MASS CULTURE

Question 1-how the ruling class shape our tastes and desires

The social group into which an individual is born plays a significant role in determining what kind of person individuals are likely to become in the future. For instance, the type of foods and clothes that youngsters consume influence how such individuals will act in future. Furthermore, social status impacts people’s essential decisions in life and especially in matters related to education and careers. Due to the praises that an Audi is given in society, I desire to have one of my own (Brown 1). According to most of the individuals I have interacted with, they claim that Audi has the technology and modern designs that bear a similar reputation to Volvo. Besides, being a car enthusiast, I desire an Audi due to its impressive racing history. However, I cannot afford the German machine due to my financial status. If I did stretch myself and bought one, I would spend the rest of my life servicing a loan.

Moreover, I came to learn about the value of an Audi by accessing the company’s website. Accessing the site enables an individual to get information about the models and technologies of the car. Watching Transporter 3 made me desire to own an Audi. The sterling of the movie managed to escape the wrath of his attackers using  Audi A8 W12 which dominates the road from the get-go, from that epic first burn out, to driving on two wheels between big rig trucks, to going off-road entirely before skidding to a controlled stop and avoiding a deadly plunge off a cliff.

As seen above, individuals who have power in society influence other people’s behavior. Interacting with people with desirable goods makes an individual want to own what the influential persons own.

Question 2-types of cultures

Folk culture refers to a religion or a way of life that was conventionally practiced by a small standardized rural group living in absolute quarantine from other groups. Besides, it demonstrates the old ways of a community. This Land is Your Land by Woodie Guthrie is an excellent example of a song that upholds folk culture. The song eloquently describes the American beauty. Besides, the song reflects Guthrie’s dissatisfaction with the depression-enhanced economic disparity and greed that was witnessed in the U.S after the Second World War (McCormack 230). The songs intended to remind all people that the American Land belonged to all people, and every individual had an obligation to make the country a better place to live. Besides, the song intended to remind people to uphold the American culture of sharing.

Mass culture refers to media-driven ethnic practices within contemporary mass civilizations,” which arose in tandem with systems of large-scale manufacturing and commercial advertising. Popular culture, on the other hand, encompasses a way of life that is grounded on the tastes of ordinary people rather than an educated elite(McCormack 230). For instance, Pretty Hurts by Beyoncé is an example of a song that depicts popular culture among the people. For example, the song by Beyoncé deals with themes of women’s movement, self-empowerment, and body image.  The lyrics of the song also show the significances of the social order’s high standards of beauty. Besides, the song also shows how an organization gives people the pressure to conform to expectations from other members of the community. For instance, girls in the music video apply make-up to conform to society’s expectation of being beautiful.

Question 3-works of art

I think the Well of Moses by Claus Sluter is famous for its cult value. The piece of art encompasses the six prophets in the bible who had predicted the birth of Jesus Christ and his execution. The prophets included Moses, David, Jeremiah, Daniel, and Isaiah (Benjamin & Jennings 20).  The sight of the execution is positioned on the topmost of the scripture, but the implementation is not a part of the sculpture, thus leaving the general image of the sculpture incomplete.

Moreover, the Well of Moses remains is still an exceptional illustration of the most significant characteristics of early Gothic sculpture as it transformed into the Northern Renaissance. The art brings together religious and humanist themes, thus generating a sculpture of inspiring size, practical mastery, and celestial magnificence (Benjamin & Jennings 20). This piece of art is valuable to me because it resonates with my religious beliefs.  I came to learn about it by reading about impressive works of spiritual work through online platforms.

I also find the Great Mosque of Damascus to be valuable for its exhibition value. The sculpture is situated over the site of an early Christian cathedral that was built in memory of St. John the Baptist. Word has it that the Baptist’s skull is preserved at the Great Mosque, and a tomb to the saint is situated there. Well-thought-out by some to be the fourth most divine site in Islam, the medleys of the Great Mosque signify the extensiveness and attractiveness of Muslim art (Benjamin & Jennings 20). Besides, the medleys present an image of natural surroundings and its vivacious life and exquisiteness reminiscent of texts in the Qur’an. Not only did it function as a place of worship, but the Mosque also operated as a public place of assembly. I value the piece of art as it represents the beliefs of the Muslims. Although I am Christian, I respect all the other religions and their beliefs.

Question 4-effects of the social media on personal interactions

There is no doubt that social networking has certain benefits such as entertainment, and it’s a way that allows individuals to keep in touch with their friends and close family relatives. However, social networking plays a significant role in the spread of hypocritical social life.

