Positive signs of mass culture.

Dresses

“The influence of mass culture on public consciousness”

1. Introduction………………………………………………………3

2. Definition of “mass culture”.................................................. ........5

3. Features and functions popular culture in………………………13

modern society

4. Conclusion……………………………………………………….24

Introduction Culture - spiritual component human activity , providing different sides

human life. This means that culture is omnipresent, but at the same time, in each specific type of activity it represents only its own spiritual side - in all the variety of socially significant manifestations. At the same time, culture is also the process and result of spiritual production, which makes it an essential part of total social production and social regulation, along with economics, politics and social structure. Spiritual production and ensures the formation, maintenance, dissemination and implementation cultural norms

, values, meanings and knowledge embodied in various components of culture (myths, religion, artistic culture, ideology, science, etc.). As an important component of total production, culture is not reduced to non-productive consumption or service. It is an indispensable prerequisite for any effective production. Culture reveals its content through a system of norms, values, meanings, ideas and knowledge, which are expressed in the system of morality and law, religion, artistic field

and science.

Culture is not a static phenomenon; it is constantly changing. In the 20th century there was active talk about mass culture. Each era creates its own type, its own example of a person and attitude towards him. Mass society shapes both in its own way.

There are many different points of view on the emergence of mass culture. There is also no unity in the assessment of mass culture. Points of view on popular culture are often contradictory to each other.

The work can consider different views on mass culture and various theories associated with it. To do this, we used books by the following authors: Ortega y Gasset H. “Aesthetics. Philosophy of Culture"; Moscovici S. “The Age of Crowds”; Akopyan K.Z. “Mass culture” and the works of other authors.

Objectives: to consider what mass culture is, its origin and forms; consider the functions of mass culture.

Definition of "mass culture"

Many sciences, history, archeology, sociology, ethnography, art history and cultural studies, study culture. There are several dozen different definitions of what can be called culture, many approaches to its study, theoretical concepts, models of culture.

In the history of philosophical understanding of culture, the main models of culture can be identified. The naturalistic model reduced culture to the objective and material forms of its manifestation and saw in culture the human continuation of nature. Representatives of this view were Voltaire, Rousseau, and Holbach.

This approach turns culture into one of the links in natural evolution, embodying the development of the abilities of a “natural person.” It is thanks to culture that man is not excluded from nature, but forms the highest link in its development, substantiates ideals reasonable person from his natural needs.

German educators associated the concept of “culture” with the personal development of a person, while they identified “civilization” with the socio-political life of people.

However, culture is not only the living activity of a person and its objective embodiment, but also the relationship between people as its creators. Culture is a complex social organism that is born, lives and dies, giving way to new cultural phenomena. In the 20th century, people began to talk about a new type of culture – mass culture.

Features of production and consumption cultural values allowed culturologists to identify two social forms of cultural existence: 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 mass media and communications.

There are a number of points of view regarding the origins of mass culture in cultural studies. As an example, we can cite the most frequently found in the scientific literature:

1. The prerequisites for mass culture have been formed since the birth of humanity, and, in any case, at the dawn of Christian civilization. As an example, simplified versions of the Holy Books (for example, the “Bible for the Beggars”), designed for a mass audience, are usually given.

2. The origins of mass culture are associated with the appearance in European literature XVII-XVIII centuries of adventure, detective, adventure novels, which significantly expanded the readership due to huge circulations (books by D. Defoe, M. Komarov).

3. The law on compulsory universal literacy, adopted in 1870 in Great Britain, had a great influence on the development of mass culture, which allowed many to master the main form of artistic creativity of the 19th century - the 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. 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.

On the one hand, the emergence of mass culture democratized the sphere of culture, on the other hand, it contributed to the penetration of commercial and political interests and the pursuit of profit into this sphere.

There are many interpretations of the concept of “mass”:

1. Mass - as a monolithic, indivisible set (that is, the opposite of the concept of class).

2. Mass - as a synonym for ignorance (as X. Ortega y Gasset wrote about it).

3. The masses - as a mechanized society (i.e., a person is perceived as an appendage of technology).

4. The mass - as a bureaucratized society (that is, in a mass society the individual loses his individuality in favor of the herd).

5. Mass - like a crowd. Laid here psychological meaning. The crowd does not reason, but obeys passions. A person by himself can be cultured, but in a crowd he is a barbarian (this point of view is reflected in S. Moscovici).

In general, these points of view agree that the masses are the embodiment of herdism, unification, and stereotypes. That it is difficult to identify an individual among the masses, that culture is often unusual for the masses, that “the mass person has not acquired culture.”

In general, “mass” society is interpreted as a new social structure emerging as a result of objective processes of human development - industrialization, urbanization, the rapid growth of mass consumption, the complication of the bureaucratic system and, of course, the unprecedented development of mass communications. Under these conditions, a person “from the street,” losing his individuality, turns into a faceless extra in history, dissolving into the crowd, which no longer listens to genuine authorities, but easily becomes a victim of demagogues and even criminals devoid of any ideals.

