Elite and mass culture and their relationship. Mass and elite culture

One of the ways to weaken and hide the contradictions of modern society was found in the so-called mass culture, the main social function of which is to direct the mass needs awakened by scientific and technological progress in a constructive direction. Mass culture - special way production of cultural property intended for mass consumption. Mass culture is also called this type of cultural product that is produced and consumed 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 mass media and communications.

Bourgeois society in the 19th century was a single whole: the economy, social relations, and culture were imbued with a single system of values. Takeoff dates back to this time Western civilization. With the completion of formation industrial society and its maturity is usually associated with the formation of mass culture. A massive cult of times is born in late XIX century as a result of the crisis of classical culture. A direct prerequisite for this process is the gradual expansion of democratic institutions and the widespread inclusion of working people in active civil life. Prerequisite the formation of mass culture - the spread of literacy. The invention of cinema, the success of photography, the introduction of gramophone recordings, the emergence of “light” music, and the development of radio became the basis for the spread of mass culture. Thus, Mass culture was the result of a number of interrelated processes: the development of cities and the establishment of an urban lifestyle (urbanization), the decrease in the influence of the church on the bulk of the population (secularization), the spread of market laws to the sphere of culture, technical development and transformation of the education sector.

The emergence of mass culture means a change in the very type of functioning of culture. At the turn of the 19th-20th centuries, the former monopolists of the spiritual life of the masses - the church and secular spirituality - were forced to cede influence on minds and souls to a new phenomenon that had greater technical capabilities.

At the same time, the tendency towards anti-bourgeois rebellion intensified in society. At the first stage it was mainly a revolution in art, a cult of aesthetic and spiritual avant-gardeism. At a new stage, these trends lead to the approval of alternative styles of behavior and activity for an increasingly wider range of people. social groups, especially young people and various kinds of ethnic and cultural minorities. Arises counterculture- cultural attitudes that oppose the basic principles underlying a particular culture; protest culture is developing underground- underground culture. This culture is tied not so much to expanded as to original, prestigious consumption; it overturned the basic principles that underlay bourgeois spirituality. The experimental, avant-garde nature of culture is associated primarily with the advent of technical means in the sphere of mass culture.

If avant-gardeism is not only a negation, but also a continuation of the classics in its aristocracy, then mass culture has become not only a negation, but also a continuation of the democratic tendency inherent in realism. “Culture for the educated” did not cede dominance to mass culture without a fight, but continued to exist.

By its content and principles of functioning, mass culture is closely related to other aspects of social regulation. Socially, popular culture is associated with the process of urbanization and the break with traditional forms sociality. The development of production and the evolution of the education system have contributed to an increase in intellectual stress, which in turn requires compensation in the form of entertainment. This whole bizarre tangle of contradictions of sociocultural processes has led to the fact that mass culture has taken over both part of the traditional classics (primarily life-like forms and the attraction to mass character), and that part of the functions of religion, which is associated with the harmonization of the mental life of people.

The primary function of mass culture is to ensure the socialization and existence of a person in a complex, changeable, unstable environment, to accustom him to new social roles and values, to promote the regulation of behavior, and the relief of psychological stress. For a huge contingent of people, primarily young people, this culture provides functionally suitable ideas about the necessary style of behavior, lifestyle, career, relationships between people, and ways to realize their aspirations. Various options Popular culture plays an important role in the implementation of mass communication and dissemination of information.

Another important function of mass culture is to satisfy the need for recreation, relaxation, and rest.

Mass culture as a social phenomenon determines the attraction to a stereotype (regardless of gender, age, religion, nationality, etc.). Mass culture is based on the primacy of compensatory-entertainment, psychotherapeutic functions, finds support in new technologies (in particular, satellite and electronic communications), allowing it to be widely distributed, and the commercial nature of its functioning, which is based on the effective demand of the bulk of the population.

Despite the obvious contribution of individual European nations to global popular culture (for example, English pop music or Italian design), the primacy of the American cultural industry in this area is generally recognized. Therefore, natural competition between mass and classical culture is often interpreted as a struggle between European and American cultural traditions.

Mass commercial culture is a necessary component of democratic social order And market economy. Its fundamental universality, non-eliteism and open focus on making a profit turns it at the same time not only into an inevitable result, but also into a necessary basis for civil society and the rule of law.

