Studies into the cultural meanings of class have often focused on whether the working class would play a role in overthrowing capitalism (Devine and Savage 2005). Paul Willis’ ‘Learning to Labour’ (1979) is a neo-Marxist approach to education and describes how it can have ‘unintended consequences on pupils which may not be beneficial to capitalism.’ (Haralambos 1991:249). Willis’ study of twelve working class boys recognises a particular conflict within the education system. He ‘rejects the view that there is any simple, direct relationship between the economy and the way the education system operates’ (Haralambos 1991:248). Willis uses an ethnographic format within his research in order to look at ‘the cultural’. Willis states that he sees the cultural as ‘the product of collective human praxis’ (1977:4). Hence, he wanted to blend into the environment to gain a better picture of what he was studying rather than leaving it to what he thought was the case. He analyses how the boys’ attitude to education and work was understood through their class culture and which actually reinforced their class location in economic terms, through reproducing their own subordinate position in society.
Willis observes that it is not true that the working class boys are not capable of achieving in school and getting good jobs. He notes they end up in working class jobs because of their culture, therefore the way they make sense of the world and their place within it. They have developed a ‘counter-school culture’ which enables them to successfully resist the authority of school. Willis argues this is done in such a way which will not find them individual or collective advancement. Therefore, resisting the system only makes it worse for the boys due to the way they go about it. Unlike Bowles and Gintis (1976) Willis argues how the ‘lads’ are not forced, but rather choose to fail at school. He notes how the boys seem to have an acceptance of their class but at the same time form a resistance to it. Similarly he observes how this counter-school culture has similarities to structural factors such as work and thus creating a ‘shopfloor culture’ when in employment. ‘The masculinity and toughness of counter-school culture reflects one of the central locating themes of shopfloor culture – a form of masculine chauvinism.’ (Willis 1977:52) He notes how there is a comparison between the two because ‘despite harsh conditions and external direction, people do look for meaning and impose frameworks.’ (Willis 1977:52) Willis links work with culture as he argues that ‘when we are at our most natural, we are also at our most cultural’ (1979:185). Therefore because most people spend their prime working hours at work, they also tend to base their identities and activities on work and are therefore ‘defined by others through their relation to work’ (Willis 1979:186). He also observes that it is specifically ‘working class cultural forces from the place of production which helps to mould the whole of class culture’ (1979: 186). Marx would argue it is simply a mechanism by which subordination is produced. Although, Willis notes how they make the situation they find themselves in better through seeking enjoyment, expressing creativity and forming a ‘living culture’. He describes how the boys ‘have a laff’ in school and similarly in work, they ‘joke around’.
Similarly Weber argues ‘the extent to which there emerges ‘mass action’ by the members of a class some form of ‘communal action’, or even possibly of ‘association’, depends on general cultural conditions’ (1922: 46) The communal action that Willis observes seems to be unstructured. An example of this is the ‘systematic soldiering’ or working slowing as an attempt to gain control within the shopfloor culture. Willis also argues the ‘lads’ tried to ‘substitute their own unofficial timetables, and control their own routines and life spaces’. Thus trying to create their own culture and identity and form a ‘class for itself’ (Marx 1848:223).
Karl Marx sees this as creating conditions in which the proletariat can live. He describes how the proletariat ‘cannot raise itself up, without the whole strata of official society being sprung into air’ (1848:230). Similarly Willis talks about labour power. As Willis describes labouring ‘takes on specific forms and meanings in different kinds of societies’ (1977:2) Various processes are applied in order to understand labour power which eventually ‘help to construct distinctive class forms at the cultural and symbolic level as well as at the economic and structural level’ (Willis 1977:2). Willis sees this as an important aspect in connecting with the world. This relates to Marx’ idea of class consciousness: being aware of your situation in order to decide for yourself. It is at this stage that the workers need to unite and produce class solidarity (Marx 1848). However, this hunger for self expression is not enough. Although the ‘lads’ Willis studies have potential, they are ruining it with their anti-shopfloor culture. Nevertheless, my view is that the education system is set up in such a way that it prepares the majority of children for relatively low paid, unfulfilling employment. As Bowles and Gintis argue in ‘Schooling in Capitalist America’ (1979) education is subservient to the needs of those who control the economy and the workforce – the ruling class. They describe how the process of conformity, obedience and social control is sustained through a ‘hidden curriculum’ that teaches the children the norms, values and attitudes required for the continuation of social inequality (1979: 221). Therefore, the ‘lads’ are unable to escape this even though they try to undermine the norms and values of the school.
