Topic:- Culture, Popular Culture, The Production and Consumption of Culture, Power / culture
Name:- Upadhyay
Devangana S.
Sub:- the cultural
Studies
Paper:- 08
Std:- M.A. Sem – 2
Roll No:- 06
Submitted to:- M.K.
Bhavnagaar University
Before we know what is Culture study we have
to know what is Culture? Answer of this is
Culture...
- influences our expectations of what is appropriate or inappropriate
- is learned
- reflects the values of a society
- frames our experiences
- provides us with patterns of behavior, thinking, feeling, and interacting
In summery culture means how we
live our life, style of life. We cannot defined any particular definition of
the culture because every people have their own culture. Every society and
place culture’s definition will be change so it is very difficult to say about
culture. Most of the people are unaware for their culture. When we come to know
about another culture only that time we become aware about our culture and we
able to find different between our and other culture. Cultural misunderstandings and conflicts
arise mostly out of culturally-shaped perceptions and interpretations of each
other's cultural norms, values, and beliefs (those elements below the
waterline). Entering another culture is like two icebergs colliding - the real
clash occurs beneath the water where values and thought patterns conflict.
Now we move on what is Culture
study, how it work, where it began?
Cultural studies is an
academic field of critical theory and literary criticism initially
introduced by British academics in 1964 and subsequently adopted by allied
academics throughout the world. Characteristically interdisciplinary, cultural
studies is an academic discipline aiding cultural researchers who theorize
about the forces from which the whole of humankind construct their daily lives.
Cultural Studies is not a unified theory, but a diverse field of study
encompassing many different approaches, methods and academic perspectives.
Distinct from the breadth, objective and methodology of cultural anthropology and ethnic studies, cultural studies is focused upon
the political dynamics of contemporary culture and its historical foundations,
conflicts and defining traits. Researchers concentrate on how a
particular medium or message relates
to ideology, social class, nationality, ethnicity, sexuality and gender, rather
than providing an encyclopedic identification, categorization or definition of
a particular culture or area of the world.[1]
Cultural studies
seeks to understand how meaning is generated, disseminated, and produced from
the social, political and economic spheres within a given culture. The
influential theories of cultural hegemony and agency have emerged from the cultural studies
movement as well as the most recent communications theory, which attempts to
explain the cultural forces behind globalization.
Unique academic approaches to cultural studies have also emerged in the United
States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and Italy.
During the 1980s rise
of neo-liberalism in
Britain and the new conservatism in America, cultural studies
was beset with criticism from both outside political and inside academic
forces, due to the close alliance between many cultural studies scholars
and Marxist theory, left-wing politics and perceived
"triumphalism" by other established scholars. Opposition to cultural
studies was most dramatically demonstrated with the 2002 closing of the Centre
for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS)
at the University of Birmingham, UK. CCCS was
considered the founding academic program for cultural studies in the world, and
was closed due to the result of the Research Assessment Exercise of 2001, a holdover
initiative of the Margaret Thatcher-led
UK Government of 1986, that determined research funding for university
programs. While many of its opponents continue to describe the discipline
as "irrelevant," the field has a world-wide presence consisting of
numerous annual international conferences, academic programs, publications,
students and practitioners, from Taiwan to Amsterdam and
from Bangalore to Santa Cruz.
Culture studies initially
developed in Britain as a reaction against specific disciplinary and political
positions. The most important of these were liberal humanism. Specifically the
‘culture and civilization’ tradition in literary studies; orthodox Marxism
culture studies developed as part of an engagement with the New left in the
1950 and 1960 and the mass society thesis and the related tradition of media
effects research in mass communications studies. Here culture studies took
issue with an impoverished view of culture and agency and a ‘Scientific’ – that
is to sat, positivist – empiricist research method.
In the previous lesson we saw
how complex the concept of culture could be. In this lesson we will look at the
history of Cultural Studies.
Most accounts of the history
of Cultural Studies point to the origins of the discipline in the West, and
also draw attention to the difference between the British and American variants
of Cultural Studies. When we talk of Cultural Studies in India, we need to note
that British Cultural Studies has certainly been an important influence.
