Wednesday, 19 May 2010
Culture Industry
The Frankfurt School; a predominant left wing group of intellectuals gathered from the middle and upper classes of German society in the early twentieth century are popularly associated within the ‘development of critical theory and research’. (Strinati:2004). The most significant critique concerned highlighting the apparent ‘social contradictions underlying the emergent capitalist societies of the time, and their typical ideologies’ (ibid). The Frankfurt School – within a metaphysical paradigm – described such contradictions, ‘the very nature or essence of the social phenomena’, as present within the reality of The Culture Industry (Cohen et al:2007).
The Frankfurt School adopted several Marxist theoretical principles implying that ‘the Culture Industry reflects the consolidation of commodity fetishism, the domination of exchange value and the ascendancy of state monopoly capitalism’ (Strinati:2004). Indeed, the classical Marxist conflict model provides the basis for the Culture Industry paradigm. This conflict model – Bourgeoisie versus Proletariat – derived from observations that ‘capitalists appropriated a disproportionate share of society’s total income solely by their virtue of being owners of the means of production’ is the essential analytical tool in terms of understanding that the ‘dominant ideas in any society are those which are drawn up, distributed and imposed by the ruling class to secure and perpetuate its rule’ (Cypher & Dietz:2004), (Strinati:2004). The Culture Industry, therefore, is a cultural phenomenon initiated by the ruling class to maintain social order.
The Frankfurt School adopted several Marxist theoretical principles implying that ‘the Culture Industry reflects the consolidation of commodity fetishism, the domination of exchange value and the ascendancy of state monopoly capitalism’ (Strinati:2004). Indeed, the classical Marxist conflict model provides the basis for the Culture Industry paradigm. This conflict model – Bourgeoisie versus Proletariat – derived from observations that ‘capitalists appropriated a disproportionate share of society’s total income solely by their virtue of being owners of the means of production’ is the essential analytical tool in terms of understanding that the ‘dominant ideas in any society are those which are drawn up, distributed and imposed by the ruling class to secure and perpetuate its rule’ (Cypher & Dietz:2004), (Strinati:2004). The Culture Industry, therefore, is a cultural phenomenon initiated by the ruling class to maintain social order.
A mockingbird will never strike back
According to Bourdieu, (in Jenks:2004) Cultural Capital is ‘diffused within a social space…. transmitted by inheritance and invested in order to be cultivated’. Furthermore within his theory of Cultural Reproduction, Bourdieu believed that; ‘differentiated and stratified, socialisation practices, in combination with the system of education, function to discriminate positively in favour of these members of society who, by virtue of their location with the class system are the natural inheritors of cultural capital’ (Jenks:2004). Therefore, this statement suggests, within a Marxist discourse, that Cultural Capital – the demonstration of social and economic status and power - is a privilege, exclusive to the higher tiers of the social stratification paradigm, which is perpetual and must be tolerated by the masses.
Furthermore, cultural capital is only one facet within a trinity of ‘major types of capital’; the others being economic – ‘high levels of income and property’ - and social – ‘stems not so much from what you know but who you know’ capital (Thornton:1995) (ibid1) (ibid2). In addition, within contemporary society there exists a manifold of consonant and dissonant relationships pertaining to such a trinity. Of course, within the elite of society – the royal family provides the best example – there will be a harmonious consonance of the trinity paradigm. However, there are increasing instances of dissonant relationships within contemporary society such as; ‘those rich in economic capital but less affluent in cultural capital’ (ibid3). Indeed, the opportunist markets of economic opportunity – professional sport, media and reality shows – will perpetuate such dissonant relationships and, indeed, the rejection of new money celebrities by the hereditary social elite.
