Cultural criminology is a subfield in thestudy of crime that focuses on the ways in which the "dynamics ofmeaning underpin every process incriminal justice, including the definition of crime itself."[1]: 6 In other words, cultural criminology seeks to understand crime through the context ofculture andcultural processes.[2] Rather than representing a conclusive paradigm per se, this particular form of criminological analysis interweaves a broad range of perspectives that share a sensitivity to “image,meaning, andrepresentation” to evaluate the convergence of cultural and criminal processes.[3]: 395
As opposed to other theories, cultural criminology views crime in the context of an offenders culture as a motive to commit crime. The theory gives motives to a crime, whereas other theories, such asrational choice theory, explain what was gained.
Sociologist Jack Katz is recognized by many as being a foundational figure to this approach[4] through his seminal work,Seductions of Crime, written in 1988.[5] Cultural criminology as a substantive approach, however, did not begin to form until the mid-1990s,[6] where increasing interest arose from the desire to incorporatecultural studies into contemporary criminology. Developed in both theUnited States and theUnited Kingdom, the approach has had transnational impacts.
Recent theories within cultural criminology take into account the role of space (such as urban space) in the construction of crime, positing, for example, that where an action takes place is as important as the effect of the action in determining criminality. The roles ofexcitement and control in cultural criminology has laid the foundation for the sociological concept of "edgework".[7] Edgework's focus on prototypically masculine, high-risk pursuits has been criticised by a number offeminist criminologists. More recent works, however, suggest that edgework can be applied to either gender.[8]
In Katz (1988) and other works, the goal is to find the overlap between the emotions associated with everyday life and those associated with crime.[4][9] As such, one of the main tenets of cultural criminology is the role ofaffect in crime.[10]
Jeff Ferrell, cited by many scholars as a forerunner of the subfield as it is known today, describes the purpose of cultural criminology as being to investigate “the stylized frameworks andexperiential dynamics of illicitsubcultures; the symbolic criminalization ofpopular culture forms; and the mediated construction of crime and crime control issues.”[3]: 395 Moreover, the approach has often been used to demonstrate the ways in whichpower affects the construction of crime, such as the creation and breaking of law, as well as the interplay ofmoral entrepreneurship, moral innovation, and transgression.[11]
Since the approach itself consists of a mélange of various perspectives linked together by dynamics of meaning, deliberations in this domain often invoke an assortment of theoretical elements. Cultural criminological analysis unambiguously roots itself ininteractionist andconstructionist tradition. More specifically, such approach concedesHoward Becker’s (1963)labelling theory, while augmenting it with aphenomenological dimension that considers the “webs of meaning and perception in which all parties are entangled.”[3]: 398
Along with interactionist and constructionist theories, as well as ideas posed by Katz and Becker, cultural criminological work tends to explicitly cite, or be reminiscent of, the following theories and/or theorists among others:
Originally, cultural criminologists utilized one of two main research methods: eitherethnographic andfieldwork techniques,[14] or the mainqualitative research techniques associated with the scholarly readings.[3] Cultural criminologists today also employ research methods such as participatoryaction research or "narrative criminology". They remain constant, however, in their rejection ofabstract empiricism,positivism and administrative criminology;[2][15] these rejections and criticisms were influenced byC. Wright Mills in his seminal workThe Sociological Imagination and then further developed in The Criminological Imagination byJock Young.[16]
A key criticism of cultural criminology states that the perspective romanticizes the criminal which downplays the severity of criminal action.[17] However, theorists such asJock Young remind critics that the aims of cultural criminology is to place deviancy within a context of culture, regardless of how the criminal comes across.[18]
^Lyng, Stephen (1990). "Edgework: A Social Psychological Analysis of Voluntary Risk Taking".American Journal of Sociology.95 (4):851–886.doi:10.1086/229379.JSTOR2780644.S2CID144098424.
^Young, Jock (August 2003). "Merton with Energy, Katz with Structure:: The Sociology of Vindictiveness and the Criminology of Transgression".Theoretical Criminology.7 (3):389–414.doi:10.1177/13624806030073007.S2CID145314044.
^Young, Alison (2009).The scene of violence: Crime, cinema, affect. London and New York: Routledge.ISBN978-1-134-00872-8.[page needed]
^Hayward, Keith, and Jock Young. 2012. "Cultural Criminology." InThe Oxford Handbook of Criminology (5th ed.), edited by M. Maguire, R. Morgan, and R. Reiner. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-959027-8.[page needed]
^Ferrell, J., Hayward, K and Young, J. (2015)Cultural Criminology: An Invitation. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications.ISBN978-1-4462-5915-3.[page needed]
^Ferrell, J., Hayward, K and Young, J. (2015) Cultural Criminology: An Invitation. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications.ISBN978-1-4462-5915-3.[page needed]
Ferrell, Jeff, Keith Hayward, Wayne Morrison, and Mike Presdee (eds.). 2004.Cultural Criminology Unleashed. London: GlassHouse.ISBN9781904385370.
Frederick, B.J. & Larruscahim, P. (2015). Cultural criminology. In Jennings, W.G. (ed)The Encyclopedia of Crime & Punishment. 1st ed. John Wiley & Sons.
.svg)