The very type of spiritual production, the product of which is mass culture, is changing fundamentally. Works of mass culture are built according to completely different laws than classical masterpieces and avant-garde works. It is difficult for a mass audience to perceive a work whose author seeks to construct an aesthetic distance between literary text and viewer, reader, listener. Mass culture ignores this distance. “To truly enjoy, you need to be an artistically educated person” - this classic statement of K. Marx is directly related to XIX culture century. Unlike elite culture, for mass culture to truly enjoy it, it is better to be an artistically uneducated person. Artistic education here is not an incentive, but an obstacle, since mass culture, turning mainly to the emotional sphere, does not require additional knowledge that prevents people from appreciating works of this type.

In many cultures past and present, crude and violent spectacles are the core of public entertainment. The difference between modern mass culture is that now the display of cruelty is not a ritual, but rather a show in which there is no mechanism that would include it in a coherent system of culture and give it meaning and deep resonance.

Pleasure is the basis of the business of mass culture, it is the starting point in creativity and the main source of income. In many ways, it is the culture industry that creates modern standards for what is considered an acceptable and desirable form of pleasure, and the fact that it does so on a completely unprecedented mass scale means that we must take its shaping influence on this important aspect of human life very seriously .

Popular culture includes a variety of literary genres : detective, adventure, fantasy, melodrama, mysticism, erotica. Pop, dance music, radio, horror films, disaster films are also products of mass culture.

The phenomenon of mass culture refers primarily to modern society, as well as to that stage of it, which in Western literature is usually called post-industrial. The appearance of the latter in theory and practice dates back, as a rule, to the 60s of this century, when World culture moves from a radical confrontation between “elite” creativity and the cultural industry to their interpenetration in the system of postmodernism.

All Western and domestic experience convinces us that it is mass culture that is organically combined with democracy in politics and the market in economics. Why this happens is quite simple to explain. The idea of ​​equal rights, when everyone has one vote, in the field of culture is manifested in the right of everyone to buy (or not to buy) a ticket, CD, book, turn on (or not turn on) the radio or TV, as a result of which the mass of people gets the opportunity to systematically “order” "a culture that corresponds to its aspirations, that is, it wins back rights that previously belonged only to the elites (by origin, wealth or education).

In this sense modern culture, which can be called classical, was elitist in nature - accessible exclusively to the “reading and writing public” and leaving out the uneducated layers, that is, more than 50 percent of the population globe. The elite is a special, privileged layer of society, most capable of spiritual activity, gifted with high moral and aesthetic inclinations. Elite culture therefore - the antipode of mass culture, culture for the elite, personal culture.

In the 20th century significant changes have occurred in this culture: its representatives abandoned educational claims and openly proclaimed through the mouth of the Spanish philosopher J. Ortega y Gaset that the “new art” will be the art of the caste, and not democratic art, art for artists, and not for the masses of people . Along with this, what was previously considered the domain of elite culture became a mass phenomenon. At the turn of the 20s - 30s. of our century, X. Ortega y Gaset spoke about the crisis of culture, one of the manifestations and causes of which he considered the fact of “massification” of what was accessible to a few. This note of despair, nostalgia for " high art"almost always accompanied all conversations about popular culture, especially if they were based on theoretical level. The “offensive” of mass culture has always been considered evidence of a crisis.

Elite, traditional and mass cultures occupy their own niches in modern society. "Art for artists" continues to exist - this is natural. Art for the educated turns into one of many subcultures. In general, there is a real possibility of the existence of art designed for separate groups of people (young people live in one culture, their parents and teachers live in another). So, for example, although rock music is often entirely classified as mass culture, it is essentially the same subculture as “culture for the educated.” Its adherents are not the entire population, but only a part of it, more precisely, the youth.

Arises a common problem combination of two global trends in modern cultural life: integration associated with mass culture, designed for everyone and covering almost the entire population of the globe, and increasing diversity of cultural orientations. Alongside and in parallel with the expansion and strengthening of popular culture, a number of futurists predict a revival of interest in reading, museums and traditional arts, which will affect primarily, if not exclusively, the most educated sections of society in economically prosperous countries.