However, the emergence of the area in the Indian context has also been
determined by developments in the disciplines of history, art history and the
study of cinema. Moreover, much of what we may today view as early work in
Cultural Studies was in fact not called Cultural Studies.
A working definition of
Cultural Studies would be that it is the study of culture in order to
understand a society and its politics. While attempting to trace the history of
Cultural Studies we need to look at approaches and areas that are clearly
related to what we identify as the concerns of Cultural Studies.
·
Popular Culture
Popular culture is
the entirety of ideas, perspectives, attitudes, memes, images, and other phenomena that
are within the mainstream of a given culture, especially Western culture of the early to mid 20th
century and the emerging global mainstream
of the late 20th and early 21st century. Heavily influenced by mass media,
this collection of ideas permeates the everyday lives of
the society.
The term "popular
culture" was coined in the 19th century or earlier. Traditionally,
the term has denoted the education and general "culturedness" of
the lower classes, as
opposed to the "official culture" and higher or the education
emanated by the dominant classes.
The stress in the distinction from
"official culture" became more pronounced towards the end of the 19th
century a usage that became established by the interbellum period.
From the end of World War II,
following major cultural and social changes brought by mass media innovations, the meaning of
popular culture began to overlap with those of mass culture, media culture,
image culture, consumer culture, and culture for mass consumption. Social
and cultural changes in the United States were a pioneer in this with respect
to other western countries.
The abbreviated form
"pop" for popular, as in pop music,
dates from the late 1950s.Although terms "pop" and
"popular" are in some cases used interchangeably, and their meaning
partially overlap, the term "pop" is narrower. Pop is specific of
something containing qualities of mass appeal, while "popular" refers
to what has gained popularity, regardless of its style.
According to John Storey, there are six
definitions of popular culture. The quantitative definition of culture
has the problem that much "high culture"
(e.g., television
dramatizations of Jane Austen)
is also "popular". "Pop culture" is also defined as the
culture that is "left over" when we have decided what high culture
is. However, many works straddle the boundaries, e.g., Shakespeare and Charles Dickens.
Definition: Popular
culture is the accumulated store of cultural products such as music, art,
literature, fashion, dance, film, television, and radio that are consumed
primarily by non-elite groups such as the working, lower, and middle class.
There are two opposing sociological arguments in relation to popular culture.
One argument is that popular culture is used by the elites (who tend to control
the mass media and popular culture outlets) to control those below them because
it dulls people’s minds, making them passive and easy to control. A second
argument is just the opposite, that popular culture is a vehicle for rebellion
against the culture of dominant groups.
Owing to the pervasive
and increasingly interconnected nature of popular culture, especially its
intermingling of complementary distribution sources, some cultural
anthropologists, literary, and cultural critics have identified a large amount
of intertextuality in popular culture's
portrayals of itself. One commentator has suggested this self-referentiality
reflects the advancing encroachment of popular culture into every realm of
collective experience. "Instead of referring to the real world, much media
output devotes itself to referring to other images, other narratives;
self-referentiality is all-embracing, although it is rarely taken account of." Furthermore,
the commentary on the intertextuality and its self-referential
nature has itself become the subject of self-referential and recursive commentary.
Many cultural
critics have dismissed this as merely a symptom or side-effect of mass consumerism;
however, alternate explanations and critique have also been offered. One critic
asserts that it reflects a fundamental paradox: the increase in technological
and cultural sophistication, combined with an increase in superficiality and
dehumanization.
Long-running
television series The Simpsons routinely alludes to
mainstream media properties, as well as the commercial content of the show
itself. In the episode "Bartvs. Thanks giving",
Bart complains about the crass commercialism of the Macy's Thanks giving Day Parade while
watching television. When he turns his head away from the television, the
screen shows an oversized inflatable balloon of Bart Simpson floating past.
