Advertisement

Abstract

Contemporary cultural theory has acquired discipline-wide status as the only “subfield” within which quintessentially “theoretical” issues are widely discussed, while at the same time forming core parts of the research agenda. Cultural theory is also one of the few strands of modern theorizing that boasts having a “straight line” of succession stemming from the programmatic concerns that preoccupied the sociological classics. Cultural theory carries this status in spite of the fact that its central concept is a twentieth century anthropological importation made prominent in Parsons’s functionalism. This an odd situation because culture seems to be an inherently functionalist concept, and yet functionalism is the theory that is both accused with providing a misleading interpretation of the classics and, accordingly, the theory that contemporary “cultural” approaches use to define themselves against. In this chapter I argue that, in spite of the aforementioned pretensions, there is no straightforward conceptual link between modern cultural analysis and the work of the classics, precisely because the contention that the classics were budding cultural theorists is a convenient invention of functionalism in the first place. I close by suggesting that the “problems” of contemporary cultural theory, being problems inherited from functionalism, may only be soluble by abandoning the culture concept. Ironically enough the nineteenth century classics, especially Durkheim, and one twentieth century “classic,” namely Bourdieu, provide a model of how to do social theory without a culture concept.

Keywords

Culture Social structure Social action 

References

  1. Abu Lughod, L. (1991). Writing against culture. In R. G. Fox (Ed.), Recapturing anthropology: Working in the present (pp. 137–162). Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, J. (1982). Theoretical logic in sociology: The antinomies of classical thought: Marx and Durkheim. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, J. C. (1990). Durkheimian sociology: Cultural studies. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Alexander, J. C. (2003). The meanings of social life: A cultural sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alexander, J. C. (2008). Clifford Geertz and the strong program: The human sciences and cultural sociology. Cultural Sociology, 2(2), 157–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Alexander, J. C., Jacobs, R., & Smith, P. (2012). The Oxford handbook of cultural sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Archer, M. S. (1985). The myth of cultural integration. British Journal of Sociology, 36, 333–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Archer, M. S. (1995). Culture and agency: The place of culture in social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bachrach, C. A. (2014). Culture and demography: From reluctant bedfellows to committed partners. Demography, 51, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bandelj, N., Spillman, L., & Wherry, F. F. (2015). Economic culture in the public sphere: Introduction. European Journal of Sociology, 56, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bennett, T., & John F. (2008). The Sage handbook of cultural analysis. Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Bidney, D. (1967). Theoretical anthropology. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Biernacki, R. (2000). Language and the shift from signs to practices in cultural inquiry. History and Theory, 39, 289–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Boas, F. (1911). The mind of primitive man. New York: Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
  16. Bonnell, V. E., & Hunt, L. A. (1999). Beyond the cultural turn: New directions in the study of society and culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  17. Campbell, J. L. (1998). Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy. Theory and Society, 27, 377–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Collins, R. (1986). Weberian sociological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Douglas, M. P. (1966). Purity and Danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic books.Google Scholar
  23. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goddard, C. (2005). The lexical semantics of culture. Language Sciences, 27(1), 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hall, J. R., Grindstaff, L., & Lo, M.-C. (2010). In J. R. Hall, L. Grindstaff, & M.-C. Lo (Eds.) Handbook of cultural sociology. Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Hannerz, U. (1996). Transnational connections: Culture, people, places. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  27. Jacobs, M. D., & Spillman, L. (2005). Cultural sociology at the crossroads of the discipline. Poetics, 33, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kroeber, A. L. (1917). The superorganic. American Anthropologist, 19, 163–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kroeber, A. L., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions. Papers. Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  30. Kroeber, A. L., & Parsons, T. (1958). The concepts of culture and of social system. American Sociological Review, 23(5), 582–583.Google Scholar
