Mobilization Through Interpellation : James Bulger, Juvenile Crime and the Construction of a Moral Panic
| Author | Colin Hay |
| Published date | 01 June 1995 |
| Date | 01 June 1995 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/096466399500400203 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
197-
MOBILIZATION
THROUGH
INTERPELLATION :
JAMES
BULGER,
JUVENILE
CRIME
AND
THE
CONSTRUCTION
OF
A
MORAL
PANIC
COLIN
HAY
Lancaster
University
INTRODUCTION
More
moral
panics
will
be
generated
and
other,
as
yet
nameless,
folk
devils
will
be
created.
This
is
not
because
such
developments
have
an
inexorable
inner
logic,
but
because
our
society
as
presently
structured
will
continue
to
generate
problems
for
some
of
its
members -
like
working-class
adolescents -
and
then
condemn
whatever
solution
these
groups
find.
(Cohen,
1972: 204)
T
IS
now
over
twenty
years
since
Stanley
Cohen
concluded
his
pioneering
account
of
the
discursive
construction
of
folk
devils
and
the
mobilization of
the
moral
panic
surrounding
the
Mods
and
Rockers
’phenomenon’
with
these
hauntingly
prophetic
comments.
Since
then
his
words
have
become
something
of
a
sociological
truism.
Indeed,
in
a
somewhat
ironic
confirmation
of
Cohen’s
thesis,
we
are
currently
witnessing
the
first
reflexive
moral
panic
in
which
the
British
media
itself
has
co-opted
Cohen’s
terminology
to
describe
its
own
culpability
in
the
narration
of
the
James
Bulger
incident
and
its
broader
resonances.
A
second
(and
not
merely
sociological)
truism,
then,
is
that
in
Britain
we
are
witnessing -
or
more
accurately,
participating in -
the
mobilization
of
a
new
SOCIAL
&
LEGAL
STUDIES
(SAGE,
London,
Thousand
Oaks,
CA
and
New
Delhi),
Vol.
4
(1995), 197-223
198
moral
panic,
a
panic
precipitated
around
the
phenomenon
of
juvenile
delin-
quency,
but
with
much
broader
resonances.
As
Hall
et
al.
say
of
the
societal
reaction
to
mugging
in
the
1970s,
the
panic
’is
about
something
other
than
crime,
per
se.
The
society
comes
to
perceive
crime
in
general,
and
&dquo;mugging&dquo;
in
particular,
as
an
index
of
the
disintegration
of
the
social
order’
(1978:
viii-viii).
So
too,
juvenile
delinquency
today.
The
current
moral
panic
is
characterized
in
much
the
same
way
by
the
same
excesses
of
spectacularization
(Bruck,
1992;
Debord,
1987),
sensitization
(both
public
and
police),
deviance
amplification,
symbolic
(if
not
’deterrent’)
sentencing,
moral
authoritarianism,
the
mobiliz-
ation
of
a
control
culture,
the
return
of
vigilante
groups
to
the
streets,
and
the
discursive
construction
and
exclusion
of
the
deviant
(Cohen,
1972;
Hall
et
al.,
1978;
Pearson,
1983,
1985) -
’the
expurgation
of
the
other’
(Thompson,
1990: 65).
All
apparently
coexist
in
a
complex
mutual
symbiosis.
Yet
the
panic
surrounding
the
’James
Bulger
case&dquo;
has
its
own
specificity.
Not
only
is
this
the
first
reflexive
moral
panic,
it
is
also
characterized
by
the
invisibility
of
the
’folk
devil’.
In
this
respect
the
juvenile
delinquent
as
deviant
’other’
contrasts
sharply
with
Cohen’s
stylized
image
of
the
folk
devil
as
a
’distinguishable
social
type’,
whose
visibility
is
the
basis
of
his/her
expurgation
through
the
imposition
of
an
external
disciplinary
gaze
(the
black,
male,
urban
proletarian
’mugger’;
the
’Mod’;
the
’Rocker’).
Our
inability
to
distinguish
between
the
face
of
the
’juvenile
delinquent’
and
that
of
’innocent
youth’
stimulates
a
profound
sense
of
anxiety
and
insecurity
as
conventional
concep-
tions
of
innocence
and
guilt
become
deeply
problematized.
Can
we
pick
out
the
two
’evil
monsters’
from
the
three
photographs
of
James
Bulger,
Robert
Thompson
(Child
A)
and
Jon
Venables
(Child
B)
that
frame
the
coverage
of
the
verdict?
This
intense
and
collective
sense
of
insecurity
is
graphically
captured
by
the
Sunday
Times
in
its
reflections
on
the
verdict:
[W]e
will
never
be
able
to
look
at
our
children
in
the
same
way
again....
All
over
the
country,
parents
are
viewing
their
sons
in
a
new
and
disturbing
light.
Where
we
see
them
at
the
ages
of
9,
10
or
11,
pushing
each
other,
jostling,
or
showing
impatience
with
their
younger
brothers
and
sisters,
we
can’t
help
wondering
in
what
circumstances
they
could
end
up
like
Robert
Thompson
or
Jon
Venables,
the
killers
of
little
James
Bulger....
Parents
everywhere
are
asking
themselves
and
their
friends
if
the
Mark
of
the
Beast
might
not
also
be
imprinted
on
their
offspring.
(Sunday
Times,
28
November
1993: 3)
In
this
article
I
hope
to
reflect
this
specificity
whilst
developing
a
more
general
theoretical
account
of
the
recruiting
of
subjects
to
moral
panics.
In
so
doing
I
hope
to
make
a
case
for
the
rehabilitation
of
a
critical
conception
of
ideology
which
is
capable
of
recognizing
the
inherent
activity
and
imagination
of
audiences
in
textual
appropriation
and
decoding.
My
broader
aim
is
to
demonstrate
that
a
critical
conception
of
ideology
does
not
necessarily
imply
an
understanding
of
audiences
as
passive
ideological
dupes.
Ideology
critique
premised
upon
a
view
of
an
active
and
imaginative
subject,
is,
as
I
hope
to
show,
crucial
to
an
understanding
of
the
role
of
the
media
in
the
setting
of
the
discursive
To continue reading
Request your trial