0360-0572/99/0815-0395$08.00395Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.
25:395418Copyright 1999 by Annual Reviews. All rights
reservedCULTURAL CRIMINOLOGYJeff FerrellDepartment of Criminal
Justice, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff,
Arizona,86011-5005; e-mail: [email protected] WORDS: crime,
culture, media, subculture, meaningABSTRACTAs an emergent
orientation in sociology, criminology, and criminal
justice,cultural criminology explores the convergence of cultural
and criminal pro-cessesincontemporarysociallife.
Drawingonperspectivesfromculturalstudies, postmodern theory,
critical theory, and interactionist sociology, andon ethnographic
methodologies and media/textual analysis, this
orientationhighlightsissuesofimage,meaning,andrepresentationintheinterplayofcrime
and crime control. Specifically, cultural criminology investigates
thestylizedframeworks andexperiential dynamics of illicit
subcultures; thesymboliccriminalizationofpopularcultureforms;
andthemediatedcon-struction of crime and crime control issues. In
addition, emerging areas of in-quiry within cultural criminology
include the development of situated mediaand situated audiences for
crime; the media and culture of policing; the
linksbetweencrime,crimecontrol,andculturalspace;andthecollectivelyem-bodied
emotions that shape the meaning of crime.INTRODUCTIONThe concept of
cultural criminology denotes both specific perspectives andbroader
orientations that have emerged in criminology, sociology, and
crimi-nal justice over the past few years. Most specifically,
cultural criminologyrepresents a perspective developed by Ferrell
& Sanders (1995), and likewiseemployed by Redhead (1995) and
others (Kane 1998a), that interweaves par-ticular intellectual
threads to explore the convergence of cultural and
criminalprocessesincontemporarysocial life. Morebroadly,
thenotionofculturalcriminology references the increasing analytic
attention that many
criminolo-gistsnowgivetopopularcultureconstructions,
andespeciallymassmediaAnnu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418.
Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on
11/13/13. For personal use only.constructions, of crime and crime
control. It in turn highlights the emergenceof this general area of
media and cultural inquiry as a relatively distinct
domainwithincriminology, asevidenced, forexample,
bythenumberofrecentlypublishedcollectionsundertakingexplorationsofmedia,culture,andcrime(Anderson&Howard1998,
Bailey&Hale1998, Barak1994a, Ferrell &Sanders 1995, Ferrell
& Websdale 1999, Kidd-Hewitt & Osborne 1995,
Potter&Kappeler1998).Mostbroadly,theexistenceofaconceptsuchasculturalcriminology
underscores the steady seepage in recent years of cultural and
me-diaanalysisintothetraditionaldomainsofcriminologicalinquiry,suchthatcriminological
conferences and journals increasingly provide room and legiti-macy
for such analysis under any number of conventional headings, from
ju-venile delinquency and corporate crime to policing and domestic
violence.Given this range, across tightly focused theoretical
statements and particularcase studies to wider analytic and
substantive (re)orientations, this essay incor-porates the work of
the growing number of scholars who consciously
identifytheirworkasculturalcriminologybutalsoincludestheworkofthosewhomoregenerallyexplorethevariousintersectionsofculturalandcriminaldy-namics.
Further, while it considers existing works that might now be
retroac-tively gathered under the heading of cultural criminology,
it focuses on recentscholarship, and especially on work
nowdeveloping in and around the fields ofcriminology and criminal
justice. Thus, cultural criminology at this point canbe seen to
denote less a definitive paradigmthan an emergent array of
perspec-tives linked by sensitivities to image, meaning, and
representation in the studyof crime and crime control. Within this
broad and fluid framework, a numberoftheoretical, methodological,
andsubstantiveorientationscanbeseentoprovide a degree of
commonality as well.FOUNDATIONS OF CULTURAL CRIMINOLOGYHistorical
and Theoretical FrameworksAt its most basic, cultural criminology
attempts to integrate the fields of crimi-nology and cultural
studies or, put differently, to import the insights of
culturalstudiesintocontemporarycriminology.Giventhis,muchscholarshipincul-tural
criminology takes as its foundation perspectives that emerged out
of theBritish/Birmingham School of cultural studies, and the
British new criminol-ogy (Taylor et al 1973), of the 1970s. The
work of Hebdige (1979, 1988), Hall&Jefferson(1976),
Clarke(1976), McRobbie(1980), Willis(1977, 1990),and others has
attuned cultural criminologists to the subtle, situated dynamicsof
deviant and criminal subcultures, and to the importance of
symbolism andstyle in shaping subcultural meaning and identity.
Similarly, the work of Cohen(1972/1980), Cohen & Young (1973),
Hall et al (1978), and others has influ-enced contemporary
understandings of the mass medias role in constructing396
FERRELLAnnu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only.the reality of crime and deviance, and in
generating new forms of social andlegal control. At times,
contemporaryscholarshipincultural
criminologysimplyassumesthisintellectual foundationor utilizesit
onlypartially. Atother times, though, cultural criminologys lineage
in British cultural studiesandthe Britishnewcriminologyis made
explicit (Cohen1996, Redhead1995:3346). In the introduction to a
recent volume on crime and the media,for example, Kidd-Hewitt
(1995) outlines five key works that set the agendafor subsequent
research into crime, representation, and social control:
Young(1971), Cohen(1972/1980), Cohen&Young(1973), Chibnall
(1977), andHall et al
(1978).Asahybridorientation,though,culturalcriminologyhasbeenbuiltfrommore
than a simple integration of 1970s British cultural studies into
contempo-raryAmericancriminology. Certainly, cultural
criminologists continue todraw on the insights of cultural studies
as a developing field and on
currentculturalstudiesexplorationsofidentity,sexuality,andsocialspace(During1993,
Grossberg et al 1992). Moreover, with its focus on representation,
im-age, and style, cultural criminology incorporates not only the
insights of cul-tural studies, but the intellectual reorientation
afforded by postmodernism. Inplace of the modernist duality of form
and content, and the modernist hierar-chy that proposes that
formmust be stripped away to get at the meaningful coreof content,
cultural criminology operates fromthe postmodern proposition
thatform is content, that style is substance, that meaning thus
resides in
presenta-tionandre-presentation.Fromthisview,thestudyofcrimenecessitatesnotsimply
the examination of individual criminals and criminal events, not
eventhe straightforward examination of media coverage of criminals
and crimi-nal events, but rather a journey into the spectacle and
carnival of crime, a walkdown an infinite hall of mirrors where
images created and consumed by crimi-nals, criminalsubcultures,
controlagents, mediainstitutions, andaudiencesbounce endlessly one
off the other. Increasingly, then, cultural criminologistsexplore
the networks...of connections, contact, contiguity, feedback and
gen-eralized interface (Baudrillard 1985:127; see Pfohl 1993) out
of which crimeandcrimecontrolareconstructed,
theintertextualmedialoops(Manning1998)throughwhichtheseconstructionscirculate,
andthediscursiveinter-connections that emerge between media
institutions, crime control agents, andcriminal subcultures (Kane
1998b). As part of this exploration, they in turn in-vestigate
criminal and deviant subcultures as sites of criminalization,
criminalactivity, and legal control, but also as subaltern
counterpublic[s], as
paralleldiscursivearena[s]wheremembers...inventandcirculatecounterdiscoursesand
expand discursive space (Fraser 1995:291).Grounded as it is in the
frameworks of cultural studies and postmodernism,cultural
criminology is at the same time firmly rooted in sociological
perspec-tives. Perhaps because of its emergence out of sociological
criminology,CULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 397Annu. Rev. Sociol.
1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University
of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use only.though, cultural
criminology has to this point drawn less on the sociology
ofculturethanit hasonvariousother sociological
orientationsmorecloselyaligned, historically, with criminology.
Central among these is the interaction-ist tradition in the
sociology of deviance and criminology (Becker 1963, Pfuhl1986). In
examining the mediated networks and discursive connections
notedabove, cultural criminologists
alsotracethemanifoldinteractions throughwhich criminals, control
agents, media producers, and others collectively con-struct
themeaningofcrime. Insodoing, cultural criminologistsattempt
toelaborateonthesymbolicinsymbolicinteractionbyhighlightingthepopular
prevalence of mediated crime imagery, the interpersonal
negotiationof style within criminal and deviant subcultures, and
the emergence of largersymbolic universes within which crime takes
on political meaning. These un-derstandings of crime and crime
control as social and political
constructions,andthisendeavortounravel
themediatedprocessesthroughwhichtheseconstructions occur, also
build on more recent constructionist perspectives insociology (Best
1995). Yet while cultural criminology certainly draws on
con-structionist sociology, it also contributes to constructionist
orientations a sen-sitivity to mediated circuits of meaning other
than those of the mass media,and it offers a spiraling postmodern
sensibility that moves beyond dualisms
ofcrimeeventandmediacoverage,factualtruthanddistortion,whichattimesframe
constructionist analysis (Ferrell & Websdale
1999).Finally,culturalcriminologyemergesinmanywaysoutofcriticaltradi-tions
in sociology, criminology, and cultural studies, incorporating as
it does avariety of critical perspectives on crime and crime
control. Utilizing these per-spectives,
culturalcriminologistsattempttounravelthepoliticsofcrimeasplayed
out through mediated anti-crime campaigns; through evocative
culturalconstructionsofdeviance,crime,andmarginality;andthroughcriminalizedsubcultures
and their resistance to legal control. To the extent that it
integratesinteractionist, constructionist, andcritical sociologies,
cultural
criminologythusundertakestodevelopwhatCohen(1988:68)hascalledastructurallyand
politically informed version of labeling theory, or what Melossi
(1985)has similarly described as a grounded labeling theorythat is,
an analysisthat accounts for the complex circuitry of mediated
interaction through
whichthemeaningofcrimeanddevianceisconstructedandenforced.