Despite its apparent vacuity, mass culture has a very clear ideological program, which is based on certain philosophical foundations. There are many studies and concepts regarding popular culture.

One of the oldest philosophical schools of past centuries was the Greek school - the Cyrenaics, founded in the 5th century BC. friend of Socrates - Aristipus. This school created the ethical doctrine - hedonism. Hedonists argue that the feeling of pleasure is the goal of all human behavior. The ideas of hedonism were developed by the Epicureans. The presence of such ancient ideological sources in mass culture is an argument against those theories that claim that technical means alone allegedly gave birth to a new type in the 20th century. global culture" But, of course, the ideological foundations of the phenomenon of mass culture begin to take shape most intensively from the moment the bourgeoisie ascends to the historical arena. It is from this moment that the entertainment branch of the hedonistic function of artistic culture becomes one of the defining ones in mass culture.

The ideological basis of modern mass culture is the philosophy of positivism. Positivism in popular culture manifested itself as naturalism. It is characterized by the reduction of the social to the biological. An example is a series of Western detective novels. In the plots of these works, behind the crimes committed there is one social motive - money. But in the endings of the novels it turns out that the crimes were organized by maniacs, schizophrenic criminals who are unable to answer for their actions. A serious social motive turns out to be replaced by a biological motive. The dependence of sociology on biology has become a worldview platform for many works mass art. The principle of escapism, that is, the desire to lead the consumer away from contradictions by any means real world, declare them non-existent or force them to be forgotten, has firmly taken a leading place in such works.

The philosophy of positivism appeared main form ideological justification for the naturalistic artistic method in art (G. Spencer, E. Renan, I. Ton). Naturalism as a method of artistic creativity took shape in the second half of the 19th century in Europe. In naturalistic works of art, the role of the material environment is exaggerated and the role of social factors in personality formation. Naturalistic schools led, first of all, to the description of everyday life in works of art, to focusing attention on the physical details of human life, but less attention was paid to the social foundations of existence.

In his theory of the unconscious 3. Freud proceeded from the fact that the essence of man is expressed in freedom from instincts. Hence, life in society is possible only when these instincts are suppressed. What Freud called “frustration” arises - that is, the individual’s unconscious hatred of society, which is expressed in aggressiveness. But since society has capabilities strong enough to suppress this aggressiveness of individuals, a person finds a way out for his unsatisfied passions in art.

The main influence of Freudianism on popular culture lies in the use of its natural instincts (aggression, fear, etc.).

A very famous concept of mass culture was proposed by José Ortega y Gasset. Ortega, as a philosopher, created his own doctrine of “rationalism,” the essence of which is not the separate existence of philosophy and life, science and art, but their mutual influence. As a cultural theorist, Ortega became not only one of the main creators of the theory of mass society, but also a prominent theorist of mass art and creative “modernism.”

In his work “The Revolt of the Masses,” Ortega develops the idea that modern society and its culture are affected by a serious illness - the dominance of a spiritually unspiritual man in the street, devoid of any aspirations, imposing his lifestyle on entire states.

According to Ortega, the impersonal “mass” - a bunch of mediocrities - instead of following the recommendations of the natural “elite” minority, rises up against it, displaces the “elite” from its traditional areas - politics and culture, which ultimately leads to everyone social ills of our century. “If a minority consists of individuals who have certain characteristics, then the mass is a set of individuals who do not differ in anything special.”

Being incapable of critical thinking, the mass person thoughtlessly assimilates any random attitudes and norms, everything that has accumulated in him by chance, and imposes it everywhere. Ortega says that humanity can be divided into two classes: those who demand a lot from themselves and shoulder burdens and obligations on themselves, and those who do not demand anything and for whom living is to go with the flow. The Spanish philosopher connects his reasoning about the emergence of mass man, first of all, with European history. In his opinion, the glory and responsibility for the entry of the broad masses into the historical field lies with the 19th century. For all twelve centuries of its existence - from the 7th to the 19th centuries - the population of Europe never exceeded 180 million people, and during the period from 1800 to 1914, it reached 460 million. According to Ortega, these masses do not have time to become saturated with traditional culture. It is the absence of traditional culture in modern society that leads to its spiritual degradation and decline in morality. Ultimately, Ortega sought to show that it was not class contradictions or the machinations of imperialism, but precisely the inhumane attitudes imposed on millions of people in totalitarian societies that became the cause of all the tragedies of the past century.

Ortega’s thoughts largely echo the ideas of philosophers and sociologists of the so-called Frankfurt School, the “new left,” or neo-Marxists, who believed that it is the extreme technologization and bureaucratization of modern society that leads it to dead ends of unspiritual authoritarianism and dictatorships. Representatives of this school believed that “people should have true needs - to be creative, independent, autonomous, to live freely and think for themselves. But in modern capitalist society these true needs cannot be satisfied, since they are constantly superimposed by false needs necessary for the survival of the system.”

