Theodore Adorno and Max Horkheimer were two renowned Jewish representatives of the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory; they were particularly dominant during the early 20th century, approximately around the time of the 1920’s to 1960s. They took refuge in America after Adolf Hitler’s rise in Germany. These to philosophers developed the ‘Culture Industry Theory’ in the 1940s, in light of the disturbed society they had seen during this time. They witnessed how Nazi Fascism used mass media such as films, radio and newspapers to brainwash millions into partaking in this ideology. Similarly they saw the rise of Capitalism in America, which also used mass media such as Hollywood films and advertising to disseminate the masses into the capitalist Ideology. This essay will evaluate how the ‘culture industry’ had profound social impacts in society and examine weather it is valid in contemporary society.
Adorno and Horkheimer (1975) used the expression ‘culture industry’ to describe the monopolisation of culture. “The entire practice of the culture industry transfers the profit motive naked onto cultural forms” (Adorno, 2001, P.99). Adorno and Horkheimer believed that Capitalism was mass-producing popular culture which was fuelling consumerist ideologies. It was demolishing the aesthetic values of art and art was no longer ‘arts for art’s sake’ and ‘purposelessness purposes’ prevailed (Held, 1980, P.93). Adorno (2001) argued that popular culture and art in capitalist societies were used for distraction and escapist purposes. The ‘Culture Industry’ was seen to assemble masses to participate in it’s ideology, which has profound social impacts. The monopolisation of culture exploits and manipulates mass population for social control and p...
... middle of paper ...
...ergraduate Research Journal, 9(1), 9-17. Retrieved from http://xulanexus.xula.edu/textpattern/index.php?id=121
Steinert, H. (2003). Culture industry. Oxford, Cambridge UK: Polity Press.
Strinati, D. (2004). An Introduction to Theories of Popular Culture (pp. 52-79). New York, NY USA: Taylor & Francis.
Sussan, F. (2012). Consumer interaction as intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 13(1), 81-105. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=17005163&show=abstract
Taylor, P. A. (2009). Critical theory 2.0 and im/materiality: the bug in the machinic flows.Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 1(1), 93-110. doi:10.1386/iscc.1.1.93_1
Thompson, J. B. (2005). Books in the digital age: The transformation of academic and higher education publishing in Britain and the United States. Cambridge, U.K: Polity Press.
Products of the culture economy take on the appearance of artwork but are in fact dependant on industry and economy, meaning that they are subjected to the interests of money and power and producing a profit “The whole world is passed through the filter of the culture industry” . To Adorno the production of art and consumerism is driven and shaped by the logic of capitalist rationality, meaning consumer products are created on the basis of whatever will sell best.
Fowles, Jib. “Advertising's Fifteen Basic Appeals.” Eds Michael Petracca, Madeleine Sorapure. Common Culture: Reading and Writing About American Pop Culture. Boston: Pearson, 2012. 54-72. Print.
Epstein, Dan. 20th Century Pop Culture: The Early Years to 1949. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2001. Print.
Jameson, Frederick. "Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism" New Left Review. 146 (July-August 1984) Rpt in Storming the Reality Studio. Larry McCaffrey, ed. Durham, NC: Duke UP, 1992.
In Highbrow, Lowbrow, Levine argues that a distinction between high and low culture that did not exist in the first half of the 19th century emerged by the turn of the century and solidified during the 20th century, and that despite a move in the last few decades toward a more ecumenical interpretation of “culture,” the distinction between high art and popular entertainment and the revering of a canon of sacred, inalterable cultural works persists. In the prologue Levine states that one of his central arguments is that concepts of cultural boundaries have changed over the period he treats. Throughout Highbrow, Lowbrow, Levine defines culture as a process rather than a fixed entity, and as a product of interactions between the past and the present.
Strinati, Dominic (2003), ‘Structuralism, semiology and popular culture’ (extract), in his An Introduction to Theories of Popular Culture: 2nd Ed., London, Routledge, pp. 82-85.
The issue of the relationship between the mass media and the popular culture has always been a controversial issue in social sciences. The political economists insist on the role of the media industry in the creation of this phenomenon of the twentieth century. Though, advocates such as John Fiske, argue that popular culture is actually the creation of the populous itself, and is independent of the capitalist production process of the communication sector. Basing his argument on the immense interpretive power of the people, Fiske believes that the audience is able to break all the indented meanings within a media message. He also believes- by giving new meanings to that specific message they can oppose the power block that is trying to impose its ideology to the public. Consequently, this anarchistic activity of the audience creates the popular culture as a defence mechanism. Even when we accept Fiske’s ideas, we can not disregard the manipulative power of the media and its effects on cultural and social life.
The most influential cultural practice of our time is the culture of capitalism, as it is the dominant form of economic organization across the globe (Anderson 2010). Capitalism takes and makes places throughout the globe, leaving traces that affect the commodities we buy, the livings earned, the methods and motives for travelling, and the meanings associated with them (Anderson 2010). The culture of capitalism is based upon trading products, experiences, and services, at all different scales - locally, nationally, or globally. Those who successfully trade products and services, and those who are limited to selling their labour to help other manufacture and provide the desired product often define capitalism. The process of making more money is a key defining element of the culture of capitalism (Anderson 2010).