Furthermore, cultural capital is only one facet within a trinity of ‘major types of capital’; the others being economic – ‘high levels of income and property’ - and social – ‘stems not so much from what you know but who you know’ capital (Thornton:1995) (ibid1) (ibid2). In addition, within contemporary society there exists a manifold of consonant and dissonant relationships pertaining to such a trinity. Of course, within the elite of society – the royal family provides the best example – there will be a harmonious consonance of the trinity paradigm. However, there are increasing instances of dissonant relationships within contemporary society such as; ‘those rich in economic capital but less affluent in cultural capital’ (ibid3). Indeed, the opportunist markets of economic opportunity – professional sport, media and reality shows – will perpetuate such dissonant relationships and, indeed, the rejection of new money celebrities by the hereditary social elite.
Identity Positions
Within this presentation exists a myriad of identity position dichotomy. The initial, and indeed most apparent, concerns male versus female sensibility – of which a female bias is evident criticising a series of stereotypical generalisations – and, secondly, an emphasis regarding the gender specific processes of economic labour (Men – Police and Women – Office). Both contribute to an overall sense of social and economic inequality towards women. Therefore, the presentations ideology demonstrates a shift from ‘Female Passivity’ to a collective stance of objection towards the implied dominant patriarchal society (Frith & McRobbie:1978). This is exemplified in two particular strong instances. The initial example concerns the MTV video scope of role reversal and, secondly, the presence of an all female band within a rock setting.
The question as to its relevancy to general society will, inevitably, lead to great debate. Indeed, if we analyse this from an economic standpoint, since the advent of a post-industrial society in the UK in the 1970s and the shift from mass production to more flexible forms of production (i.e. Fordism to Post-Fordism), women left what was regarded as the fifth world - the kitchen, garden and nursery – to participate in the service sector and indeed achieve greater levels of economic equality. Prior to this point in time, this theme of passivity would achieve greater relevancy as Strinati (2004) describes the industrial epoch of the UK as the ‘symbolic annihilation of women…. that the roles of wife, mother and housewife, etc., are the fate of women in a patriarchal society. Women are socialised into performing these roles by cultural representations which attempt to make them appear to be the natural prerogative of women’. This demonstrates, quite considerably, that over the past 50 years great strives towards the symbolic annihilation of women have been achieved without the help of Beyonce. However, in terms of social rituals, her mimesis does, to a large extent, achieve greater relevancy as Frith and McRobbie (1978) ‘boys can express their sexuality more directly than girls; they are allowed to display physical as well as spiritual desire’.
Another interesting and valid point made by the presentation, particularly by the live clip is with regards to the ensemble – an all women rock group which defies the view that ‘women musicians who make it are almost always singers’, (ibid). Indeed, if we analyse women within contemporary music, does the theory of Frith and McRobbie still retain relevance today? Beyonce as well as other female ‘artists’ such as Shakira, Leona Lewis, Britney Spears would certainly support this theory. Furthermore, the identification of a prominent women within rock instrumentation eludes me as it’s by far easier to identify classical women performers such as Evelyn Glynnie. This can be attributed to many reasons such as the assumed male dominated, testosterone fuelled realms of rock or as Bayton (1988) simply concludes; ‘Women are much less likely to be able to play already’.
The question as to its relevancy to general society will, inevitably, lead to great debate. Indeed, if we analyse this from an economic standpoint, since the advent of a post-industrial society in the UK in the 1970s and the shift from mass production to more flexible forms of production (i.e. Fordism to Post-Fordism), women left what was regarded as the fifth world - the kitchen, garden and nursery – to participate in the service sector and indeed achieve greater levels of economic equality. Prior to this point in time, this theme of passivity would achieve greater relevancy as Strinati (2004) describes the industrial epoch of the UK as the ‘symbolic annihilation of women…. that the roles of wife, mother and housewife, etc., are the fate of women in a patriarchal society. Women are socialised into performing these roles by cultural representations which attempt to make them appear to be the natural prerogative of women’. This demonstrates, quite considerably, that over the past 50 years great strives towards the symbolic annihilation of women have been achieved without the help of Beyonce. However, in terms of social rituals, her mimesis does, to a large extent, achieve greater relevancy as Frith and McRobbie (1978) ‘boys can express their sexuality more directly than girls; they are allowed to display physical as well as spiritual desire’.
