Why Pop Culture?
Posted: August 24, 2010 at 8:00 am | Tags: convergence, cultural relativism, hi/lo culture, pop culture, power, symbolic artifacts
The readings for today introduce us to important definitions in the critical and cultural studies traditions. I outline my thoughts on some of them here. While this is not a graded individual blog post, the questions I pose here (as in future posts that review readings) are not simply rhetorical. I’d like for you think about them and offer a comment (on this blog, not your own). I don’t object to you discussing on your own blogs (for that counts toward overall participation, too), I simply encourage you to comment here toward a group conversation. Additionally, these questions are intended as prompts for in class and Twitter discussion.
From Danesi:
The phrase “pop culture” surfaced in the United States in the 1950s. The post-war and baby boom era brought unprecedented buying power, especially to the new class of “teenagers.”
It’s important to understand culture historically and subjectively, also known as cultural relativism. This means we have to work hard to not morally or even aesthetically judge forms of pop culture by current standards. This doesn’t mean we can’t form and share opinions, just that the practice of cultural critique involves analyzing culture on “its own terms” (p. 3).
Scholars and fans alike have contested the distinctions of high, mid and low categories of popular culture. The examples Danesi shares in Table 1.1 on page 6 identify Mozart and Frontline (a PBS program) as high culture, while PBS is listed as mid along with Oprah. Finally, American Idol and Budweiser are included as examples of low culture. What do you make of these placements? Are they arbitrary or do they make sense based on your understanding of high/mid/lo culture choices? What institutions and/or types of people impact what becomes hi, mid or low?
On page 25, Negroponte’s definition of convergence culture is included as an example of how media, technology and cultural forms are becoming intertwined and, I argue, indistinguishable, if we combine this with McLuhan’s symbolic artifacts (where culture, society and science are conflated). Your reading uses the jukebox and the automobile as prime examples of convergent, symbolic artifacts. What examples exist today? (Hint: this is a prime example of how to engage popular culture via Twitter! Perhaps, tweet your ideas? #justsaying)
The article also discusses entertainment spectacles. What are prime spectacles in popular culture we currently consume? How have they changed from previous eras that Danesi outlines?
From Martin:
The concept of power is crucial in critically analyzing popular culture. Everyday life may feel as it moves along naturally, put our actions and experiences are very much tied to politics and people/institutions in power (p. 13). This doesn’t just mean economic power but also cultural power and identity politics. Her argument, grounded in Marx and Gramsci (which we discuss soon), encourages an understanding of structures and policies that organize and command our lives and choices, but also that we interrogate how we operate within, around (or perhaps beyond) these rules and forces.
From Storey:
Our textbook author summarizes key terms such as Marxism, hegemony, ideology and articulation toward emphasizing the political nature of culture. If you don’t grasp what these ideas mean, ask here, as they are foundational to critical theory. In fact, rather than me regurgitating the definitions here why don’t you attempt commenting your interpretations of one of the above four terms?
Dr. Stern
The Discussion
see what everyone is saying
I really enjoed Danesi’s article. It was a good start to trying to understand pop culture. I think pop culture is definitely one of the harder topics to study because it is always changing. What makes something popular one day makes it unpopular the next. I like how Danesi went through the growth of pop culture, starting with the “Roaring Twenties” and going through the difference between high and low culture and where we are today. As a result, pop culture is always changing and it is the youth of that generation that decides what is culture for them while everyone else takes what was culture while they were growing up with them.
I liked Danesi’s article as well. Due to the popularity of something always changing, I think that the placement of things in our culture in the categories of hi, mid, and lo are completely up to the discretion of the individual and the era it is from. If pop culture cannot be based on current standards, then wouldn’t Mozart no longer be considered high culture? It seems that it is the class system of the time that gets to decided the distinction of hi, mid, and lo. (ex. high society listens to Mozart, mostly middle class watches Oprah, people with lower incomes drink beer) After reading Danesi’s article and learning that youth culture’s trends are the beginnings of pop culture, I came to the conclusion that I don’t agree with certain things being placed in certain categories. Due to ever changing trends shouldn’t the chart in Danesi’s article be different every year?
From Storey’s introduction I took ideology to mean how a certain group of people come to understand the world around them. With the different social groups, these ideologies will probably be different though. Not everyone will place things in the same category or have the same view.
In agreement with the posts above, I believe that Danesi’s article is a great introduction to this course. The fact that popular culture is always changing is indeed what makes it a difficult subject but it is also what makes it interesting. Unlike many other studies, pop culture changes every single day. The idea of cultural relativism is what interests me the most. It is imperative to understand that culture changes with every generation. Also, generations will likely not understand other generation’s forms of pop culture. Just like I would not understand my dad’s love for his Atari, he wouldn’t understand my obsession with Facebook.
Great points here!
This article was a great introduction to the course. It helped to define what popular culture is and keep us aware that it is not a static element, yet dynamic, because it is constantly changing. I was also very interested in the idea of cultural relativism. Generational differences seems to the root of many misunderstandings in our culture today. For example, in regards to jobs and ageism, the younger generation often dismiss advice and guidelines from those of older generations and vice versa. It is important to be open minded to each individual opinion regardless of age.
Danesi’s article was a great first read for the course. Pop culture is constantly changing and very complex, but this article breaks it down in a way that makes it understandable. It also provides some consistencies that help with the study of pop culture. Many people don’t realize that we really are shaped by our culture from birth, including our culturally defined gender stereotypes (A perfect example is how baby girls are immediately wrapped in pink blankets and boys in blue ones right at birth). I agree with Danesi’s placement of things in the high, mid, and low culture categories. Mozart, Shakespeare, etc. are all what he would call “great works of art” that will be known and present in our culture for a long time (maybe even forever!). Tabloids, American Idol, and Jerry Springer are just current trends that will eventually fade out and live what he calls a “short self life,” which is why I feel it is appropriate to keep them in the low culture category.
I think one of the most fascinating things about pop culture is the way that things can move from low culture to high culture over the course of generations. Shakespeare, though written for the ruling class, was just as much for the uneducated masses. Now most people are intimidated by his writing and think it is out of their reach. Even dances like the Charleston that were once considered incredibly sexy and risqué are now something that is relegated to ballroom dance class. So no matter how shocking some aspects of our current low-brow culture may seem, they will one day bore our children the way that KISS and Rocky Horror Picture Show seem blasé to us.