Putmoresimply,culturalcriminologyheedsBeckers(1963:183,199)classicinjunc-tionthat
we look at all the people involved in any episode of alleged
devi-ance...allthepartiestoasituation,andtheirrelationshipsandincludesinthis
collective examination those cultural relationships, those webs of
meaningand perception in which all parties are entangled.In its mix
of historical and theoretical foundations, cultural criminology
canthus be seen to incorporate both more traditional sociological
perspectives andmore recently ascendant cultural studies and
postmodern approaches. As such,398 FERRELLAnnu. Rev. Sociol.
1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University
of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use only.cultural criminology
likewise embodies the creative tension in which sociol-ogy and
cultural studies/postmodernism often exist (Becker & McCall
1990,Denzin 1992, Pfohl 1992), a tension which at its best produces
attentiveness tostructures of power and nuances of meaning, to
fixed symbolic universes andemergent codes of marginality, to the
mediated expansion of legal control andthe stylized undermining of
legal authorityand to the inevitable confoundingof these very
categories in everyday criminality.Methodological
FrameworksCultural criminologys melange of intellectual and
disciplinary influences alsosurfaces in the methodologies that
cultural criminologists employ. In explor-ing the interconnections
of culture and crime, researchers utilize ethnographicmodels rooted
in sociology, criminology, cultural studies, and
anthropology;modifications of these models suggested by recent
developments in feminist,postmodern, and existentialist thought;
and a range of methods geared towardmedia and textual analysis.
Further, as will be seen, researchers at times com-bine or overlay
these methods in the course of particular projects.
Nonetheless,there remains within the broad framework of cultural
criminology a significantsplit betweenmethodologies
orientedtowardethnographyandfieldworkpractice, and those oriented
toward media and textual analysis.Ethnographic research in cultural
criminology reflects the long-standingattentivenessof cultural
studiesresearcherstoprecisenuancesof meaningwithin particular
cultural milieux. Willis (1977:3), for example, notes that
hisuseofethnographictechniqueswasdictatedbythenatureofmyinterestinthe
cultural. These techniques are suited to record this level and have
a sensi-tivity to meanings and values.... At the same time,
ethnographic research
inculturalcriminologyreflectsthesociologicalandcriminologicaltraditionofdeepinquiryintothesituateddynamicsofcriminalanddeviantsubcultures(Adler1985,Becker1963,Humphreys1975);especiallyinfluentialherearePolskys(1969)manifestoonthenecessarypoliticsandpracticeoffieldre-search
among deviant and criminal populations, and Hagedorns (1990)
morerecent echoingof thesethemes. Inaddition, thepracticeof
fieldresearchwithin cultural criminology incorporates recent
reconsiderations of fieldmethod among sociologists, criminologists,
and anthropologists (Burawoy
etal1991,Ferrell&Hamm1998,VanMaanen1995a),andamongfeminists,postmodernists,
and existentialists (Fonow & Cook 1991, Clough 1992, Den-zin
1997, Sanders 1995, Adler & Adler 1987) inside and outside
these disci-plines. Together, these works suggest that field
research operates as an
inher-entlypersonalandpoliticalendeavor,profoundlyengagingresearcherswithsituations
and subjects of study. These works thus call for reflexive
reportingontheresearchprocess,foranethnographyofethnography(VanMaanenCULTURAL
CRIMINOLOGY 399Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use
only.1995b),whichaccountsfortheresearchersownroleintheconstructionofmeaning.An
extreme version of this ethnographic perspective within cultural
crimi-nology,yetonerootedinsociologicalparadigms,isthenotionofcrimino-logical
verstehen (Ferrell & Hamm 1998). Drawing on Webers
(1978:45)formulation of verstehen in terms of interpretive
understanding and sympa-thetic participation, and on later
refinements within qualitative methodology(Adler & Adler 1987),
the concept of criminological verstehen denotes a
fieldresearcherssubjectiveappreciationandempathicunderstandingofcrimessituatedmeanings,symbolism,andemotions,inpartthroughthesortsofdi-rectlyparticipatoryresearchthatcanfosteramethodologyofattentiveness.Fromthisview,
theresearchersownexperiencesandemotionsemergeaswindows into
criminal events and criminal subcultures, and into the
collectiveexperiencesandunderstandingsofthoseinvolvedinthem.
Whilecertainlyfraught with personal and professional danger, and
limited by issues of indi-vidual and collective identity, this
approach seeks to move deep inside the cul-tures of crime and crime
control by dismantling dualistic epistemic hierarchiesthat
positiontheresearcheroverandapart fromresearchsubjects,
abstractanalysis over and beyond situated knowledge, and sanitary
intellect over andoutside human experience and emotion. The concept
of criminological verste-henthusincludestheresearcher,
andtheresearchersownsituatedexperi-ences, in the collective
construction of crimes reality.Alternatively, other bodies of
research in cultural criminology are based
notinresearchersdeepparticipatoryimmersionincriminalworlds,butintheirscholarly
reading of the various mediated texts that circulate images of
crimeandcrimecontrol. Therangeof substantivescholarshipthat has
recentlyemerged is itself remarkable, exploring as it does both
historical and contem-porary texts, and investigating local and
national newspaper coverage of
crimeandcrimecontrol(Brownstein1995,Websdale&Alvarez1998,Perrone&Chesney-Lind
1997, Howe 1997); filmic depictions of criminals, criminal
vio-lence, andcriminaljustice(Newman1998, Cheatwood1998,
Niesel1998);television portrayals of crime and criminals (Tunnell
1998, Fishman
&Caven-der1998);imagesofcrimeinpopularmusic(Tunnell1995);comicbooks,crime,
and juvenile delinquency (Nyberg 1998, Williams 1998); crime
depic-tions in cyberspace (Greek 1996); and the broader presence of
crime and crimecontrol imagerythroughout
popularculturetexts(Barak1995,
Marx1995,Surette1998,Kidd-Hewitt&Osborne1995,Kooistra1989).Manyofthesestudies
utilize conventional content analysis techniques to measure the
degreeof crime coverage, the distribution of source material, or
the relative presenceof crimeimagery. Others incorporateless
formal, descriptiveaccounts ofprominent media constructions (Barak
1996), or illustrative case-by-casecomparisonsamongmediatexts.
Still others, ofteninfluencedbyfeminist400 FERRELLAnnu. Rev.
Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby
University of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use only.methodology
and epistemology, develop imaginative readings,
counter-read-ings,andsociologicaldeconstructions(Pfohl&Gordon1986,seeYoung1996,
Clough 1992) of crime texts and criminal justice formations.While
this divergence between ethnography and textual analysis does
char-acterize much of the scholarship in cultural criminology, a
number of scholarshave in fact begun to produce works that usefully
integrate these two methodo-logical orientations. Chermak (1995,
1997, 1998), for example, has
combinedcontentanalysiswithethnographicobservationandinterviewingtoproducemultilayered
studies that explore not only the sources and symbolic
character-istics of mediated crime accounts, but the organizational
dynamics
underlyingthem.Situatingherworkintheoverlappingfieldsofethnographyandcul-tural
studies, Kane (1998b:8, 1998a) has engaged in extensive,
cross-culturalfield research in order to analyze and place herself
within, contrasting
publicdiscoursesofpublichealthandlawaroundAIDSandHIV.Byintegratingethnographicresearchamongneo-Nazi
skinheadswithdetailedanalysisofpopularmusicshistoricalandthematicstructures,
Hamm(1993,
1995)hassucceededinexplicatingthebroadsymbolicunderpinningsoftheskinheadsubculture
and the specific place of musical idioms within it. Ferrell (1996)
haslikewiseinterwovenextendedparticipant
observationamongurbangraffitiwriters with an analysis of media and
criminal justice campaigns against themto reveal the ongoing,
reflexive process by which each party to the conflict
hasreappropriated and reconstructed the meanings of the
other.Theseandotheremergingworkssuggest that
anysharpdisjunctionbe-tween ethnographic research and textual/media
analysis in cultural criminol-ogy not only makes little sense
methodologically, but to some degree
actuallyunderminestheverymandateofculturalcriminologyitself.
Atfirstglance,thismethodologicaldisjunctionwouldseemtobejustifiedbyaparalleldis-junction
in subject matter, with ethnography best suited for exploring
criminalsubculturesandsituations,
andtextualanalysisbestsuitedforinvestigatingmedia constructions of
crime and crime control. Yet, as contemporary researchbegins to
show, these subjects are never as distinct as they first seem. The
massmedia and associated culture industries certainly produce an
ongoing flood ofcrime images and crime texts; but media audiences,
deviant and criminal sub-cultures, control agencies, and others
subsequently appropriate these texts andimages, and in part
reconstruct their meaning as they utilize them in
particularsocialsituations.Similarly,themanysubculturesconcernedwithcrimeandcrime
controlfrom gang members and graffiti writers to police
associationsandpoliticalinterestgroupsthemselvesproducecomplexcircuitsofcom-munication,
and within this circuitry all manner of images and symbols.