Another interesting and valid point made by the presentation, particularly by the live clip is with regards to the ensemble – an all women rock group which defies the view that ‘women musicians who make it are almost always singers’, (ibid). Indeed, if we analyse women within contemporary music, does the theory of Frith and McRobbie still retain relevance today? Beyonce as well as other female ‘artists’ such as Shakira, Leona Lewis, Britney Spears would certainly support this theory. Furthermore, the identification of a prominent women within rock instrumentation eludes me as it’s by far easier to identify classical women performers such as Evelyn Glynnie. This can be attributed to many reasons such as the assumed male dominated, testosterone fuelled realms of rock or as Bayton (1988) simply concludes; ‘Women are much less likely to be able to play already’.
Friday, 16 April 2010
Musical Stratification
‘In every healthy society there are three types which condition each other and gravitate differently physiologically: each has its own hygiene, its own field of work, its own sense of perfection and mastery. Nature, not man distinguishes the pre-eminently spiritual ones, those who are pre-eminently strong in muscle and the temperament and those, the third type, who excel neither in one respect nor the other, the mediocre ones – the last the great majority, the first as the elite’.
Nietzsche (1886)
Nietzsche’s statements with regards to his critical, acerbic summary of culture, it can be argued, retain an element of relevancy today. As a precursor to the following discussion, it is important to concede that ‘there is no such thing as a human nature independent of culture’ (Geertz:1965). Furthermore, the consideration that culture is ‘notoriously ambiguous concept’ must be taken into account; Nietzsche summarises culture according to his modes of perception and will be met with equal levels of concession and objection (Hebdige:1979).
Returning to Nietzsche’s definition, he implies a Marxist paradigm of elitist hegemony; the bourgeoisie spiritual over the strong in muscle and temperament proletariat and the mediocre; the ones unfit for the purpose of production; the elderly, the infirm, the antagonists. Furthermore, the use of the word Nature implies that such hegemony is a privilege of hereditary power and status; cultural capital and therefore, subordinate spheres shall never attain such spiritual plains. Furthermore, Bourdieu’s concept of cultural reproduction - ‘differentiated and stratified, socialisation practices, in combination with the system of education, function to discriminate positively in favour of these members of society who, by virtue of their location with the class system are the natural inheritors of cultural capital’ - would certainly support this postulation (Jenks:2004).
If such a Marxist structure of society is adopted it can be suggested an individual will, indeed, embrace or be at the mercy of a particular hereditary Conceptual System – ‘caught within a linguistic system that does not relate to external reality in the way we expect’ contributing to the perpetual motion of elitism (Butler:2002). Interestingly, such linguistic systems can be to the detriment of all spheres as they can only offer only ‘partial interpretation and often uses metaphor when it thinks it’s being literal’ in which ‘we live, not inside reality, but inside our representations of it’ (ibid1) (ibid2). Only by conceding a reflexive ideology will achieve the perspective that ‘we can see that the world, its social systems, human identity even, are not givens, somehow guaranteed by a language which corresponds to reality, but are constructed by us in language, in ways that can never be justified by the claim that this is the way that such things really are’ (ibid3). Such sentiments of compromise are shared by Hoggart (1966) who states; ‘first without appreciating good literature, no one will really understand the nature of society, second, literary critical analysis can be applied to certain social phenomena other than academically respectable literature (for example, popular arts, mass communications) so as to illuminate their meanings for individuals and their societies’.
Indeed, this piece will focus upon a facet of the popular arts; contemporary popular music and an analysis pertaining to whether Nietzsche’s summary of society can be transposed to relate to contemporary music spheres.
For instance, the natural assumption dictates classical music attains the spiritual label which derives from Adorno’s critique; On Popular Music. Indeed, Adorno distinguished a serious and popular sphere of music - he demonstrates considerable bias towards serious music; particularly Beethoven – of which serious music assumed the hegemonic position. Furthermore, it is implied that the field of work within serious music is a major contributory factor towards such hegemony; ‘in Beethoven and in good serious music… the detail virtually contains the whole and leads to the exposition of the whole’ (Adorno:1941). Therefore, in good serious, classical music – it’s interesting Adorno concedes not all serious music is therefore spiritual – ‘every detail derives its musical sense from the concrete totality of the piece’ and ‘never of a mere enforcement of a musical scheme’ – although, ascertained by the aforementioned concession, the later statement is, indeed, a fallacy (ibid1) (ibid2). With this concession in mind, it can be suggested that such holistic musical construction is indeed the aesthetic sense of perfection and mastery.
