As an independent phenomenon, mass culture is assessed controversially. In general, existing points of view can be divided into two groups. Representatives of the first group (Adorno, Marcuse, etc.) give a negative assessment of this phenomenon. In their opinion, mass culture forms a passive perception of reality among its consumers. This position is justified by the fact that in the works popular culture ready-made answers are offered to what is happening in the sociocultural space around the individual. In addition, some theorists of mass culture believe that under its influence the system of values changes: the desire for entertainment and entertainment becomes dominant. The negative aspects associated with the influence of mass culture on public consciousness also include the fact that mass culture is based not on an image oriented to reality, but on a system of images that influence the unconscious sphere of the human psyche.
Many researchers note that modern mass culture in Russia is characterized by a completely irrepressible desire to fill everything with oneself. cultural space each person, displacing any individual preferences. Moreover, sometimes one gets the impression that in Russia the entire mass culture has been “taken over” by one clan, which is making its own profit on it. This is indirectly confirmed by the fact that on television every day everyone can see the same faces having fun, making faces, celebrating something, singing songs and telling “funny” jokes. And this is all against the backdrop of a deep systemic crisis that is occurring in Russia in all aspects of the lives of its citizens. There is evidence of the use of popular culture as a mechanism of manipulation public opinion, when through this phenomenon there is a duping of the masses, instilling complete indifference to what is happening in the country, distraction from pressing problems, planting false values and ideals. Moreover, starting from a certain point, figures of mass culture suddenly imagined themselves as experts in other areas of human activity, so their expert opinion becomes very much in demand to influence the fragile consciousness of young people, whose representatives often choose their idols from among such dishonest figures.
Another aspect of popular culture is the hidden genocide of certain groups of citizens. So, for example, in lately It has become fashionable to ridicule everything that is originally Russian - Russian traditions, Russian foundations, the Russian way of life, everything in general. Comedians, under the guise of jokes, introduce into the consciousness of their audience thoughts about the inferiority of this very audience due to its origin. It should be noted that most of these humorists who undertake to talk about the Russian people in a ridiculous manner have nothing to do with this people. However, such “sabbaths” are broadcast at the federal level almost every day in a state where the majority of the population consider themselves Russian.
Meanwhile, researchers who adhere to an optimistic point of view on the role of mass culture in the life of society point out that:
- - it attracts the masses who do not know how to use their free time productively;
- - creates a kind of semiotic space that promotes closer interaction between members of a high-tech society;
- - provides an opportunity for a wide audience to become acquainted with works of traditional (high) culture.
And yet, it is likely that the contrast between definitely positive and definitely negative assessments of mass culture will not be entirely correct. It is obvious that the influence of mass culture on society is far from clear and does not fit into the binary scheme “white - black”. This is one of the main problems of analyzing popular culture.
Mass culture plays an important role in modern society. On the one hand, it facilitates and, on the other hand, simplifies the understanding of their elements. This is a contradictory and complex phenomenon, despite the characteristic simplicity that the products of mass culture possess.
Mass culture: history of origin
Historians have not found a common point at which their opinions could converge on the exact time of occurrence of this phenomenon. However, there are the most popular provisions that can explain the approximate period of the emergence of this type of culture.
- A. Radugin believes that the prerequisites for mass culture existed, if not at the dawn of humanity, then certainly during the time when the book “The Bible for the Beggars,” which was intended for a wide audience, was widely distributed.
- Another situation implies the later emergence of mass culture, where its origins are connected with European At this time, detective, adventure and adventure novels became widespread due to their large circulation.
- In the literal sense, according to A. Radugin, it originated in the USA at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. He explains this by the emergence of a new form of arrangement of life - massification, which was reflected in almost all spheres: from political and economic to everyday life.
Based on this, we can assume that the impetus for the emergence of mass culture was the capitalist view and mass production, which should have been realized on the same scale. In this regard, the phenomenon of stereotyping has become widespread. Sameness and stereotypes are the striking main characteristics of mass culture, which have spread not only to everyday objects, but also to views.