  31. Kuper, A. (1999). Culture: The anthropologists’ account. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Lamont, M. (1992). Money, morals, and manners: The culture of the French and the American upper-middle class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  34. Levine, D. N. (1995). Visions of the sociological tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lizardo, O. (2011). Pierre Bourdieu as a post-cultural theorist. Cultural Sociology, 5, 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Martin, J. L. (2010). Life’s a beach but you’re an ant, and other unwelcome news for the sociology of culture. Poetics, 38, 229–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Martin, J. L. (2015). Thinking through theory. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  38. Parsons, T. (1935). The place of ultimate values in sociological theory. International Journal of Ethics, 45, 282–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Parsons, T. (1937). The structure of social action. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  40. Parsons, T. (1938). The role of ideas in social action. American Sociological Review, 3, 652–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  42. Parsons, T. (1964). Social structure and personality. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  43. Parsons, T. (1972). Culture and social systems revisited. Social Science Quarterly, 53, 253–266.Google Scholar
  44. Parsons, T., & Shils, E. A. (1951). Toward a general theory of action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Patterson, O. (2014). Making sense of culture. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pickering, W. S. F. (Ed.). (2000). Durkheim and representations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Polletta, F. (2008). Culture and movements. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 619, 78–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rawls, A. W. (2005). Epistemology and practice: Durkheim’s the elementary forms of the religious life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reed, I. A. (2011). Interpretation and social knowledge: On the use of theory in the human sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schmaus, W. (1994). Durkheim’s philosophy of science and the sociology of knowledge: Creating an intellectual niche. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. Schmaus, W. (2004). Rethinking Durkheim and his tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sewell, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sewell, W. H. (1997). Geertz, cultural systems, and history: From synchrony to transformation. Representations, 59, 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sewell, W. H. (2005). Logics of history: Social theory and social transformation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shepherd, H. (2011). The cultural context of cognition: What the implicit association test tells us about how culture works. Sociological Forum, 26, 121–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shore, B. (1996). Culture in mind: Cognition, culture, and the problem of meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Small, M. L., Harding, D. J., & Lamont, M. (2010). Reconsidering culture and poverty. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 629, 6–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Smilde, D. (2007). Reason to believe: Cultural agency in Latin American evangelicalism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  59. Sperber, D. (1995). Explaining culture. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  60. Stedman Jones, S. (2001). Durkheim reconsidered. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  61. Stocking, G. W. (1966). Franz boas and the culture concept in historical perspective. American Anthropologist, 68(4), 867–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51, 273–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Swidler, A. (1995). Cultural power and social movements. In H. Johnston & B. Klandermans (Eds.), Social movements and culture (pp. 25–40). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  64. Swidler, A. (2001). Talk of love: How culture matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  65. Swidler, A. (2008). Comment on Stephen Vaisey’s “Socrates, Skinner, and Aristotle: Three ways of thinking about culture in action.” Sociological Forum, 23, 614–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Turner, S. P. (1984). Durkheim as a methodologist: Part II-Collective forces, causation, and probability. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 14(1), 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Turner, S. (2007). Social theory as a cognitive neuroscience. European Journal of Social Theory, 10, 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vaisey, S. (2009). Motivation and justification: A dual-process model of culture in action. American Journal of Sociology, 114, 1675–1715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Warner, R. S. (1970). The role of religious ideas and the use of models in Max Weber’s comparative studies of non-capitalist societies. The Journal of Economic History, 30, 74–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Warner, R. S. (1978). Toward a redefinition of action theory: Paying the cognitive element its due. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 1317–1349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Weber, M. (1946a). The social psychology of the world religions. In H. H. G. Mills & C. Wright (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 267–301). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Weber, M. (1946b). Religious rejections of the world and their directions. In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 323–359). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Weber, K., & Dacin, M. T. (2011). The cultural construction of organizational life: Introduction to the special issue. Organization Science, 22, 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Weick, K. E. (1996). Drop your tools: An allegory for organizational studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zerubavel, E. (1999). Social mindscapes: An invitation to cognitive sociology. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA

Personalised recommendations