Society as a Composition of Public and Culture - Essay Example

?Thesis: Society is a composition of public and culture in which both are inseparably interlinked. Though culture has a strong demand over the publicin terms of commodification or capitalism, it is in fact allow the public only to live like machines accepting commands just to sustain with the cultural trends. Ironically speaking, the concept of Cultural Industry and Commodification of everyday life is a provisional attempt taken to make the common people realise the illusion of modernisation as having been pushed under the authorities of modernisation or whatever the connotations of modernisation could be, irrespective of them realising the absence of optimistic benefits. The famous works on the concept of Cultural Industry and Commodification of Everyday life by Adorno and Horkheimer and Lefebvre respectively is a true incarnation of the present social trend that is completely taken over by commercialism in the form of mass production. Both the authors’ observations prove to be similar in spite of the fact the both have taken various means of capitalistic trends of the society to justify their statement. According to them media productions have a centralised power in a society that holds the mind of men hence; there remains a similar denotation between society and culture. These sociologists observe society and culture as synonymous facets. Their field of study is public versus commodification, in which Adorno and Horkheimer witness modernisation or capitalism in terms of commodification such as Media, Movie Industry, construction industry, whereas Lefebvre observes the modernisation in terms of work and pleasure relation, leisure products etc. Both the works show traces of influence of the recent French Industrial revolution; however the analysis appears to suit the present situation throughout the world. The Culture Industry captures the society as being dominated by modernisation and Lefebvre clarifies the same notion through an individual’s routine activity depending upon the mass products. Lefebvre observes, “Everyday life is defined by contradictions: illusion and truth, power and helplessness, the intersection of the sector man controls and the sector he does not control”[p-27]. According to Lefebvre, pleasure and leisure are interlinked and hence it is a source of commercialism which has different manifestations such as sport, cinema, music concert etc. Men live in this world of illusion for a time being, so he works engage the illusionary pleasure are none other the common people working under the authoritative and economically well settled management. The objective of the theories is to make the consumer believe in the real tendency of the mass production and capitalistic ideologies. Adorno and Horkhimer observe that. “The culture industry as a whole has moulded men as a type unfailingly reproduced in every product”. It is also important to make a note on the class difference still present in this modern society. Since every individual is a part of the inequalities. The inequalities between the working class and the ruling class had been a part of our social structure so far, and presently it might appear that people have good economic background due to the influence of industrial revolution and individuality. But unfortunately the truth is that every individual is unknowingly forced to a sort of dwelling which contains most of the make-believe commodity. In the sense monopolies hold their power in every aspect of the individual. For example, a housing project or a film acted by a popular artist are planned and executed keeping the individual as target. The most possible way of attracting people or public into the so called illusionary comforts is just to advertise the products focusing on the expectations of the individual. Whereas Lefebvre points out Chaplin’s idea behind his reach among audience The so called products include the housing projects, films, leisure principles etc., which are present abundant in the social circle in terms of the housing projects that allows them to develop a feeling of independence enjoy the attractive pleasure. The pleasure stands for the commodities that attract the people irrespective of their economic status However Adorno and Horkheirmer point out the condition as art being converted to business or commercial product, where one product is compared in terms of its economic status with that of its competing product. Hence both the authors observe "The public is catered for with a hierarchical range of mass-produced products of varying qualities....Everybody must behave (as if spontaneously) in accordance with his previous determined and indexed level, and choose the category of mass product turned out for his type" (pg. 34). Movies, one of the facet of pleasures have been converted into commercial oriented entertainment rather than a form of art, observes Lefebvre. The manufacturers of the film industry make their products knowing very well that the people need a mental relaxation from the mundane work. In addition they observe a ruthless unity among the mass products. Man started to live with a false identity in order to survive up with the impact of demands made by the modern culture industry. The author calls is as capitalism. In The Culture Industry both the authors have formed an impression about the individual in a society as having some unidentified issues with his identity. Capitalism disguised under modernisation replaced the old form of social aspects with its objective of monopoly has a strong hold on individuals as their clients. But the fact that whether the supposed individuals are really benefitted by it remains unanswerable. Whereas, Lefebvre tries to point out at the exact route to success, explains the necessity to become the centre of attraction which might be of great use to spot at the exact identity for an individual. Lefebvre while criticising everyday life points out at the increase in consumption of social needs which were once considered sophistication but now considered as necessity. For example, repairing a house costs much more than buying a small unit in an apartment and finally it shows the monopoly of commercial capitalist and hence Lefebvre observes “a large number of working class couples have a washing machine, a television set, or a car, but they have generally sacrificed something else for these gadgets [having a baby for example. In this way problems of choosing what to buy-or problems associated with the hire-purchase, etc, are posed within working-class families, and these problems modify everyday life. Lefebvre also perceives, ”That the relatively poor peasants , or workers, should buy television sets proves the existence of a new social need.”