Survey Research Book

This classic text from the Birmingham CCCS offers a comprehensive semiotic analysis of the punk movement as a case study in the spectacular nature of subcultures. Hebdige posits that style in subcultural formations in England function as a form of protest against power structures, transforming the meaning of objects from their original use-based definitions into a visual revolt against a classist society entrenched in tradition. Hebdige assumes that the fashions of the punks, mods, teds, and rastas can be explicated using semiotic analytic techniques. He also assumes that a class-based political structure shapes the worldview of the subculture members.

Hebdige initiates the discussion with a definition of three key terms. In 1969, the definition and usage of the term culture was undergoing a transformation in Britain with the introduction of Marxist theory. Culture transitioned from the primarily historical dimension of the study of relationships changes to incorporate a strongly political dimension described as the study of relationships in conflict. Ideology descended below the level of consciousness under the same Marxist influence, transforming from a set of agreed upon beliefs and approaches to an insidious system of principles, far more effective because it is subconscious and thus naturalized among members of society. Finally, Hebdige brings in the Gramscian notion of hegemony to unite culture and ideology in an uneasy relationship guiding the functions and development of society. This sets the stage for his development of spectacular subcultural style as a form of protest to this hegemonical system.

Hebdige keeps to the semiotic tradition of interrogating visual signs in society as a mythic text to be deciphered, and uses the textual analytic techniques employed by Barthes and others. He also includes references to previous theoretical texts to develop his arguments, framing the work in a historical context. Hebdige's tendency to neglect the perspectives of the subcultures he was studying not only goes against the social scientific origins of the term subculture as originated by the University of Chicago, but has prompted criticism in recent years to make the argument that qualitative research is needed to back up Hebdige's and others textual analysis. Hebdige's investigation of motivations is constrained by his lack of qualitative research'he speculates on the reasons for teds' involvement in race-based attacks, but doesn't delve deeply. Similarly, his discussion of West Indian culture is limited by a a model that at times casts the Black Man as little more than a metaphor, at the expense of a more sophisticated investigation of relationships between the different subcultures.

Hebdige plumbs the depths of postmodern style and produces a comprehensive record of the historical relevance and referential techniques of various subcultures to be enjoyed by scholars and enthusiasts alike. Hebdige's argument for the subculture as a political formation may be tempered in recent years, but his work has shaped much of the discussion of subcultures since its publication in 1969. Hebdige's text remains a seminal work in the fields of youth studies, frequently quoted and used as a baseline for current work in the field.