Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
on account of the plethora of overlapping and sometimes contradictory defi nitions 'out there'.
Readers new to social theory are encouraged to persevere with this complexity - the insight
permitted by even a basic knowledge of post-modernist, structuralist and post-structuralist
theories justifi es tourism researchers investing time in getting to know them (in this author's
opinion, at least). For example, they can help describe and explain contemporary tourism
landscapes, or the behaviour of tourists and the enterprises that satisfy their needs and wants,
with implications for new knowledge creation in tourism studies and (cultural and economic)
geography as a contributory discipline (Davis, 2001; Squire, 1994).
The terms post-structuralism and post-modernism are often used interchangeably,
notwithstanding the differences between them. Explanations of post-modernism as a
form of
theorising
- it can also refer to a
cultural formation or experience
or an
artistic and architectural style
associated with post-modernity as the current epoch of history - invariably emphasise one or
more of the following:
The rejection of grand theories or 'meta-narratives' that claim to be universally applicable
and, thus, make no provision for spatiotemporal or cultural differences;
The belief that there is nothing knowable that is independent of mind (cf. relativism);
The deconstruction of other people's theories to reveal the assumptions and ideologies
behind them, rather than creating new (and possibly 'useful') knowledge through empir-
ical study; and
Experimentation with deliberately inconclusive and open-ended styles of writing
(cf. 'language games').
The utility of post-modernist modes of analysis is discussed by Uriely (2005) in relation to
the tourist experience. He makes the point that 'one might agree with the notion of so-called
“postmodernist culture” in general, and “postmodernist modes of theorising” in particular,
and still criticise these contemporary developments' (Uriely, 2005: 202). Certainly, this is
true of Gale's (2005) account of the decline and restructuring of British seaside resorts
which - using a case study of Rhyl, North Wales - explores the relationship between the
alleged transition from modernism to post-modernism as cultural formations and changes to
the built environment of these erstwhile long holiday destinations since the 1960s,
without
taking up some of the more radical ideas associated with post-modernist social theory.
Similarly, Gottdiener's (1995: 101) socio-semiotic analysis of Disneyland, in studying the
'articulation between ideology and built, material forms' (here represented by late capitalism
and the various themes around which space in the park is organised, respectively), avoids the
idealism of other (post-modernist) readings of the theme park as 'text'.
Post-structuralism, as denoted by the prefi x 'post', follows structuralism - hence, to under-
stand the former (in the order they are presented in this sentence) we must fi rst understand
the latter. Structuralism holds that the behaviour of human subjects is determined by pre-
existing structures, or abstract systems whose constituent parts and principles are known only
to social scientists. It has its origins in structural linguistics and the work of Ferdinand de
Saussure, who defi ned (any) language as a system of signs, a sign being composed of two
inseparable elements - the 'signifi er' (e.g. an audible sound or a mark on a page) and the
'signifi ed' (i.e. the mental image that it evokes). This system governs acts of speech and
writing, where signs (words) are selected and combined in accordance with rules (grammar)
to create meaning. Saussure also found this to be true of non-linguistic aspects of culture,
although it was only after his death that these ideas were extended to a range of social
phenomena such as kinship structures and cooking practices (Schatzki, 1998).