In Weber’s view, class is rarely a source of unity except in times of crises. He argues that groups form because their members share a similar ‘status situation’. This refers to ‘all those typical components of people’s destinies which are determined by a specific social evaluation of status.’ (Weber 1922:48). Those who share the same class situation will not necessarily belong to the same status group and therefore divisions can occur. Weber suggests that ‘in certain situations status rather than class provides the basis for the formation of social groups whose members perceive common interests and a group identity.’ (Haralambos 1991:44).
Jon Cook provides a perspective on how class is reproduced through culture: ‘taste is not just systematically linked to class. It reinforces class distinctions’ (2000:102). He argues that a subculture is a further version of the relation between class and taste. Similarly Pierre Bourdieu uses the term ‘cultural capital’ to describe the tastes, education and knowledge which is ‘accumulated over a lifetime through participation in social groups and informal and formal education’ (1986, 1993). He refers to the dominant culture as ‘cultural capital’ because ‘via the education system, it can be translated into wealth and power’. (Haralambos 1991:268) He argues that education reproduces the culture of the ‘dominant classes’ and sees culture as innate - ‘something one is, rather than something one has’ (1986:107).
In conclusion, it is apparent that cultural values have some impact on the reproduction of class positions. This is primarily through structural factors such as labour and work which produce social reproduction and reinforce class positions over time. Willis observed that the education system for the ‘lads’ was a reinforcement of their class in cultural and economic terms. The formation of a ‘counter-school culture’ actually led to self affirmation and incidentally reinforced their working class culture. Similarly, Weber sees class as based on an individuals’ economic position and reflects their opportunities within the market. He argues that members of a class carry out actions based on their ‘general cultural conditions’ (1922:46).
However, can or will workers become conscious of their ‘shared interest’ in changing society? Or do we need new ways of thinking about working class culture? Johnson argues ‘key elements of the classic Marxist view of the proletariat were formed before the emergence of a modern working class’ (1979:203). Similarly, Jackson and Marsden mention that ‘the education system we need is one which accepts and develops the best qualities of the working class living and brings these to meet our central culture’ (1962:224).
Perhaps we need to look at where power is embedded. Is it in institutions, within the individual or in all social relations?
As Medhurst mentions ‘Class is not an objective entity’ (2000:20) and is open to interpretation. It is not just about where you live and who you socialise but also a question of identifications, perceptions and feelings. I believe that other identities exist besides our class position, although these are hybridized and complex. Perhaps in time they will also become reproduced through cultural values.
Bibliography
Bradley, H., (1996), Fractured Identities, Changing Patterns of Inequality, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T. and Roberts, B., (1975) ‘Subcultures, Cultures and Class: A theoretical overview’ in Hall, S. and Jefferson, T., (eds.) Resistance through Rituals, London: Routledge.
Cobb, J. and Sennet, R., (1970), The Hidden Injuries of Class, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Devine, F. and Savage, M., (2005), ‘The Cultural Turn, Sociology and Class Analysis’ in F. Devine, M. Savage, J. Scott and R. Crompton (eds.) Rethinking Class, Culture, Identities and Lifestyle, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.
Goldthorpe, J.H., Lockwood, D., Bechhofer, F. and Platt, J., (1969), The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haralambos, M. and Holborn, M., (1991), Sociology, Themes and perspectives, London: Harper Collins
Jackson, B. and Marsden, D., (1962), Education and the Working Class, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Marx, K. and Engles, F., (1848), ‘Bourgeois and proletarians’, section 1 of The communist manifesto, in McLellan, D., (ed.) (1977) Karl Marx: Selected Writings. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 222-231
Medhurst, A., (2000), ‘If Anywhere: Class Identifications and Cultural Studies Academics’ in Sally R. Munt (eds.), Cultural Studies and The Working Class, London: Cassell.
Weber, M., (1922), ‘Class, Status and Party’. Extract from Economy and society in Runciman, W. G., (ed.) (1978), Max Weber: Selections in Translation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 43-56.
Willis, P., (1977), Learning to Labour: how working class kids get working class jobs, Aldershot: Gower.
Willis, P., (1979), ‘Shop-floor culture, masculinity and the wage form’ in Clarke, J., Critcher, C., Johnson, R., (eds.), Working Class Culture, Studies in history and theory, London: Hutchinson.