Mass culture is closely connected with the process of globalization, which is carried out mainly through the media. This is especially evident at the present stage. One striking example is yoga. Yogic practices arose in ancient times, and Western countries had nothing to do with this. However, with the development of communication, international exchange of experience began to occur, and yoga was accepted by Western people, beginning to be introduced into their culture. This has negative characteristics because a Westerner is unable to understand the depth and meaning that Indians understand when they practice yoga. Thus, a simplified understanding of a foreign culture occurs, and phenomena that require in-depth understanding are simplified, losing their value.
Mass culture: signs and main characteristics
- It implies a superficial understanding that does not require specific knowledge and is therefore accessible to the majority.
- Stereotyping is the main feature of the perception of products of this culture.
- Its elements are based on emotional unconscious perception.
- She operates with average linguistic semiotic norms.
- It has an entertaining focus and manifests itself, to a greater extent, in an entertaining form.
Modern mass culture: “pros” and “cons”
At the moment it has a number of disadvantages and positive features.
For example, this one allows for close collaboration large group members of society, which improves the quality of their communication.
Stereotypes generated by mass culture, if they are based on a true classification, help a person perceive a large flow of information.
The shortcomings include the simplification of cultural elements, the profanation of foreign cultures and the tendency to remakes (remaking once created and recognized elements of art into new way). The latter leads to the assumption that mass culture is not able to create something new, or is capable, but in small quantities.
Master's student
Averkina Tatyana Nikolaevna, honorary worker of general education Russian Federation, teacher of history and social studies at VUVK named after. A.P. Kiseleva, Voronezh
Annotation:
Mass culture is a form of culture that dominates among the majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics and an orientation toward the “average person.” One part of society criticizes mass culture, considering it faceless and propaganda. Another part recognizes its effectiveness in supporting the spiritual and moral unification of individuals. At the same time, no one denies the global influence that mass culture has on the collective consciousness and mind. This article is devoted to a more detailed study and analysis of the presented influence, as well as its connection with various spheres of society.
Mass culture is a form of culture dominant among the majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics, orientation towards the "average person". One part of society criticizes mass culture, considering it faceless and propagandistic. The other part recognizes its effectiveness in supporting the spiritual and moral unification of individuals. At the same time, no one denies the global influence that mass culture has on collective consciousness and reason. This article is devoted to a more detailed study and analysis of the presented influence, as well as its relationships with different spheres of society.
Key words:
culture; popular culture; moral values; society
culture; mass culture; moral values; society
UDC 316.7
Mass culture is one of the fundamental attributes of the spiritual sphere of modern society. A striking example of mass culture is the creation of the “Hollywood industry” and the emergence of such film genres as horror, action films and TV series. Similar products are aimed at mass consumer, which craves “bread and circuses” and does not set itself the goal of careful thoughtfulness and understanding of what is happening on the screen. So-called “Hollywood” films are one of the most widespread and “effective” tools for influencing people’s consciousness over the past decades.
Mass culture has become one of the integral components modern era. Moreover, this phenomenon has left its mark on absolutely all spheres of social life, which can be easily traced on the basis of all the changes that have affected the way of human existence.
For example, popular culture has a great influence on political sphere. First of all, it introduces the individual to the established system public relations, suppressing attempts and impulses to rebel against her. With the help of the media, citizens are introduced to politics and the level of their political participation increases. However, it is worth noting the other side of this coin. Extreme politicization of many printed publications often serves as the basis for forming the opinion of a reader who is unable to recreate his own picture of the world. Due to the spread of the influence of mass culture, politics is perceived through images (image and stereotypes). There is no complete understanding of political processes; the idea of politics is formed under the influence of PR, advertising and agitation. In such conditions, the likelihood of spreading false information and misleading citizens with the help of the media and other tools is high. One of the most striking examples of such a situation is the scandal caused by the appearance in the nineties of the 20th century of photographs of the “Serbian death camp”, which turned out to be fake, but played an important role in accusing Serbia of exterminating civilians.