The phenomenon of “mass culture” described above from the point of view of its role in the development modern civilization Scientists assess it far from unambiguously. Depending on their inclination towards an elitist or populist way of thinking, cultural scientists tend to consider it either something like a social pathology, a symptom of the degeneration of society, or, conversely, an important factor in its health and internal stability.

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 its alienation from real life

The opposite approach, on the contrary, is expressed in the fact that mass culture is proclaimed as a natural consequence of the irreversible scientific technical 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 the cultural heritage of the past, but also makes its best examples the property of the widest strata of the people by replicating them through print, radio, television and industrial reproduction.

There is no consensus on the issue of mass culture. One way or another, mass culture has become an integral part of our lives and we need not to fight it, but to use it for our own benefit.

Features and functions of mass culture in modern society.

The origins of the wide spread of mass culture in the modern world lie in the commercialization of all social relations. The desire to see a product in the sphere of spiritual activity, combined with the powerful development of mass communication, led to the creation of a new phenomenon - mass culture. Socially, mass culture forms a new social stratum, called “ middle class" This “middle class” became the core of life in industrial society, and it is also what made mass culture so popular.

Mass culture mythologizes human consciousness, mystifies real processes occurring in nature and in human society. There is a rejection of the rational principle in consciousness. The purpose of mass culture is not so much to fill leisure time and relieve tension and stress in industrial and post-industrial people. industrial society, how much stimulation of consumer consciousness in the recipient (i.e., viewer, listener, reader), which in turn forms special type- passive, uncritical perception of this culture by a person. All this creates a personality that is quite easy to manipulate. In other words, the human psyche is manipulated and the emotions and instincts of the subconscious sphere of human feelings are exploited, and, above all, feelings of loneliness, guilt, hostility, fear, and self-preservation. Shaped by popular culture mass consciousness diverse in its manifestation. However, it is characterized by conservatism, inertia, and limitations. It cannot cover all processes in development, in all the complexity of their interaction. In the practice of mass culture, mass consciousness has specific means of expression. Popular culture in to a greater extent focuses not on realistic images, but on artificially created images (image) and stereotypes. In mass culture, the formula (and this is the essence of an artificially created image - an image or a stereotype) is the main thing. This situation encourages idolatry. Today, the newfangled “stars of artificial Olympus” have no less fanatical fans than the old gods and goddesses.

Mass culture in artistic creativity performs specific social functions. Among them, the main one is illusory-compensatory: introducing a person to the world of the dominant way of life, open or hidden by propaganda, which has as its ultimate goal the distraction of the masses from social activity, the adaptation of people to existing conditions, conformism.

Hence the use in popular culture of such genres of art as detective, western, melodrama, musical, comic book. It is within these genres that simplified versions of life are created that reduce social evil to psychological and moral factors.

In America, popular culture has acquired a dual character: the American mind, which is not occupied with practical concerns, remains at rest, while the other part of it, occupied with discovery, production and social organization, resembles Niagara Falls. The American will is embodied in the skyscraper, the American intellect is embodied in colonial buildings.

From market-oriented consumer goods, we learn about the typical behaviors, attitudes, generally accepted opinions, prejudices and expectations of a large number of people.

When considering popular culture, we inevitably come across the concept of “manipulation”. The word "manipulation" has its root Latin word manus- hand ( manipulus- handful, handful, from manus And ple- fill). In the dictionaries of European languages, the word is interpreted as handling objects with certain intentions and purposes (for example, manual control, examination of a patient by a doctor using hands, etc.). This means that such actions require dexterity and dexterity. This is where modern figurative meaning words – deft handling of people as objects, things.

S. Kara-Murza identifies three main signs of manipulation.

Firstly, this is a type of spiritual, psychological influence (and not physical violence or the threat of violence). The target of the manipulator’s actions is the spirit, the mental structures of the human personality.

Secondly, manipulation is a hidden influence, the fact of which should not be noticed by the object of manipulation. When an attempt at manipulation is discovered and the exposure becomes widely known, the action is usually curtailed, since the disclosed fact of such an attempt causes significant damage to the manipulator. The main goal is hidden even more carefully - so that even the exposure of the very fact of an attempt at manipulation does not lead to the clarification of long-term intentions.

Thirdly, manipulation is an influence that requires significant skill and knowledge.

Manipulation is a method of domination through spiritual impact on people through programming their behavior. This influence is aimed at the mental structures of a person, is carried out secretly and aims to change the opinions, motives and goals of people in the direction desired by the authorities. It is in the conditions of mass culture that it is easiest to manipulate people.

The nature of manipulation consists in the presence of a double impact - along with the openly sent message, the manipulator sends a coded signal to the addressee, hoping that this signal will awaken in the recipient’s mind those images that the manipulator needs. The art of manipulation is to set the imagination process in the right direction , but in such a way that a person does not notice the hidden impact.

