Stuart Hall and ideology: A brief look at Animal rights

I will be looking at Stuart Halls’ definition of ideology, Hall describes an ideology as “The mental frameworks – the language, concepts, categories, imagery of thought and system of representation – which different classes and social groups deploy in order to make sense of, define, figure out and render intelligible the way society works” (Hall, 1996 pg. 26). What does Hall mean by this definition of ideology? From this definition it is easy to see that Halls definition is rooted in the material, instead of the metaphysical, the physical world and how we interpret it is the most important part of understanding our lives and how we fit into things. I intend to look at the Animal rights movement and use it as a lens with which to look at Halls’ concept of ideology showing that the Ideology of the Animal rights movement is grounded in the real world and stands against real oppression.

I will do this by looking at some of the components that make up the ideology of the Animal rights movement; first I will look at language and examine some of terms used by proponents of Animals rights to communicate their message; I will also talk about the imagery, how it is used and the meanings behind the imagery.

                The terms used by the Animal rights movement that I will discuss will be speciesism, and cruelty-free. First let us look at speciesism (a term I find myself using at least a few times a week); the idea is that of a hierarchy, where one species (human) is “better” than another, and therefore can discriminate against and abuse another (non-human) species. By looking at this term using Halls’ concept of ideology the central idea of Animal rights can be seen, the equality of life and through this equality lies the possibility to see Animal use as exploitative and abusive. Is it really such a mental leap to see the exploitation of Animals any differently than the plight of the working class, poor, women, or any group that is suffering oppression? I would say no, the suffering of any species, group, or class seems unnecessary.

                The term cruelty-free is much as it appears, a statement that we are living a life that, as much as possible, causes as little suffering as possible. So if this term is so straight forward why did I select it for examination? The term cruelty-free has made great leaps into the mainstream, products labelled as cruelty-free grace the shelves of major grocery chains, it has even been distorted in the labelling of “cruelty-free meat,” the use of the term is in this way allows others to change the way they view the things they consume, to alleviate the conscience of burden. So it is evident that the term used by Animal right advocates has a different meaning and effects how we see the products we purchase differently than someone who holds no such values.

                Imagery plays a huge role in the Animal rights movement, whether it is pictures of emaciated dogs in cages at puppy mills or pictures of rabbits and cats in small cages being tested on by the cosmetics industry, or performance art where people adopt the role of the exploited Animal. The statement is that Animals are exploited and are suffering because of human indifference. The shocking nature of some of the imagery is a statement of the reality of the situations Animals find themselves in, it shows that Animal rights is grounded in and defines the reality that we see as preventable everyday occurrences. One of my favourite images is that of a figure clad in a balaclava holding a small Animal, for me this image truly defines the duel nature of how I see things. The figure being masked shows conflict, but it is dichotomized by the compassion shown in the rescuing of an Animal from whatever circumstances it had been placed. 

                I have demonstrated how the Animal rights movement is the ideological filter that we see the world though, and how the ideas are grounded in the material world and that the goal of the ideology is to make real change in the world, I have done this by showing how the language is rooted in the traditional language of oppression and links species oppression with forms of human oppression. I have also shown how imagery plays a role in stating and reinforcing the beliefs and moral outlook of the Animal rights movement by showing both oppression and compassion.  

 

References 

Hall, Stuart (1996) ‘The problem of ideology: Marxism without guarantees’ in D. Morley and K-H Chen (eds.) Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies. London: Routledge.