Positive influence of popular culture examples. Positive and negative aspects of popular culture
Popular culture in modern society plays important role. On the one hand, it facilitates and, on the other hand, simplifies the understanding of their elements. This is contradictory and complex phenomenon, despite the characteristic simplicity that mass culture products have.
Mass culture: history of origin
Historians have not found a common point at which their opinions about the exact time of occurrence of this phenomenon could converge. 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 of bright examples- yoga. Yogic practices arose in ancient times, and Western countries had nothing to do with it the slightest attitude. 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. It has negative characteristics, because a Westerner is not able to understand the depth and meaning that Indians understand when they do 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”
IN currently it has a number of disadvantages and positive features.
For example, this allows a large group of society members to interact closely, 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, profanation of foreign cultures and a tendency towards 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.
The concept of “culture” is very ambiguous, has different contents and different meaning not only in everyday language, but also in various sciences and philosophical disciplines.
The concept of “culture” must be disclosed in its differential-dynamic aspects, which requires the use of the categories “social practice” and “activity”, connecting the categories “social being” and “ public consciousness”, “objective” and “subjective” in historical process. In modern domestic philosophical literature the concept of “activity” appears as one of the most fundamental characteristics 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 unified systems education and equally coordinated information are continuously “stamped” by faceless human “material”, which is obviously doomed to anonymity. If the Bolsheviks and their followers sought to forcibly transform people and some kind of “cogs,” then since the middle of our century the processes of standardization of everyday life have acquired an involuntary and comprehensive character throughout the world, with the exception of the remote periphery.
The culture of modern society is a combination 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 has led to the formation of the so-called mass culture, simplified in semantic and artistic terms, 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 or something like 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 the irreversible scientific and technological progress that it promotes the unity of people, especially young people, regardless of any ideologies and national-ethnic differences into a sustainable social system and not only does not reject cultural heritage of the past, but also makes its best examples available to 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 post-war period problems of "mass culture", especially its essential element - mass media, have been studied with equal attention in both democratic and totalitarian states.
Concept, historical conditions and stages of the formation of mass culture
Features of production and consumption cultural values allowed cultural scientists to identify two social forms existence of culture: mass culture and elite culture. Mass culture is a type of cultural product that is produced in large volumes every day. 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. Simplified versions are usually given as an example Holy books(for example, “The Beggar’s Bible”), designed for a mass audience.
2.The origins of mass culture are associated with the appearance in European literature XVII-XVIII centuries of adventure, detective, adventure novel, which significantly expanded the readership due to huge circulations (books by D. Defoe, M. Komarov).
3. Big influence The development of mass culture was also influenced by the law on compulsory universal literacy adopted in Great Britain in 1870, 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.”
For turn of XIX-XX centuries, a comprehensive massification of life has become characteristic. 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 masses - as a bureaucratized society (i.e. in 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 means mass communication give rise to a new type of 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” that 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, insofar as the subject of “mass culture” can be considered as dual, that is, both individual and mass. 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.
As an independent phenomenon, mass culture is assessed controversially. Generally existing points vision 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 argued by the fact that works of mass culture offer ready-made answers 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 mass culture as a mechanism for manipulating public opinion, when through this phenomenon there is a duping masses, instilling complete indifference to what is happening in the country, distracting 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 fields human activity, so their expert opinion is becoming very popular for influencing 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 certain groups 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 most of 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.
When you buy a music disc in a store, you see sections - standard jazz, standard country, standard classic, standard rap. The choice of standards is unlimited.
The choice of film standards is even wider. Every demographic - blacks, Latinos, intellectuals, working class, baby boomers, gays, teenagers, retirees, action movie buffs and fans of old 19th century British aristocracy - all get their share. There is a film standard for a traditional family, a standard for amateurs thrills, the standard for lovers of refined European aesthetics. Hundreds of new films released per year, as well as hundreds television channels, leave the consumer with the feeling that the difference between them is so superficial that they are practically indistinguishable.
"Most American films are frozen dinners, usually with no trace of life." Andrey Konchalovsky.