Ideology is “a system of meaning that helps define and explain the world and that makes value judgments about that world.” (Croteau & Hoynes, 2014). According to Sturken (2001), the system of meaning is based on the use of language and images or representation. Therefore, media texts come along and select what is “normal” and what is “deviant” to the extent that this hegemony of constructed meanings in the viewer’s head becomes “common-sense” (Gramsci in Croteau & Hoynes, 2014). From this standpoint, what America claims to be pop culture which is omnipresent in media internationally, is a representation, through “politics of signification” of what is right or wrong (Kooijman, 2008). An example of America’s cultural ‘manifestation’ is Mean Girls,
Popular Culture. Ed. John Woodward, Farmington Hills, MI: Thompson Gale, 2005. 138-140.
The concept of mass culture emerged as a philosophical exploration of the question of modernity in relation to individual identities and individuality. As the society progressed from its traditional existence to a modern state, numerous advancements were realized that drastically changed the outlook of the society and its influence on an individual and individual thinking. One of the most important factors that have been an influence in the advancement of modernity is the mass media phenomenon (Landgraf 25). In fact, very few would contend that the institutions within the mass media franchise are crucial aspects of contemporary politics and philosophy. However, philosophers like Nietzsche and Karl Marx had the contention that the mass media had to be considered in light of its effects to the values and institutions of modern societies. Nietzsche’s criticisms is based on the general idea that the values and institutions of modern day society oppress creativity and bodily energies and limit the ability if human beings to function as individuals. This in turn blocks a generation of stronger individuals from emerging in a society that is now characterized by vigor. Friedrich Nietzsche critically appraised the modern age and developed one of the foremost sustainable critiques of mass culture and society, bureaucratic discipline, the state and regimentation. This led to the production of fresh perspectives which later deeply influenced discourse about modernity.
Slater, D. quoted in Bell D. and Hollows J. (2005). Ordinary Lifestyles: Popular Media, Consumption and Taste, Maidenhead: Open University Press, Page 178
It is increasingly clear that media and culture today are of central importance to the maintenance and reproduction of contemporary societies. Cultures expose society to different personalities, provide models, which display various forms of societal life and cultivate various ways to introduce people into dominant forms of thought and action. These are the types of activities integrate people into society and create our public sphere. Media and technology surround our society; engrained into the fabric of our existence so much so, that it has become hard to find an aspect of life not influenced by its effects. For this reason, media controllers, wield extreme power and influence over the lives of everyday people. Although, they increasingly continue to feed the audience trash, despite their authority as the creator of our social/cultural interactions, and justify their actions by calling themselves industries. Reducing themselves to just businesses whose sole purpose is to create a profit. This admittance of what they feel to be their true purpose however does not hinder their control and power but instead adds to it. Creating a need for there to be some way to analyze and discuss whether they are using their position and power wisely. Filling this void, scholars have theorized ways for individuals to be critical of the media that they intake. One of these critical theories is the “Culture Industry” theory. Using Cultural Theory, as well as other complementary neo Marxist theories, it is possible to determine how Stacy Peralta, once urban youth culture advocate, became incorporated into the superstructure through media use, thus making him a tool for the continued commoditization of society, and a youth marketer for industries l...
What popular culture and mass culture are, their significance to society and how they are consumed are very multifaceted questions that have been subject to wide debate is the fields of Sociology and Cultural Studies. Many theorists have chimed in on the debate to answer these questions. Two notable theories on this topic are that of Dwight MacDonald in his work “A Theory of Mass Culture” and John Fiske in his work “Popular Culture”. MacDonald argues that mass culture is a phenomenon that is detrimental to society. He believes that although mass culture is something that produced “by and for human beings” that is ultimately is what leads to the loss of individuality and individual thought and expression in favor
On an individual basis, popular culture helps establish and mold the subjective self. It influences the way individuals think, act and respond, and this becomes part of how people develop their personalities, preferences, beliefs, and their overall identity. For example, most people idolize certain fashion statements or fads which determines their preference of clothing. This process of self-formation coincides with both elements of personal choice and the responses and attitudes of others. Furthermore, the identity that an individual asserts is influenced by and helps determine the development of social relationships; it influences the communities and groups to which an individual will identify with and how that identification is processed. In the establishment of communal bonding, mass culture helps with, as Leavis describes, a “leveling down of society” (35). The lines of class distinction have been blurred which, to Leavis is not a good thing, but it unites us nonetheless. Popular culture also promotes unity in that it “blurs age lines” (29). As stated earlier, the products of popular culture are targeted towards a variety of audiences; adults read comic books, children watch adult films, etc. (Macdonald 29). Similarly, teenagers and young adults are brought together through night clubs, fashion, and music; college students come together to enjoy campus events; book fans wait in line hours for new releases, etc. Each of these instances produce feelings of belonging, acceptance and connection with members of society over a common