One of the important functions of modern mass culture is the mythologization of public consciousness. Works of mass culture, just like myths, are not based on the distinction between the real and the ideal. They become the subject not of knowledge, but of faith.

There is an opinion that the most adequate term expressing the essence of works of mass culture is the term icon. It is the icon that corresponds to the Russian concept of image. This term characterizes this type of artistic reflection, which is symbolic, fundamentally unrealistic in nature, is an object of faith, worship, and not a means of reflection and knowledge of the world.

Since in the conditions of mass culture the individual cannot always express himself and is often suppressed, we can talk about public opinion. In the “Workbook of a Sociologist”, public opinion was considered as “the attitude of the population towards a particular phenomenon, object or situation.”

Public opinion does not exist in every society, since it is not simply the sum of those private opinions that people exchange in a narrow, private circle of family or friends. Public opinion is a state of public consciousness that is expressed publicly and influences the functioning of society.

The functioning of public opinion as a social institution means that it acts as a kind of “social power”, i.e. “power endowed with will and capable of subordinating the behavior of subjects of social interaction.”

Public opinion in its modern meaning and understanding appeared with the development of the bourgeois system and the formation of civil society as a sphere of life, independent of political power. In the Middle Ages, a person’s belonging to one class or another had direct political significance and strictly determined his social position. With the emergence of bourgeois society, estates were replaced by open classes consisting of formally free and independent individuals. This was a prerequisite for the formation of influential public opinion.

However, public opinion is not always an absolute force expressing the interests of people. The fact is that in a developed democracy, with a stable socio-political situation, the role and importance of public opinion is clearly limited and balanced by a strong and authoritative representative government; its impact on government activity is carried out not directly, but indirectly, through forms of representative democracy. Besides, public opinion can be managed effectively. In the conditions of mass culture and standardization, this is easily achieved by competent specialists using various technologies of influence.

Not many representatives of society can resist the phenomena of mass influence manifested in advertising and propaganda. The factors and limits of such belief require careful analysis. In particular, this refers to the idea of the omnipotence of mass communicative influence on a mass audience, on a “mass” person, which frightens some and encourages others (depending on the position).

French researcher Serge Moscovici discusses public opinion and behavior. He says that: “In civilizations where crowds play a leading role, man loses the meaning of existence as well as the sense of “I.” The individual is dead, long live the masses! This is the harsh fact that the observer of modern society discovers for himself.”

Serge Moscovici draws attention to group actions, which are not limited to the behavior of individual participants. At the same time, in the masses he sees not only an obedient herd, but also a crowd ready to break loose at any time. Moral prohibitions are swept away by such a crowd along with submission to reason. It turns out that the crowd, or mass, is monolithic and if you know how to control it, then you can lead it with you anywhere. Individual opinions of the mass participants need not be taken into account.

Psychologists such as S. Freud and Le Bon also speak about this feature of the masses. Mass psychology considers an individual person as a member of a tribe, people, caste, estate, or as an integral part of the human crowd, in known time and for specific purpose organizing into a mass. The phenomena that appear in these special conditions are the expression of a special, deeper unfounded primary urge, which does not manifest itself in other situations. An individual, under a certain condition, feels, thinks and acts completely differently than could be expected from him when included in a human crowd that has acquired the property of a psychological mass.

The strangest thing about a psychological mass is this: whatever the type of individuals that make it up, no matter how similar or dissimilar their way of life, activities, their characters and degree of intelligence, but they, turning into a mass, acquire collective soul, due to which they feel, think and act completely differently than each of them individually felt, thought and acted. “There are ideas and feelings that are manifested or transformed into action only in individuals united in masses. The psychological mass is... a new being with qualities completely different from those of individual cells.”

Individual achievements are erased among the masses individuals and their originality disappears; the racial unconscious comes to the fore, the psychic superstructure, developed differently in individual people, is demolished and the unconscious, the same for everyone, is brought into action.

Freud identifies qualities in mass individuals that they did not possess, and the reasons for this, in his opinion, are in the following three main points.

The first of the reasons is that in a mass, by virtue of the mere fact of his multitude, the individual experiences a feeling of irresistible power, allowing him to indulge in primal urges that, if he were alone, he would be forced to curb. There is less reason to curb them, since with the anonymity, and thus the irresponsibility of the masses, the sense of responsibility, which always restrains the individual, completely disappears.

The second reason - infectiousness - also contributes to the manifestation of special signs among the masses and the determination of their direction. Contagiousness is an easily ascertainable but inexplicable phenomenon that should be classified as a hypnotic phenomenon... In a crowd, every action, every feeling is contagious, and to such a strong degree that the individual very easily sacrifices his personal interest in favor of the general interest. This is a property completely opposite to his nature, which a person is capable of only as part of an integral part of the mass.

The third, and moreover the most important reason, determines in individuals united in a mass special qualities that are completely opposite to the qualities of an isolated individual. By them, Freud understands suggestibility, and the mentioned infectiousness is only its consequence. An individual who remains in the active mass for some time falls into special condition, very close to the “enchantment” that takes possession of the hypnotized under the influence of the hypnotist. The conscious personality is completely lost, the will and the ability to discriminate are absent, all feelings and thoughts are oriented in the direction indicated by the hypnotist.

Le Bon's point of view is similar to Freud's. “In addition, by the mere fact of belonging to the organized masses, a person descends several steps lower on the ladder of civilization. Being an individual, he was perhaps an educated individual, but in the mass he is a barbarian, i.e. a creature driven by primal urges. He has the spontaneity, impetuosity, wildness, and also the enthusiasm and heroism of primitive creatures."

The masses are impulsive, changeable and excitable. It is almost exclusively driven by the unconscious. The impulses that the mass obeys may, depending on the circumstances, be noble or cruel, heroic or cowardly, but in all cases they are so imperative that they do not allow the manifestation of not only personal instinct, but even the instinct of self-preservation. Nothing about her is intentional. If she passionately desires something, it is always for a short time; she is incapable of constancy of will. She cannot stand the delay between desire and the implementation of what she wants. She feels omnipotent; the concept of the impossible disappears among the individual in the mass.

The masses are gullible and extremely easy to influence; for them there is nothing implausible. She thinks in images that generate each other associatively, not verified by reason for compliance with reality. The masses, therefore, know neither doubt nor uncertainty.

The mass immediately goes to extremes, the expressed suspicion immediately turns into unshakable confidence, the grain of antipathy into wild hatred. The danger of contradicting the masses is absolutely obvious. You can protect yourself by following the example of those around you. Therefore, it is not so surprising if we observe a person in the crowd performing or welcoming actions that he would turn away from in his usual conditions.

The base instincts present in man are exploited by modern mass culture. The 20th century will go down in human history as the century of fear. Destructive wars, revolutions, catastrophes, and natural disasters contributed to the appearance of the image “ little man", who overcomes all the troubles that the outside world throws at him. The ancient Greeks created in art the image of a hero who existed organically with the world around him; artistic creativity of the 20th century widely exploits the image of a little man as a hero of our time.

Modern cinema has been particularly successful in realizing the instinct of fear, producing a huge number So horror films, disaster films, thrillers. Their main subjects are: natural disasters (earthquakes, tsunamis, Bermuda Triangle with its unsolved mysteries); just disasters (shipwrecks, plane crashes, fires); monsters (these include giant gorillas, aggressive sharks, creepy spiders, man-eating crocodiles, etc.); supernatural powers(we are talking about devils, antichrists, spirits, phenomena of transmigration of the soul, telekinesis); aliens.

Disasters resonate in people’s souls because we all live in an unstable world, where real disasters occur every day and everywhere. In conditions of economic and environmental crisis, local wars, national clashes, there are no guarantees against life disasters. So, gradually the theme of “catastrophe”, “fear”, sometimes not even always consciously, takes possession of people.

In the last decades of the 20th century, they increasingly began to be used as a reason for depicting a disaster on film and television screens. tragic events political life: acts of brutal terrorism and kidnappings. Moreover, in the presentation and promotion of this material, what is most important is sensationalism, cruelty, and adventurism. And as a result, the human psyche, trained by disaster films, masterfully aestheticized by the commercial screen, gradually becomes insensitive to what is happening in real life. And instead of warning humanity against the possible destruction of civilization, such works of mass culture simply prepare us for this prospect.

The problem of realizing the instincts of cruelty and aggressiveness in works of art of mass culture is not new. Plato and Aristotle argued about whether a cruel artistic spectacle generates cruelty in the viewer, listener or reader. Plato considered the depiction of bloody tragedies a socially dangerous phenomenon. Aristotle, on the contrary, expected from the depiction of scenes of horror and violence the purification of recipients by catharsis, that is, he wanted to see a certain mental release that the recipient experiences in the process of empathy. For many years, the depiction of violence in art was characteristic of the margins of popular culture. Nowadays, the “super violence” that permeates books, plays, and films has come to the fore. Mass culture continuously releases more and more vicious and cruel films, records, and books to the public. Addiction to fictional violence is similar to drug addiction.

Today, people have different attitudes towards violence in artistic culture. Some believe that the topic of violence does not bring anything terrible into real life. Others believe that depictions of violence in fiction contribute to more violence in real life. Of course, it would be a simplification to see a direct connection between works that promote violence and the rise in crime. However, in a society of mass consumption of films, television programs, records - all this is part of real life. Art culture always has a huge impact on a person, causing certain feelings.