Among the economic consequences of the influence of mass culture, one cannot fail to note the stimulation of technical progress, accessibility, low cost of products (due to their standardization), and, consequently, the ability to meet the needs of the poorest segments of the population and, as a result, an increase in living standards in all corners of the globe. For example, over the past ten years, the economic growth of some African countries located south of the Sahara Desert has amounted to more than seven percent. In addition, popular culture preaches the need and importance of developing production technologies and technical innovations. Since most researchers agree that mass culture originated in the United States (a country where pragmatism and technology are elevated to the rank of basic values), technological innovations also spread with the spread of mass culture. On the other hand, mass culture limits the stimulation of the production of unique and high-quality products. Thus, any economic agent, be it a company, positions profit maximization as its main economic goal, which can be achieved, among other things, through increasing the scale of production. One of the accompanying factors and ways to achieve this goal is to reduce costs by offering the consumer homogeneous and unified products, which, of course, cannot be characterized positively.
Mass culture also had a huge impact on the social sphere. The same homogeneous products of mass culture act as a certain integrating force, bringing people together and promoting globalization.
Due to its universality and focus on each individual, regardless of his social status, mass culture erases the boundaries between classes. All this ultimately helps reduce the level of social tension in society.
However, the spread of mass culture caused a sharp increase in the level of patriotism of nations. Certain cultural communities began to defend the right to national identity, fighting against universal unification. Suffice it to recall the policy of the Ukrainian authorities to restore the importance Ukrainian language as one of the measures to revive national identity.
Among the negative social consequences of mass culture, one should mention the passive perception of reality by the individual, conservatism, orientation not to reality, but to advertising, television and radio images, conformism as the main type of personality behavior, reluctance and inability to change the existing public order and eliminate its shortcomings.
Although the mid-20th century is considered to be the birth of mass culture, it is worth considering that some of its features can be seen before this time. So you can quote the Russian philosopher A.I. Herzen, who says that the masses (people) are an inhibitory force that does not allow society to develop progressively: “He clings to his depressing life, to cramped frames... He even accepts new things in old clothes...” The masses resist innovation and are afraid of the new. This hinders the development of society along the path of progress.
Perhaps the most noticeable imprint was left by mass culture on the spiritual sphere of society. Mass culture, when using simple tools (typical images, standardized plots), helps the individual to better navigate modern world, to obtain, albeit primitive, an idea of the relationships between people. Through art culture, mass culture gives society the opportunity to become familiar with a more high level. By copying and adopting the achievements and examples of elite culture, mass culture disseminates them, popularizes them through the media, cinema, and other means. Moreover, it was thanks to the spread of mass culture that the poorest segments of the population acquired the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of high art. It is also impossible not to take into account the general increase in the level of literacy of the population, in which mass culture played an important role.
At the same time, most experts note that the negative consequences of this phenomenon are still greater than the positive ones. The famous sociologist and researcher of mass culture J. Ortega y Gasset wrote: “The peculiarity of our time is that ordinary souls, without being deceived about their own mediocrity, fearlessly assert their right to it and impose it on everyone and everywhere.” Universalization, standardization kills high art, which society simply does not need.
The products of human spiritual activity in a mass consumption society are focused primarily on satisfying primary needs. A reassessment of values is taking place: postmodernism - the dominant philosophical trend in the era of mass culture - proclaims the principle of pleasure as the main goal of art. “Everything in the world is relative, there is no “good” or “bad” art,” postmodernists assert, guided by the principle of denying the hierarchy of values. Contemporary art and mass culture choose the path of commercialization as the main trajectory of their movement. This path is not aimed at moral improvement of the individual, but at satisfying needs and basic instincts. The primary goal of such a culture is to entertain, but not to provide “food for thought.” It is impossible not to note the emerging trend of denial of such values as chastity, patriotism, and family. Chastity is declared a moral inferiority, the patriot is contrasted with the cosmopolitan - “citizen of the world”, the institution of the family is experiencing a deep crisis.
