自称是描述性的定义本质上等同于和几乎所有的流行文化的人做的事,享受。然而,霍尔说,反对派在主导文化的中心和主导文化在社会结构的外围。因此,这种差异是有价值的在我们的注意力的方式现有的机构如学校说,等工作来创建和管理这一对立。然而,这些信息不是描述性的,它依赖于人们的观念和已经不复存在,比较精确地文化由对话构成,在这些事业单位进行规划设计。文化没有固定位置的形式在这个层次结构,但要根据他们的招聘按上下移动的讨论合法和大会主席强行以非法文化现有的时间。大厅拒绝上述定义,而是说话的流行文化的地方代表“人民”,是与和相关的斗争。从大厅特别关注,与“人”的过程被定义为提交更高的权力,提供他们所有正确利用相同的对“人民”反对这些原则的支配,进而生流行文化的政治概念。然而,文章大厅只是提供了一个瞥见自己的受欢迎的作为一个概念的分析,试图利用读者的想象力的休息。种族主义意识形态已经持有了工人阶级的常识,有足够的证据表明这些共同的意识形态领域像报纸评论的政客和几乎所有常见的生活的一部分。因此,大厅的问题在试图理解的流行不是简单的可用性的证据。也从来没有问题,是比较容易研究生产的这种意识形态在社会的普遍可用的领域,但是他遇到的问题是在等概念的理论地位人们的意识和流行文化。他认为,意识的辩证方法和条件是非常重要的,但几乎没有被探索的道路。同样,分析文化时,他指的是常识和理论地位被暗示和不发达在清晰的框架和诸如“工人阶级文化”的照片。但是大厅并不认为问题是至少可以排除在分析流行文化。他认为一次又一次,没有固定的内容类别一般称为“人民”,流行文化是“人民”的网站或平台构成,而流行文化始终是一个网站的斗争中所涉及的利益相关者
The definition claims to be descriptive in nature and equates the popular culture with almost all the things that the people do and enjoy. However, Hall says that it is the opposition amongst the dominating culture which is the centre and the dominated culture literally on the periphery of the social fabric. Thus, this difference is valuable in taking our attention to the way in which the existing institutions like say schools, etc. work to create and manage this opposition. However, this information is not descriptive in nature and it relies on a notion of the people versus the non-people, a comparison precisely constituted by the dialogue about the culture, conducted in those institutions. The forms of cultural does not have a fixed position on this hierarchy, but keep moving up and down according to their recruitment as per discussion of legitimate and non-legitimate culture in the existing time.Hall rejects both of the above mentioned definitions and instead speaks of the popular culture as a site where ‘the people’ are represented, are fought with and the associated struggle. The concern from Hall particularly, is associated with the processes by which ‘the people’ are defined as submitting to higher powers and providing them all the right to leverage the same against ‘the people’ being opposed to such principles of domination, in turn giving birth to the political concept of the popular culture. However in, the essay Hall just provides a glimpse of his own analysis of the popular as a concept and tried to use the imagination of the reader to work out the rest. Racist ideologies had taken hold of the common sense of the working class and had enough evidence of these ideologies in common realms like newspapers, comments of politicians and almost every part of common life. Thus, the question for Hall working on trying to understand the popular is not simply with the availability of evidence. Also, it was never a matter of it being comparatively easier to study the production of such ideologies in the common available realms of society, but the problem that he encountered was in the theoretical status of concepts such as the consciousness of people and the popular culture.
He argues that a dialectic approach to consciousness and conditions is of paramount importance but that path has hardly been explored. Similarly, when analysing the culture, he refers to common sense and its theoretical status which is being hinted to and not developed within the clear frameworks and the terms like ‘working class culture’ comes in to the picture. But Hall does not see the problem to be one which can be at least left out in the analysis of the popular culture. He has argued time and again that there is no fixed content to the category commonly termed as ‘the people,’ and that popular culture is the site or platform where ‘the people’ are constituted, and that popular culture is always a site of struggle amongst the stakeholders involved.