Cable or satellite television provides hundreds of channels covering thousands of topics - programs about police work, surveys of people on the street, films about the history of the country and the world, biographical series, but they all give the impression that it was made by the same director, on the same assembly line. At the same time, the consumer has a choice - this is a remote control that he holds in his hands and can always switch to another program. But even on another program he will see only a standard spectacle or standard news - what those who own the media want to show him.
To attract the attention of the public, a product of mass culture must be bright, spectacular, and therefore significant phenomena of the American cultural life These are not those that talk about the main issues of life, but peripheral events, extreme in their entertainment - robberies, murders, political scandals, a car or plane crash, an earthquake in California or a flood in New Orleans.
"In popular culture, the quality of things, events and human qualities have no value. Only the effect that a thing, person or event does is valued." Italian writer Barzini.
Mass culture is not created freelance artists looking for answers to eternal questions life, it is created by performers who carry out orders by professionals, specialists, subject to the laws of production.
Popular culture says that if you don’t like something in your life, draw yourself a dream, believe in the dream, replace reality with the dream, live in the dream, just like many generations before you did, living the “American Dream”.
Sylvester Stallone's hero in the film "Rambo IV" alone restores order in Southeast Asia. He wins where american army suffered a crushing defeat. Although this contradicts historical facts, the viewer believes the impressive spectacle, and not the historical facts, which he does not care about. All social problems are decided by one person, alone. The system educates the masses on the idea - “One can make a difference”, one person can change the world.
IN Stalin era was given great value the influence of individual people on the life of the entire country. In case of economic, political and military failures, responsibility was assigned to specific performers. As Stalin said about the methods of social problems, “no man, no problem.” The result of the Stalinist approach is productive executions and unproductive economic system. But the Stalinist method made it possible to remove responsibility from the system itself, which became inaccessible to criticism.
The same principle is reflected in the American formula - “One can make a difference”, which uses the paradoxical property of human mass consciousness - the concreteness of experience, which says that one cannot change anything, and the ability to believe in the illusion that the world can be changed alone. The world is being changed by the entire system, in which an individual person is just a grain of sand in a huge stream of sand. Mass culture is part of this flow, and more and more “grains of sand” from many countries and continents are pouring into it, cosmopolitan, international mass culture.
Thanks to the development of various new types of communications that have connected the world into a single whole, the unification of all national cultures, natural in this process, begins to occur, and each individual national culture abandons its specificity, since national specificity is provincial and cannot enter the global market.
At one of the forums “A Zealous Fan” of television, Zhalkov N.A. wrote “Television has a huge impact on the consciousness of people, society and daily life generally. The power of TV lies in its profound impact on human mind, many heads of TV channels understand this, and in pursuit of crazy ratings, they broadcast programs designed for the base instincts of the population. Therefore, for example, on Channel One you rarely see programs aimed at improving people’s morality, and if you do, it’s only late in the evening. But Channel One is not the worst. Just look at “Dom-2” on TNT! But this reality show is intended for young and fragile souls. For example, my family. Some members of my family are at home all day and, of course, watch TV. So by the end of the day they become more nervous, irritable, and often take it out on their relatives. Our television is structured in such a way that, turning on the TV in the morning, the average person immediately begins to see various crimes committed overnight, shown in the most perverted form, to hear about corruption, protest rallies, and courtroom hearings. One may not even be surprised by the increasing violence in our society. An example is an event that happened quite recently, namely on November 12, 2008: three 12-year-old children beat a baby kangaroo to death with sticks on the head. It seems to me that all this is precisely the influence of television, that stream of violence pouring from the screen, on the weak and unformed children’s mind. The NTV channel is especially different in this, and not only that. Based on the example of my family, I guess that this influence occurs on all people in general. People become tougher, crueler, harsher, more embittered. That is why such concepts as mutual assistance, sympathy, and mercy disappear from our lives. And endless series! These so-called “works” do not shine with either direction or acting. And the intellectual level of both the characters in the series and, apparently, the screenwriters is below the lowest limit. That is why our “great” nation is becoming stupid! That's why they stop reading Dostoevsky and Bulgakov. After all, in TV series these stupid heroes reach everyone material goods without resorting to your mental abilities.
