A redefinition of “High” versus “Low” culture.

 

An argument that has arisen over the past few decades is that Popular Culture is synonymous with consumer generated media. Some theorist refer to this view of culture as a debate of popular culture versus culture industry. Where the first refers to the genuine expression of an artistic phenomena and the second where culture is being manufactured for an audience. This is increasingly a non-black and white argument with regard to the nature of  Aesthetic Relations(our judgement of good) and the neo-Marxist view that we now have. As touched upon in Dr. Strangelove’s lecture, historically and at times, currently, the Intellectual Elites dictate what is ‘high’ and ‘low’ culture; and by default, what is good and bad artistic expression. In short, often a past reason for the propagation of culture was for the moral em-betterment  of the ‘masses’. This is an issue of class, and power, that was a focal criticism of Marxist theories. 

An example of ‘high’ culture would be the artist Maria Callas shown in the first image below who was famous through the middle of the 20th century for her amazing beauty, talent in singing and acting, and tantalizing personal life.

A portrait photograph of Maria Callas.

The term ‘low’ culture as has much debate to its nature, but an example of this would be the ever changing Madonna who is synonymous with the phenomena of MTV. The judgement phrase of ‘low’ is simply meant to indicate the opposite of ‘high’ culture, and refers to that which is produced by culture industries to gain a profit. This form of culture is held in this form of distain is due to the purpose of it to be directly commodified.

A cropped photograph of Madonna from her album "Hard Candy"

 

 

 

One of the 20th centuries foremost renowned Critical theorist, W.T. Adorno, along with Max Horkeimer (both part of the Frankfurt School of Thought) published numerous articles on the nature of ‘high’ and ‘low’ culture. They argued that culture industries commodifies culture, that is, culture industry sells a form of culture that they know will sell to the masses. Adorno’s main concern was that an individuals choice was being eliminated in this process, thus making people malleable and sponge-like to compromised culture. A further concern of neo-Marxist theorist was that this would occur no matter the economic situations of the individuals.

In the School of thought of Culture Studies, the prominent theorist Raymond Williams scrutinized the concept of ‘high’ versus ‘low’ culture. He made the point that some ‘low’ culture of the past such as jazz and theatre, through time and social change becomes ‘high’ culture. For example Maria Callas who attained super celebrity success in the opera world during her career would possibly in previous centuries been viewed in the same manner that we view Madonna. 

In an attempt to clarify the nature of Marxist’s concern with this high and low debate, I must define that Critical neo-Marxists believe that ‘high culture’ has its own innate value and integrity, which should not be subject to the influence of the elites for a method of manipulating for power. For further clarification see http://www.wright.edu/~gordon.welty/Adorno_84.htm In their oppinion, however, popular culture should remain the genuine expression of the masses. 

This has been in recent years becoming increasingly possible with mediums such as Youtube and the internet in general which has given more power to individuals to express their own creations, without having to go through the culture industry and risk censorship and manipulation to be more ‘sellable’.

1 Comment(s)

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI