Structuralism & Post-structuralism

In “Method,” Michel Foucault addresses the problems that occur when analyzing culture “in terms of power,” since the word power possesses many misconceptions. As a solution to this, Foucault offers “four rules to follow” when looking at a particular discourse:

1.       The Rule of Immanence

2.       Rules of Continual Variations

3.       Rule of Double Conditioning

4.       The Rule of Tactical Polyvalence of Discourse

Foucault writes that, “Power is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere,” and he adds that it is “permanent, repetitious, inert, and self-reproducing, is simply the overall effect that emerges from all these motilities, the concatenation that rests on each of them and seeks in turn to arrest their movement” (313-314). Rather than viewing power strictly as a class battle, Foucault says that power “comes from below,” and he also writes that, “Where there is power, there is resistance” (314-315).

The idea of “power” has arisen in many of the cultural analysis theories that we’ve studied: most notably in the models of Marx, Adorno, Gramsci, and Freud. The Marxist and Hegemony approaches to culture seem to hold “power” as the root of all evil – the cause of class conflicts and oppression. However, Gramsci’s theories did recognize the negotiations that existed between the ruling class and working class when the system provided workers with their basic desires. The psychoanalytic approach to culture also acknowledges power in the form of the “Oedipus Complex,” which results in the formation of the “self.” Like Marxism and Hegemony, this idea of “power” is also considered to be a struggle. Foucault derives from each of these ideas, and instead, he theorizes that “power produces reality,” and he also seems to be saying that it is neither a positive or negative force – but rather – it is a force that “produces the ‘truths’ we live by” (Storey, 132).

Structuralism and post-structuralism, despite being very complex, are both interesting approaches to cultural studies. Personally, I find the post-structuralism approach to be the most useful lens to analyze culture. Derrida and Foucault’s ideas make sense: “meaning” seems too volatile to exist only within a particular structure, and “power” does seem to exist everywhere – producing both positives and negatives. Also, I prefer Foucault’s explanation of “discourse” over Laclau and Mouffe’s explanation.