| Abstract: | Power is often theorised in a way that equates its meaning with A's control over B. Alternatively, it is regarded as a universal transformative capacity. In which case, power is conceptualised in terms of its accomplishment of social order. The central objective of this paper is to expose the contribution and limitations of existing functionalist, action theoretic, radical and relational conceptions of power. This is done by attending to the significance of identity securing strategies in the reproduction of power relations. Highlighting the relevance of this identity dimension, we argue that individuals’ attempts to distance and protect themselves from their ‘powerlessness’ can have important, self-defeating consequences in respect of the reproduction of asymmetrical relations of power. Connecting the search for independence to the preoccupation with securing a stable and valued sense of identity, we explore how this preoccupation sustains the very structural conditions that promote insecurity. Our thesis on power and identity is then applied and illustrated through a critical discussion of relevant aspects of two recent labour ethnographies: Nichols and Beynon's Living with Capitalism and Willis's Learning to Labour. |