Besides, social networking replaces earnest interaction with pleasantries leaving individuals yearning for human connection (Nisar & Whitehead 747).  As a result, individuals lack a chance to open up and share problems that they go through in their daily lives leading to depression and anxiety. Therefore people and especially young people end up dying at an early age due to increased cases of suicide. Besides, although the internet acts as a good means of communication, it cannot fix the problem of loneliness and isolation.

The internet does not provide a good platform for individuals to generate any real emotion. Many individuals may ask for assistance through the different social media platforms, and although people may sympathize with them through commenting and liking, there is little or no media evidence to show that such campaigns are successful on a large scale basis which is an indication that individuals are still detached from each other emotionally when it comes electronic communication (Nisar & Whitehead 747). The internet cannot also solve loneliness among individuals as it tampers with the way in which people communicate with each other face to face. Individuals who are used to communicate through social media lack words while talking to other people on a one to one situation. As a result, they may fail to give important information that can help to solve different issues in society.

Works cited

Benjamin, Walter, and Michael W. Jennings. “The work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility [first version].” Grey Room (2010): 11-37.

Brown, Racheal Baaba. Desire and Taste: Disillusion in Migration. Diss. 2015.

McCormack, Thelma. “Folk culture and the mass media.” European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie 10.2 (1969): 220-237.

Nisar, Tahir M., and Caroline Whitehead. “Brand interactions and social media: Enhancing user loyalty through social networking sites.” Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016): 743-753.

CLICK HERE TO ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER

Mass Culture

The Frankfurt School and Popular Culture

In this ‘lecture’ we’re going to look at a few important theories and theorists

in the study of popular culture.

To begin, we must understand what is meant by ‘popular culture’. When

most people use this term today, they are referring to the cultural texts of

mainstream American culture. TV shows like the Big Bang Theory,

musicians like Beyonce and Kanye West, movies like the Avengers. These

are all cultural texts that are available to large audiences, and that enjoy

widespread popularity. Not all popular culture is well received by critics, but

it is still ‘popular’ because many people like it, or talk about it, or even know

about it (the Kardashians).

No matter how stupid popular culture may seem at times, it’s important to

realize that there is no such thing as ‘pure’ entertainment. No TV show is

simply mindless entertainment – there are always messages and meanings to

be found. Popular culture – from TV shows to music videos – represents the

culture it comes from. It communicates the values and ideas of a culture, and

in this respect it is extremely useful to study popular culture.

Now, before the days of broadcast media (film, radio, TV, Internet) it was

generally assumed that the values and ideas of a society came from the top –

from the powerful people in society. As Marx wrote, “The ideas of the ruling

class are in every epoch the ruling ideas”. The institutions of power

employed art critics and authors and intellectuals, who told people what was

good art, what was bad art, and what culture was trying to communicate.

Think about the remaining forms of ‘high culture’ today. When you go to an

art gallery, you can look at the paintings and sculptures, but you usually end

up reading the signs next to the art, where someone else tells you what the

art is ‘about’. There are still cultural experts who know which opera singers

are ‘best’, and which classical music is most ‘important’.

If you ever want to see this kind of cultural elitism in action, go downtown

to the SFU Harbour Centre campus. Across Hastings Street from the

university, there is a store called Sikora Music. They sell classical music.

Everything about the store is designed to make you feel stupid. THEY know

classical music, and they know what is worth listening to, and what is not.

They even have a sign in their window, written in detailed calligraphy, that

says they have a “beginners bin” inside. Because (as we have all been

taught), Classical Music is very complex and only smart people can ‘get’ it,

and you would need to spend years LEARNING to appreciate it. Right?

…. right?

What else does the Ruling Class like? What do they eat? Have you ever

eaten CAVIAR, or TRUFFLES? Are these really the best foods in the

world? Or are they just expensive, fancy things that rich people like. The

thing is… if powerful people like something, that thing starts to have value

for the rest of us, too. “Caviar looks like salty fish eggs, but it MUST be a

delicacy because it’s so expensive and served in fancy restaurants!”

QUESTION 1: Think about how the ruling classes shape our tastes and

desires. I want you to pick a LUXURY ITEM to write about: an expensive

thing (clothing, car, etc.) that you WANT, but can’t afford. WHY do you

want this thing? Where did you learn about it? Who told you it was a good

thing? Can you think of a movie, or an advertisement that really convinced

you that you want this thing someday?

