![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Academic quote of the day
Strain Theory, old and not without limitations, but still relevant.
“... actual advance toward desired success-symbols through conventional channels is, despite our persisting open-class ideology, relatively rare and difficult for those handicapped by little formal education and few economic resources. The dominant pressure of group standards of success is, therefore, on the gradual attenuation of legitimate, but by and large ineffective, strivings and the increasing use of illegitimate, but more or less effective, expedients of vice and crime. The cultural demands made on persons in this situation are incompatible. On the one hand, they are asked to orient their conduct toward the prospect of accumulating wealth and on the other, they are largely denied effective opportunities to do so institutionally. The consequences of such structural inconsistency are psycho-pathological personality, and/or antisocial conduct, and/or revolutionary activities. The equilibrium between culturally designated means and ends becomes highly unstable with the progressive emphasis on attaining the prestige-laden ends by any means whatsoever. Within this context, Capone represents the triumph of amoral intelligence over morally prescribed "failure," when the channels of vertical mobility are closed or narrowed in a society which places a high premium on economic affluence and social ascent for all its members. This last qualification is of primary importance. [...] It is only when a system of cultural values extols, virtually above all else, certain common symbols of success for the population at large while its social structure rigorously restricts or completely eliminates access to approved modes of acquiring these symbols for a considerable part of the same population, that antisocial behavior ensues on a considerable scale. In other words, our egalitarian ideology denies by implication the existence of noncompeting groups and individuals in the pursuit of pecuniary success. The same body of success-symbols is held to be desirable for all. These goals are held to transcend class lines, not to be bounded by them, yet the actual social organization is such that there exist class differentials in the accessibility of these common success-symbols.” (Merton, 1938: 679-80, emphasis as original)
Ref.
Merton, R.K. (1938) ‘Social Structure and Anomie’, American Sociological Review 3(5): 672-682.
no subject
Ah, I've got 1 page left to write and I have NOTHING more to say. It's ridiculous! I've read a thousand (slight exaggeration) articles. For weeks I've been trying to find a topic for that paper and now that I've got a sort-of-good one, I can't fulfill the page quota. :/
At least it's an interesting topic. I'm defending the existence of the subject in postmodernist literature. Fuck everyone who claims there is no individual left. I say there is. At least there can be, if one looks at it from a certain angle. I feel like I'm writing an anamorphic paper here. Ignore that theory and it works. Don't ignore it, and I'm basically writing something one can wipe one's ass with.
But all those great theorists do that... they just ignore whatever someone said they don't agree with. And then they call each other neo-conservative.... whatever the Situationists called Baudrillard. he just wanted to be part of the club! And Barth, that bastard, even quotes All the world's a stage and doesn't bother to add a citation. I guess he can do that... the great John Bath who'd rather have no fun in a funhouse than admit that literature is still awesome. As if Funhouse is such a great story!
XD Sorry~ I'm a bit frustrated.
I do hope you're having a great Sunday. I just wanted to drop in to say thanks for the coincidence! That article was really helpful!
no subject
Glad the article was helpful! How awesome is it that you could bring something across disciplines and make it relevant :D