Thus, we can confidently say that mass culture at the present stage of its existence is an integral element of social relations, exerting a huge and constantly growing influence on various areas life of society. At the same time, both in the political, and in the economic, and in the social, and in the spiritual spheres, both positive and negative consequences of this influence. That is why the main task of civilization in the coming years is to prevent the negative influence of mass culture, limit the further decomposition of art, and also prevent its transformation into a tool for satisfying basic needs. To achieve this result, a clear and meaningful change in the values of mass culture in all its manifestations and the introduction of cultural ideals of a higher level are necessary. This process can be organized primarily by mixing mass culture with elite culture, which obviously has a higher base of values.
Bibliography:
1. Ilyin A. Subjectivity within mass culture // Knowledge. Understanding. Skill. 2008. No. 4
2. Riveli M.A. Archbishop of Genocide. Monsignor Stepinac, The Vatican and the Ustasha dictatorship in Croatia 1941−1945. 2011. P. 244.
3. Ortega y Gasset H. Uprising of the masses. 1929. P. 311
Reviews:
12/22/2017, 13:39 Adibekyan Oganes Aleksandrovich
Review: Adibekyan Oganes Alexandrovich. Article by Kanishchev K.V. written skillfully, significant for the public, its scientists, politicians, journalists. It is recommended for printing. But it is proposed to take it into account if the author agrees. It is necessary to stipulate the richness of the content of the term “culture”, where knowledge, morality, behavior, law-abiding, peacefulness, etc. We should not linger in the United States of America; we should also turn to other countries of the world. Taking into account the “mass of people”, one should take into account the representation of poor and rich people in it, and in terms of politics, stipulate the predominance of representatives of the rich there, who influence public consciousness for their benefit. One should not forget the use of the term "classes".
12/22/2017, 14:23 Ershtein Leonid Borisovich
Review: I'll tell you what. I would like to see what specific problem the author is solving. How other authors tried to solve it and what are the disadvantages of past solutions and the advantages of the current solution. There are obvious contradictions in the text, for example, in one place the author writes “Since most researchers agree that mass culture originated in the USA...”, in another he gives the following definition of mass culture: “Mass culture is a form of culture that dominates among majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics, orientation toward the “average person.” Attention, question, is there such a culture that didn’t exist before the USA? Complete nonsense. By the way, the abstract, where I got this definition from, should generally contain what the article is about. The conclusions are amazing “Thus, we can confidently say that mass culture at the present stage of its existence is an integral element of social relations, exerting a huge and constantly growing influence on various spheres of social life.” Isn't it obvious? Further, “This process can be organized primarily by mixing mass culture with elite culture, which obviously has a higher base of values.” What is a "value base"? Apparently only the author knows (although I suspect that he doesn’t know either). Conclusion: it can be published only after serious revision. It's not science yet...
The concept of “culture” is very polysemantic, has different content and different meanings not only in everyday language, but also in different sciences and philosophical disciplines.
The concept of “culture” must be revealed in its differential-dynamic aspects, which requires the use of the categories “social practice” and “activity”, connecting the categories “social being” and “social consciousness”, “objective” and “subjective” in historical process. In modern Russian philosophical literature, the concept of “activity” appears as one of the most fundamental characteristics of human existence. At the same time, it is also generally accepted that a person is an “active natural being” that asserts itself in the world, in its being. Thus, we can say that through the concept of “activity” the specificity of the social form of the movement of matter is expressed.
If we recognize that one of the main features of true culture is the heterogeneity and richness of its manifestations, based on national-ethnic and class-class differentiation, then in the 20th century the enemy of cultural “polyphony” turned out to be not only Bolshevism, which by its nature does not accept any pluralism. In the conditions of “industrial society” and scientific and technological revolution, humanity as a whole has discovered a clearly expressed tendency towards pattern and monotony to the detriment of any kind of originality and originality, whether we are talking about an individual or about certain social strata and groups. Modern state, like a giant machine, with the help of unified education systems and equally coordinated information, continuously “stamps” faceless human “material” that is obviously doomed to anonymity. If the Bolsheviks and their followers sought to forcibly transform people and some semblance of “cogs,” then from the middle of our century the processes of standardization everyday life have acquired an involuntary and all-encompassing character throughout the world, with the exception of the remote periphery.
