Theories of the Information Society, Third Edition - Cryptome

NETWORK SOCIETY
elements that connect. This is not to say that Castells presents a functional
account of how each part supports an overall operation. Not at all: his approach
is one which emphasises the connectedness of parts, though often these are in
contradictory relationships, and their very frictional character is an important
contributor to change. Still, it is noteworthy that Castells connects, say, feminism
with processes of globalisation, as well as with economic and technological
innovations, with changes in family forms and shifts in stratification. Of course,
a conception of totality is not the preserve of Marxism, though that it is an
important dimension of the Marxist tradition does reveal its continued influence
on Castells. It is also something that is unfashionable in these postmodern
times, when ‘grand narratives’ are regarded with suspicion, and enthusiasm is
reserved for accounts of particularities and differences. Hanging on to a Marxist
lineage, Castells also stands out against today’s orthodox suspicion of totalistic
explanation.
In what follows I set out major elements of Castells’s thought as expressed
especially in The Information Age (see Webster, 1995, ch. 9, for discussion of urban
dimensions). This is something of a misrepresentation of his work since it
unavoidably reduces it to a series of rather abstract and theoretical observations.
It cannot be stated too forcefully that Castells’s most impressive quality is that
he is an empirical sociologist. This does not mean that he just describes situations,
piling up data and description. Castells is theoretically informed, sophisticatedly
so, but he prioritises in his work engagement with evidence. He does not
start with a theory that is then obstinately held to in face of facts. Manuel Castells
(2000a) recommends ‘disposable theory’, in large part as a reaction against
an overemphasis on abstract theorising that has so marked social science and
the humanities since the post-structuralist turn. Against this, Castells’s work is
marked by its inclusion of a remarkable amount of empirical material, drawn from
around the world. He presents this evidence in an impressively coherent framework
of analysis, whether it concerns the ‘wild capitalism’ of post-1989 Russia,
the inner-city ghettoes of North America, or the intricacies of the European
Union, but always he is at pains to incorporate and respond to substantive trends
and events.
Continuity or change?
Castells’s core argument is that the ‘information age’ announces ‘a new society’
(Castells, 2000c, p. 693) which has been brought into being by the development
of networks (enabled by ICTs) and which gives priority to information flows. I
shall say more about this, but for now would note that Castells does not straightforwardly
suggest the arrival of an ‘information society’. In his view all societies
have used information, and hence the term ‘information society’ is of little analytical
value with regard to the distinctiveness of the present era (Castells, 2000d,
p. 21).
Castells adopts the concept ‘informational capitalism’ when describing the
present epoch. Both the adjective and the noun here are important. On the one
100