According to
television studies scholars specializing in quality television,
such as Kristin Thompson, self-referentiality in
mainstream American television (especially comedy) reflects and exemplifies the
type of progression characterized previously. Thompson argues shows such
as The Simpsons use
a "...flurry of cultural references, intentionally inconsistent
characterization, and considerable self-reflexivity about television
conventions and the status of the programme as a television
show." Extreme examples approach a kind of thematic infinite regress wherein distinctions between
art and life, commerce and critique, ridicule and homage become intractably
blurred.
See also.
·
The production and Consumption of Culture
Max Weber's theory of
cultural rationalization and differentiation is well known. For Weber the
development of modernity not only involved a long process of differentiation of
the capitalist economy and the modern state but also entailed a cultural
rationalization with the emergence of separate scientific, aesthetic, and moral
value spheres. Weber's (1948) discussion of the differentiation of the cultural
sphere from a more rudimentary, holistic, religious cultural core is conducted
at a high level of abstraction. Although Weber provides brief glimpses of the
way in which each aspect of the cultural sphere is relentlessly driven by its
own logic, the way in which values relate to life-style and conduct, and the
tensions experienced by intellectuals, the "cultivated man" and the
cultural specialist, his prime purpose was to sketch out a typology (Weber
1948:323–24). While we do find fuller discussions of the cultural sphere in the
writings of Bell (1976) and Habermas (1981), we need to build on these sources
if we seek to understand the particular conjunction of culture in contemporary
Western societies. In effect we need to investigate the conditions for the
development of the cultural sphere by focusing on particular historical sequences
and locations. First, we need to understand the emergence of relatively
autonomous culture (knowledge and other symbolic media) in relation to the
growth in the autonomy and power potential of specialists in symbolic
production.
We therefore need to focus on
the carriers of culture and the contradictory pressures that
are generated by changing interdependencies and power struggles of the growing
fraction within the middle class toward dual processes of (a) the monopolization
and separation of a cultural enclave and (b) the demonopolization and diffusion
of culture to wider publics. Second, we need to focus on the development of
separate institutions and life-styles for cultural specialists and examine the
relation between value complexes and conduct in the various life orders, not
only in terms of a cultural sphere conceived as the arts and the academy
("high culture") but also in terms of the generation of oppositional
countercultures (bohemias, artistic avant-gardes). Third, we need to comprehend
the relational dynamic of a parallel development to that of the cultural
sphere: the general expansion of cultural production via "culture
industries" and the generation of a wider market for cultural and other
symbolic goods to produce what has been termed a mass culture or
consumers culture . Both tendencies have contributed to the
increasing prominence of culture within modern societies—tendencies that
threaten to erode and domesticate everyday culture, the taken-for-granted stock
of memories, traditions, and myths.
Like the pieces
of a mosaic, popular culture practices embody a series of different yet,
overlapping elements through which unique traditions emerge. For most
Americans, popular culture is the way of life in which, and by which, the
dominant society lives. As Ray Brown defines it, "popular culture is the
everyday culture of a group, large or small, of people." He contends that,
in a democracy like the United States, "popular culture is the voice of
the people- their practices, likes and dislikes- the lifeblood of their daily
existence" (Brown 23). When looking at American popular cultural studies,
however, it is important to consider that there are unlimited demonstrations of
cultural behavior dictated by history, race, ethnicity, custom, gender, age,
locality and group-size conditions. While most would confine the 'popular'
aspects of cultural practices to the dominant, it is also important to consider
the alternative cultural narratives that have emerged as hybrids from within
the margins of American society.
Although these cultural elements make up a much smaller component than
those of the dominant society, they are uniquely relevant in explaining and
emphasizing the fragmentary nature of American popular culture and the extent
to which the 'popular' has conditioned and contested the formation of social
spaces.
Because of their exclusion from
political power, cultural recognition, mass communication and popular culture,
ethnic minorities and immigrants have played an important role in shaping the
American post-modem aesthetic for decades. These exclusions, while often
generating marginal states of consciousness among minorities, have contributed
to the development of 'historical blocs' of oppositional groups. These
'historical blocs'- united by common ideas, dreams, intentions and alienating
experiences- signify the fragmentary nature of the post modem sensibility and
display the importance of the many overlapping and inter working popular
cultures of American society. (Lipsitz 152).
While popular culture studies
have embraced a wide definition of culture, and have resisted any particular
set of theories and methodologies, ghettos, barrios and border zones have been
the setting for most texts that examine the popular culture of minority groups
in United States (Cawelti 5). When immigrants and ethnic minorities assemble in
these urban communities, they often settle as ethnic groups and are surrounded
by other marginal clusters. Because such communities share with each other
similar experiences of alienation on the margins of society, they have produced
similarly apparent, yet alternative narratives, influenced by their conflicting
desires to challenge ideological hegemony and/or conform to the mainstream of
mass popular culture. "Neither assimilationist nor separatist, these
groups drew upon 'families of resemblance'
similarities to the experiences
and cultures of other groups- to fashion a unity of disunity"
·
Power\ culture
Culture can and
should play a role in bringing people together, even those with very
different world views. Culture can undoubtedly change individual
lives. Beyond that though, it can help to solve intractable
social and economic problems; to raise understanding between people
and nations; and to encourage solutions to some of the major international challenges
we all face.
With the pressing economic,
social and environmental issues which face the international
community, the Edinburgh International Culture Summit will create a
much needed and rare opportunity to look at the role of culture in
government and governments in culture. It creates a significant
new platform to think about key issues such as how Ministries of
Culture, and their equivalents, can encourage the right environment for helping
culture in all its forms to develop and grow.
The summit also provides an
opportunity for Ministers, and other key figures in the international
world of culture, to think about, and discuss together, how cultural
policy in countries across the world can be enriched by the sharing
of international best practice and co-operation.
The process of globalisation
is transforming all societies and making them increasingly diverse and
interconnected. This opens vast new opportunities for exchange and mutual enrichment
between persons of different and plural cultures. It is also raising new
questions about inclusion, human rights, and sustainability, calling for new
competencies.
Culture is a key resource to
address both the economic and social dimensions of poverty and to provide
innovative and cross-cutting solutions to complex issues such as health and the
environment, gender equality and promoting quality education for
all. Cultural and creative industries are some of the most rapidly growing
sectors in the world, representing an estimated global value of US$ 1.3
trillion.
At the same time, culture is a
source of wealth in ways that do not have price tags. Culture can help promote
social cohesion and youth engagement, and it is a wellspring for social
resilience. Culture is a source of identity and cohesion for societies at
a time of bewildering change. No development can be sustainable without it.
At this moment of change, when we
are rethinking strategies for development and seeking to identify new sources
of dynamism, let’s put culture on the agenda as a force for sustainability in
development.
The Power of Culture is a website
about culture and development. Culture is not a peripheral matter. The ideas,
ideals and creativity of people are the driving force behind development
towards more political, economic and social freedom. The Power of Culture
reviews art and cultural expressions in conjunction with human rights,
education, the environment, emancipation and democratisation. The site offers a
list of projects, initiatives and objectives of Dutch organisations active in
this area.
The site also reports on the part played by cultural organisations in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean and South-east Europe. News and background information illustrate how culture is inextricably entwined with ethics and policy. The Power of Culture also points the way to other internet sources, media and organisations. No development without culture. If culture is defined as the entire system of beliefs, practices and customs that exist in a society, it is the foundation that supports every development. Economic development without cultural roots will never be sustainable. But culture is not merely a vehicle for material progress: it is a goal in itself. It is part of the daily reality and is therefore essential to the development of all people.
All our efforts to achieve the millennium goals will be in vain if we fail to notice the themes that occupy people every day and bypass their creativity.
The site also reports on the part played by cultural organisations in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean and South-east Europe. News and background information illustrate how culture is inextricably entwined with ethics and policy. The Power of Culture also points the way to other internet sources, media and organisations. No development without culture. If culture is defined as the entire system of beliefs, practices and customs that exist in a society, it is the foundation that supports every development. Economic development without cultural roots will never be sustainable. But culture is not merely a vehicle for material progress: it is a goal in itself. It is part of the daily reality and is therefore essential to the development of all people.
All our efforts to achieve the millennium goals will be in vain if we fail to notice the themes that occupy people every day and bypass their creativity.