Another reason for the emergence of mass culture is the emergence among a significant layer of working citizens of excess free time and leisure, due to the high level of mechanization of the production process. People increasingly have a need to “kill time.” “Mass culture” is designed to satisfy it, naturally for money, and manifests itself primarily in the sensory sphere, i.e. in all types of literature and art. Particularly important channels for the general democratization of culture over the past decades have been cinema, television and, of course, sports (in its purely spectator part), gathering huge and not too discriminating audiences, driven only by the desire for psychological relaxation. This leads to another function of mass culture in modern society – relieving stress and helping to spend free time.

Mass culture cannot be viewed only from a negative perspective; in modern society it also performs some positive functions. True, it has very little positive influence on modern culture, increasingly satisfying lowered tastes.

Conclusion

The meaning of the existence of each era lies in the formation of a certain type of personality. And the tool for accomplishing this task is culture in all its diversity. The formation of personality occurs depending on the tasks that a given people faces in a specific historical period. Law, art, education and other spheres of culture strive to cultivate in a person such qualities that would allow him to create the necessary conditions for the preservation and development of his own people, his culture. Only a person with certain qualities could solve the problem of increasing and preserving the spiritual wealth of the people. And every historical era made specific demands on her contemporaries.

Activity in learning about the world, love for one’s fatherland, and the desire for physical and spiritual perfection were characteristic of the people of the ancient world. Deep religiosity combined with a strictly defined hierarchy of cultural values found expressed in social structure societies were characteristic of medieval Western European society. In it, the problems of forming a deeply religious personality, who does not doubt the tenets of faith and is ready to defend them, regardless of anything, came to the fore. During the Renaissance, it was discovered that man contains not only a spiritual, but also a sensual principle.

Bourgeois society, which requires a certain level of education from its members, seems to create conditions for the accessibility of culture and the possibility of cultural creativity for everyone. In bourgeois society, the world of culture is viewed by the individual through the prism of utilitarian needs, which are determined by his social role. The person here is not a creator, but only exploits creative activity, subordinating it to his own interests. And what he can actually create is directed precisely against culture, serving its alienation and destruction.

In a consumer society, creative individuals act as labor, and works as consumer value. Therefore, an artist from the sphere of “mass culture” is evaluated primarily by productivity, by distribution, by audience reaction, and, above all, by profit and loss indicators. The main feature of “mass culture” is a market mentality that treats art, science, religion, and politics as consumer goods subordinated to profit considerations rather than to the internal logic of content.

Focus on material values, following the average taste - all this does not contribute to cultural development society.

Literature.

Akopyan K.Z. Mass culture. – M.: Alfa-M, 2004.

Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. - M.: Nauka, 1994.

Bart R. Mythologies. – M., 1988.

Grinder J.; Bandler R. Formation of trance. – M., 1994.

Kara-Murza S. Manipulation of consciousness. - M.: "Algorithm", 2000.

Konetskaya V. P. Sociology of communication. - M., 1997.

Le Bon G. “Crowd creation” // New time. - No. 3, 1994.

Moscovici S. Century of Crowds. – M., 1996.

Ortega y Gasset H. Aesthetics. Philosophy of culture. – M., 1991.

A sociologist's workbook. - M., 1983.

Safarov R.A. Sociological research. – M., 1979.

Snow C. P. Two cultures. – M., 1973.

Freud Z. Psychology of the masses and analysis of the human “I”. – Minsk, 1991.

Chumikov A. N. Public relations. – M., 2001.

Moscovici S. Century of Crowds. – M., 1996.

Akopyan K.Z. Mass culture. – M.: Alfa-M, 2004. – P. 27.

Freud Z. Psychology of the masses and analysis of the human “I”. – Minsk, 1991

Ortega y Gasset H. Aesthetics. Philosophy of culture. – M., 1991

Akopyan K.Z. Mass culture. – M.: Alfa-M, 2004. – P. 26.

Akopyan K.Z. Mass culture. – M.: Alfa-M, 2004. – P. 36.

Kara-Murza S. Manipulation of consciousness. - M.: "Algorithm", 2000

A sociologist's workbook. - M., 1983. - P. 100

Safarov R.A. Sociological research. – M., 1979. - P. 14

Moscovici S. Century of Crowds. – M., 1996. – P. 56

Freud Z. Psychology of the masses and analysis of the human “I”. – Minsk, 1991. – P. 423

Le Bon G. “Crowd creation” // New time. - No. 3, 1994. P. 63

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.

Teacher. The term “mass culture” was first used by the American scientist D. MacDonald in 1944. He emphasizes the prevalence and general accessibility of spiritual values, the ease of their assimilation, which does not require particularly developed, refined taste and perception. Mass culture is a complex of spiritual values that correspond to the tastes and level of development of a mass consumption society. It originated in the second half of the 20th century, when this society was formed.

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. Great importance, in connection with this, advertising is acquired. 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.

The main “translator” for mass culture is the media. The rapid development of mass communications in the twentieth century. led to a change in worldview, transformation, “dehumanization” of culture, the formation of a new virtual world communication.