So it seems to me that modern television carries at its core only negativity, pouring in streams onto our poor heads...” [6]
The words and symbols used in it are designed to produce changes in the behavior of the TV viewer and shape him as a consumer. At the same time, the most receptive audience is children from four to sixteen years old. Well, “customer formation” begins even earlier...
In an article by Maxim Shulgin, they collected various situations related to the influence of television on children.
“When my child was not yet two years old,” one mother wrote on the forum, “I was surprised at the mesmerizing effect commercials had on him. By what signs my daughter distinguished advertising remained a mystery to me, but as soon as it started, the little girl ran as fast as she could into the room and froze motionless in front of the TV. At that moment, you could do anything with her - there was only a bright TV picture, the daughter did not react to anything else. And as soon as the TV was turned off, the siren immediately turned on - the child began to cry loudly.
Later I found out that many parents encountered this phenomenon. Babies who are attracted bright picture and a funny plot (and those that are older are already the advertised product) make up more than half of the viewing audience of commercials. In one of the online forums, a mother admitted that she used advertising screensavers in order to feed her one-year-old daughter, who ate very poorly. Another mother managed to cut her two-year-old’s nails during commercials, and another even managed to cut her hair. This is just the beginning... On the same forum, visitors shared true stories from life. Someone told how a friend’s five-year-old daughter came into her parents’ bedroom at night and asked: “Does Tefal also think about us at night?” Someone shared their impressions of what they saw: “A three-year-old baby walked around the supermarket and, pointing with his finger at the products on display, recited: “Cleanliness - pure Tide!”, “Forget about dandruff - let your hair be beautiful”, “Danone - - a magical taste of health." The kid clearly couldn’t read yet, but advertising slogans were already firmly ingrained in his head...”; “Just recently I saw how two little kids about five years old cut out pads from paper and expertly inserted Barbie dolls into their panties...”
The influence of advertising on children worries many parents today, because it is possible to keep their children away from the TV only up to a certain age. Slightly older children and teenagers are becoming increasingly active consumers. To be fair, it should be noted that children’s consumer culture is largely shaped by their favorite cartoons. For example, Disney stories about Uncle Scrooge and his duckling nephews come down mainly to the search for ways to get rich, instilling in young viewers the main dream and commandment of a market society. Meanwhile, according to the observations of the famous American sociologist Juliet Skor, children who are interested in consumer culture eventually grow into depressed and lonely teenagers.
For a long time, it was believed among psychologists that it was mainly problem children who suffered from the fact that they could not possess advertised goods who fell into the web of consumerism. Many parents believe that videos promoting expensive clothes, toys and gadgets that poor families cannot afford are increasing social divides. However, the results of Dr. Skor's research prove that consumerism may be the cause of depression, and not vice versa. Being drawn into the consumer cycle, previously healthy children begin to feel a constant feeling of anxiety, headaches and even stomach cramps; their sense of self-esteem weakens, alienation and hostility towards parents and teachers arise.
Symptoms of “consumer disease” include constant sitting in front of the TV and computer games, extreme preoccupation own appearance, clothes and a desire for fame and wealth. Television advertising intrusively creates a completely unnatural lifestyle. Appealing to the basest feelings of the consumer, advertisers repeat: “You deserve this luxury!”, “You deserve it!”, “Treat yourself!” ... And children trustingly accept these calls at face value.
Where can I get money for all the attributes of success? The authors of the commercials carefully suggest the “correct” way: cut out the label or candy wrapper, and you will definitely be lucky - you will win trip around the world or, at worst, a video console. Just hurry up, because “everyone more people preparing for battle... People will do anything to collect the most wrappers and become the winner. Turn on!” If the heroes of advertising go to work, it seems only to drink a cup of instant coffee, tea, a bottle of mineral water, eat yogurt and - “Let the whole world wait!” But for a child (especially a small one) they - real characters. The lifestyle of advertising “heroes”, their tastes, preferences, and manner of speech become a standard for the child. To put it mildly, a very strange standard, which constantly suffers from caries, dandruff, bad breath and indigestion. Which is not surprising, considering that he eats mostly chips, packet soups and beer, and his clothes constantly have stains that can only be removed with a certain type of powder. At the same time, no matter what is advertised, a huge portion of commercials contain sexual overtones. Sometimes it is even difficult to understand what exactly is being advertised.
