A subculture may be defined as a group of people whose beliefs, attitudes, and or behaviors differ from the culturally prescribed norms of the dominant society while at the same time being related to it (subculture, 2007). Dick Hebdige (1979) one of the foremost scholar in the area of cultural research, examines subcultures by studying how they challenge homogeneity of the dominant culture through style, rather than how they overtly communicate clear cut ideological differences. There are ways in which ADAPT, a grassroots disability rights organization fits into Hebdige's conceptualization of a subculture. ADAPT uses the element of symbolic style to communicate their message and assert their unique identity within society. ADAPT is also influenced by historical context and change which is another component of Hebdige’s conceptualization of a subculture. Furthermore because ADAPT is a cross disability organization its members may form smaller groups which focused on disability specific needs apart from the larger group. Segmentation of the larger group into smaller groups appears to be a common characteristic of many subcultures (subculture, 2007). There are however elements of ADAPT that run counter to Hebdige (1979) and other theorists ideas of subculture. Contrary to Hebdige’s idea of subculture ADAPT is not youth related, is highly organized and uses overt tactics to get their message across. Thus ADAPT possesses elements that fit into the idea of a subculture and other elements that do not.
Hebdige (1979) asserts subcultures create their style by developing a “hybrid” style. A “hybrid” style consists of material from the dominant culture that has been manipulated in a manner that helps a subculture form a unique identity and asserts their independence from the dominant culture. It appears ADAPT has adopted this type of “hybrid” style. For example their logo consists of the universal symbol of disability with the person raising their hands above their head in an effort to break free of shackles (ADAPT, 2007). The use of the universal symbol of disability connects the logo to dominant culture. However depicting the person seated in a wheelchair raising their hands above their head attempting to break free of shackles helps ADAPT create their own identity and assert their autonomy from the dominant culture. In addition many of the ADAPT members wave American flags embroidered with the ADAPT logo during their protests (ADAPT videos, 2007). This allows ADAPT members to embrace the cultural value of freedom while at the same time communicating their disagreement with the dominant cultures unequal treatment of people with disabilities. Others style elements that help ADAPT signify their identity include ADAPT logo embroidered backpacks, baseball caps and bandannas. It is possible that the ADAPT logo is a more covert style element than Hebdige’s conceptualization of style elements within subcultures. Nonetheless the logo serves the purpose of communicating group identity and autonomy which are key characteristics of style elements within subcultures. However, more subtle elements of ADAPT’S style do exist. For example mobility devices can be considered style elements. Type, brand, color and other decorative items on their mobility devices can assist members in constructing their identity. ADAPT’S use of various style elements certainly appears to be consistent with Hebdige’s conceptualization of a subculture.
According to Hebdige (1979) it is common for the styles of the subcultures to be influenced by historical change. Even though ADAPT’S style has not undergone much notable change over the past decades, the focus of the group most certainly has been influenced by historical change. For instance throughout the 1980’s the group’s main focus was to acquire accessible transportation in all cities nationwide (ADAPT, 2007). When this goal was accomplished with the passage of the ADA in 1990 the group turned its attention to the current focus which is obtaining community supports for people with disabilities. Once this goal is accomplished it is probably safe to surmise that the focus will shift once again. Even though ADAPT’S style has not been influenced by historical change it can certainly be said that the shifting focus of ADAPT is in some ways consistent with Hebdige’s (1979) notion of subcultures being sensitive to historical change.
It is also common for subcultures to segment into smaller groups whose needs at times are at odds with each other (Minh-ha, 1989). This notion certainly can be applied to ADAPT. The ADAPT membership includes people with a variety of different disabilities and at times the needs of those with a specific type of disability may come into conflict with the needs of the larger group. For example, ADAPT’s most recent protest focused on obtaining full community integration for individuals with disabilities. Although most of its membership fully supports community integration, campaigning for this issue may come into conflict with the desires of its deaf members. Many members of the deaf community prefer to be educated in segregated environments in order to preserve the sanctity of deaf culture. The competing needs of its group members gives ADAPT a commonality with other subcultures such as feminism.