Postmodernism has become a new attitude of cultural consciousness, for which the division of culture into elite and mass is not essential. In the 70-80s in Western countries middle-level culture began to predominate quantitatively. It is characterized by a combination of samples of high culture and popular culture. She adapts the classics, but thereby raises the viewer’s spiritual world above the ordinary level. A significant feature of mass culture has become the widespread dissemination of not only entertainment artistic products, but also popular science. The corrupting influence of such elements of mass culture as the propaganda of violence, pornography, and drugs is well known. Among the theorists of mass culture, who consider it an indispensable attribute of the technical world, calls began to be heard to raise its moral level.

Collocation "Mass culture" there is a name social phenomenon, the existence of which, as a rule, is not questioned. This is a symbol included in cultural circulation since the late forties, indicating how in philosophical literature, and in social journalism, quasi-obvious content. The role of “proof” of the existence of a special “mass culture”, possible only through confirmation of its qualitative differences from a certain culture in general, is still the conviction in its existence and empirical illustrations of this conviction: “idols” and “stars” of leisure, standardization of philistine life , extreme institutionalization of communication, etc. Despite the fact that the idea of ​​“mass culture” is borrowed from Western journalism, the thesis is expressed about the existence of a problem of “mass culture” in a socialist society.

Mass culture- term used in modern cultural studies to denote a specific type of spiritual production, aimed at the “average” consumer and suggesting the possibility of wide replication of the original product. The appearance of M.K. It is customary to associate it with the era of the emergence of large-scale industrial production, which required the creation of an army of hired workers for its maintenance. The simultaneous disruption of traditional social structure feudal society also contributed to the emergence of a mass of people cut off from the usual forms of activity and the spiritual traditions associated with them. M.K. arises, on the one hand, as an attempt by new social strata (wage workers and employees) to create their own version of urban folk culture, on the other hand, as a means of manipulating mass consciousness in the interests of the dominant political and economic structures. M.K. seeks to satisfy the natural human longing for an ideal with the help of a set of stable ideological clichés that form an implicit code of worldview and behavior patterns. M.K. operates, as a rule, with basic archetypal ideas and feelings (desire for love, fear of the unknown, desire for success, hope for a miracle, etc.), creating on their basis products designed for an immediate emotional reaction of the consumer, similar to a child’s direct perception of reality . M.K. creates modern mythology, constructing its own world, which is often perceived by its consumers as more real than their own everyday existence. An essential aspect of M.K. is the exact choice of the addressee-consumer (age, social and national groups), which determines the choice of appropriate artistic and technical techniques and, if successful, brings significant income. M.K. traditionally opposed to an elitist culture capable of creating unique artistic value products that require certain intellectual efforts and initial cultural baggage for their perception. The element of innovation in M.K. is insignificant, since its creators are mainly engaged in creating simplified versions of the achievements of “high” culture, adapted for the mass consciousness. At the same time, it is unlawful to consider M.K. a reserve of vulgarity and bad taste, which has nothing in common with genuine art. In fact, M.K. serves as a kind of mediator between the generally accepted values ​​of elite culture, the avant-garde “underground” and traditional folk culture. Transforming esoteric revelations and marginal artistic experiments into part of the “naive” consciousness, M.K. contributes to its enrichment and development. At the same time, recording the mass attitudes and orientations existing in society, M.K. has the opposite effect on elite cultural creativity and largely sets the perspective modern reading cultural tradition. Dynamics of M.K. is able to give a fairly accurate picture of the evolution of social ideals and ideological models, the main trends in the spiritual life of society. M.K. is a natural product modern civilization. The most striking phenomena of M.K. (comics, “black” crime novel, family saga) are often considered as varieties of urban folklore. Therefore, the significance of a specific product M.K. is determined not by its universal value, but by the ability to express the illusions, hopes and problems of the era in the language of its time.

