英语论文网

of the features of postmodernism and, for those who are interested in a deeper understanding of postmodern thought, a list of useful references are to be found in the appendix of this paper. Bearing these points in mind it is now appropriate to take a detailed look at the work of Jean Baudrillard. 3. Baudrillard and a theory of objects. Although postmodern theorists would like to be seen as not creating meta-narratives this is just what Jean Baudrillard seems to have achieved. He is concerned with three central concepts throughout his work; symbolic exchange value, simulation, and hyper-reality. His work takes aspects of symbo lic interactionism, Marxian dialectics, and discourse theory but views the object as no more than a signifier. It is in fact a very good example of postmodernism as pastiche. The aim of this chapter will be to take these concepts and investigate how they are relevant to our understanding of the nature of objects. 3.1. Symbolic exchange value. "This mechanism of discrimination and prestige is at the very basis of the system of values and of integration into the hierarchical order of society." (Baudrillard,1981:30) Baudrillard (1981) lays down his concept of symbolic exchange value in 'For A Critique Of The Political Economy Of The Sign'. Central to the idea of symbolic exchange value is the assumption that each object acts as a signifier, thus its only value is as a symbol. For Baudrillard the meta-narratives of theorists such as Marx are mere stories which are based on objective measures of truth and validity and rely on concepts that may not exist. One phenomenon that does exist however, according to Baudrillard, is culture. It is within the realm of culture, rather than production and economics, that Baudrillard sees the springboard of contemporary society. At this point one must ask how Baudrillard defines culture, and in this respect, he seems to favour the consensual view that culture is the product of humanity acting within an environment1. The area where Baudrillard detracts from the consensus is where he argues that the environment which humanity acts in is not a natural environment, rather it is a consumption based environment. Thus, we can begin to see that the genesis of modern society lies not only in the cultural system but also in consumption. The natural progression from this stand-point is that consumption creates eras which in turn manufacture culture in the form of objects, each of which is a symbol having a specific meaning and exchange value attached to it. The outcome of such an approach is that consumption should always be viewed as an aspect of culture rather than one of production2. Why then does Baudrillard focus on symbolic exchange value rather than use value? The answer lies in his argument that it is objects and their nature that afford us social prestation3 rather than our relationship to an imagined mode of production. Indeed, it is argued that, "An accurate theory of objects will not be established upon a theory of needs and their satisfaction, but upon a theory of social prestations and signification" (Baudrillard, 1981:30). Now from this argument one can conclude that consumption of goods does not allude to a satisfaction of needs; rather it is connected to the creation of symbols which allow delineation in hierarchies. At this point I feel it is necessary to give an illustration in order that the point be clarified. The example which I will use is from my own experienc