文化公民身份

前言

　　媒介是神奇的，社會(huì)也是神奇的，媒介與社會(huì)的耦合生產(chǎn)出無限的神奇。從涂爾于的《宗教生活的基本形式》關(guān)于“社會(huì)”與喚起社會(huì)意識(shí)的符號(hào)與儀式共生的理論來看，媒介使社會(huì)顯得神奇的過程也造就了自身的神奇?！　∪祟愒诂F(xiàn)代大眾傳播成為現(xiàn)實(shí)之前對(duì)于“神奇”的感知是經(jīng)由巫師及其巫術(shù)的轉(zhuǎn)化來實(shí)現(xiàn)的。澳洲土著在圖騰舞蹈的狂熱中感受到超個(gè)人的社會(huì)力量的存在。滿身披掛的薩滿用舞蹈和神歌請(qǐng)靈降神，讓已經(jīng)消逝的顯露原形，讓凡人通常不可見的顯現(xiàn)真身，讓千山萬水之遙的即刻大駕光臨。借助巫術(shù)，時(shí)間和空間的障礙可以暫時(shí)克服，過去的、未來的都可以在現(xiàn)實(shí)中出現(xiàn)，墓室中的、仙山上的都可以召喚到面前?！　∵@些神奇經(jīng)驗(yàn)在現(xiàn)當(dāng)代越來越徹底地被大眾媒介所造就，電視、網(wǎng)絡(luò)等圖像傳輸技術(shù)在其中發(fā)揮著關(guān)鍵作用。大人物像變戲法一樣總跑到百姓居室內(nèi)高談闊論，歷史的亡靈在熒屏上招之即來，揮之即去。媒介使常人具有千里眼、順風(fēng)耳，看見那原本遙不可見的，聽清那從前根本就聽不到的。媒介是神奇的，它在社會(huì)中的運(yùn)行有如巫術(shù)。幾百年的現(xiàn)代化對(duì)世界“祛魅”，結(jié)果我們看到人類社會(huì)所集聚的全部的“魅”都匯聚于媒介，并被媒介無限放大?！　￠L(zhǎng)期耳濡目染，媒介的神奇人們已經(jīng)習(xí)以為常了，就像前現(xiàn)代的人對(duì)巫術(shù)習(xí)以為常一樣。但是，這個(gè)過程一直都是知識(shí)界探討的課題?，F(xiàn)代大眾媒介的各種新形式從一開始出現(xiàn)的時(shí)候就會(huì)被知識(shí)界作為新事物加以關(guān)注。從較早的照相、無線電廣播到電影、電視，再到近年的新媒介傳播，關(guān)于大眾傳媒研究、文化研究、虛擬社會(huì)研究的知識(shí)生產(chǎn)就一直緊隨媒介發(fā)展的步伐。媒介研究在發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家已經(jīng)形成龐大的群體和細(xì)密的分工，這個(gè)群體既能夠追逐傳播領(lǐng)域的新事物，也能夠通過專業(yè)的眼光讓人們習(xí)以為常的許多方面顯出怪異來，從而引發(fā)眾人的注意和分析的興趣。我們國(guó)內(nèi)的媒介研究在這兩個(gè)方向上都需要培育自己的能力。

內(nèi)容概要

　　為什么“文化”成為政治爭(zhēng)論的核心？ 　　在信息時(shí)代，我們應(yīng)該如何重新思考公民身份的問題？ 　　什么是世界主義？它會(huì)成為未來的基本典范嗎？ 　　　本書將身份、個(gè)性化、文化多元主義與調(diào)解納入文化政治學(xué)的研究范疇，從政治學(xué)理論、文化研究和社會(huì)學(xué)的爭(zhēng)論中借鑒經(jīng)驗(yàn)，集中討論了如下問題： 　　·全球化引致的公民身份重塑 　　·新社會(huì)運(yùn)動(dòng) 　　·民族-國(guó)家的衰落　　·流行文化的沖擊 　　史蒂文森認(rèn)為，世界主義的問題越來越有可能出現(xiàn)在這些領(lǐng)域。無論我們?cè)谟懻摥h(huán)境破壞，還是文化政策、城市、消費(fèi)者文化的議題，這些問題都可能與世界主義的維度有關(guān)。權(quán)利、義務(wù)和文化方面的議題如今都已成為我們思考這個(gè)世界的中心內(nèi)容。這本原創(chuàng)性的著作提請(qǐng)我們重新思考什么樣的政治和人格才是適應(yīng)信息時(shí)代的。

作者簡(jiǎn)介

尼克·史蒂文森(Nick Stevenson)英國(guó)諾丁漢大學(xué)社會(huì)學(xué)與社會(huì)政策學(xué)院高級(jí)講師，著有《文化、意識(shí)形態(tài)和社會(huì)主義》(1995)、《媒介的轉(zhuǎn)型》(1999)、《文化與公民身份》(2001)、《讀懂男性雜志》(與彼得·杰克遜和凱特·布魯克斯合著)(2001)、《理解媒介文化》(2002)等著作。

書籍目錄

SERIES EDITOR'S FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CULTURAL CITIZENSHIP 　T.H. Marshall and Raymond Williams: a cultural citizenship? 　Cultural citizenship in the information age 　The culturation of citizenship 　Civil society, culture and public space 　Identity, difference and cultural politics 　The challenge of individualization 　Conclusion 　Notes 　Further reading 2 COSMOPOLITAN AND MULTICULTURAL CITIZENSHIP: WORLD, NATION, CITY AND SELF 　Disarmament and European cosmopolitanism 　The new political cosmopolitans 　National citizenship: liberalism and multiculturalism 　Multicultural citizenship: Iris Marion Young, Will Kymlicka and Bhikhu Parekh 　Cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism 　The city as a contested space 　Cosmopolitan cultures and cosmopolitan selves 　Conclusion 　Notes 　Further reading 3 ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL CITIZENSHIP: ACROSS THE NATURE/CULTURE DIVIDE 　Culture and nature 　Cosmopolitan and ecological citizenship 　Modernity, progress and consumption 　Risk, science and democracy 　Cinematic representations of risk: Safe 　Cyborg relations: humans, animals and technology 　Vulnerability, voice and community 　Conclusion 　Note 　Further reading 4 MEDIA, CULTURAL CITIZENSHIP AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE 　Media, citizenship and cultural power 　Cultural citizenship in a global mediated culture 　Human rights, social movements and global media 　Technocultures, media and community 　Speed and communication 　Moral indifference and cosmopolitanism 　Media, popular culture and the deconstruction of public and private 　Conclusion 　Note 　Further reading 5 CONSUMERISM, CULTURAL POLICY AND CITIZENSHIP 　Consumer culture and the death of citizenship 　Consumer culture as citizenship 　Questions of cultural capital 　Cultural policy and questions of governance 　A 'common' cultural citizenship 　Conclusion 　Further reading 6 CULTURAL CITIZENSHIP: A SHORT AGENDA FOR THE FUTURE GLOSSARY BIBLIOGRAPUY INDEX

章節(jié)摘錄

　　But crucially involves the direct intervention of ethical communities,feminist campaigners, green networks, religious denominations, trade unions,ethnic organizations and parents groups. A society-wide conversation isdependent upon the emergence of an energetic civil society that is able to forceissues and perspectives on to a public agenda. A robust civil society ensures thatthe communicative basis of society never becomes completely colonized byagencies of money and power. Civil society, then, under certain circumstances,is able to convert itself into communicative power through the channels ofpublic communication and the activation of public normative sentiment. Forthe public sphere to be socially just, it must both prevent the manipulation ofthe public by forces with vested interests in social control and pull togetheran otherwise fragmented public.　　A widespread, publicly inclusive conversationwould shatter attempts at information processing strategies and replace themwith genuinely communicative interests and passions.　　A communicative civilsociety would produce a cultural citizenship where the public were capable oflearning from one anothers viewpoints.　　The creation of a robust civil society is, however, constantly threatened by thecolonizing capacity of money and power. According to Benjamin Barber （2001）there are at least three dangers to the creation of an engaged civil society.The first is the bureaucratic mechanisms of government that seek to manageand limit public criticism. These can emerge through hegemonic strategiesof incorporation and exclusion, censorship and the division of oppositionalsentiments. The second is the belief that markets promote democratization.Markets tend to promote individualistic goals and choices, limiting our capacityto deliberate upon the common good. Finally, civil society is threatened by ayearning for undifferentiated and homogeneous communities. Whereas marketsfoster individual yearnings, they unintentionally promote unsatisfied desires forcommunal solidarity. This promotes a basic ambivalence where the thinner the markets social nexus, the thicker and more bloody the response to it （Barber2001: 272）. Hence, whereas Barber does not press this point, any analysis of a genuinely civil society would need to investigate the construction of cultural identity. The problem here is that Habermas rarely takes these questions as seriously as he might.　　More recently, Habermas （2001） has argued that in an age where the state is continually permeated by global flows of money and power, only the develop- ment of a genuinely global civil society and public sphere will foster the development of cosmopolitan solidarity. The impact of economic globalization has shifted the locus of control from the states regulation of territory to the imperatives of speed capitalism. These developments （among others） have shaken the idea of the nation being the basis for civic solidarity.

圖書封面

圖書標(biāo)簽Tags

無

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    文化公民身份 PDF格式下載

---