Cultural History – Rethinking the Concept of Culture
In recent years scholars in the humanities have begun to rethink old certainties about culture. A major theme of this new work has been to question the conventionally understood relationship between knowledge and power, arguing that the latter is actually the more effective instrument for unmasking mental dominations, such as religious dogma, and criticizing the status quo. Another central issue has been to reconsider what we mean when we speak of culture, and how it might be defined as an object of history.
The term culture refers to a people’s way of life, including its attitudes, values, beliefs, arts, sciences, and patterns of behavior, and the ways in which these are passed on from one generation to the next. It also includes its institutions, such as the law and religion, systems of education and learning, and the ways in which the members of a society perceive their environment.
Cultural historians have often been puzzled by the sheer difficulty of defining what a culture is. Some, such as Kroeber and Kluckhohn, have been led to the conclusion that a culture is an abstraction from concrete behavior; but if we analyze such behaviors in terms of their symbols and meanings they become language, which is the subject matter not of psychology but of linguistics.
Other scholars have suggested that a culture is something that exists outside of the individual; that it consists of the learned habits of a people, such as their attitudes, skills, and habits of perception, which are transmitted from person to person through imitation, communication, and teaching, and which make up a shared world in which individuals interact and live. This approach has been called “the societal perspective.”
In the sociological sense, a culture is a system of external forms that organizes human social life. This view was introduced by sociologist Georg Simmel, who wrote that a culture “is a man-made environment in which the internal and innate forms of life are given form and substance through the agency of external, symbolic forms.”
The discipline of cultural history takes up these issues in a variety of ways, with topics as diverse as parades in 19th century America, 16th-century Spanish texts, and Italian Renaissance frescoes. All, however, share the premise that culture is a force to be reckoned with, and that it can provide valuable insight into what makes humans tick. As such, the study of culture is an essential tool for understanding the world around us. It can help us understand why some cultures change more rapidly than others, and why some are more resilient to change. It can also serve as a guide to how we might improve our own. We all have the capacity to create and to adapt. It is just a matter of whether we choose to use that capacity wisely. If not, we risk becoming part of the problem rather than the solution. This is a choice that can never be made lightly.
In recent years scholars in the humanities have begun to rethink old certainties about culture. A major theme of this new work has been to question the conventionally understood relationship between knowledge and power, arguing that the latter is actually the more effective instrument for unmasking mental dominations, such as religious dogma, and criticizing the status quo. Another central issue has been to reconsider what we mean when we speak of culture, and how it might be defined as an object of history. The term culture refers to a people’s way of life, including its attitudes, values, beliefs, arts, sciences, and patterns of behavior, and the ways in which these are passed on from one generation to the next. It also includes its institutions, such as the law and religion, systems of education and learning, and the ways in which the members of a society perceive their environment. Cultural historians have often been puzzled by the sheer difficulty of defining what a culture is. Some, such as Kroeber and Kluckhohn, have been led to the conclusion that a culture is an abstraction from concrete behavior; but if we analyze such behaviors in terms of their symbols and meanings they become language, which is the subject matter not of psychology but of linguistics. Other scholars have suggested that a culture is something that exists outside of the individual; that it consists of the learned habits of a people, such as their attitudes, skills, and habits of perception, which are transmitted from person to person through imitation, communication, and teaching, and which make up a shared world in which individuals interact and live. This approach has been called “the societal perspective.” In the sociological sense, a culture is a system of external forms that organizes human social life. This view was introduced by sociologist Georg Simmel, who wrote that a culture “is a man-made environment in which the internal and innate forms of life are given form and substance through the agency of external, symbolic forms.” The discipline of cultural history takes up these issues in a variety of ways, with topics as diverse as parades in 19th century America, 16th-century Spanish texts, and Italian Renaissance frescoes. All, however, share the premise that culture is a force to be reckoned with, and that it can provide valuable insight into what makes humans tick. As such, the study of culture is an essential tool for understanding the world around us. It can help us understand why some cultures change more rapidly than others, and why some are more resilient to change. It can also serve as a guide to how we might improve our own. We all have the capacity to create and to adapt. It is just a matter of whether we choose to use that capacity wisely. If not, we risk becoming part of the problem rather than the solution. This is a choice that can never be made lightly.