Elite culture- a type of culture characterized by the production of cultural values, samples, which, due to their exclusivity, are designed and accessible mainly to a narrow circle of people (elite). E.K.- a specific sphere of cultural creativity associated with the professional production of cultural texts, which subsequently acquire the status of cultural canons. The concept of "E.K." appears in Western cultural studies to designate cultural layers that are diametrically opposed in content to “profane” mass culture. Unlike communities of sacred or esoteric knowledge inherent in any type of culture, E.K. represents the sphere of industrial production of cultural samples, existing in constant interaction with various forms mass, local and marginal culture. At the same time, for E.K. characterized by a high degree of closedness, due to both specific technologies of intellectual work (forming a narrow professional community) and the need to master the techniques of consumption of complexly organized elite cultural products, i.e. a certain level of education. Samples of E.K. In the process of their assimilation, they imply the need for a targeted intellectual effort to “decipher” the author’s message. In fact, E.K. puts the recipient of an elite text in the position of a co-author, recreating in his mind a set of its meanings. Unlike mass culture products, elite cultural products are designed for repeated consumption and have fundamentally ambiguous content. E.K. sets the leading guidelines for the current type of culture, defining both the set of “intellectual games” inherent in “high” culture and the popular set of “low” genres and their heroes, reproducing the basic archetypes of the collective unconscious. Any cultural innovation becomes cultural event only as a result of its conceptual design at the level of E.K., including it in the current cultural context and adapting it for mass consciousness. Thus, the “elite” status of specific forms of cultural creativity is determined not so much by their closeness (characteristic of marginal culture) and the complex organization of the cultural product (inherent and high-class mass production), but by their ability to significantly influence the life of society, modeling possible ways of its dynamics and creating social action scenarios and ideological guidelines that are adequate to social needs, art styles and shapes spiritual experience. Only in this case can we speak of the cultural elite as a privileged minority expressing the “spirit of the times” in their creativity.

Contrary to the romantic interpretation of E.K. as a self-sufficient “bead game” (Hesse) far from the pragmatism and vulgarity of the “profane” culture of the majority, the real status of E.K. most often associated with various forms of “playing with power”, servile and/or non-conformist dialogue with the current political elite, as well as the ability to work with the “grassroots”, “garbage” cultural space. Only in this case E.K. retains the ability to influence the real state of affairs in society.

Elite culture has rather blurred boundaries, especially nowadays with the tendencies of mass elements to strive for the expression of individuality. Its peculiarity is that it is doomed to be misunderstood by most people, and this is one of its main characteristics. In this article we will find out elite culture, what its main characteristics are and compare it with mass culture.

What it is

Elite culture is the same as “high culture”. It is contrasted with mass culture, which is one of the methods of its detection in the general cultural process. This concept was first identified by K. Mannheim and J. Ortega y Gasset in their works, where they derived it precisely as the antithesis of the concept of mass culture. They meant by high culture one that contains a core of meaning capable of developing human individuality, and from which the continuation of the creation of its other elements can follow. Another area that they highlighted is the presence of special verbal elements accessible to narrow social groups: for example, Latin and Sanskrit for clergy.

Elite and mass culture: contrast

They are contrasted with each other by the type of impact on consciousness, as well as by the quality of the meanings that their elements contain. Thus, the mass one is aimed at a more superficial perception, which does not require specific knowledge and special intellectual efforts to understand the cultural product. Currently, there is an increased spread of popular culture due to the process of globalization, which, in turn, is distributed through the media and is stimulated by the capitalist structure of society. unlike elitist, it is intended for a wide range of people. Now we see its elements everywhere, and it is especially pronounced in television programs and cinema.

Thus, Hollywood cinema can be contrasted with arthouse cinema. Moreover, the first type of film focuses the viewer’s attention not on the meaning and idea of ​​the story, but on the special effects of the video sequence. Here quality cinema implies an interesting design, an unexpected but easy-to-understand plot.

Elite culture is represented by arthouse films, which are assessed by different criteria than Hollywood products of this kind, the main one of which is meaning. Thus, the quality of the footage in such films is often underestimated. At first glance the reason Low quality filming is due to either the lack of good funding or the amateurism of the director. However, this is not so: in arthouse cinema, the function of video is to convey the meaning of an idea. Special effects can distract from this, so they are not typical for products of this format. Arthouse ideas are original and deep. Very often, in the presentation of a simple story, a deep meaning is hidden from a superficial understanding; the real tragedy of the individual is revealed. While watching these films, you can often notice that the director himself is trying to find the answer to the question posed and studying the characters as he shoots. Predicting the plot of an arthouse movie is almost impossible.

Characteristics of high culture

Elite culture has a number of characteristics that distinguish it from mass culture:

1. Its elements are aimed at displaying and studying the deep processes of human psychology.
2. It has a closed structure, understandable only to extraordinary individuals.
3. It is distinguished by original artistic solutions.
4. Contains a minimum of visual aids.
5. Has the ability to express something new.
6. It tests what may later become a classic or trivial art.