‘In every healthy society there are three types which condition each other and gravitate differently physiologically: each has its own hygiene, its own field of work, its own sense of perfection and mastery. Nature, not man distinguishes the pre-eminently spiritual ones, those who are pre-eminently strong in muscle and the temperament and those, the third type, who excel neither in one respect nor the other, the mediocre ones – the last the great majority, the first as the elite’.
Nietzsche (1886)
Nietzsche’s statements with regards to his critical, acerbic summary of culture, it can be argued, retain an element of relevancy today. As a precursor to the following discussion, it is important to concede that ‘there is no such thing as a human nature independent of culture’ (Geertz:1965). Furthermore, the consideration that culture is ‘notoriously ambiguous concept’ must be taken into account; Nietzsche summarises culture according to his modes of perception and will be met with equal levels of concession and objection (Hebdige:1979).
Returning to Nietzsche’s definition, he implies a Marxist paradigm of elitist hegemony; the bourgeoisie spiritual over the strong in muscle and temperament proletariat and the mediocre; the ones unfit for the purpose of production; the elderly, the infirm, the antagonists. Furthermore, the use of the word Nature implies that such hegemony is a privilege of hereditary power and status; cultural capital and therefore, subordinate spheres shall never attain such spiritual plains. Furthermore, Bourdieu’s concept of cultural reproduction - ‘differentiated and stratified, socialisation practices, in combination with the system of education, function to discriminate positively in favour of these members of society who, by virtue of their location with the class system are the natural inheritors of cultural capital’ - would certainly support this postulation (Jenks:2004).
If such a Marxist structure of society is adopted it can be suggested an individual will, indeed, embrace or be at the mercy of a particular hereditary Conceptual System – ‘caught within a linguistic system that does not relate to external reality in the way we expect’ contributing to the perpetual motion of elitism (Butler:2002). Interestingly, such linguistic systems can be to the detriment of all spheres as they can only offer only ‘partial interpretation and often uses metaphor when it thinks it’s being literal’ in which ‘we live, not inside reality, but inside our representations of it’ (ibid1) (ibid2). Only by conceding a reflexive ideology will achieve the perspective that ‘we can see that the world, its social systems, human identity even, are not givens, somehow guaranteed by a language which corresponds to reality, but are constructed by us in language, in ways that can never be justified by the claim that this is the way that such things really are’ (ibid3). Such sentiments of compromise are shared by Hoggart (1966) who states; ‘first without appreciating good literature, no one will really understand the nature of society, second, literary critical analysis can be applied to certain social phenomena other than academically respectable literature (for example, popular arts, mass communications) so as to illuminate their meanings for individuals and their societies’.
Indeed, this piece will focus upon a facet of the popular arts; contemporary popular music and an analysis pertaining to whether Nietzsche’s summary of society can be transposed to relate to contemporary music spheres.
For instance, the natural assumption dictates classical music attains the spiritual label which derives from Adorno’s critique; On Popular Music. Indeed, Adorno distinguished a serious and popular sphere of music - he demonstrates considerable bias towards serious music; particularly Beethoven – of which serious music assumed the hegemonic position. Furthermore, it is implied that the field of work within serious music is a major contributory factor towards such hegemony; ‘in Beethoven and in good serious music… the detail virtually contains the whole and leads to the exposition of the whole’ (Adorno:1941). Therefore, in good serious, classical music – it’s interesting Adorno concedes not all serious music is therefore spiritual – ‘every detail derives its musical sense from the concrete totality of the piece’ and ‘never of a mere enforcement of a musical scheme’ – although, ascertained by the aforementioned concession, the later statement is, indeed, a fallacy (ibid1) (ibid2). With this concession in mind, it can be suggested that such holistic musical construction is indeed the aesthetic sense of perfection and mastery.
As a means of resistance to Adorno’s critique – ‘the reader….involved in the articulation and interpretation of this play of language should act independently of any supposed intentions of the author’ - this study shall sub-divide the popular music sphere into two independent fragments. Therefore this study shall assign the authentic popular musical sphere as those; pre-eminently strong in muscle and the temperament. This concept of authentic popular music can be attributed to the work of Frith (1996) who stated that traditional dominant ‘assumption about the source of musical value – serious music matters because it transcends social forces – popular music is aesthetically worthless because it is determined by them’ can be challenged.
Therefore, this lead to the process of distinguishing the authentic from the in-authentic. According to Frith (1996) such an authentic field of work pertains to a ‘critical judgement measuring the performers truth to the experiences or feeling they are describing’ which, typically, I an ‘expression of something – a person, an idea, a feeling, a shared experience, a zeitgeist (ibid1). It can be suggested that this process contains modes of transactions; the initial – The Emotional Transaction - the artist will provide an interpretation of such aforementioned emotions and experiences and the listener – via a combination of monetary and emotional currencies – will buy into this interpretation and, secondly – The Power Transaction - the exchange of cultural capital to the listener – status and power within social groups – and popularity for an artist who contributes a strong, sustained economic source to popular music production. This is, indeed, the essence of perfection and mastery within this sphere of which bands such as U2 and other career based bands such as; The Stereophonics, Foo Fighters, etc, sustain the economic power of contemporary, authentic popular music.
Therefore, this lead to the process of distinguishing the authentic from the in-authentic. According to Frith (1996) such an authentic field of work pertains to a ‘critical judgement measuring the performers truth to the experiences or feeling they are describing’ which, typically, I an ‘expression of something – a person, an idea, a feeling, a shared experience, a zeitgeist (ibid1). It can be suggested that this process contains modes of transactions; the initial – The Emotional Transaction - the artist will provide an interpretation of such aforementioned emotions and experiences and the listener – via a combination of monetary and emotional currencies – will buy into this interpretation and, secondly – The Power Transaction - the exchange of cultural capital to the listener – status and power within social groups – and popularity for an artist who contributes a strong, sustained economic source to popular music production. This is, indeed, the essence of perfection and mastery within this sphere of which bands such as U2 and other career based bands such as; The Stereophonics, Foo Fighters, etc, sustain the economic power of contemporary, authentic popular music.
Indeed, such popular music which fails – or indeed simply perceived to have failed – to portray required elements of truth and, therefore, provides an un-sustainable economic source to popular music production will therefore be deemed as the mediocre in-authentic.
Such music is a mere novelty and, indeed, an accurate reflection of Adorno’s critique of popular music – ‘the detail has no bearing on the whole, which appears to be an extraneous framework’ – where the focus is the performers idiosyncrasies; the music is mere background accompaniment which is, indeed, ‘mutilated by a device’; a recent example being Jedward, of whom their hairstyles, pseudo-rapping and erratic dance-routines render music a simple coincidence (Adorno:1941) (ibid1). Although in a rather contradictory sense, the perfection and mastery within this sphere is the celebration of novelty, a break from reality, a metaphorical throwing of inanimate objects at the stalks of pseudo-celebrity.
Such music is a mere novelty and, indeed, an accurate reflection of Adorno’s critique of popular music – ‘the detail has no bearing on the whole, which appears to be an extraneous framework’ – where the focus is the performers idiosyncrasies; the music is mere background accompaniment which is, indeed, ‘mutilated by a device’; a recent example being Jedward, of whom their hairstyles, pseudo-rapping and erratic dance-routines render music a simple coincidence (Adorno:1941) (ibid1). Although in a rather contradictory sense, the perfection and mastery within this sphere is the celebration of novelty, a break from reality, a metaphorical throwing of inanimate objects at the stalks of pseudo-celebrity.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