Culture modern society- a collection of the most diverse layers of culture, that is, it consists of the dominant culture, subcultures and even countercultures. In any society one can distinguish high culture (elite) and folk culture (folklore). The development of the media led to the formation of the so-called mass culture, simplified in semantics and artistically, technologically accessible to everyone. Mass culture, especially with its strong commercialization, is capable of displacing both high and folk culture. But in general, the attitude towards popular culture is not so clear.
The phenomenon of “mass culture” from the point of view of its role in development modern civilization Scientists assess it far from unambiguously. Depending on their inclination towards an elitist or populist way of thinking, cultural scientists tend to consider it either something like a social pathology, a symptom of the degeneration of society, or, conversely, important factor his health and internal stability. The first, largely fueled by the ideas of F. Nietzsche, included O. Spengler, X. Ortega y Gasset, E. Fromm, N.A. Berdyaev and many others. The latter are represented by the already mentioned L. White and T. Parsons. A critical approach to “mass culture” boils down to its accusations of neglecting the classical heritage, of allegedly being an instrument of conscious manipulation of people; enslaves and unifies the main creator of any culture - the sovereign personality; contributes to her alienation from real life; distracts people from their main task - “the spiritual and practical development of the world” (K. Marx). The apologetic approach, on the contrary, is expressed in the fact that “mass culture” is proclaimed as a natural consequence of irreversible scientific and technological progress, that it contributes to the unity of people, especially young people, regardless of any ideologies and national-ethnic differences into a stable social system and not just doesn't reject cultural heritage of the past, but also makes its best examples the property of the widest strata of the people by replicating them through print, radio, television and industrial reproduction. The debate about the harm or benefit of “mass culture” has a purely political aspect: both democrats and supporters of authoritarian power, not without reason, strive to use this objective and very important phenomenon of our time in their interests. During the Second World War and in the post-war period, the problems of “mass culture”, especially its most important element - mass information, were studied with equal attention in both democratic and totalitarian states.
Concept, historical conditions and stages of the formation of mass culture
The peculiarities of the production and consumption of cultural values have allowed culturologists to identify two social forms of cultural existence: mass culture and elite culture. Mass culture is the type of cultural production that is produced every day in large volumes. It is assumed that mass culture is consumed by all people, regardless of place and country of residence. It is the culture of everyday life, presented to the widest audience through various channels, including the media and communications.
There are a number of points of view regarding the origins of mass culture in cultural studies.
As an example, we can cite the most frequently found in the scientific literature:
1.The prerequisites for mass culture have been formed since the birth of humanity, and, in any case, at the dawn of Christian civilization. As an example, simplified versions of the Holy Books (for example, the “Bible for the Beggars”), designed for a mass audience, are usually given.
2. The origins of mass culture are associated with the appearance in European literature of the 17th-18th centuries of the adventure, detective, and adventurous novel, which significantly expanded the readership due to huge circulations (books by D. Defoe, M. Komarov).
3. The law on compulsory universal literacy, adopted in 1870 in Great Britain, had a great influence on the development of mass culture, which allowed many to master main view artistic creativity XIX century - novel.
And yet, this is the prehistory of mass culture. And in the proper sense, mass culture manifested itself for the first time in the United States at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. The famous American political scientist Z. Brzezinski has a phrase that has become commonplace over time: “If Rome gave the world the right, England parliamentary activity, France - culture and republican nationalism, then modern SSL gave the world a scientific and technological revolution and mass culture.”
The turn of the 19th and 20th centuries was characterized by a comprehensive massification of life. It affected all its spheres: economics and politics, management and communication between people. The active role of the human masses in various social spheres has been analyzed in a number of philosophical works XX century. As, for example, the American sociologist D. Bell in his book “Horses of Ideology” determines the features of modern society by the emergence of mass production and mass consumption. Here the author formulates several meanings of the word “mass”:
1. Mass - as an undifferentiated set (i.e., the opposite of the concept of class).
2. Mass - as a synonym for ignorance (as X. Ortega y Gasset also wrote about this).
3. The masses - as a mechanized society (i.e., a person is perceived as an appendage of technology).
4. The mass - as a bureaucratized society (that is, in a mass society the individual loses his individuality in favor of the herd).