Now, early in the semester, we briefly talked about the idea of Hegemony.

That is, the process of maintaining power without the use of force – invisible

consent. The institutions of power in a society can preserve order and

stability through everyday, boring activities – School, Church, TV, etc. We

learn about laws, and moral codes, and normal behaviours, not through

military lectures, but through everyday life. This is why Popular Culture is

so interesting – it helps us see hegemony in action. Why do we believe the

things we do, and how do everyday things help to maintain order?

Scholars who look at culture tend to use a variety of terms to describe what

they see, but for our purposes there are three main types of culture for

discussion.

1. Folk Culture. This is literally the culture of the people (Folk comes from

the German word ‘volk’, which means people. Ever seen a Volkswagen?

That means “the people’s car”) Folk Culture is not the culture that the people

enjoy – it is culture OF the people. People make it themselves. Generally,

folk culture refers to the past, when people lived in small villages and

communities, with only limited contact to other cultures.

Think about the songs and dances associated with traditional cultures. Folk

Dances and Folk Songs can’t be attributed to a single writer or creator – they

are the songs and dances that a culture has known for generations. Many

countries around the world celebrate their folk songs, stories, dances, etc.

They are a connection to the past, to what is often seen as a ‘simpler’ time.

In this way, most writing about Folk Culture becomes bogged down in myth

and nostalgia – romantically remembering a past that may or may not have

actually existed.

2. Mass Culture. This is the subject that most interested the Frankfurt

School, as we’ll see later in the lecture. Mass Culture only comes into being

when there is a mass audience, and when culture can be produced for this

mass audience.

Much of what we know as mass culture therefore comes into being when

modern communication technologies are introduced. You can sing a song on

a stage, to a large audience, but the radio allows you to sing that same song

to millions of listeners. As we have seen in the history of radio and TV,

however, the technology required to broadcast that song over the radio is

expensive, and regulated by governments. Therefore, the difference between

singing a song to a small group and singing over the radio is very significant.

The reasons for singing change. The listening experience changes. The

control over who gets to listen changes.

Mass culture is interested in both the mass production of culture and in the

implications of a society defined by mass media. We become part of a mass

audience, undefined by geography, personality, or taste. It doesn’t matter if

you love the Simpsons or hate the Simpsons – you are part of the mass

audience that watches the Simpsons. If you watch, it stays on the air. If you

don’t, it can go off the air. The mob rules.

3. Popular Culture. As I said, this is simply the range of cultural products

popular in the mainstream. On the surface, Popular Culture and Mass

Culture seem to be the same thing. What is important, however, is that Mass

Culture is made by large producers, for a mass audience. Pop Culture can

come from a variety of sources, but is consumed by many people. The

significance will become clearer as we look at the Frankfurt School’s

concerns with Mass Culture, and as we explore the various critiques of their

work.

QUESTION 2: Give me an example of each of these three types of culture,

using either MUSIC or FOOD. For example, you might discuss three

restaurants in Vancouver: one that you feel is producing Folk Culture (for a

small community, because they love making food), one that is Mass Culture,

and one that is Popular Culture (but NOT necessarily Mass Culture… that is,

the example is POPULAR, but it wasn’t designed for a mass audience.)

Briefly describe your three examples. Feel free to look up the terms Folk,

Mass, and Popular Culture on Wikipedia and YouTube for a better

understanding.

The Frankfurt School

As you saw in your readings, the Frankfurt School is a term that refers to

several important scholars in the 20 th Century. They started work in

Frankfurt, Germany, but were forced to flee for their own safety.

The Frankfurt School (Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno in particular)

were interested in what they referred to as the Culture Industries. They

looked at the history and development of economic production (coming

from Marxism) in order to understand the changes in culture around them.

The term Culture Industries is meant to suggest a very real connection

between economics (factories, assembly lines, mass production, planned

obsolescence, the need for marketing, etc.) and the world of culture (art,

entertainment, etc).

In studies of economics and the Industrial Revolution, it has been noted that

the development of Mass Production came fairly easily – once the

technology was invented, it was an easy step for industries to mass produce

their products. The trick for capitalism was, and always has been, the

development of a Mass Market: we can make millions of cars/TVs/sweaters,

but now we need millions of people to buy them. Capitalism solves this

problem in two key ways.

First, despite the growth of technology, mass production must continue to

employ the majority of citizens in a country. Wages at the Ford Factory, for

example, (where the first assembly line was built), were kept very high. This

way, the employees of a factory can afford to buy the products they spend

the day making. (It is interesting to see this rule coming apart in various

developing countries today.)