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 advertising influence? (both positive and negative)

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, many negative consequences. Very often it influences human behavior. Young people, having watched enough militants, can commit a crime by analogy.
Many bad habits have 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.
Mass culture is more focused 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

A television talk show discusses the topic “Mass culture has a negative impact on children.” Refute this statement with three examples of the positive influence of popular 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, having looked away from computer and television screens, began to read fiction with pleasure . Describe this phenomenon, highlighting the signs of mass culture in it.
There is an opinion that mass culture has become an exclusive tool for regulating 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.

Master student

Averkina Tatyana Nikolaevna, honorary worker of general education Russian Federation, teacher of history and social studies at VUVK named after. A.P. Kiseleva, Voronezh

Annotation:

Mass culture is a form of culture that dominates among the majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics and an orientation toward the “average person.” One part of society criticizes mass culture, considering it faceless and propaganda. Another part recognizes its effectiveness in supporting the spiritual and moral unification of individuals. At the same time, no one denies the global influence that mass culture has on the collective consciousness and mind. This article is devoted to a more detailed study and analysis of the presented influence, as well as its connection with various spheres of society.

Mass culture is a form of culture dominant among the majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics, orientation towards the "average person". One part of society criticizes mass culture, considering it faceless and propagandistic. The other part recognizes its effectiveness in supporting the spiritual and moral unification of individuals. At the same time, no one denies the global influence that mass culture has on collective consciousness and reason. This article is devoted to a more detailed study and analysis of the presented influence, as well as its relationships with different spheres of society.

Keywords:

culture; Mass culture; moral values; society

culture; mass culture; moral values; society

UDC 316.7

Mass culture is one of the fundamental attributes of the spiritual sphere of modern society. A striking example of mass culture is the creation of the “Hollywood industry” and the emergence of such film genres as horror, action films and TV series. Such products are aimed at the mass consumer, who craves “bread and circuses” and does not set themselves the goal of careful thoughtfulness and understanding of what is happening on the screen. So-called “Hollywood” films are one of the most widespread and “effective” tools for influencing people’s consciousness over the past decades.

Mass culture has become one of the integral components of the modern era. Moreover, this phenomenon has left its mark on absolutely all spheres of social life, which can be easily traced on the basis of all the changes that have affected the way of human existence.

For example, mass culture has big influence on political sphere. First of all, it introduces the individual to the existing system of social relations, suppressing attempts and motivations to rebel against it. With the help of the media, citizens are introduced to politics, their level of political participation. However, it is worth noting reverse side this medal. The extreme politicization of many printed publications is often the basis for the formation of the opinion of a reader who is unable to recreate his own picture of the world. Due to the spread of the influence of mass culture, politics is perceived through images (image and stereotypes). Lacks full understanding political processes, the idea of politics is formed under the influence of PR, advertising and agitation. In such conditions, the likelihood of spreading false information and misleading citizens with the help of the media and other tools is high. One of the most striking examples of such a situation is the scandal caused by the appearance in the nineties of the 20th century of photographs of the “Serbian death camp”, which turned out to be fake, but played an important role in accusing Serbia of exterminating civilians.

Among the economic consequences of the influence of mass culture, one cannot fail to note the stimulation of technical progress, accessibility, low cost of products (due to their standardization), and, consequently, the ability to meet the needs of the poorest segments of the population and, as a result, an increase in living standards in all corners of the globe. For example, over the past ten years, the economic growth of some African countries located south of the Sahara Desert has amounted to more than seven percent. In addition, popular culture preaches the need and importance of developing production technologies and technical innovations. Since most researchers agree that mass culture originated in the United States (a country where pragmatism and technology are elevated to the rank of basic values), technological innovations also spread with the spread of mass culture. On the other hand, mass culture limits the stimulation of the production of unique and high-quality products. Thus, any economic agent, be it a company, positions profit maximization as its main economic goal, which can be achieved, among other things, by increasing the scale of production. One of the accompanying factors and ways to achieve this goal is to reduce costs by offering the consumer homogeneous and unified products, which, of course, cannot be characterized positively.

Mass culture also had a huge impact on the social sphere. The same homogeneous products of mass culture act as a certain integrating force, bringing people together and promoting globalization.

Due to its universality and focus on each individual, regardless of his social status, popular culture blurs the boundaries between classes. All this ultimately helps reduce the level of social tension in society.

However, the spread of mass culture caused a sharp increase in the level of patriotism of nations. Certain cultural communities began to defend the right to national identity, fighting against universal unification. Suffice it to recall the policy of the Ukrainian authorities to restore the significance of the Ukrainian language as one of the measures to revive national identity.

Among the negative social consequences of mass culture, one should mention the passive perception of reality by the individual, conservatism, orientation not to reality, but to advertising, television and radio images, conformism as the main type of individual behavior, reluctance and inability to change the existing social order and eliminate shortcomings in him.