Thesesituatedmediainturncirculatewithinandbetweensocial worlds,
generatecompeting symbolic references and public perceptions of
crime, and
regularlyreappearascaricaturewithintherealmofmassmediaentertainmentandre-CULTURAL
CRIMINOLOGY 401Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only.porting on crime. Thus, as before, it is not
criminal subcultures and situationsthat merit the attention of
cultural criminologists, nor mediated constructionsof crime, but
rather the confounding and confluence of these categories in
every-day life. And in this hall of mirrors, in this world of
spiraling symbolism andfluid meaning, neither traditional
ethnography nor textual analysis sufficesbut instead some mix of
method that can begin to situate the researcher insidethe complex
swirl of culture and crime.In this sense ethnography and
media/textual analysis, whether utilized
indi-viduallyorincombination,produceattheirbestinterpretivecasestudiescase
studies that expose the dynamic cultural situations out of which
crime andcrime control are constructed. In fact, Ferrell &
Sanders (1995:3048) arguethat the subtlety and complexity of these
dynamics are such that cultural crimi-nology is best served by an
accumulation of in-depth case studies, rather
thanbymoreshallowsurveyresearchor moreabstract statistical
analysis. Yetwhile this reliance on case study method (Geis 1991,
Ragin & Becker
1992)mayenhancetheanalyticsophisticationofculturalcriminology,itmayalsofunctiontomarginalizeit
fromthecriminological andsociological main-stream. Feagin et al
(1991:270), for example, contend that case study sociol-ogy has now
been overtaken, and to some degree delegitimated, by a form
ofmainstream journal-article sociology which accents
quantitative-statisticaldata interpreted in a hypothetico-deductive
positivistic framework.The long sweep of scholarly history reminds
us that, for cultural criminol-ogy as for other emergent
perspectives, such marginalization may or may notdevelop, and may
or may not endure. Should marginalization result from
cul-turalcriminologysrelianceoncasestudymethodandinterpretiveanalysis,though,
it would dovetail doubly with the larger project of cultural
criminol-ogy. First, this sort of methodological marginalization
would perhaps suit anapproach developed out of cultural studies,
postmodernism, critical and femi-nist theory, andother perspectives
longsuspect withincertainquarters ofmainstream social science.
Second, as will be seen, the contemporary practiceof cultural
criminologyembodies not onlytheoretical
andmethodologicalframeworksexteriortothepositivistmainstream,butanintellectualpoliticsforeign
to traditional notions of objectivity and detachment as
well.CONTEMPORARY AREAS OF
INQUIRYFramedbythesetheoreticalandmethodologicalorientations,culturalcrimi-nologicalresearchandanalysishaveemergedinthepastfewyearswithinanumber
of overlapping substantive areas. The first two of these can be
charac-terized by an overly simple but perhaps informative
dichotomy
betweencrimeascultureandcultureascrime.Thethirdbroadareaincorporatesthe
variety of ways in which media dynamics construct the reality of
crime and402 FERRELLAnnu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded
from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only.crime control; the fourth explores the social
politics of crime and culture andthe intellectual politics of
cultural criminology.Crime as
CultureTospeakofcrimeascultureistoacknowledgeataminimumthatmuchofwhat
we label criminal behavior is at the same time subcultural
behavior, collec-tively organized around networks of symbol,
ritual, and shared meaning. Putsimply, it is to adopt the
subculture as a basic unit of criminological analysis.While this
general insight is hardly a newone, cultural criminology develops
itinanumberofdirections.Bringingapostmodernsensibilitytotheirunder-standing
of deviant and criminal subcultures, cultural criminologists argue
thatsuch subcultures incorporateindeed, are defined byelaborate
conventionsof argot, appearance, aesthetics, and stylized
presentation of self and thus op-erate as repositories of
collective meaning and representation for their mem-bers. Within
these subcultures as in other arenas of crime, formshapes
content,image frames identity. Taken into a mediated world of
increasingly dislocatedcommunication and dispersed meaning, this
insight further implies that devi-ant and criminal subcultures may
nowbe exploding into universes of
symboliccommunicationthatinmanywaystranscendtimeandspace.
Forcomputerhackers, graffiti writers, drug runners, and others, a
mix of widespread
spatialdislocationandprecisenormativeorganizationimpliessubculturesdefinedless
by face-to-face interaction than by shared, if second-hand,
symbolic codes(Gelder & Thornton
1997:473550).Understandably,then,muchresearchinthisareaofculturalcriminologyhasfocusedonthedisperseddynamicsofsubculturalstyle.FollowingfromHebdiges(1979)classicexplorationofsubculture:themeaningofstyle,cultural
criminologistshaveinvestigatedstyleasdefiningboththeinternalcharacteristics
of deviant and criminal subcultures and external constructionsof
them. Miller (1995), for example, has documented the many ways in
whichgang symbolism and style exist as the medium of meaning for
both street gangmembersandtheprobationofficerswhoattempt tocontrol
them.
Readinggangstylesasemblematicofgangimmersionandgangdefiance,enforcingcourtordersprohibitinggangclothing,confiscatinggangparaphernalia,anddisplayingtheirconfiscatedcollectionsontheirownofficewalls,theproba-tion
officers in Millers study construct the meanings of gang style as
surely asdothegangmembersthemselves. Likewise, Ferrell
(1996)hasshownhowcontemporary hip hop graffiti exists essentially
as a crime of style for graffitiwriters,
whooperateandevaluateoneanotherwithincomplexstylisticandsymbolicconventions,butalsoformediainstitutionsandlegalandpoliticalauthorities
who perceive graffiti as violating the aesthetics of authority
es-sential to their ongoing control of urban environments. More
broadly, Ferrell(in Ferrell &Sanders 1995:16989) has explored
style as the tissue connectingCULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 403Annu. Rev.
Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby
University of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use
only.culturalandcriminalpracticesandhasexaminedthewaysinwhichsubcul-turalstyleshapesnotonlyaestheticcommunities,butofficialandunofficialreactionstosubculturalidentity.Finally,Lyng&Bracey(1995)havedocu-mented
the multiply ironic process by which the style of the outlaw biker
sub-culturecamefirsttosignifyclass-basedculturalresistance,nexttoelicitthesorts
of media reactions and legal controls that in fact amplified and
confirmedits meaning, and finally to be appropriated and
commodified in such a way asto void its political potential.
Significantly, these and other studies
(Cosgrove1984)echoandconfirmtheintegrativemethodologicalframeworkoutlinedabovebydemonstratingthattheimportanceofstyleresidesnotwithinthedynamics
of criminal subcultures, nor in media and political constructions
ofits meaning, but in the contested interplay of the two.If
subcultures of crime and deviance are defined by their aesthetic
and sym-bolic organization, cultural criminology has also begun to
show that they aredefined by intensities of collective experience
and emotion as well.
BuildingonKatzs(1988)wide-rangingexplorationofthesensuallyseductivefore-groundofcriminality,
cultural criminologistslikeLyng(1990, 1998)andFerrell
(1996)haveutilizedverstehen-orientedmethodologiestodocumenttheexperiencesofedgeworkandtheadrenalinrushimmediate,incan-descent
integrationsofrisk, danger, andskillthat
shapeparticipationandmembership in deviant and criminal
subcultures. Discovered across a range
ofillicitsubcultures(Presdee1994,OMalley&Mugford1994,Tunnell1992:45,
Wright &Decker 1994:117), these intense and often ritualized
moments ofpleasure and excitement define the experience of
subcultural membership and,by members own accounts, seduce them
into continued subcultural participa-tion. Significantlyfor
asociologyof thesesubcultural practices, research(Lyng & Snow
1986) shows that experiences of edgework and adrenalin existas
collectively constructed endeavors, encased in shared vocabularies
of mo-tive and meaning (Mills 1940, Cressey 1954). Thus, while
these experiencescertainly suggest a sociology of the body and the
emotions, and further verste-hen-oriented explorations of deviant
and criminal subcultures as affectuallydetermined (Weber 1978:9)
domains, they also reveal the ways in which col-lective intensities
of experience, like collective conventions of style,
constructshared subcultural meaning.Culture as CrimeThe notion of
culture as crime denotes the reconstruction of cultural
enter-priseascriminal endeavorthrough, for example,
thepubliclabelingofpopularcultureproductsascriminogenic,
orthecriminalizationofculturalproducers through media or legal
channels. In contemporary society, such
re-constructionspervadepopular cultureandtranscendtraditional
highandlow cultural boundaries. Art photographers Robert
Mapplethorpe and Jock404 FERRELLAnnu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418.
Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on
11/13/13. For personal use only.Sturges, for example, have
facedhighlyorchestratedcampaigns accusingthem of producing obscene
or pornographic images; in addition, an art centerexhibiting
Mapplethorpes photographs was indicted on charges of
panderingobscenity, and Sturgess studio was raided by local police
and the FBI (Dubin1992). Punk and heavy metal bands, and associated
record companies, distribu-tors, and retail outlets, have
encountered obscenity rulings, civil and criminalsuits,
high-profile police raids, and police interference with concerts.
Perform-ers, producers, distributors, and retailers of rap and
gangsta rap music havelikewise faced arrest and conviction on
obscenity charges, legal confiscationof albums, highly publicized
protests, boycotts, hearings organized by politi-cal figures and
police officials, and ongoing media campaigns and legal
pro-ceedingsaccusingthemofpromotingindeed,directlycausingcrimeanddelinquency(Hamm&Ferrell
1994). Morebroadly, avarietyoftelevisionprograms, films, and
cartoons have been targeted by public campaigns alleg-ingthat
theyincitedelinquency, spinoffcopy-catcrimes, andotherwiseserve as
criminogenic social forces (Ferrell 1998, Nyberg 1998).These many
cases certainly fall within the purview of cultural
criminologybecausethetargetsofcriminalizationphotographers,musicians,televisionwriters,andtheirproductsareculturalinnature,butequallysobecausetheir
criminalization itself unfolds as a cultural process. When
contemporaryculture personas and performances are criminalized,
they are primarily crimi-nalized through the mass media, through
their presentation and re-presentationas criminal in the realm of
sound bites, shock images, news conferences, andnewspaper
headlines. This mediated spiral, in which media-produced
popularculture forms and figures are in turn criminalized by means
of the media, leadsonce again into a complex hall of mirrors. It
generates not only images, butimages of imagesthat is, attempts
bylawyers, policeofficials,
religiousleaders,mediaworkers,andotherstocraftcriminalizedimagesofthoseim-ages
previously crafted by artists, musicians, and filmmakers. Thus, the
crimi-nalization of popular culture is itself a popular, and
cultural, enterprise, stand-ing in opposition to popular culture
less than participating in it, and helping toconstruct the very
meanings and effects to which it allegedly responds.
Giventhis,culturalcriminologistshavebeguntowidenthenotionofcriminaliza-tion
to include more than the simple creation and application of
criminal law.Increasingly, they investigate the larger process of
cultural criminalization(Ferrell 1998:8082), the mediated
reconstruction of meaning and perceptionaround issues of culture
and crime. In some cases, this cultural criminalizationstands as an
end in itself, successfully dehumanizing or delegitimating
thosetargeted, thoughnoformallegalchargesarebroughtagainstthem.
Inothercases,culturalcriminalizationhelpsconstructaperceptualcontextinwhichdirectcriminalchargescanmoreeasilyfollow.
Ineitherscenario, though,media dynamics drive and define the
criminalization of popular culture.CULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 405Annu.
Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only.The mediated context of criminalization is a
political one as well. The
con-temporarycriminalizationofpopularculturehasemergedaspart
oflargerculture wars (Bolton 1992) waged by political conservatives
and culturalreactionaries. Controversies over the criminal or
criminogenic
characteristicsofartphotographersandrapmusicianshaveresultedlessfromspontaneouspublic
concern than from the sorts of well-funded and politically
sophisticatedcampaigns that have similarly targeted the National
Endowment for the Artsand its support of feminist/gay/lesbian
performance artists and film festivals.In this light it is less
than surprising that contemporary cultural
criminalizationisaimedtimeandagainat
marginal(ized)subculturesradical punkmusi-cians,
politicallymilitant blackrapgroups, lesbianandgayvisual
andper-formanceartistswhosestylizedcelebrationofandconfrontationwiththeirmarginalitythreatenparticularpatternsofmoral
andlegal control. Culturalcriminalization in this sense exposes yet
another set of linkages between sub-cultural styles and symbols and
mediated constructions and reconstructions ofthese as criminal or
criminogenic. In addition, as a process conducted largelyin the
public realm, cultural criminalization contributes to popular
perceptionsand panics, and thus to the further marginalization of
those who are its focus. Ifsuccessful, it constructs a degree of
social discomfort that reflects off the faceof popular culture and
into the practice of everyday life.Media Constructions of Crime and
Crime ControlThe mediated criminalization of popular culture
exists, of course, as but one ofmany media processes that construct
the meanings of crime and crime control.As noted in earlier
discussions of textual methodologies, cultural
criminologyincorporates a wealth of research on mediated
characterizations of crime andcrime control, ranging across
historical and contemporary texts and
investigat-ingimagesgeneratedinnewspaperreporting, popularfilm,
televisionnewsand entertainment programming, popular music, comic
books, and the cyber-spaces of the Internet. Further, cultural
criminologists have begun to explorethe complex institutional
interconnections between the criminal justice systemand the mass
media. Researchers like Chermak (1995, 1997, 1998) and Sand-ers
& Lyon (1995) have documented not only the mass medias heavy
relianceoncriminaljusticesourcesforimageryandinformationoncrime,butmoreimportantly,
the reciprocal relationship that undergirds this reliance.
Workingwithin organizational imperatives of efficiency and
routinization, media insti-tutions regularly rely on data
selectively provided by policing and court agen-cies. In so doing,
they highlight for the public issues chosen by criminal
justiceinstitutions and framed by criminal justice imperatives, and
they in turn con-tribute to the political agendas of the criminal
justice system and to the genera-tion of public support for these
agendas. In a relatively nonconspiratorial but406 FERRELLAnnu. Rev.
Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby
University of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use
only.nonethelesspowerfulfashion,mediaandcriminaljusticeorganizationsthuscoordinate
their day-to-day operations and cooperate in constructing
circum-scribed understandings of crime and crime
control.Alargebodyofresearchinculturalcriminologyexaminesthenatureofthese
understandings and the public dynamics of their production. Like
culturalcriminology generally, much of the research here (Adler
&Adler 1994, Goode& Ben-Yehuda 1994, Hollywood 1997,
Jenkins 1992, Sparks 1995, Thornton1994) builds on the classic
analytic models of cultural studies and interaction-ist sociology,
asembodiedinconceptssuchasmoral entrepreneurshipandmoral enterprise
in the creation of crime and deviance (Becker 1963), and
theinventionoffolkdevilsasameansofgeneratingmoralpanic(Cohen1972/1980)aroundissuesofcrimeanddeviance.
Exploringtheepistemicframe-workssurroundingeverydayunderstandingsofcrimecontroversies,
thisre-search (Fishman 1978, Best 1995, Acland 1995, Reinarman
1994, Reinarman&Duskin 1992, Websdale 1996) problematizes and
unpacks taken-for-granted assumptions regarding the prevalence of
criminality and the particu-lar characteristics of criminals, and
the research traces these assumptions
totheinterrelatedworkingsofinterestgroups,mediainstitutions,andcriminaljustice
organizations.Emerging scholarship in cultural criminology also
offers useful reconcep-tualizations and refinements of these
analytic models. McRobbie & Thornton(1995), forexample,
arguethattheessentialconceptsofmoralpanicandfolk devils must be
reconsidered in multi-mediated societies; with the prolif-eration
of media channels and the saturation of media markets, moral
panicshave become both dangerous endeavors and marketable
commodities, and folkdevils nowfind themselves both stigmatized and
lionized in mainstreammediaand alternative media alike. Similarly,
Jenkinss (1999) recent work has begunto refine understandings of
crime and justice issues as social and cultural con-structions.
Building on his earlier, meticulous deconstructions of drug
panics,serial homicidescares, andother
constructedcrimecontroversies, Jenkins(1994a,b) argues that
attention must be paid to the media and political dynam-ics
underlying unconstructed crime as well. Jenkins explores the
failure
toframeactivitiessuchasanti-abortionviolenceascriminalterrorism,situatesthis
failure within active media and political processes, and thus
questions themeaning of that for which no criminal meaning is
provided.Throughall ofthis, cultural
criminologistsfurtheremphasizethat intheprocess of constructing
crime and crime control as social concerns and politi-cal
controversies, the media also construct them as entertainment.
Revisitingtheclassiccultural studies/newcriminologynotionof
policingthecrisis(Hall et al 1978), Sparks (1995; see 1992), for
example, characterizes the pro-duction and perception of crime and
policing imagery in television crime dra-mas as a process of
entertaining the crisis. Intertwined with mediated moralCULTURAL
CRIMINOLOGY 407Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only.panic over crime and crime waves, amplified fear
of street crime and strangerviolence, and politically popular
concern for the harm done to crime
victims,then,isthepleasurefoundinconsumingmediatedcrimeimageryandcrimedrama.Totheextentthatthemassmediaconstructscrimeasentertainment,wearethusofferednot
onlyselectiveimagesandagendas, but theironicmechanism for amusing
ourselves to death (Postman 1986) by way of our owncollective pain,
misery, and fear. Given this, contemporary media scholarshipin
cultural criminology focuses as much on popular film, popular
music, andtelevisionentertainment programmingas
onthemediatedmanufactureofnewsandinformation,anditinvestigatesthecollapsingboundariesbetweensuchcategories.Recentworkinthisareatargetsespeciallythepopularityofreality
crime programs (Fishman &Cavender 1998). With their mix of
streetfootage, theatrical staging, and patrol-car sermonizing,
reality crime programssuch as C.O.P.S., L.A.P.D.,and True Stories
of the Highway Patrol gen-erate conventional, though at times
contradictory, images of crime and polic-ing. Along with talk shows
devoted largely to crime and deviance topics, theyin turn spin off
secondary merchandising schemes, legal suits over videotapedpolice
chases and televised invasions of privacy, and criminal activities
alleg-edly induced by the programs themselves. Such dynamics
demonstrate the en-tangled reality of crime, crime news, and crime
entertainment, and suggest thatas mediated crime constructions come
to be defined as real, they are real intheir consequences (Thomas
1966:301).The Politics of Culture, Crime, and Cultural
CriminologyClearly,
acommonthreadconnectsthemanydomainsintowhichculturalcriminologyinquires:thepresenceofpowerrelations,andtheemergenceofsocial
control, at the intersections of culture and crime. The stylistic
practicesand symbolic codes of illicit subcultures are made the
object of legal
surveil-lanceandcontrolor,alternatively,areappropriated,commodified,andsani-tized
within a vast machinery of consumption. Sophisticated media and
crimi-nal justice culture wars are launched against alternative
forms of art,
music,andentertainment,therebycriminalizingthepersonalitiesandperformancesinvolved,
marginalizing them from idealized notions of decency and commu-nity
and, at the extreme, silencing the political critiques they
present.
Ongoingmediaconstructionsofcrimeandcrimecontrolemergeoutofanallianceofconvenience
between media institutions and criminal justice agencies, serve
topromote and legitimate broader political agendas regarding crime
control, andin turn function to both trivialize and dramatize the
meaning of crime. Increas-ingly, then, it is televisioncrimeshows
andbigbudget detectivemovies,nightlynewscasts andmorningnewspaper
headlines, recurrent campaignsagainst thereal
andimaginedcrimesofthedisenfranchisedthat constitute408
FERRELLAnnu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only.Foucaults (in Cohen 1979:339) hundreds of tiny
theatres of punishmenttheatresinwhichyoungpeople, ethnicminorities,
lesbiansandgays, andothers play villains deserving of penalty and
public outrage.At the same time, cultural criminologists emphasize
and explore the variousforms that resistance to this complex web of
social control may take. As Sparks(1992, 1995) and others argue,
the audiences for media constructions of crimeare diverse in both
their composition and their readings of these constructions;they
recontextualize, remake, and even reverse mass media meanings as
theyincorporate them into their daily lives and interactions.
Varieties of resistancealso emerge among those groups more
specifically targeted within the practiceof mediated control.
Artists and musicians caught up in contemporary
culturewarshaverefusedgovernmental awards,
resignedhigh-profilepositions,wonlegaljudgments,organizedalternativemediaoutletsandperformances,andotherwiseproducedpubliccounterattacks(Ferrell
1998). Withinothermarginalizedsubcultures, personal
andgroupstylecertainlyexistsasstig-mata, inviting outside
surveillance and control, but at the same time is valuedas a badge
of honor and resistance made all the more meaningful by its
endur-ingdefianceofoutsideauthority(Hebdige1988).Likewise,asLyng(1990,1998)
andFerrell (1996) emphasize, thoseimmersedinmomentsof
illicitedgeworkandadrenalinconstructresistancedoubly. First,
bycombininginsuchmomentshighlevelsofriskwithpreciseskillsandpracticedartistry,those
involved invent an identity, a sense of crafted self, that resists
the
usualdegradationsofsubordinatestatusanddeskilled,alienatedlabor.Second,asthesemomentsbecomemoredangerousbecausetargetedbycampaignsofcriminalizationandenforcement,
participantsinthemfindanenhancementand amplification of the edgy
excitement they provide, and in so doing trans-form political
pressure into personal and collective pleasure. In investigatingthe
intersections of culture and crime for power relations and emerging
formsof social control, then, cultural criminologists carry on the
tradition of
culturalstudies(Hall&Jefferson1976)byexaminingthemanyformsofresistancethat
emerge there as well.Moreover, cultural criminology itself operates
as a sort of intellectual resis-tance, as a diverse counter-reading
and counter-discourse on, and critical in-tervention(Pfohl
&Gordon1986:94) into, conventional constructions ofcrime.
Indeconstructingmoments of mediatedpanicover crime,
culturalcriminologists work to expose the political processes
behind seemingly
spon-taneoussocialconcernsandtodismantletherecurringandoftenessentialistmetaphorsofdisease,
invasion, anddecayonwhichcrimepanicsarebuilt(Brownstein 1995, 1996,
Reinarman 1994, Reinarman & Duskin 1992, Murji1999). Beyond
this, Barak (1988, 1994a) argues for an activist
newsmakingcriminologyinwhichcriminologistsintegratethemselvesintotheongoingmediated
construction of crime, develop as part of their role in this
processCULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 409Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418.
Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on
11/13/13. For personal use only.alternative images and
understandings of crime issues, and in so doing producewhat
constitutivecriminologists(Henry&Milovanovic1991,
Barak1995)callareplacementdiscourseregardingcrimeandcrimecontrol.
Muchofcultural criminologysethnographicworkinsubcultural
domainsfunctionssimilarly, asacritical moveawayfromtheofficial
definitionsofreality(Hagedorn 1990:244) produced by the media and
the criminal justice systemand reproduced by a courthouse
criminology (see Polsky 1969) that relies onthese sources. By
attentively documenting the lived realities of groups
whomconventional crime constructions have marginalized, and in turn
documentingthe situated politics of this marginalization process,
cultural criminologists at-tempt to deconstruct the official
demonization of various outsiders (Becker1963)from rural domestic
violence victims (Websdale 1998) to urban
graf-fitiwriters(Ferrell1996,Sanchez-Tranquilino1995),gayhustlers(Pettiway1996),
and homeless heroin addicts (Bourgois et al 1997)and to produce
alter-native understandings of them. Approaching this task from the
other
direction,Hamm(1993)andotherslikewiseventureinsidetheworldsofparticularlyviolent
criminals to document dangerous nuances of meaning and style
ofteninvisible in official reporting on such groups. In its
politics as in its theory andmethod, then, cultural
criminologyintegratessubcultural ethnographywithmedia and
institutional analysis to produce an alternative image of
crime.TRAJECTORIES OF CULTURAL CRIMINOLOGYIn describing an emergent
orientation like cultural criminology, it is
perhapsappropriatetoclosewithabriefconsiderationofitsunfinishededges.Thefollowingshortdiscussionsarethereforemeanttobeneithersystematicnorexhaustive;theysimplysuggestsomeofwhatisemerging,andwhatmightproductively
emerge, as cultural criminology continues to develop.Situated
Media, Situated AudiencesThe dynamic integration of subcultural
crime constructions and media
crimeconstructionshassurfacedtimeandagaininthisessayasoneofculturalcriminologys
essential insights. This insight further implies that the
everydaynotionofmediamustbeexpandedtoincludethosemediathattakeshapewithin
and among the various subcultures of crime, deviance, and crime
con-trol. As noted in the above methodological discussions, various
illicit subcul-tures certainly come into regular contact with the
mass media, but in so doingappropriate and reinvent mass media
channels, products, and meanings. Fur-ther, illicit subcultures
regularly invent their own media of communication; asMcRobbie
&Thornton (1995:559) point out, even the interests of folk
devilsare increasingly defended by their own niche and micro-media.
Thus, alter-410 FERRELLAnnu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418.
Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on
11/13/13. For personal use only.native and marginalized youth
subcultures self-produce a wealth of zines
(al-ternativemagazines)andwebsites;streetgangmembersconstructelaborateedificesofcommunicationoutofparticularclothingstyles,colors,andhandsigns;andgraffitiwritersdevelopacontinent-widenetworkoffreighttraingraffiti
that mirrors existing hobo train graffiti in its ability to link
distant sub-cultural members within a shared symbolic community. As
also suggested
inabovediscussions,multiple,fluidaudienceslikewisewitnessefflorescencesof
crime and crime control in their everyday existence, consume a
multitude ofcrimeimagespackagedasnewsandentertainment,
andinturnremakethemeaning of these encounters within the symbolic
interaction of their own lives.Investigating the linkages between
media and crime, then, means investigat-ing the many situations in
which these linkages emerge, and moreover the situ-atedplace of
media, audience, andmeaningwithincriminal worlds
(seeVaughan1998).Ultimately,perhaps,thisinvestigationsuggestsblurringtheanalytic
boundarybetweenproducer andaudiencerecognizing, inotherwords, that
a variety of groups both produce and consume contested images
ofcrimeand moving ahead to explore the many microcircuits of
meaning thatcollectively construct the reality of crime.The Media
and Culture of PolicingIncreasingly,
theproductionandconsumptionofmediatedmeaningframesnot only the
reality of crime, but of crime control as well. Contemporary
polic-ing can in fact hardly be understood apart from its
interpenetration with mediaat all levels. As reality crime and
policing television programs shape publicperceptions of policing,
serve as controversial tools of officer recruitment andsuspect
apprehension, andengenderlegal suitsovertheireffectsonstreet-level
policing, citizensshoot videofootageof policeconduct
andmiscon-ductsomeofwhichfindsitsway,full-circle,ontonewsandrealitypro-grams.
Meanwhile, withinthepolicesubcultureitself,
surveillancecamerasandon-boardpatrolcarcamerascapturethepracticesofpoliceofficersandcitizensalikeand,
asWebsdale(1999)documents, policecrimefilesthem-selves take shape
as situated media substrates which, like surveillance andpatrol
carfootage, regularlybecomebuildingblocksforsubsequent
massmediaimagesofpolicing.Thepolicingofapostmodernworldemergesasacomplex
set of visual and semiotic practices, an expanding spiral of
mediatedsocial control (Manning 1998, 1999a,b).From the view of
cultural criminology, policing must in turn be
understoodasasetofpracticessituated,likecriminalpractices,withinsubculturalcon-ventions
of meaning, symbolism, and style. In this regard, Kraska &
Kappeler(1995:85)integrateperspectivesfrompolicestudies,feministliterature,andcriticaltheorytoexplorethesubculturalideologies,
situateddynamics, andbroader cultural and structural context within
which police deviance and po-CULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 411Annu. Rev.
Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby
University of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use only.lice sexual
violence against women develop. Perhaps most interesting here,
inlight of the reflexive methodologies discussedabove, is Kraskas
(1998)grounded investigation of police paramilitary units.
Immersing himself and hisemotions in a situation of police
paramilitary violence, Kraska details the styl-ized subcultural
status afforded by particular forms of weaponry and clothing,and he
documents the deep-seated ideological and affective states that
definethecollectivemeaningofsuchsituations.Withcrimecontrolaswithcrime,subcultural
and media dynamics construct experience and perception.Crime and
Cultural SpaceMany of the everyday situations in which crime and
policing are played out,and in fact many of the most visible
contemporary controversies surroundingcrime and policing issues,
involve the contestation of cultural space. Incorpo-rating
perspectives from cultural studies, cultural geography, and
postmoderngeography (Merrifield & Swyngedouw 1997, Scott &
Soja 1996, Davis 1992),the notion of cultural space references the
process by which meaning is
con-structedandcontestedinpublicdomains(Ferrell1997).
