Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Articles

No. 2(7) (2014): What Did We Get from Counterculture?

Why Do We Need Counterculture? Contemporary Reflections on Theodore Roszak’s „The Making of a Counter Culture”

  • Michał Kaczmarczyk
DOI
https://doi.org/10.51196/srz.7.4
Submitted
June 23, 2020

Abstract

The counterculture is a provocative concept as far as it means a rejection of culture while being itself a part of culture and as far as it talks the young generation into a rebellion but requiring a mature project of society. It is also provocative in that it rejects modernization and at the same time promotes a moral universalizm which is a hallmark of modernity. The author of the paper attempts to find the constitutive ideas of the counterculture and to compare them with other ideologies, their advantages and drawbacks. Moreover, it indicates the significance of counterculture for a proper understanding of social movements. The theme which proves to be the central one in the counterculture is the tension between an artistic and philosophical interpretation of subject.

References

  1. Alexander J. 2006. The Civil Sphere, Oxford University Press, New York.
  2. Alexander J. 2010. The Performance of Politics. Obama’s Victory and the Democratic Struggle for Power, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York.
  3. Eisenstadt N. S. 2003. From Generation to Generation, Transaction, New Brunswick, London.
  4. Habermas J. 1968. Technik und Wissenschaft als Ideologie, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main.
  5. Habermas J. 1975. Legitimationsprobleme im Spätkapitalismus, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main.
  6. Habermas J. 1981. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, t. I i II, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main.
  7. Hochschild A. R. 2012. The Outsourced Self. Intimate Life in Market Times, Metropolitan Books, New York.
  8. Inglehart R. 1977. The Silent Revolution. Changing Values, Behaviours, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations, Sage, Beverly Hills.
  9. Kaczmarczyk M. 2010. Nieposłuszeństwo obywatelskie a pojęcie prawa, Oficyna Naukowa, Warszawa.
  10. Luhmann N. 1996. Tautologie und Paradoxie in den Selbstbeschreibungen der modernen Gesellschaft, [w:] tenże, Protest. Systemtheorie und soziale Bewegungen, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, s. 79–106.
  11. Nietzsche F. 1991. Tako rzecze Zaratustra. Książka dla wszystkich i dla nikogo, tłum. W. Berent, „Bis”, Warszawa.
  12. Parsons T. 2010. System społeczny, tłum. M. Kaczmarczyk, NOMOS, Kraków.
  13. Read H. 1973. O pochodzeniu formy w sztuce, tłum. E. Życieńska, PIW, Warszawa.
  14. Reckwitz A. 2012. Die Erfindung der Kreativität. Zum Prozess gesellschaftlicher Ästhetisierung, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main.
  15. Roszak T. 1968. The Making of a Counter Culture. Reflections on the technocratic society and its youthful opposition, Anchor Books, G Sharp G. 1973. The Dynamics of Nonviolent Action, Porter Sargent, Boston.
  16. Snow D., Phillip W. D. 1995. The Chicago Approach to Collective Behavior, [w:] A Second Chicago School? The Development of a Postwar American Sociology, red. Gary Alan Fine, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, London, s. 188–220.
  17. Sulej K. 2014. Zostanie po nas tylko dobra muzyka. Wywiad z Jenny Diski, „Wysokie obcasy” 2014, nr 17.
  18. Thome H. 2012. Zmiana wartości w Europie z perspektywy empirycznych badań społecznych, [w:] Kulturowe wartości Europy, red. H. Joas, R. Wiegand, tłum. M. Bucholc, M. Kaczmarczyk, Wydawnictwo IFiS PAN, Warszawa, s. 307–354.
  19. Touraine A. 2000. Can We Live Together? Equality and Difference, Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.