On Popular Culture
I have been reading various articles and books (or more accurately parts of books) concerning minority culture and mass produced civilizations, the impacts of Industrial Revolution and modernity to high brow art and social cohesion, and the relationship between Marxism, Socialism, and popular culture. I cannot really say that I am profoundly aware of the breadth of theoretical and literary approaches that deal with these themes. So far, I am acquainted with the works of Leavis, Raymond Williams, Walter Benjamin, and Adorno.
Leavis for me, regardless of what avid Leavists might claim, is plain elitist. Granted that, considering his context, he witnessed a dramatic and somehow horrifying wave of mass produced products brought about by the increasing production in Europe and the emergence of factories and large manufacturing companies. It was, at that time, an economic revolution that was also inevitably changing the social modes and consumptions. Leavis, instead of scrutinizing or criticizing the phenomenon, as he was supposed to do like the Genius and the True Artist he puts so high up the pedestal, began to wage an almost war against popular culture. He was in defense but in that posture he appeared to be more aggressive. He called for the elevation of the process of analysis and introspection but he, it seems to me, dismissed the dynamics of mass production so easily. Such is the product of standardization, of the nonsense, of the proletariat, of the workers - who is easily absorbed by the manipulation of the media and the trickery of the capitalists. To some degree, I understand the trivialities of his time, but even so I do not agree with his total embrace of serious art, of the high culture, as if it is the only thing that matters - as if everyone, without exemption, at the time of the Middle Ages, kneel in favor of it stripped of any form of opposition, neither to submit nor to negate.
The most interesting is Adorno. I fell in love with some of the key statements in his articles. Not because I bow to submission but because I am moved to think further and reconsider. In his essay, Adorno writes "The actual function of sentimental music lies rather in the temporary release given to the awareness that one has missed fulfillment...They consume music in order to be allowed to weep. They are taken in by the musical expression of frustration rather than by that of happiness."
(to be continued...im busy focusing on acads..argh)
Leavis for me, regardless of what avid Leavists might claim, is plain elitist. Granted that, considering his context, he witnessed a dramatic and somehow horrifying wave of mass produced products brought about by the increasing production in Europe and the emergence of factories and large manufacturing companies. It was, at that time, an economic revolution that was also inevitably changing the social modes and consumptions. Leavis, instead of scrutinizing or criticizing the phenomenon, as he was supposed to do like the Genius and the True Artist he puts so high up the pedestal, began to wage an almost war against popular culture. He was in defense but in that posture he appeared to be more aggressive. He called for the elevation of the process of analysis and introspection but he, it seems to me, dismissed the dynamics of mass production so easily. Such is the product of standardization, of the nonsense, of the proletariat, of the workers - who is easily absorbed by the manipulation of the media and the trickery of the capitalists. To some degree, I understand the trivialities of his time, but even so I do not agree with his total embrace of serious art, of the high culture, as if it is the only thing that matters - as if everyone, without exemption, at the time of the Middle Ages, kneel in favor of it stripped of any form of opposition, neither to submit nor to negate.
The most interesting is Adorno. I fell in love with some of the key statements in his articles. Not because I bow to submission but because I am moved to think further and reconsider. In his essay, Adorno writes "The actual function of sentimental music lies rather in the temporary release given to the awareness that one has missed fulfillment...They consume music in order to be allowed to weep. They are taken in by the musical expression of frustration rather than by that of happiness."
(to be continued...im busy focusing on acads..argh)
Comments