The second solution to the problem of mass production is much more

important – advertising. You can make millions of sweaters at a factory, and

you can pay your employees enough to afford these sweaters. But you need

to make them WANT to buy your sweaters. This is why the Industrial period

is also when we see the rise of modern advertising. Capitalism must create

desire – it must manufacture demand for products that most of us don’t

actually need. How many people in this room want a Mercedes, or a Rolex,

or designer sunglasses? Why on earth do we want these things? They’re

expensive, unnecessary, and rarely well built. But we do want them. This is

because advertising has become one of the most powerful forces on the

planet.

So the central theme in Horkheimer and Adorno’s work is that in the age of

mass media, the Culture Industries are the most powerful hegemonic force

on the planet. The movies we watch, the songs we hear on the radio, and the

stories we read in daily newspapers, taken together, have an incredibly

powerful influence on us. We don’t need governments and the upper classes

to tell us how to act and what to like, because the mass media does it instead.

A handful of companies make billions of dollars selling us ideas and

lifestyles that keep us ignorant, powerless, and poor. We willingly spend all

of our time and money trying to buy products and services we don’t need.

Advertising has convinced us that the good life is what we see on TV, and

that we can buy it at the mall.

Obviously, the Frankfurt School is generally seen as extremely pessimistic.

It’s a depressing thought – TV and movies tell us what to think, and we are

powerless. The Culture Industries – those companies that make TV shows

and CDs and commercials – control us. They trick us into doing what they

want us to do. Most people don’t want to believe this, and that’s a major

reason so many people have criticized the Frankfurt School. That doesn’t

mean they were wrong – in the 1940s, a handful of scholars were warning us

that TV and movies and music are too important to ignore. We need to

understand the culture around us if we want to understand what makes us

who we are.

The readings this week present a number of criticisms of the Frankfurt

School, but I want to focus on two in particular. The first is the work of

Walter Benjamin. Benjamin was connected with the Frankfurt School, but

wasn’t a key member, the way Horkheimer and Adorno were.

“The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” (1936)

In the age of mechanical reproduction, Benjamin argues, something has

gone missing from art. Reproduction, however, is hardly new. From stamps,

to foundries (metal working), to simple transcription, art has always been

reproducible. Mechanical reproduction, on the other hand, changes the rules

greatly. Now we have machines that can make millions of copies of

something. That means we can mass produce cars and clothing and

furniture… but also music and painting and books. MORE people have

access to these things, which is good. But we ONLY have access to copies,

not Originals.

“Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one

element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place

where it happens to be” (Benjamin).

This is what Benjamin calls the ‘Aura’ connected to an original work of art.

No matter how good a copy you make, the copy is never as meaningful as

the original.

Have you ever seen a picture of the Mona Lisa?

Have you been to Paris to see THE Mona Lisa?

What’s the difference? Well, the original painting is special. It is the ONLY

original. It exists in ONE place. And when you stand in front of it, and you

think about this fact, you realize that you are experiencing something

special. Something unique. The Original work of art has an AURA – a

magical quality that cannot be found in any copy.

Benjamin argues that a work of art can be received and valued on two

different levels:

Cult Value, and Exhibition Value.

Cult value is based solely on the existence of the object. Certain statues, for

example, remain hidden in churches for all but one day of the year. If a work

of art has Cult Value, it means that the art is valuable to you because you

have BEEN TOLD that it is valuable. You might never actually see or hear

the art yourself. But because others (experts, scholars, elders) TELL you that

the thing is valuable, it has value to you.

Exhibition Value, on the other hand, means that a work of art is valuable to

you because you EXPERIENCED IT YOURSELF. You saw it, you heard it,

you touched it. You didn’t need experts to tell you this thing is valuable –

you actually experienced the thing firsthand.

In an age of reproduction (of copies), MOST art relies on Exhibition Value.

Why?

Because you and I don’t NEED experts anymore! If I ask you: ‘Who is

better: Mozart, or Beethoven?’ Do you need to study classical music for

several years, and listen to professors tell you their thoughts? No. Just

download both onto your phone, listen to them, and make up your OWN

mind.

Before it was easy to copy things like music, ordinary people didn’t have

access to most art. So they had to trust authorities and experts.

Today, you can make a copy of a film, a song, a book, a painting… on your

phone. And you consume that copy, and come to your own conclusions.

So MOST art you and I consume will only be valuable to us through its

EXHIBITION. NOT its ‘cult’ status.

