The Contentious Performances of Culture Jamming : Art, Repertoires of Contention, and Social Movement Theory David M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2013 The contentious performances of culture jamming : art, repertoires of contention, and social movement theory David M. Iles III Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Iles III, David M., "The onc tentious performances of culture jamming : art, repertoires of contention, and social movement theory" (2013). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 2812. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2812 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. THE CONTENTIOUS PERFORMANCES OF CULTURE JAMMING: ART, REPERTOIRES OF CONTENTION, AND SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORY A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Political Science by David M. Iles III B.S., Southeastern Louisiana University, 2006 M.S., Louisiana State University, 2009 December 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation is the culmination of a project first engaged in the Fall of 2007. Either in whole or in part, some of the chapters below are elaborated and refined versions of earlier papers, including Chapters Six and Twelve. My Master’s thesis crystallized many of the questions and approaches of this project. Indeed, the heart of the project (Chapters Two and Three) and its climax (Chapter Twelve) were first forged in the crucible of the thesis. During that period I gathered not moss but kindness and direction from Dr. Xi Chen, Caroline Payne, Omar Khalid, Jeremiah Russell, Natasha Bingham, and Shaun King. Clearly, like all such works this dissertation is more than the product of my effort. Whatever errors and delusions of grandeur contained in this manuscript are not to be traced to the intervention and support of others, but to my stoic and misguided willingness to ignore their intervention and support. More than an advisor, Dr. William Clark is a friend and a listener. His confidence in my capacity to perform the enormous task required of a doctoral candidate was both (as it should be) frustrating and rewarding. I can only hope that I did not return the frustration in the final product. As members of my doctoral committee, Dr. Cecil Eubanks and Dr. Leonard Ray also performed the unenviable responsibilities required of them. In the classroom and out, Dr. Eubanks and Dr. Ray are fountains of wisdom, professionalism, and, my savior, humor. Finally, Dr. Wonik Kim paid for too many of my lunches. He also gave me numerous professional opportunities and offered the kind of advice and direction I needed considering he accurately characterized me as the rōnin of the department. I must thank my friends who over the last three years failed to refrain from repeatedly asking me the same questions and offering the same sage advice about the ii scope of my ambitions and the necessity of settling for imperfection. Nathan Price and Tao Dumas in particular pushed me to avoid writing a five-volume treatise on street theater. The fact that they failed should not be read as a mark against them. Thanks go to Caroline Wiser as well for our long nights of discussion and debate about music, love, and science. Catherine Fleming, Jennipher Fullerton, and Jonathon Mayers contributed their expertise and knowledge in the area of art history. I offer special thanks to Catherine Fleming and Cassandra Black for their critical comments on early drafts. Ty Brown’s critiques, comments, and outside perspective were especially refreshing considering the notably hermetic quality of my work ethic. Many of the chapters contained herein received their first critical lashing under his gaze. Finally, I thank Christina Avery and Kasie Fallo for their personal support, criticism, and impatience throughout this process. Finally, I would like to thank my family for providing me with all of the support imaginable. Since I was younger than I can remember (and much younger than I can imagine), my parents instilled in me the belief that I was capable of doing whatever I wanted to do with my life. Socratic doubt and sociological wisdom mildly tempered this sense of self, but their confidence and caring were and remain incalculable and indispensable elements in my life and work. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................... viii ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................x INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Research Questions ................................................................................................................................ 2 Art and Protest ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Organization of Dissertation .............................................................................................................. 9 PART I: PROBLEM AND THEORY 1. CULTURE JAMMING ......................................................................................................................................12 1.1. Culture Jamming and Social Movement Theory ...............................................................13 1.2. Conceptual Review.......................................................................................................................16 1.3. Conceptualization .........................................................................................................................20 1.4. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................38 2. TILLY AND BOURDIEU .................................................................................................................................39 2.1. Repertoire Change .......................................................................................................................39 2.2. Summary ..........................................................................................................................................43 2.3. Tilly and Bourdieu ........................................................................................................................48 2.4. Dialogue ...........................................................................................................................................58 2.5. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................64 3. SOCIALIZATION AND COLLECTIVE ACTION THEORY ....................................................................65 3.1. Socialization....................................................................................................................................65 3.2. Collective Action Theory ............................................................................................................67 3.3. Theoretical Development ..........................................................................................................74 3.4. Identity and Preferences ...........................................................................................................79 3.5. Familiarity and Uncertainty .....................................................................................................89 3.6. Familiarity, Effectiveness, and Incentives ....................................................................... 106 3.7. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 115 4. DATA ................................................................................................................................................................ 116 4.1. Research Constraints ............................................................................................................... 116 4.2. Sample Design ............................................................................................................................. 120 4.3. Data Collection ............................................................................................................................ 124 4.4. Case Descriptions ...................................................................................................................... 128 4.5. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................