Introduction

Culture is a sphere human activity, associated with a person’s self-expression, manifestations of his subjectivity (character, skills, abilities, knowledge). That is why every culture has additional characteristics, because it is associated with human creativity and everyday practice, communication, reflection, generalization and his everyday life.

Culture is specific method organization and development human life, presented in the products of material and spiritual labor, in the system social norms and institutions, in spiritual values, in the totality of people’s relationships to nature, among themselves and to themselves.

Within the society we can distinguish:

Elite - high culture

Mass - popular culture

Folk culture

The purpose of the work is to analyze the content of mass and elite culture

Job objectives:

Expand the concept of “culture” in in a broad sense

Identify the main types of culture

Characterize the features and functions of mass and elite culture.

Concept of culture

Culture was originally defined as the cultivation and care of the earth in order to make it suitable for satisfying human needs. IN figuratively culture - improvement, ennoblement of a person’s bodily and spiritual inclinations and abilities; Accordingly, there is a culture of the body, a culture of the soul and a spiritual culture. In a broad sense, culture is the totality of manifestations, achievements and creativity of a people or group of peoples.

Culture, considered from the point of view of content, is divided into various areas, spheres: morals and customs, language and writing, the nature of clothing, settlements, work, economics, socio-political structure, science, technology, art, religion, all forms of manifestation of the objective spirit of this people. The level and state of culture can only be understood based on the development of cultural history; in this sense they speak of primitive and high culture; the degeneration of culture creates either lack of culture and “refined culture.” In old cultures there is sometimes fatigue, pessimism, stagnation and decline. These phenomena allow us to judge how much the carriers of culture remained true to the essence of their culture. The difference between culture and civilization is that culture is the expression and result of self-determination of the will of a people or an individual (“cultured person”), while civilization is the totality of technological achievements and associated comfort.

Culture characterizes the characteristics of consciousness, behavior and activity of people in specific spheres of public life (culture of politics, culture of spiritual life).

The word culture itself (in its figurative sense) has come into use social thought in the second half of the 18th century.

At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, the established evolutionary concept of culture was criticized. Culture began to be seen primarily as a specific system of values, arranged according to their role in the life and organization of society.

At the beginning of the 20th century, the concept of “local” civilizations - closed and self-sufficient cultural organisms - became widely known. This concept is characterized by the opposition between culture and civilization, which was considered as the last stage in the development of a given society.

In some other concepts, the criticism of culture begun by Rousseau was carried to the point of its complete denial, the idea of ​​the “natural anti-culture” of man was put forward, and any culture is a means of suppressing and enslaving man (Nietzsche).

The diversity of types of culture can be considered in two aspects: external diversity - culture on a human scale, the emphasis of which lies in the progress of culture on the world stage; internal diversity is the culture of a particular society, city; subcultures can also be taken into account here.

But the main task of this work is a specific consideration of mass and elite culture.

Mass culture

Culture has gone through many crises throughout its history. The transitions from antiquity to the Middle Ages and from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance were marked by deep crises. But what is happening to culture in our era cannot be called one of the crises along with others. We are present at a crisis of culture in general, at the deepest upheavals in its thousand-year-old foundations. The old classical ideal has finally faded - beautiful art. Art frantically strives to go beyond its limits. The boundaries that separate one art from another and art in general from what is no longer art, what is higher or lower than it, are being violated. Man wants to create something that has never happened before, and in his creative frenzy he transcends all limits and boundaries. He no longer creates such perfect and beautiful works, which created more humble person bygone eras. This is the whole essence of mass culture.

Mass culture, the culture of the majority, is also called pop culture. The main characteristics are that it is the most popular and predominant among a wide section of the population in the society. It may include such phenomena as everyday life, entertainment (sports, concerts, etc.), as well as the media.

Mass culture. Prerequisites for the formation

Prerequisites for the formation of mass culture in the 18th century. inherent in the very existence of the structure of society. José Ortega y Gasset formulated a well-known approach to structuring based on creative potential. Then the idea of ​​a “creative elite” arises, which, naturally, constitutes a smaller part of society, and of the “mass” - quantitatively the main part of the population. Accordingly, it becomes possible to talk about the culture of the “elite” - “elite culture” and about the culture of the “mass” - “mass culture”. During this period, a division of culture occurs, with the formation of new significant social layers. Gaining an opportunity for conscious aesthetic perception cultural phenomena, newly emerging social groups, constantly communicating with the masses, make “elite” phenomena significant on a social scale and at the same time show interest in “mass” culture, in some cases their mixing occurs.