Although the mid-20th century is considered to be the birth of mass culture, it is worth considering that some of its features can be seen before this time. So you can quote the Russian philosopher A.I. Herzen, who says that the masses (people) are an inhibitory force that does not allow society to develop progressively: “He clings to his depressing life, to cramped frames... He even accepts new things in old clothes...”. The masses resist innovation and are afraid of the new. This hinders the development of society along the path of progress.

Perhaps the most noticeable imprint was left by mass culture on the spiritual sphere of society. Mass culture using simple tools ( typical images, standardized plots) helps an individual to better navigate the modern world, to gain, albeit primitive, an idea of the relationships between people. Through art culture, mass culture gives society the opportunity to join a higher level of culture. By copying and adopting the achievements and examples of elite culture, mass culture disseminates them, popularizes them through the media, cinema, and other means. Moreover, it was thanks to the spread of mass culture that the poorest segments of the population acquired the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of high art. It is also impossible not to take into account the general increase in the level of literacy of the population, in which mass culture played an important role.

At the same time, most experts note that the negative consequences of this phenomenon are still greater than the positive ones. The famous sociologist and researcher of mass culture J. Ortega y Gasset wrote: “The peculiarity of our time is that ordinary souls, without being deceived about their own mediocrity, fearlessly assert their right to it and impose it on everyone and everywhere.” General universalization and standardization kills high art, which society simply does not need.

The products of human spiritual activity in a mass consumption society are focused primarily on satisfying primary needs. A reassessment of values is taking place: postmodernism - the dominant philosophical trend in the era of mass culture - proclaims the principle of pleasure as the main goal of art. “Everything in the world is relative, there is neither “good” nor “bad” art,” postmodernists assert, guided by the principle of denying the hierarchy of values. Modern Art and mass culture choose the path of commercialization as the main trajectory of their movement. This path is not aimed at moral improvement of the individual, but at satisfying needs and basic instincts. The primary goal of such a culture is to entertain, but not to provide “food for thought.” It is impossible not to note the emerging trend of denial of such values as chastity, patriotism, and family. Chastity is declared a moral inferiority, the patriot is contrasted with the cosmopolitan - “citizen of the world”, the institution of the family is experiencing a deep crisis.

Thus, we can say with confidence that mass culture at the present stage of its existence is an integral element of social relations, exerting a huge and constantly growing influence on various spheres of social life. At the same time, both in the political, and in the economic, and in the social, and in the spiritual spheres, both positive and Negative consequences of this influence. That is why the main task of civilization in the coming years is to prevent negative influence mass culture, limiting the further decomposition of art, as well as stopping its transformation into a tool for satisfying basic needs. To achieve this result, a clear and meaningful change in the values of mass culture in all its manifestations and the introduction of cultural ideals of a higher level are necessary. This process can be organized primarily by mixing mass culture with elite culture, which obviously has a higher base of values.

Bibliography:

1. Ilyin A. Subjectivity within mass culture // Knowledge. Understanding. Skill. 2008. No. 4
2. Riveli M.A. Archbishop of Genocide. Monsignor Stepinac, The Vatican and the Ustasha dictatorship in Croatia 1941−1945. 2011. P. 244.
3. Ortega y Gasset H. Uprising of the masses. 1929. P. 311

Reviews:

12/22/2017, 13:39 Adibekyan Oganes Aleksandrovich
Review: Adibekyan Oganes Alexandrovich. Article by Kanishchev K.V. written skillfully, significant for the public, its scientists, politicians, journalists. It is recommended for printing. But it is proposed to take it into account if the author agrees. It is necessary to stipulate the richness of the content of the term “culture”, which includes knowledge, morality, behavior, law-abidingness, peacefulness, etc. We should not linger in the United States of America; we should also turn to other countries of the world. Taking into account the “mass of people”, one should take into account the representation of poor and rich people in it, and in terms of politics, stipulate the predominance of representatives of the rich there, who influence public consciousness for their benefit. One should not forget the use of the term "classes".

12/22/2017, 14:23 Ershtein Leonid Borisovich
Review: I'll tell you what. I would like to see what specific problem the author is solving. How other authors tried to solve it and what are the disadvantages of past solutions and the advantages of the current solution. There are obvious contradictions in the text, for example, in one place the author writes “Since most researchers agree that mass culture originated in the USA...”, in another he gives the following definition of mass culture: “Mass culture is a form of culture that dominates among the majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics, orientation toward the “average person.” Attention, question, is there such a culture that didn’t exist before the USA? Complete nonsense. By the way, the abstract, where I got this definition from, should generally contain what the article is about. The conclusions are amazing “Thus, we can say with confidence that mass culture at the present stage of its existence is an integral element of social relations, exerting a huge and constantly growing influence on various spheres of social life.” Isn't it obvious? Further, “This process can be organized primarily by mixing mass culture with elite culture, which obviously has a higher base of values.” What is a "value base"? Apparently only the author knows (although I suspect that he doesn’t know either). Conclusion: it can be published only after serious revision. It's not science yet...

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Positive signs of mass culture.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents