Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Notes on Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Democracy beyond Hegemony
- 3 Democracy without Hegemony: A Reply to Mark Purcell
- 4 The Post-Marxist Gramsci
- 5 The Post-Marxist Gramsci: A Reply to James Martin
- 6 The Limits of Post-Marxism: The (Dis)function of Political Theory in Film and Cultural Studies
- 7 The Limits of Post-Marxism: The (Dis)function of Political Theory in Film and Cultural Studies: A Reply to Paul Bowman
- 8 Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe: The Evolution of Post-Marxism
- 9 Laclau and Mouffe’s Blind Spots: A Reply to Philip Goldstein
- 10 Enriching Discourse Theory: The Discursive-Material Knot1 as a Non-hierarchical Ontology
- 11 Enriching Discourse Theory: The Discursive-Material Knot as a Non-hierarchical Ontology: A Reply to Nico Carpentier
- 12 From Domination to Emancipation and Freedom: Reading Ernesto Laclau’s Post-Marxism in Conjunction with Philip Pettit’s Neo-Republicanism
- 13 From Domination to Emancipation and Freedom: Reading Ernesto Laclau’s Post-Marxism in Conjunction with Philip Pettit’s Neo-Republicanism: A Reply to Gulshan Khan
- 14 Spectres of Post-Marxism? Reassessing Key Post-Marxist Texts
- 15 Spectres of Post-Marxism? Reassessing Key Post-Marxist Texts: A Reply to Stuart Sim
- Index
6 - The Limits of Post-Marxism: The (Dis)function of Political Theory in Film and Cultural Studies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 October 2022
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Notes on Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Democracy beyond Hegemony
- 3 Democracy without Hegemony: A Reply to Mark Purcell
- 4 The Post-Marxist Gramsci
- 5 The Post-Marxist Gramsci: A Reply to James Martin
- 6 The Limits of Post-Marxism: The (Dis)function of Political Theory in Film and Cultural Studies
- 7 The Limits of Post-Marxism: The (Dis)function of Political Theory in Film and Cultural Studies: A Reply to Paul Bowman
- 8 Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe: The Evolution of Post-Marxism
- 9 Laclau and Mouffe’s Blind Spots: A Reply to Philip Goldstein
- 10 Enriching Discourse Theory: The Discursive-Material Knot1 as a Non-hierarchical Ontology
- 11 Enriching Discourse Theory: The Discursive-Material Knot as a Non-hierarchical Ontology: A Reply to Nico Carpentier
- 12 From Domination to Emancipation and Freedom: Reading Ernesto Laclau’s Post-Marxism in Conjunction with Philip Pettit’s Neo-Republicanism
- 13 From Domination to Emancipation and Freedom: Reading Ernesto Laclau’s Post-Marxism in Conjunction with Philip Pettit’s Neo-Republicanism: A Reply to Gulshan Khan
- 14 Spectres of Post-Marxism? Reassessing Key Post-Marxist Texts
- 15 Spectres of Post-Marxism? Reassessing Key Post-Marxist Texts: A Reply to Stuart Sim
- Index
Summary
Introduction: from too theoretical to not theoretical enough
One value of Laclau and Mouffe’s political theory of hegemony and discourse is that it can so readily and productively be translated into and applied or deployed in studies of all kinds of things in all kinds of academic disciplines and fields. As theorised by Laclau and Mouffe, hegemony is a relational concept that enables us to conceptualise hierarchies, conventions, structures, values, norms, biases and preferences of all kinds, in terms of the interplay of relative gravities of different kinds of power and the formations and transformations of relations and kinds of influence (Laclau and Mouffe, 1985). Importantly, the concept of hegemony can be expanded, extracted or extrapolated from the realms of political discourse proper, and applied to show that there can often be said to be hegemonies in such things as aesthetics, styles, fashions, norms, practices, relationships, and in fact in conventions of any kind. There can be hegemony in international relations, in interpersonal relationships, in the most private ways of thinking, and of course in conventions and regimes of representation.
As such, Laclau and Mouffe’s theory of discourse and hegemony enables such ideas as the otherwise oxymoronic formulation ‘cultural politics’ to come into its own. Arguably, taken to its ultimate conclusions, Laclau and Mouffe’s theory of discourse and hegemony could actually be said to transform a term like ‘cultural politics’ from being an oxymoron into being a pleonasm – transforming ‘culture’ and ‘politics’ from being regarded as ostensibly discrete and different to their being regarded as inextricably intertwined, two sides of the same coin, or tied like a Gordian Knot. Arditi and Valentine (1999) called this ‘the contingency of the commonplace’, a perspective which means that, from this point of view, anything and everything is at least potentially political.
Consequently, by theorising the contingency of all practices – whether ostensibly political, cultural, social, or whatever – the theory of hegemony and/as articulation (or of hegemony as established by articulatory practices) has long been found highly useful across a range of academic disciplines and fields of the arts, humanities and social sciences.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Reflections on Post-MarxismLaclau and Mouffe's Project of Radical Democracy in the 21st Century, pp. 59 - 78Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2022