Advertisers are trying their best to appeal to teenagers, realizing that they make up a significant part of the television audience. And the easiest way is to speak in a language they understand. Therefore speech young heroes in the videos it is oversaturated with teenage slang: “cool”, “cool”, “cool”, “have a blast”, “don’t slow down - take a snicker”.
Children are an excellent audience: they have more free time, many have pocket money, and they also go shopping with their parents, asking for that candy bar, yogurt, or toy they saw advertised on TV. Large American corporations spend about $15 billion annually on advertising products for children under 12 years of age. In order to more effectively influence the fragile minds of children, a huge staff of psychologists, sociologists and specialists in child development. The budgets of Ukrainian advertisers, I think, are smaller, but they are trying their best to catch up with their American colleagues. “Successes” are already evident today.
What should parents do? American psychologist S. Adams Sullivan believes that in shaping children’s views on advertising younger age The attitude of their parents towards her is very important. In his Encyclopedia for Fathers, he suggests solving the problem by acting out several skits in which the parent and child take turns playing the roles of buyer and seller. The parent tries to “sell” a completely unnecessary product to the child so that the child understands that the product itself is not so good as the seller needs to sell it. Then let the child try to persuade the parent to “buy” something. Perhaps after this he will begin to treat advertising as a game, or perhaps he will understand that advertising is just an attempt to impose someone’s opinion. The main thing is to explain to your child that advertising should be treated selectively and that the absence of any thing, even a very good one, does not harm one’s self-esteem, and life does not get any worse from it. [7]
So what influence does “mass culture” have? Positive or negative?
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 argued by the fact that works of mass culture offer ready-made answers 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.
This group also includes the authors of the Teaching of Living Ethics (the Mahatmas, the Roerich family). According to the Living Ethics paradigm, mass culture is essentially a pseudo-culture, since, unlike the true one (i.e. high culture) in most of its forms does not contribute to humanistically oriented social progress and spiritual evolution of man. The calling and purpose of true culture is the ennobling and perfection of man. Mass culture performs the opposite function - it reanimates the lower aspects of consciousness and instincts, which, in turn, stimulate the ethical, aesthetic and intellectual degradation of the individual.
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. This is one of the main problems of analyzing popular culture.
Drawing a conclusion on this point, we can highlight that “mass culture” is firmly entrenched in modern society, and we can expect its spontaneous disappearance, at least in the next historical period, not necessary. It is obvious that if it continues to exist in its present form, then the overall cultural potential of civilization will not only not increase, but may also suffer significant damage. “Mass culture” has both positive and negative sides. It is not possible to clearly determine the advantage of one of these parties. The pseudo-values of mass culture are still too burdensome and even destructive for the individual and society. Therefore, an ideological transformation of mass culture is necessary through filling it with more sublime ideas, socially significant plots and aesthetically perfect images.
on the spiritual life of society"
Ivanova Marina Nikolaevna,
history teacher, Municipal Educational Institution "Secondary School No. 1"
Definition of the concept of “culture”, forms of culture, signs of mass culture.
The prerequisites for the development of mass culture are the development of universal education, the spread of radio, cinema, television, and the growth of incomes of the population.
Initially, so-called pulp literature, cheap entertainment publications and comics became widespread. Then, at a fast pace Cinema began to develop, which was accessible to almost everyone. The leading position in it was occupied and still is occupied by the United States, which distributes its film production throughout the world, thereby imposing its standards of spiritual culture. With the development of sound recording technology, a gigantic industry for the production of popular (pop, dance) music has emerged. The transition to mass culture ended with the introduction of radio and television into everyday use.
Popular culture contributed to the creation of an entire leisure industry: the production of audio and video products. In this regard, advertising becomes of great importance. In addition to information about mass culture products, advertising makes it possible to popularize various products using images of film, television and music idols.
