12. Cultural Criminology
12.2 Something Borrowed
Dr. Steven Kohm
Cultural criminology borrows from several sociological theories of deviance. The earliest is the work of the Chicago School of Sociology of the early 20th century (see 1 What is Crime?). Also influential was the so-called “new deviance theory” from the 1950s and 1960s in the United States, which included subcultural theory and labelling theory (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 26; Hayward, 2016, p. 298). While mainstream criminology viewed crime and deviance as an expression of cultural dysfunction, new deviance theory granted “criminal and deviant behaviour cultural meaning” (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 32 original emphasis). Ferrell et. al (2008) link the rise of this approach with increased awareness of cultural differences in Western nations in the 1960s, resulting from the civil rights movement, international immigration, the mass media, and the rise of mass tourism. These shifts also brought worries about what diversity might mean for society.Subcultural theory shifted the way we thought about deviance and demonstrated that “subcultural responses are not empty, not absurd, but meaningful” (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 34, original emphasis). Equally important was labelling theory. Howard Becker (1963) argued that deviance was not the result of a failure of social control, but rather reflected its success (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 37). Also key to the development of cultural criminology was Matza and Sykes’s (1961) techniques of neutralisation [link to chapter??] which are the “cultural work necessary to commit crimes” (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 39, original emphasis). Matza and Sykes asserted that deviant culture is similar to the dominant culture in that both value aggression, violence and toughness. Thus, cultural criminology focuses on the paradox that while criminal violence is condemned by law, it is also “widely commodified, consumed and celebrated” (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 41).
On the other side of the Atlantic at roughly the same time, British subcultural theory was taking shape. The National Deviancy Conference and the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies were influenced by the new deviancy work from the United States. British work was a blend of American subcultural theory and labelling theory that was “given a zest, an energy” (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 44). British theorists sought to understand action and reaction, as well as incorporate wider societal analyses alongside the dynamics of small-scale situations.
The most important contribution to what would become cultural criminology was moral panic theory developed by Jock Young (1971) and Stanley Cohen (1972) (see 3 Media and Crime). Moral panic theory drew from the insights of American labelling theory to make sense of “seemingly ill-conceived and irrational reactions to deviance by authorities and the wider public” (Ferrell et al., 2008, p. 47). Later works like Hall et al.’s Policing the Crisis (1978) expanded moral panic