This clearly derives from a number performed by the Bonzo Dog Doodah Band in the Beatles' Magical Mystery Tour. The Bonzos borrowed it from the title of a spoof American gangster film invented by Hoggart to symbolise what he called the "invitations to the candy floss world".
Not everything in The Uses of Literacy entirely convinces. Its catchment area, confined to the northern working class can seem uncomfortably narrow. Although published in the late 1950s and discussed and promoted as a quintessential 50s artefact, its locus classicus looks to be a good quarter-century earlier; the less fragmented working- class environment which Hoggart holds up as his exemplar was probably on the way out a couple of decades before he set to work. A district health inspector who read the encomia to "a good and comely life, one founded on love, affection, a sense of the small group if not of the individual" would probably want to suggest that at certain times a sense of the small group, if not the individual, is a poor substitute for free orange juice and penicillin.
Significantly, the occasional gusts of mild sentimentalising never transfer to Hoggart's memories of his own life. Some of Uses' sharpest vignettes are autobiographical, grim, poverty-haunted images from the hungry 20s and the Slump: the young Hoggart hiding his mother's packet of Woodbines in a drawer when the "Guardians" come to call, in case she should be thought to squander charity; the middle-aged bachelor miner who, whenever he bought a drink in the working man's club, gave the teenage Hoggart half-a-crown out of the change with the instructions to "spend it on thee education". In the end its contents boil down to a disguised autobiography written by a socially mobile but environmentally rooted man, who not only believes in the primacy of "value" but imagines that some kinds of lives are "better" for the people who lead them than others.
"It's a very puritanical book," Hoggart says, with what seems to be a glint in his eye. It depends what you mean by Puritanism. Certainly, The Uses of Literacy employs a vocabulary that would have most of today's cultural relativists flinging up their hands in horror: its key words are "decency", "crude", "healthy", "weakening", "trivial" and "serious". It is also intensely prefigurative of the havoc wreaked on English popular culture - defined as the culture devised by ordinary people for themselves - by the mass culture imposed on them from above in the second half of the 20th century. Does he think that "popular culture" still exists? "All gone" Hoggart confirms. As for the "mass entertainment" of the TV soap and the agony column, Uses lines up with DH Lawrence in thinking it "anti-life", full of "a corrupt brightness, of improper appeals and moral evasion", in which "progress" means "materialism" and "equality" can be decoded as "moral levelling".
These productions belong to a vicarious, spectators' world; they offer nothing which can really grip the brain or heart. They assist a gradual drying-up of the more positive, the fuller, the more cooperative kinds of enjoyment, in which one gains much by giving much. They have intolerable pretensions; and pander to the wish to have things both ways, to do as we want and accept no consequences.
This, you will note, was written in 1957, but it sounds uncomfortably like a description of a modern TV reality show or celebrity magazine. For all its insistence on the value of "community", The Uses of Literacy is, ultimately, a defence of individual freedom and integrity. "We all need to remember, every day and more and more," Hoggart writes in his introduction, "that in the last resort there is no such thing as the common man." The "problem" he defined - "acute and pressing" as long ago as 1957 - was how to preserve the ordinary person's room for moral manoeuvre in a world where individual sensibilities were routinely menaced by the centralising tendencies of the machine age. The mass cultural tide has swept over our national life, and all we can do is adapt to the consequences. As Hoggart's masterpiece continues to remind us, it is still possible to regret the debris left behind in its sleek, anaesthetising wake.
لینک دسترسی: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/feb/24/society
تاریخ دسترسی: 22/11/1393
- Hoggart,R., (1957),The Uses of Literacy,London: Chatto &Windus.
- Hoggart, R., (1989), Life and Times: A Local Habitation 1918-40,Vol. 1,London: Chatto & Windus.
- Hoggart , R., (1995), The Way We Live Now, London: Chatto & Windus
- Hoggart, R., (1999), First & Last Things, London: Aurum press.
- Hoggart, R., (2003), Everyday Life & Everyday Language, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
- Hoggart, R., (2001), Between Two Worlds: Politics, Anti-politics, and the Unpolitical , New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
- Hoggart, R., (2004), Mass Media in a Mass Society, A&C Black.
- Hoggart, R., (2005), Promises to Keep: Thoughts in Old Ages, London: Bloomsbery Publishing.
- Raymond Williams
- Stuart Hall
- F. R. Leavis