Popular culture in modern understanding

At the beginning of the 20th century. mass society and the mass culture associated with it have become the subject of research by prominent scientists in various scientific fields: philosophers Jose Ortega y Gasset (“Revolt of the Masses”), sociologists Jean Baudrillard (“Phantoms of Modernity”), and other scientists in different areas Sciences. Analyzing mass culture, they highlight the main essence of this culture, it is entertainment, so that it has commercial success, so that it is bought, and the money spent on it makes a profit. Entertaining is determined by the strict structural conditions of the text. The plot and stylistic texture of mass culture products may be primitive from the point of view of elitist fundamental culture, but it should not be poorly made, but on the contrary, in its primitiveness it should be perfect - only in this case will it be guaranteed readership and, therefore, commercial success . Mass culture requires a clear plot with intrigue and, most importantly, a clear division into genres. We see this clearly in the example of mass cinema. The genres are clearly demarcated and there are not many of them. The main ones are: detective, thriller, comedy, melodrama, horror film, etc. Each genre is a closed world with its own linguistic laws, which in no case should be crossed, especially in cinema, where production involves the greatest amount of financial investment.

We can say that mass culture must have a rigid syntax - an internal structure, but at the same time it may be semantically poor, it may lack deep meaning.

Mass culture is characterized by anti-modernism and anti-avant-gardeism. If modernism and the avant-garde strive for a sophisticated writing technique, then mass culture operates with an extremely simple technique, worked out by the previous culture. If modernism and the avant-garde are dominated by an attitude toward the new as the main condition for their existence, then mass culture is traditional and conservative. It is focused on the average linguistic semiotic norm, on simple pragmatics, since it is addressed to a huge readership and viewing audience.

It can therefore be said that mass culture arises not only due to the development of technology, which has led to such a huge number of sources of information, but also due to the development and strengthening of political democracies. An example of this can be given that the most developed mass culture is in the most developed democratic society - in America with its Hollywood.

Speaking about art in general, a roughly similar trend was noted by Pitirim Sorokin in the mid-20th century: “As a commercial product for entertainment, art is increasingly controlled by merchants, commercial interests and fashion trends. This situation creates the highest connoisseurs of beauty out of commercial businessmen and forces artists to submit to their demands, which are also imposed through advertising and other media.” At the beginning of the 21st century, modern researchers note the same cultural phenomena: “ Modern tendencies are scattered in nature and have already led to the creation of a critical mass of changes that have affected the very foundations of content and activity cultural institutions. The most significant of them, in our opinion, include: the commercialization of culture, democratization, the blurring of boundaries - both in the field of knowledge and in the field of technology - as well as a predominant attention to the process rather than to the content."

The relationship between science and popular culture is changing. Mass culture is “the decline of the essence of art.”

Table 1. The influence of mass culture on the spiritual life of society

PositiveNegativeHer works do not act as a means of authorial self-expression, but are directly addressed to the reader, listener, viewer, and take into account their needs. It is democratic (its “products” are used by representatives of different social groups), which corresponds to the time. It meets the needs and needs of many people, including the needs of in intensive rest, psychological time row. It has its peaks - literary, musical, cinematic works that can be classified as “high” art. It lowers the general level of spiritual culture of society, since it indulges undemanding tastes “ mass man"Leads to standardization and unification of not only the way of life, but also the way of thinking of millions of people. Designed for passive consumption, since it does not stimulate any creative impulses in the spiritual sphere. Plants myths in the minds of people (“the myth of Cinderella”, “the myth of the simple guy”, etc. d.) Forms artificial needs in people through massive advertising. Using modern media, replaces them for many people. real life, imposing certain ideas and preferences

Elite culture

Elite culture (from the French elite - selected, selected, best) is a subculture of privileged groups of society, characterized by fundamental closedness, spiritual aristocracy and value-semantic self-sufficiency. A select minority, as a rule, are also its creators. Elite culture consciously and consistently opposes mass culture.