Thisprocessinter-twines with a variety of crime and crime control
situations. Homeless popula-tions declare by their public presence
the scandal of inequality, and they are inturn hounded and herded
by a host of loitering, vagrancy, trespass, public lodg-ing, and
public nuisance statutes. Gutter punks invest downtown street
cor-ners with disheveled style, skate punks and skateboarders
convert walkwaysand parking garages into playgrounds, Latino/a
street cruisers create mobilesubcultures out of dropped frames and
polished chromeand face in
responseaggressiveenforcementoflawsregardingtrespass, curfew,
publicsleeping,andevencarstereovolume.Streetgangscarveoutcollectiveculturalspacefromsharedstylesandpublicrituals;
criminal justiceofficialsprohibit andconfiscate stylized clothing,
enforce prohibitions against public gatherings byknowngangmembers,
andorchestratepublicganground-ups.Graffitiwritersremakethevisuallandscapesandsymboliccodesofpubliclife,
butthey do so in the face of increasing criminal sanctions,
high-tech surveillancesystems, and nationally coordinated legal
campaigns designed to remove themand their markings from public
life.As with the mediated campaigns of cultural criminalization
discussedabove, these conflicts over crime and cultural space
regularly emerge aroundthemarginalizedsubculturesofyoungpeople,
ethnicminorities, andothergroups, and thus they raise essential
issues of identity and authenticity(Sanchez-Tranquilino1995).
Suchconflicts inturnincorporateacomplexcriminalization of these
subcultures as part of a systematic effort to erase
theirself-constructed public images, to substitute in their place
symbols of homoge-neityandconsensus,
andtherebytorestoreandexpandtheaestheticsof412 FERRELLAnnu. Rev.
Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby
University of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use
only.authoritynotedinabovediscussions. Ultimately,
thesedisparateconflictsovercrimeandculturalspacerevealthecommonthreadofcontestedpublicmeaning,
and something of the work of control in the age of cultural
repro-duction.Bodies, Emotions, and Cultural CriminologyPerhaps the
most critical of situations, the most intimate of cultural spaces
inwhich crime and crime control intersect are those in and around
the
physicalandemotionalself(Pfohl1990).Throughoutthisessaysuchsituationshavebeen
seen: the development of subcultural style as marker of identity
and locusof criminalization; the fleeting experience of edgework
and adrenalin
rushes,heightenedbyriskoflegalapprehension;theutilizationofresearchersownexperiences
and emotions in the study of crime and policing. These
situationssuggest that other moments merit the attention of
cultural criminology as well,from gang girls construction of
identity through hair, makeup, and discourse(Mendoza-Denton 1996)
and phone fantasy workers invocation of sexualityand emotion
(Mattley 1998), to the contested media and body politics of
AIDS(Kane 1998b, Watney 1987, Young 1996:175-206). Together, these
and othersituationsinturnsuggest
acriminologyoftheskin(seeKushner1994)acriminology that can account
for crime and crime control in terms of pleasure,fear,
andexcitement andthat canconfront
thedeformitiesofsexualityandpower,controlandresistancethatemergeintheseinsidespaces.Theyalsodemand
the ongoing refinement of the reflexive,verstehen-oriented
method-ologiesandepistemologiesdescribedaboveofwaysofinvestigatingandknowingthatareatthesametimeembodiedandaffective(Scheper-Hughes1994),
closer to the intimate meaning of crime and yet never close
enough.CONCLUSIONSAs an emerging perspective within criminology,
sociology, and criminal jus-tice, cultural criminology draws from a
wide range of intellectual orientations.Revisiting and perhaps
reinventing existing paradigms in cultural studies,
thenewcriminology, interactionistsociology,
andcriticaltheory;integratinginsights from postmodern, feminist,
and constructionist thought; and incorpo-rating aspects of
newsmaking, constitutive, and other evolving criminologies,cultural
criminology seek less to synthesize or subsume these various
perspec-tives than to engage them in a critical, multifaceted
exploration of culture andcrime. Linking these diverse intellectual
dimensions, and their attendant meth-odologies of ethnography and
media/textual analysis, is cultural criminologysoverarching concern
with the meaning of crime and crime control. Some threedecades ago,
Cohen (1988:68, 1971:19) wrote of placing on the agenda of
aCULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 413Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418.
Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on
11/13/13. For personal use only.culturally informed criminology
issues of subjective meaning, and of
devi-anceandcrimeasmeaningfulaction.Culturalcriminologyembracesandexpandsthisagendabyexploringthecomplexconstruction,attribution,andappropriation
of meaning that occurs within and between media and
politicalformations, illicit subcultures, andaudiences
aroundmatters of crimeandcrime control. In so doing, cultural
criminology likewise highlights the inevi-tabilityoftheimage.
Insidethestylizedrhythmsofacriminalsubculture,reading a newspaper
crime report or perusing a police file, caught between thepanic and
pleasure of crime, there is no escape fromthe politics of
representa-tion (Hall 1993:111).ACKNOWLEDGMENTSIthankNeil
Websdaleforhisgenerouscontributionstothisessay;
PhoebeStambaughandBrianSmithfor assistancewithsourcematerial;
andtwoanonymousAnnualReviewofSociologyreviewersfortheirinsightfulcom-ments.Visit
the Annual Reviews home page athttp://www.AnnualReviews.org.414
FERRELLLiterature CitedAclandCR.1995. Youth, Murder,
Spectacle:TheCulturalPoliticsofYouthinCrisis.Boulder, CO:
WestviewAdlerPA.1985.WheelingandDealing.NewYork: Columbia Univ.
PressAdlerPA,AdlerP.1987.MembershipRolesin Field Research. Newbury
Park, CA:SageAdler PA, Adler P, eds. 1994. Constructions
ofDeviance:SocialPower,Context,andIn-teraction. Belmont, CA:
WadsworthAnderson SE, Howard GJ, eds. 1998. Interro-gating Popular
Culture: Deviance, Jus-tice, andSocial Order. Guilderland,
NY:Harrow & HestonBailey FY, Hale DC, eds. 1998. Popular
Cul-ture, Crime, and Justice. Belmont, CA:West/WadsworthBarak G.
1988. Newsmaking criminology: re-flectionsonthemedia,
intellectuals, andcrime. Justice Q.
5:56587BarakG,ed.1994a.Media,Process,andtheSocial Constructionof
Crime: StudiesinNewsmaking Criminology. New York:GarlandBarak G,
ed. 1994b. Varieties of Criminology.Westport, CT: PraegerBarakG.
1995. Media, crime, andjustice: acase for constitutive criminology.
See Fer-rell & Sanders 1995, pp. 14266BarakG, ed. 1996.
RepresentingO.J.: Mur-der, Criminal Justice,
andMassCulture.Guilderland, NY: Harrow & HestonBaudrillard J.
1985. The ecstasy of communi-cation. In Postmodern Culture, ed. H
Fos-ter, pp. 12634. London: PlutoBecker HS. 1963. Outsiders:
Studies in the So-ciology of Deviance. New York: FreePressBecker
HS, McCall M, eds. 1990. Symbolic In-teractionandCultural Studies.
Chicago:Univ. Chicago PressBestJ, ed. 1995.
ImagesofIssues:TypifyingContemporary Social Problems. NewYork:
Aldine de Gruyter. 2nd ed.Bolton R, ed. 1992. Culture Wars:
DocumentsAnnu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only.CULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 415from the Recent
Controversies in the Arts.New York: New PressBourgois P, Lettiere
M, Quesada J. 1997. So-cial misery and the sanctions of
substanceabuse: confronting HIV risk among
home-lessheroinaddictsinSanFrancisco.Soc.Probl. 44:15573Brownstein
HH. 1995. The media and the con-struction of randomdrug violence.
SeeFerrell & Sanders 1995, pp. 4565Brownstein HH. 1996. The
Rise and Fall of aViolent
CrimeWave:CrackCocaineandtheSocialConstructionofaCrimeProb-lem.
Guilderland, NY: Harrow & HestonBurawoy M, Burton A, Ferguson
AA, Fox KJ,GamsonJ, et al. 1991. EthnographyUn-bound: Power and
Resistance in the Mod-ern Metropolis. Berkeley: Univ.
Calif.PressCheatwood D. 1998. Prison movies:
filmsaboutadult,male,civilianprisons:19291995. See Bailey &Hale
1998, pp. 20931Chermak S. 1995. Victims in the News:
CrimeandtheAmericanNewsMedia. Boulder,CO: WestviewChermak S. 1997.
The presentation of drugs inthe news media: the news sources
involvedin the construction of social problems. Jus-tice Q.
14:687718ChermakSM. 1998. Police, courts,
andcor-rectionsinthemedia. SeeBailey&Hale1998, pp. 8799Chibnall
S. 1977. LawandOrderNews: AnAnalysis of Crime Reporting in the
BritishPress. London: TavistockClarkeJ. 1976. Style. SeeHall
&Jefferson1976, pp.
17591CloughP.1992.TheEnd(s)ofEthnography:FromRealismtoSocial
Criticism. New-bury Park, CA:
SageCohenS,ed.1971.ImagesofDeviance.Har-mondsworth, UK:
PenguinCohenS. 1972/1980. FolkDevilsandMoralPanics. London:
Macgibbon & KeeCohen S. 1979. The punitive city: notes on
thedispersalofsocialcontrol.Contemp.Cri-ses 3:33963Cohen S. 1988.