5. Mass - like a crowd. There is a psychological meaning here. The crowd does not reason, but obeys passions. A person may be cultured by himself, but in a crowd he is a barbarian.
And D. Bell concludes: the masses are the embodiment of herdism, uniformity, and stereotypes.
An even more in-depth analysis of “mass culture” was made by the Canadian sociologist M. McLuhan. But he, like D. Bell, comes to the conclusion that the media give rise to new type culture. McLuhan emphasizes that the starting point of the era of “industrial and typographical man” was the invention of the printing press by J. Guttenberg in the 15th century. Modern media, having created, in McLuhan’s words, a “global village,” is also creating a “new tribal man.” This new person differs from the “tribal” who once lived on earth in that its myths are formed by “electronic information”. According to McLuhan, printing technology created the public, electronic technology created the masses. Defining art as the leading element of spiritual culture, McLuhan emphasized the escapist (i.e., leading away from reality) function of artistic culture.
Of course, these days the mass has changed significantly. The masses have become educated and informed. In addition, the subjects of mass culture today are not just the masses, but also individuals united by various connections. Since people act simultaneously as individuals, and as members of local groups, and as members of mass social communities, the subject of “mass culture” can be considered as dual, that is, both individual and mass at the same time. In turn, the concept of “mass culture” characterizes the features of the production of cultural values in a modern industrial society, designed for mass consumption of this culture. At the same time, mass production of culture is understood in analogy with the conveyor belt industry.
The birth of mass culture was 1870 (a law on universal literacy was passed in Great Britain).
IN further development popular culture contributed to:
1) in 1895 - the invention of cinema;
2) in the middle of the twentieth century. - the emergence of pop music. Society is a unity of majority and minority. Mass - a lot of people without any special merits.
A man of the masses is one who does not feel in himself any gift or difference from everyone else. A minority is a group of people whose goal is to serve a higher norm. Literary products are in great demand in popular culture and fiction novels. Decisive role Cinema and radio played a role in the formation of mass culture, since cinema is the foundation aesthetic principles mass culture. He developed ways to attract viewers, the main thing being the cultivation of illusions. A special quality of mass culture is the ability to relieve the consumer of any intellectual effort by creating for him shortcut to pleasure.
Signs of mass culture:
1) serial nature of the product;
2) primitivization of life and relationships between people;
3) entertainment, fun, sentimentality;
4) naturalistic depiction of certain scenes;
5) cult of a strong personality, cult of success.
Positive aspects popular culture:
1) a wide range of genres and styles;
2) meeting the demands of many segments of society.
Negative aspects of popular culture:
1) mass culture depends on ideological politics;
2) is of an entertaining nature;
3) a small number of works raise the question of the purpose and meaning of life, its values;
4) not all works are made at a high professional level and have aesthetic value;
5) forms a mass worldview with uncritical beliefs and views.
Elite culture stands in opposition to mass culture, the main task of which is to preserve in culture creativity, shape values and create new aesthetic forms. The creative elite is a dynamic socio-culture of education, small in number but influential. These are active, brightly gifted people, capable of creating new forms. Everything they create is frighteningly new, breaks existing stereotypes and rules, and is perceived by society as something hostile.
Elite culture diverse, multidirectional, with a high percentage of complex experiments. It generates both discovery and motivation, but only it is capable of generating something new.
Popular culture does not recognize this elite type culture, denying him elitism and culture, and evaluates him as unprofessionalism, inhumanity, and lack of culture. Mass culture is a special phenomenon; it has its own laws of the emergence and development of forms. She prefers monotony and repetition and has selective memory. However, mass culture is an obligatory component of any cultural-historical process; it has its own laws.
Classical culture is the average between elite and mass culture. In terms of the method of creation, classical culture is elitist, but in the process of development it acquired mass characteristics.