Political and cultural elites differ; the former, also called “ruling”, “powerful”, today, thanks to the works of many learned sociologists and political scientists, have been studied in sufficient detail and deeply. Much less studied are cultural elites - strata united not by economic, social, political, and actual power interests and goals, but by ideological principles, spiritual values, and sociocultural norms.

Unlike political elites, spiritual and creative elites form their own, fundamentally new mechanisms of self-regulation and value-semantic criteria for activity choice. In the Elite culture, the range of values ​​recognized as true and “high” is limited, and the system of norms accepted by a given stratum as mandatory and strict in the community of “initiates” is tightened. The narrowing of the elite and its spiritual unity is inevitably accompanied by its quality and growth (intellectual, aesthetic, religious, and other respects).

Actually, for the sake of this, the circle of norms and values ​​of the Elite culture becomes emphatically high, innovative, what can be achieved by various means:

) mastering new social and mental realities as cultural phenomena or, on the contrary, rejection of anything new and “protection” of a narrow circle of conservative values ​​and norms;

) inclusion of one’s subject in an unexpected value-semantic context, which gives its interpretation a unique and even exclusive meaning.

) development of special cultural language, accessible only to a narrow circle, insurmountable (or difficult to overcome) semantic barriers to complex thinking;

Historical origins of elite culture

In primitive society, priests, magi, sorcerers, and tribal leaders become privileged holders of special knowledge, which cannot and should not be intended for general, mass use. Subsequently, this kind of relationship between elite culture and mass culture in one form or another, in particular secular, has repeatedly caused disagreements.

Ultimately, the elitism of knowledge, skills, values, norms, principles, traditions that was formed in this way was the key to sophisticated professionalism and deep subject specialization, without which cultural historical progress, postulate, value-semantic growth, contain, enrichment and accumulation of formal perfection - any value-semantic hierarchy. Elite culture acts as an initiative and productive principle in any culture, performing a predominantly creative function in it; while mass culture stereotypes.

Elite culture flourishes especially productively and fruitfully at the “breakdown” cultural eras, when changing cultural and historical paradigms, uniquely expressing the crisis states of culture, the unstable balance between “old” and “new”. Representatives of elite culture were aware of their mission in culture as “initiators of the new,” as ahead of their time, as creators not understood by their contemporaries (such, for example, were the majority of romantics and modernists - symbolists, avant-garde cultural figures and professional revolutionaries who carried out cultural revolution).

Thus, the directions, creative quests of various representatives of modern culture (symbolists and impressionists, expressionists and futurists, surrealists and Dadaists, etc.) - artists, theorists of movements, philosophers, and publicists - were aimed at creating unique samples and whole systems of elite culture.

Conclusion

Based on the above, we can conclude that mass and elite culture have their own personality traits and features.

Culture is an important aspect in human activity. Culture is a state of mind; it is the totality of manifestations, achievements and creativity of a people or a group of peoples.

But one feature can be identified that can be attributed to an elite culture - the greater the percentage of residents who adhere to its ideology, the higher the level of the highly educated population.

The work fully characterized mass and elite culture, highlighted their main properties, and weighed all the pros and cons.

mass elite culture

Bibliography

Berdyaev, N. “Philosophy of creativity, culture and art” T1. T2. 1994

Ortega - and - Gasset X. Revolt of the masses. Dehumanization of art. 1991

Suvorov, N. “Elite and mass consciousness in the culture of postmodernism"

Philosophical encyclopedic Dictionary. M., 1997

Flier, A.Ya. "Mass culture and its social functions»

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

In modern society, mass and elite cultures have acquired enormous importance.

Popular 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 their place of birth and country of residence. This is the culture of everyday life, presented to the widest audience through various channels, including media and communications.

Mass culture first manifested itself in the United States at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Socially, mass culture forms a new social system, called the “middle class”.

The purpose of mass culture is not so much filling leisure time and relieving tension and stress in a person of industrial and post-industrial society, but rather stimulating consumer consciousness in the viewer, listener, reader, which in turn forms special type passive uncritical perception of this culture in humans. In other words, the human psyche is manipulated and the emotions and instincts of the subconscious sphere of human feelings and, above all, feelings of loneliness, guilt, hostility, and fear are exploited.

Performs specific social functions. Among them the main one is illusory-compensatory: introducing a person to the world of illusory experience and unrealistic dreams. And all this is combined with open or hidden propaganda of the dominant way of life, which has as its ultimate goal the distraction of the masses from social activity, the adaptation of people to existing conditions.