Even though ADAPT does have some characteristics that are consistent with being a subculture there are many characteristics of ADAPT which would probably not be considered traditional characteristics of a subculture. According to Hebdige (1979) many subcultures are loosely organized. ADAPT on the other hand is highly organized and regimented. At a typical protest ADAPT members are divided into sections, given color coded bracelets, and follow all of the designated leader’s instructions (Smith 2007). During a protest ADAPT members can be seen traveling in a single file line to the protest site and chanting in unison. At the most recent protest held in Chicago ADAPT members could be heard chanting phrases such as:
" No way out just like nursing homes”
" What do we want? Community choice! When do we want it? Now!”
"The people united will never be defeated!”
“Free our People!” (ADAPT video, 2007)
" What do we want? Community choice! When do we want it? Now!”
"The people united will never be defeated!”
“Free our People!” (ADAPT video, 2007)
These chants help to communicate the groups’ message as well as, organize and unite members around a common cause, which on this day was community integration. Another example of the organized nature of ADAPT is the way they strategically used group member’s abilities in order to maximize their benefit to the group (Smith, 2007). During the protest in Chicago people in power wheelchairs where told to block building entrances and exits as well as, elevators and escalators. On the other hand, ambulatory people where told to hand out fliers and other information during the protest. These strategic decisions helped ADAPT effectively get their message across however, this type of organization most likely runs counter to Hebdige’s conceptualization of a subculture.
In addition, the oppression faced by ADAPT members and the protest element of the group would most likely put ADAPT in the category of a counter culture rather than purely a subculture. A counter culture can be defined as a group that is overtly oppressed by a dominant culture and struggles to overcome this oppression. A subculture in its most general form does not necessarily have these elements. ADAPT’s non- violent direct action techniques includes protest, marches, and sit -ins (ADAPT, 2007). These methods helps group members communicate that they are strongly opposed to the dominant society’s oppression of people with disabilities and further the possibility of obtaining immediate remedies for the oppression. During the most recent direct action in Chicago clashes between ADAPT and the dominant society could be seen in several symbolic ways. For instance, in one photo posted on the ADAPT website, protesters in wheelchairs can be seen with their arms crossed looking up at two police officers who both have their hands on their hips. This body language symbolizes the clash between the dominant culture and the counter culture of ADAPT. The direct action component of ADAPT is most likely not subtle enough and too organized to fit into Hebdige’s idea of a subculture but it most certainly fits into the definition of a counter culture.
There are elements of ADAPT that both support and refute the notion of it being a subculture. Although not subtle in nature ADAPT has definitely used elements of style deriving from dominant culture in a manner that helps them assert their identity and its autonomy from mainstream society. Other elements of ADAPT consistent with it being a subculture include its sensitivity to cultural change and the tendency for the group to at times fragment into smaller groups with competing needs. However according to Hebdige subcultures are generally loosely organized and use subtle elements of style to communicate their message. This is in stark contrast to ADAPT’s highly organized direct action techniques. ADAPT may categorized as a counterculture rather than a subculture because of its constant overt struggle to overcome the oppression of mainstream society.
References:
ADAPT (2007). Retrieved on September 16, 2007 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADAPT
ASAPT PHOTO (2007). Retrieved on September 21, 2007 from
http://www.adapt.org/freeourpeople/aar/chicago/photos/tue24.jpg
ADAPT Videos.(2007). Retrieved on September 20, 2007 from http://www.youtube.com/ADAPTvideo
Hebdige, D. (1979). The Function of Subculture. Retrieved on September 16, 2007 from
http://web.syr.edu/`tjconnel/145/Hebdige-Subculture.html
Minha-ha, T. T. ( 1989). Difference: A Special Third World Issue. In Woman, Native, Other: Writing Post-Coloniality and Feminism (pp.79-116.), Bloomington, Indiana: University Press.
Smith, G. (2007). ADAPT Action Blog. Retrieved on September 21, 2007 from
http://www.adapt.org/freeourpeople/aar/chicagp/blog01.htm
Subculture. (2007). Retrieved on September 21, 2007
http://uk.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_781533683/Subculture.html
No comments:
Post a Comment