Against Criminology. NewBrunswick, NJ: TransactionCohen S. 1996.
Review of Cultural Criminol-ogy. Justice Q. 13:73740CohenS, YoungJ,
eds. 1973. TheManufac-tureofNews:Deviance,SocialProblems,and the
Mass Media. London: ConstableCosgrove S. 1984. The zoot-suit and
style war-fare. Radical Am.
18:3851CresseyD.1954.Thedifferentialassociationtheory and
compulsive crime. J. Crim.Law Criminol. 45:4964Davis M. 1992.
Cityof Quartz. NewYork:VintageDenzinNK. 1992.
SymbolicInteractionandCultural Studies: The Politics of
Interpre-tation. Cambridge, MA: BlackwellDenzinNK. 1997.
InterpretiveEthnography.Thousand Oaks, CA: SageDubinS. 1992.
ArrestingImages: ImpoliticArt andUncivil Actions. London:
Rout-ledgeDuring S, ed. 1993. The Cultural StudiesReader. London:
RoutledgeFeagin JR, Orum AM, Sjoberg G, eds. 1991. ACase for the
Case Study. Chapel Hill, NC:Univ. N. Carol. PressFerrell J. 1996.
Crimes of Style: Urban Graffitiand the Politics of Criminality.
Boston:Northeastern Univ. PressFerrell J. 1997. Youth, crime, and
culturalspace. Soc. Justice 24:2138Ferrell J. 1998. Criminalizing
popular culture.See Bailey & Hale 1998, pp. 7183Ferrell J, Hamm
MS, eds. 1998. Ethnographyat theEdge:Crime, Deviance,
andFieldResearch. Boston: Northeastern Univ.PressFerrell J, Sanders
CR, eds. 1995. CulturalCriminology. Boston:
NortheasternUniv.PressFerrell J, Websdale N, eds. 1999.
MakingTrouble: Cultural Constructions of Crime,Deviance,
andControl. Hawthorne, NY:Aldine de GruyterFishmanM. 1978.
Crimewavesasideology.Soc. Probl. 25:53143FishmanM, Cavender G, eds.
1998. Enter-taining Crime: Television Reality Pro-grams. Hawthorne,
NY: Aldine deGruyterFonow M, Cook J, eds. 1991. Beyond
Method-ology:FeministScholarshipasLivedRe-search. Bloomington, IN:
Indiana Univ.PressFraser N. 1995. Politics, culture, and the
publicsphere: towardapostmodernconception.In Social Postmodernism:
Beyond IdentityPolitics,ed.LNicholson,SSeidman,pp.287312.
Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniv. PressGeis G. 1991. The case study
method in socio-logical criminology. See Feagin et al 1991,pp.
20023Gelder K, Thornton S, eds. 1997. The Subcul-tures Reader.
London: RoutledgeGoode E, Ben-Yehuda N. 1994. Moral
Panics.Cambridge, MA:
BlackwellGreekC.1996.O.J.andtheinternet:thefirstcybertrial. See
Barak 1996, pp. 6477Grossberg L, Nelson C, Treichler PA, eds.1992.
CulturalStudies. NewYork:Rout-ledgeHagedornJM. 1990.
Backinthefieldagain:gangresearchinthenineties.InGangsinAnnu. Rev.
Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby
University of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use only.416
FERRELLAmerica,ed.CRHuff,pp.24059.New-bury Park, CA: SageHall S.
1993. What is this black inblackpopular culture? Soc. Justice
20:10414Hall S, Critcher C, Jefferson T, Clarke J, Rob-erts B.
1978. Policing the Crisis: Mugging,the State, and Lawand Order.
Hound-mills, UK: MacMillanHall S, Jefferson T, eds. 1976.
ResistanceThrough Rituals: Youth Subcultures inPost-War Britain.
London: HutchinsonHammMS. 1993. AmericanSkinheads:
TheCriminologyandControl of HateCrime.Westport, CT: PraegerHamm MS.
1995. Hammer of the Gods revis-ited: neo-Nazi skinheads, domestic
terror-ism, and the rise of the new protest music.See Ferrell &
Sanders 1995, pp. 190212HammMS, Ferrell J. 1994. Rap, cops,
andcrime: clarifyingthecopkiller contro-versy. ACJS Today
13:1,3,29Hebdige D. 1979. Subculture: The Meaning ofStyle. London:
MethuenHebdige D. 1988. Hiding in the Light.
London:RoutledgeHenryS, MilovanovicD. 1991.
Constitutivecriminology: the maturation of critical the-ory.
Criminology 29:293315HollywoodB.1997.Dancinginthedark:ec-stasy, the
dance culture, and moral panic inpost ceasefire Northern Ireland.
Crit.Criminol. 8:6277Howe A. 1997. The war against women: me-dia
representations of men?s violenceagainst women in Australia.
ViolenceAgainst Women
3:5975HumphreysL.1975.TearoomTrade:Imper-sonal Sex in Public
Places. NewYork:Aldine de Gruyter. Enlarged ed.Jenkins P. 1992.
Intimate Enemies: MoralPanics in Contemporary Great
Britain.Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de GruyterJenkinsP. 1994a.
UsingMurder:TheSocialConstruction of Serial Homicide. Haw-thorne,
NY: Aldine de GruyterJenkins P. 1994b. TheIceAge:
thesocialconstructionof a drugpanic. Justice Q.11:731Jenkins P.
1999. Fighting terrorism as ifwomen mattered: anti-abortion
violence asunconstructed terrorism. See Ferrell &Websdale 1999,
pp. 31946Kane S. 1998a. Reversingthe ethnographicgaze: experiments
in cultural criminology.See Ferrell & Hamm 1998, pp.
13245KaneS. 1998b. AIDSAlibis:Sex, DrugsandCrime in the Americas.
Philadelphia: Tem-ple Univ. PressKatz J. 1988. Seductions of Crime:
Moral andSensual Attractions in Doing Evil. NY:Basic
BooksKidd-Hewitt D. 1995. Crime and the media: acriminological
perspective. See Kidd-Hewitt & Osborne 1995, pp.
124Kidd-HewittD,OsborneR,eds.1995.CrimeandtheMedia:ThePost-ModernSpecta-cle.
London: PlutoKooistra P. 1989. Criminals as Heroes: Struc-ture,
Power, and Identity. Bowling Green:Bowling Green State Univ.
Popular PressKraska PB. 1998. Enjoying militarism:
politi-cal/personal dilemmas in studying U.S.police paramilitary
units. See Ferrell &Hamm 1998, pp. 88110Kraska PB, Kappeler VE.
1995. To serve andpursue: exploringpolicesexual violenceagainst
women. Justice Q. 12:85111Kushner T. 1994. A socialism of the skin.
Na-tion 259:914Lyng S. 1990. Edgework: a social psychologi-cal
analysis of voluntary risk taking. Am. J.Sociol. 95:85186Lyng S.
1998. Dangerous methods: risk takingandthe researchprocess. See
Ferrell &Hamm 1998, pp. 22151LyngS, BraceyML. 1995.
Squaringtheonepercent:bikerstyleandthesellingofcul-tural
resistance. See Ferrell &Sanders1995, pp. 23576LyngS, SnowD.
1986. Vocabulariesofmo-tive andhigh-riskbehavior: the case
ofskydiving. In Advances in Group Proc-esses, ed. ELawler, pp.
15779. Green-wich, CT: JAIManningPK. 1998. Medialoops.
SeeBailey& Hale 1998, pp. 2539Manning PK. 1999a. Semiotics and
social jus-tice. In Social Justice/Criminal Justice, ed.BAArrigo,
pp. 13149. Belmont, CA:West/WadsworthManning PK. 1999b.
Reflections: the visual asa mode of social control. See Ferrell
&Websdale 1999, pp. 25575Marx GT. 1995. Electric eye in the
sky: somereflections on the newsurveillance andpopular culture. See
Ferrell &Sanders1995, pp.
10641MattleyC.1998.(Dis)courtesystigma:field-workamongphonefantasyworkers.
SeeFerrell & Hamm 1998, pp. 14658McRobbie A. 1980. Settling
accounts withsubcultures: a feminist critique. Screen
Ed.34:3749McRobbie A, Thornton SL. 1995. Rethinkingmoral panic for
multi-mediated socialworlds. Br. J. Sociol. 46:559574Melossi D.
1985. Overcoming the crisis incritical criminology: toward a
grounded la-beling theory. Criminology 23:193208Mendoza-Denton N.
1996. Muy macha: gen-derandideologyingang-girlsdiscourseabout
makeup. Ethnos 61:4763Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418.
Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on
11/13/13. For personal use only.CULTURAL CRIMINOLOGY 417Merrifield
A, Swyngedouw E, eds. 1997.TheUrbanization of Injustice.
WashingtonSquare, NY: New York Univ. PressMiller JA. 1995.
Struggles over the symbolic:gang style and the meanings of social
con-trol. See Ferrell &Sanders 1995, pp.21334Mills CW. 1940.
Situated actions and vocabu-laries of motive. Am. Sociol. Rev.
5:90413Murji K. 1999. Wildlife: constructions andrepresentationsof
yardies. SeeFerrell &Websdale 1999, pp. 179201NewmanG. 1998.
Popular culture andvio-lence: decodingthe violence of
popularmovies. See Bailey &Hale 1998, pp.4056Niesel J. 1998.
Thehorror of everydaylife:taxidermy, aesthetics, and consumption
inhorror films. See Anderson &Howard1998, pp.
1631NybergAK.1998.Comicbooksandjuveniledelinquency:ahistoricalperspective.