QUESTION 3: Discuss a work of art that you think is valuable because of

its CULT VALUE. Preferably, a piece of art you’ve never experienced

yourself. Why is this thing valuable to you? Who told you that it has value,

and why do you believe them? Then, discuss a work of art that you find

valuable because of it EXHIBITION VALUE. Preferably, a piece of art that

most critics and experts tell you has NO value. Why don’t you care what the

experts say about this piece of art? Why is it still valuable to you?

Benjamin concludes his essay with the warning that within the logic of

market capitalism, there is the danger in false prophets and solutions.

Fascism, he warned in 1936, seeks to aestheticize destruction, creating

original, wondrous works of art out of human death and decay. The potential

combination of political will, intellectual justification, and cultural creation

could be devastating. [Mankind’s] “self-alienation has reached such a degree

that it can experience its own destruction as an aesthetic pleasure of the first

order.” (Benjamin)

One of the greatest fears of the Mass Culture critics is that a massified

society, entertained by the products of mass production and mass

distribution, is an easy target for the worst instincts of human beings. Their

fears were, at various times, fuelled by, reacting to, and predicting, the Nazi

regime in Germany.

Leni Riefenstahl, 1935: Triumph of the Will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yl2iIHRE1ng

Think about the role of media and communication in Nazi Germany.

LOTS of angry little men have tried to conquer the world. That’s not new in

history.

But Hitler had his own personal filmmaker, and a weekly radio show.

If Napoleon had these things, we would all be speaking French right now…

Movies take up our attention (think McLuhan here: HOT media…)

They entertain us, they distract us… and they are an incredible tool for

propaganda and manipulation. If a government decided to use movies to

manipulate a public, what might happen…?

So the fear is that Mass Culture uses powerful weapons such as Film and

Radio and Television to brainwash us, and we’re too busy being entertained

to notice. The opening scene in Triumph of the Will was shot from an

airplane. In 1936. Most Germans who saw this movie had never been in a

place. They had literally never seen anything like this before. It’s a special

effects showcase that blew people away. Also, it was teaching them that

Adolf Hitler is a glorious leader sent from Heaven… So yeah, critics need to

pay close attention to this stuff. It matters.

Are the Mass Culture critics right? Are mass-produced cultural products

inherently dangerous?

The argument of mass culture critics is that, in the age of mechanization and

massification, we have become ‘atomised’. That is, we are all individuals in

a mass society, without the small, community-based identities that have

helped to build social cohesion for thousands of years. Without the central

role of the Family, the Neighbourhood, or the Church to keep us together,

we rely on the cultural industries to provide our social, intellectual, and even

moral direction.

Ultimately, however, this is a critique of democracy too: If it appeals to the

masses, it must be good. How can we trust masses of individuals to make

their own decisions? Don’t they need leaders to inspire them? Don’t they

need intellectuals to guide them?

This is where Mass Culture theory begins to stumble over its own

contradictions: Do we blame the rise of Nazism on the elite (who gave

direction to the masses), on the mass-produced cultural products that helped

to sway a population (Triumph), on the failure of democracy (voting for the

wrong party is worse than Not voting for a good king…), or on all of the

above? Would the preservation of German Folk Culture have prevented

Hitler’s rise? Would the existence of a thriving alternative media have

prevented it? Would Television have made it worse, or would it have

pacified the masses to the point where war would be impossible to sustain?

Ultimately, Benjamin was much more optimistic than Horkheimer and

Adorno. The Frankfurt School, in its critique of the culture industries, ends

up being a bit too elitist – they don’t trust the Mass audience, even though

the Mass Audience is us. Benjamin argues that the meaning of Art has

changed in the 20 th Century, but he doesn’t see this as an entirely bad thing.

We have access to more art – art is fundamentally more available and

accessible.

QUESTION 4: Spend a little time looking up the term ‘atomisation’, and

learning more about how Mass Media actually leaves us isolated and lonely.

We live in the most connected society ever imagined, and yet we are often

very lonely: how can that be? Atomisation is the result of mass media –

millions of us can watch the same show or the same movie at the same time,

and yet we form no actual connections to one another. We don’t talk to

strangers in a movie theatre. We barely know our neighbours.

In this particular moment where we’re all stuck indoors, literally being told

to ISOLATE from one another… do you think The Internet has the potential

to bring people together in a meaningful way? If Radio and Film and TV

caused Atomisation and isolation and loneliness… could the internet help to

fix this problem?