XXI century entered the history of mankind as the age of fear. Particularly successful in realizing the instinct of fear modern cinema, producing a huge amount of horror films. The human psyche, “trained” by disaster films, gradually becomes insensitive to what is happening in real life.

Today, people have different attitudes towards violence in artistic culture.

Artistic culture has always had a huge impact on people, evoking certain feelings.

Many culturologists consider the antipode of mass culture elite culture complex in content for the unprepared to perceive. The producer and consumer of elite culture, from the point of view of representatives of this trend, is the highest privileged layer of society - the elite. In cultural studies, the elite has been understood as a special layer of society endowed with specific spiritual abilities. Elite- this is the part of society most capable of spiritual activity, gifted with high moral and aesthetic inclinations.

It is she who ensures social progress, so art should be focused on meeting her demands and needs.

Commercial gain is not the goal for creators of elite works of art who strive for innovation, full self-expression and artistic embodiment your ideas. At the same time, unique works of art may appear, which sometimes bring their creators not only recognition, but also considerable income, becoming very popular.

The main elements of the elitist concept of culture are contained in the philosophical works of A. Schopenhauer and F. Nietzsche.

In the cultural concepts of F. Nietzsche “Thus Spake Zarathustra”(1884), the elitist concept manifests itself in the idea of ​​the “superman”. This “superman”, who has a privileged position in society, is endowed, according to F. Nietzsche, with a unique human sensitivity.

Culture modern society can be divided into three quality levels:“higher” (“refined”), “middle” (“mediocre”) and “lower” (“vulgar”) cultures.

Distinctive features " higher culture» serve the seriousness of the chosen main topic and the issues raised, deep penetration into the essence of phenomena, sophistication and richness of expressed feelings. “Higher culture” has nothing to do with social status.

"Low" culture whose works are elementary. Some of them have genre forms“middle” or even “higher” culture, but this also includes games and shows (boxing, horse racing) that have minimal internal content.

It is generally accepted that the culture of mass society has a detrimental effect on the general cultural potential not directly, but indirectly: it seduces rather than limits the artist, providing huge incomes to those who agree to the conditions offered by the institutions of “mediocre” and “inferior” cultures.

Ortega y Gasset Spanish philosopher "elite cultural concept" writes that society has always been a moving unity of the minority and the masses. Minority - a set of specially designated persons; mass - not distinguished by anything. Mass is average person. To create a minority, it is necessary that everyone, for specific, more or less personal reasons, fall away from the crowd. Ortega y Gasset writes that in essence, in order to experience the mass as a psychological reality, human crowds are not required. You can tell from just one person whether it is a mass or not. The mass is anyone and everyone who, neither in good nor in evil, does not measure himself by a special measure, but feels the same “like everyone else,” and is not only not depressed, but is satisfied with his own indistinguishability. Usually, when speaking about the “chosen minority,” they distort the meaning of this expression, pretending to forget that the chosen ones are not those who arrogantly put themselves above, but those who demand more from themselves, even if the demand on themselves is unbearable.

Thus, the division of society into the masses and selected minorities- typological and does not coincide with the division into social classes, nor with their hierarchy. In reality, every class has its own masses and minorities.

Ortega y Gasset writes that the mass- this is mediocrity, and if she believed in her talent, there would not be a social change, but simply self-deception. 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.

In 1925 the most famous essay Spanish philosopher, called “Dehumanization of Art”, dedicated to the problems of differences between old and new art. The main difference between new art and old art - according to Ortega - is that it is addressed to the elite of society, and not to its masses. Therefore, it is not at all necessary that art should be popular, that is, it should not be generally understandable, universal to mankind.

Elite - according to Ortega- this is not a tribal aristocracy and not privileged layers of society, but that part of society that has a special “organ of perception.” It is this part of society that contributes to social progress. And it is precisely this that an artist should address with his works. The new art should promote “...so that the “best” get to know themselves,...learn to understand their purpose: to be in the minority and fight with the majority” (Ibid. pp. 221-222).

Culturological theories that contrast mass and elite cultures with each other are a reaction to the processes that have developed in art. A typical manifestation of elite culture is the theory and practice of “pure art” or “art for art’s sake,” which is embodied in a number of trends in Russian and Western European artistic culture.