[p-9] Yet another example quoted by his that of the work of Charlie Chaplin as an artist and his consequent success. According to Lefebvre’s observation the success of Chaplin encountered in his way of broadening the selection of themes in his movies such as presenting a cosmic view of the real and contemporary society, its city, its factory , Fascism, and the Capitalist society as a whole. Hence Lefebvre explains the differentiation between Chaplin not just a myth “it is the very fact that an image with its roots deep in everyday life can be seen as mythical. “An individual becomes involved in the complex relationship in the society where his consciousness works for different spheres of activities [p-31]. In which leisure, sport and other forms of art includes. The leisure technique in turn had been used by Lefebvre as a medium of illustration to differentiate between alienation and de alienation among individuals. Sport is a curious kind of alienation activity feels Lefebvre. An individual who likes football or any other sport goes to watch the match by any affordable means enjoys the game and hence treated as incompatible with illusion so it could be considered as a compensation for everyday life. He requires an escape or freedom of relaxing. Lefebvre calls it escapes and observes, “we achieve a leap from necessity into freedom, from the enslavement of the individual into whatever will permit his self-development. (p-37] a straught http://www.mariabuszek.com/kcai/PoMoSeminar/Readings/AdornoHork.pdf http://www.sociosite.net/topics/texts/adorno_culture_reconsidered.pdf Both the authors obviously influenced by the Marxist theoris and hence adaptaions of Marxist adversary . every individual is drawn into a circle in search of work and pleasure.. In everyday life man is circumscribed by his possessions and his needs” (p17-18). Population must free itself from the riddels and realities dictated by the dominant class. The inhabitants of city housing projects are the producers and consumers any society involving, on the one hand , poverty and want and on the other a privilidged class [possessing administrating, exploiting, organising and obtaining for its own ends, as much social overtime as possible, either for ostentatious consumption or for the accumulation or indeed for both purposes at once. This society is maintained by the dual methos of [ideological] persuasion and compusion [punishment , laws and codes , courts, violence kept in store to prevent violence, overt violence, armed forces, police…] [p-144] Lefebvre observation states that the capitalism overall has negative influences on the everyday of life of ordinary man. There is no escape . And yet we wish to have the illusion of escape as near to hand as possible. An illusion not entirely illusory , but constituting a ‘world’ both apparent and real (the reality of appearances and the apparently real) quiet different from the everyday world yet as opended and as closely dovetailed into the everyday as possible. So we work to earn our leisure, and leisure has only one meaning: to get away from work. A vicious circle. [p-40] ASSIGNMENT READINGS= Adorno/Horkheimer The Cultural Industry, Lefebvre Foreward to the second edition Lefebvre says everyday life is an interrelationship of all parts of activity. “What makes the dialectical method crucial for Lefebvre is the idea that everyday life provides its own moments of critique, which means that the project of attending to it can be aligned with the project of transforming it” (129 The study of everyday life is the study of alienation under conditions of modernity. Every society produces its own space and hence allowing the changes of modernity into its everyday activity. If it does not leave space it might be treated Commodification interferes in every aspect of everyday life. Everyday is an activity everday is related to practices which we follow in everyday life such as the material things, to places. Leve-understanding the power of relationships. He insists on the centrality of everyday life. He saw contemporary everyday life as exploitative , oppressive and relentlessly controlled. As a romantic he sought energies within the everyday that could be used to transform it. The extension of capitalism, penetrating the details of daily life-the relationship between modernization and consumer culture, the transformation and commodification of daily life, the the American temptation . the everday always held out the possibility of its own transformation. There exisist elemental demands of everyday life to transform to something other than what it is.which is brought out by the de-alienation of human beingsand the creation of total person. For Lefebvre everyday life is a challenge to generate social atomization , a separation of society and experience into discrete realms of the political, the aesthetic , the sexual ,the economica and so on“It was only after the Second World War that capitalism succeeded in thoroughly penetrating the details of everyday life. We need new concepts in Marxism if it is to retain its capacity to help us both understand and transform this radically commodified contemporary world” (Lefebvre in 131). Henri Lefebvre, Critique of Everyday Life, Vol. 1, translated John Moore (London: Verso, 1991) p. 29. Henri Lefebvre, "Everyday and Everydayness," Architecture of the Everyday, eds. Steven Harris and Deborah Berke (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1997) p. 35. Deception passivity People accept the cultural impact through means of commercial consumption such as film, radio, magazines etc become inactive to their rationality. They are knowingly or unknowingly drowned into the culture industry which demands additional economic strength. Adorno and Horkheimer consider this high end economic demand developed by the culture industry as a threat to the society. As a result people would become habituated to the needs which might be generated by capitalism. Society is being exploited by the capitalist industry and enlightment should come through rationalism such as to decide on selecting the most important needs amidst the needs attracted by the culture industry. emancipation Henry Lefebvre Critique of Everyday life. Translated by John Moore, Volume IVerso London 1991. Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer [1994] . the Culture Undustry: Englightmen as Mass Deception. Transcribed by Andy Blundern 1998. Feb 2005 corrected version. http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/adorno/1944/culture-industry.htm http://www.scribd.com/doc/37240695/Lefebvre-The-Critique-of-Everyday-Life http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/SWA/Culture_industry_1.shtml Read More