SeeBailey & Hale 1998, pp. 6170OMalley P, Mugford S. 1994.
Crime, excite-ment, andmodernity. See Barak1994b,pp.
189211PerronePA, Chesney-LindM. 1997. Repre-sentations of gangs and
delinquency: wildin the streets? Soc. Justice 24:96116Pettiway LE.
1996. Honey, Honey, MissThang: Being Black, Gay, and on theStreets.
Philadelphia: Temple Univ.
PressPfohlS.1990.WelcometotheParasiteCafe:postmodernityas a social
problem. Soc.Probl. 37:42142Pfohl S. 1992. Death at the Parasite
Cafe: So-cial Science(Fictions) andthePostmod-ern. New York: St.
MartinsPfohl S. 1993. Twilight of the parasites:
ultra-moderncaptial andthenewworldorder.Soc. Probl. 40:12551Pfohl
S, Gordon A. 1986. Criminological dis-placements: a sociological
deconstruction.Soc. Probl. 33:94113Pfuhl EHJr. 1986. The Deviance
Process. Bel-mont, CA: Wadsworth. 2nd
ed.PolskyN.1969.Hustlers,Beats,andOthers.Garden City, NY:
AnchorPostman N. 1986. Amusing Ourselves toDeath. London:
HeinemannPotter GW, Kappeler VE, eds. 1998.
Con-structingCrime:PerspectivesonMakingNews and Social Problems.
ProspectHeights, IL:
WavelandPresdeeM.1994.Youngpeople,culture,andthe construction of
crime: doing wrongversusdoingcrime.SeeBarak1994b,pp.17987Ragin CC,
Becker HS. 1992. What is a Case?Foundations of Social Inquiry. New
York:Cambridge Univ. PressRedheadS. 1995. Unpopular Cultures:
TheBirthof LawandPopularCulture. Man-chester, UK: Manchester Univ.
PressReinarman C. 1994. The social construction
ofdrugscares.SeeAdler&Adler1994,pp.92104Reinarman C, Duskin C.
1992. Dominant ide-ologyanddrugs inthemedia. Intern. J.Drug Pol.
3:615Sanchez-TranquilinoM.1995.Space,power,and youth culture:
Mexican Americangraffiti andChicanomurals inEast LosAngeles,
19721978. In Looking High andLow: Art and Cultural Identity, ed.
BJBright, LBakewell, pp. 5588. Tucson,AZ: Univ. Ariz.
PressSandersCR. 1995. Stranger thanfiction:
in-sightsandpitfallsinpost-modernethnog-raphy. Stud. Symb.
Interact. 17:89104Sanders CR, Lyon E. 1995. Repetitive
retribu-tion: mediaimagesandthecultural con-struction of criminal
justice. See Ferrell &Sanders 1995, pp. 2544Scheper-Hughes, N.
1994. Embodiedknowl-edge: thinking with the body in criticalmedical
anthropology. InAssessingCul-tural Anthropology, ed. RBorofsky,
pp.22942. New York: McGraw-HillScott A, Soja E, eds.
1996.TheCity:LosAn-gelesandUrbanTheoryattheEndoftheTwentieth
Century. Berkeley: Univ.
Calif.PressSparksR.1992.TelevisionandtheDramaofCrime: Moral Tales
and the Place ofCrimeinPublicLife. Buckingham, UK:Open Univ.
PressSparks R. 1995. Entertaining the crisis: televi-sion and moral
enterprise. See Kidd-Hewitt &Osborne 1995, pp.
4966SuretteR.1998.Media,Crime,andCriminalJustice: Images and
Realities. Belmont,CA: West/Wadsworth. 2nd
ed.TaylorI,WaltonP,YoungJ.1973.TheNewCriminology: For a Social
Theory of Devi-ance. New York: Harper & RowThomas WI. 1966. The
relation of research
tothesocialprocess.InW.I.ThomasonSo-cialOrganizationandSocialPersonality,ed.
MJanowitz, pp. 289305. Chicago:Univ. Chicago PressThornton S. 1994.
Moral panic, the media, andBritish rave culture. In
MicrophoneFiends: YouthMusicandYouthCulture,eds. ARoss, TRose, pp.
17692. NewYork: RoutledgeTunnell KD. 1992. Choosing Crime:
TheCriminalCalculusofPropertyOffenders.Chicago: Nelson-HallTunnell
KD. 1995. Acultural approach tocrime and punishment, bluegrass
style. SeeFerrell & Sanders 1995, pp. 80105Annu. Rev. Sociol.
1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University
of Kent on 11/13/13. For personal use only.418 FERRELLTunnell KD.
1998. Reflections on crime,criminals, and control in
newsmagazinetelevisionprograms. See Bailey&Hale1998, pp.
11122VanMaanenJ, ed. 1995a. RepresentationinEthnography. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SageVanMaanenJ. 1995b.
Anendtoinnocence:theethnographyofethnography.SeeVanMaanen 1995a,
pp. 135Vaughn D. 1998. Rational choice, situated ac-tion, andthe
social control of organiza-tions. Law Soc. Rev. 32:50139WatneyS.
1987. PolicingDesire:Pornogra-phy, AIDSandthe Media.
Minneapolis:Univ. Minn. PressWeberM. 1978. EconomyandSociety.
Ber-keley: Univ. Calif.
PressWebsdaleN.1996.Predators:thesocialcon-struction of
stranger-danger in Washing-ton State as a form of patriarchal
ideology.Women Crim. Justice 7:4368WebsdaleN. 1998. Rural
WomanBatteringandtheJusticeSystem:AnEthnography.Thousand Oaks, CA:
SageWebsdaleN. 1999. Policehomicidefiles assituatedmedia
substrates. See Ferrell &Websdale 1999, pp.
277300WebsdaleN,AlvarezA.1998.Forensicjour-nalismaspatriarchal
ideology: thenews-paper construction of homicide-suicide.See Bailey
& Hale 1998, pp. 123141WilliamsJ. 1998. Comics: atool of
subver-sion?SeeAnderson&Howard1998, pp.97115Willis P. 1977.
Learning to Labor: HowWork-ingClassKidsGet WorkingClassJobs.New
York: Columbia Univ. PressWillis P. 1990. CommonCulture:
SymbolicWorkatPlayintheEverydayCulturesofthe Young. Milton Keynes,
UK: OpenUniv. PressWright R, Decker S. 1994. Burglars ontheJob.
Boston: Northeastern Univ. PressYoung A. 1996. Imagining Crime:
TextualOutlaws and Criminal Conversations.London: SageYoung J.
1971. The role of the police as ampli-fiers of deviancy,
negotiators of reality andtranslatorsoffantasy. InImagesof
Devi-ance, ed. SCohen, pp. 2761. Harmond-sworth, UK: PenguinAnnu.
Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418. Downloaded from
www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on 11/13/13. For
personal use only. Annual Review of SociologyVolume 25,
1999CONTENTSLooking Back at 25 Years of Sociology and the Annual
Review of Sociology, Neil J. Smelser1The Sociology of
Entrepreneurship, Patricia H. Thornton 19Women's Movements in the
Third World: Identity, Mobilization, and Autonomy, R. Ray, A. C.
Korteweg47Sexuality in the Workplace: Organizational Control,
Sexual Harassment, and the Pursuit of Pleasure, Christine L.
Williams, Patti A. Giuffre, Kirsten Dellinger73What Has Happened to
the US Labor Movement? Union Decline and Renewal, Dan Clawson, Mary
Ann Clawson95Ownership Organization and Firm Performance, David L.
Kang, Aage B. Srensen121Declining Violent Crime Rates in the 1990s:
Predicting Crime Booms and Busts, Gary LaFree145Gender and Sexual
Harassment,Sandy Welsh 169The Gender System and Interaction,
Cecilia L. Ridgeway, Lynn Smith-Lovin191Bringing Emotions into
Social Exchange Theory, Edward J. Lawler, Shane R. Thye217Aphorisms
and Cliches: The Generation and Dissipation of Conceptual Charisma,
Murray S. Davis245The Dark Side of Organizations: Mistake,
Misconduct, and Disaster, Diane Vaughan271Feminization and J
uvenilization of Poverty: Trends, Relative Risks, Causes, and
Consequences,Suzanne M. Bianchi307The Determinants and Consequences
of Workplace Sex and Race Composition, Barbara F. Reskin, Debra B.
McBrier, Julie A. Kmec335Recent Deveopments and Current
Controversies in the Sociology of Religion,Darren E. Sherkat,
Christopher G. Ellison363Cultural Criminology, Jeff Ferrell 395Is
South Africa Different? Sociological Comparisons and Theoretical
Contributions from the Land of Apartheid, Gay Seidman419Politics
and Institutionalism: Explaining Durability and Change, Elisabeth
S. Clemens, James M. Cook441Social Networks and Status Attainment,
Nan Lin 467Socioeconomic Position and Health: The Independent
Contribution of Community Socioeconomic Context, Stephanie A.
Robert489A Retrospective on the Civil Rights Movement: Political
and Intellectual Landmarks, Aldon D. Morris517Artistic Labor
Markets and Careers, Pierre-Michel Menger 541Perspectives on
Technology and Work Organization, Jeffrey K. Liker, Carol J.
Haddad, Jennifer Karlin575Organizational Innovation and
Organizational Change, J. T. Hage 597Inequality in Earnings at the
Close of the Twentieth Century, Martina Morris, Bruce Western623The
Estimation of Causal Effects From Observational Data, Christopher
Winship, Stephen L. Morgan659Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1999.25:395-418.
Downloaded from www.annualreviews.orgby University of Kent on
11/13/13. For personal use only.