Reasons for the popularity of mass culture:
the individual's reluctance to actively participate in social phenomena and processes spiritually or intellectually. In other words, the initial passivity of the consciousness of the majority of members of society;
the desire to get away from everyday problems, from everyday life and routine;
the desire for understanding and empathy for one’s problems on the part of another person and society.
In the film “Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears,” released on the screens of the USSR 27 years ago, there is the following episode:
“So you were at the very beginning? – Alexandra became interested.
– Well, not exactly, and, nevertheless, I saw in time that television belongs to the future. And over time, it will simply change a person’s life. There will be no newspapers, magazines, books, cinema, theater.
- What will happen? - asked Goga.
“Television, one continuous television.”
Teacher. The influence of mass culture on the development of modern society is extremely contradictory. There are both its defenders and critics.
Working with text - debate.
Tasks for the slides: What do we see in the picture. How do these programs affect children and young people?
How does TV and computer affect? (both positive and negative)
The influence of mass culture on the development of personality and human life in general is very contradictory. Mass culture has both its “+” and its “–”. Despite the difference in points of view on its meaning, it has become an integral element of life, influencing the daily existence of millions of people, shaping their needs, ideals, standards of behavior and activity.
It is obvious that if it continues to exist in its present form, then the overall cultural potential of civilization will not only not increase, but may also suffer significant damage. The pseudo-values of mass culture are still too burdensome and even destructive for the individual and society. Therefore, an ideological transformation of mass culture is necessary through filling it with more sublime ideas, socially significant plots and aesthetically perfect images.
Positive influence of popular culture
It affirms simple and understandable ideas about the world of people, about the relationships between them, about the way of life, which allows many people to better navigate the modern, rapidly changing world.
Works of mass culture are directly addressed to the reader, listener, viewer and take into account their needs.
It is characterized by democracy, i.e. its “products” are used by representatives of different social groups.
Helps meet people's needs for rest and psychological relaxation.
It has its peaks - literary, musical, cinematic works, which can already be classified as “high” art.
It attracts the masses who do not know how to use their free time productively.
Mass culture is a positive phenomenon, because its works are characterized by a clear division of good and evil, a happy ending, attractive images of heroes.
Negative influence of popular culture
Lowers the overall level of spiritual culture.
Leads to standardization and unification of the way of life and even the way of thinking of millions of people.
Designed for passive consumption.
Through advertising, it creates artificial needs in people.
Mass culture has a lot of shortcomings and many negative consequences. Very often it influences human behavior. Young people, having watched enough militants, can commit a crime by analogy.
Many bad habits spread through works of popular culture.
Many believe that popular culture is a source of intellectual degradation, imposing a simplified vision of the world.
Most works of mass culture are of low artistic value.
9. The consciousness formed by mass culture is characterized by conservatism, inertia, and limitations. It cannot cover all processes in all the complexity of their interaction.
Popular culture in to a greater extent focuses not on realistic images, but on artificially created images and stereotypes.
11.Creators works of art Popular culture often turns to genres such as detective, melodrama, musicals, and comics. It is within these genres that simplified versions of life are created.
Topic “Positive and negative influence of mass culture on the spiritual life of society” at the Unified State Exam
Part C assignments
IN television talk show The topic “Mass culture negatively affects children” is discussed. Refute this statement with three examples. positive influence mass culture on children.
Name three characteristics of popular culture and illustrate each with an example.
What works of popular culture are you familiar with? Name three of them. Show signs of mass culture in them.
The English writer Joan Rowling, having written a series of books about the young wizard Harry Potter, created a genuine bestseller. In our country alone, more than 4 million of these books were sold in one year. In the West, where there is the same interest in the work of this author, many were surprised to note that children, looking away from computer and TV screens, began to read with pleasure fiction. Describe this phenomenon, highlighting the signs of mass culture in it.
There is an opinion that mass culture has become an exclusive instrument of regulation social behavior for the ruling elites. Is this the only limit to the role of mass culture in modern society? Give reasons for your position.
