Culture industry as a term was first used by Adorno
and Horkheimer in the book Dialectic of
Enlightenment in 1947. In their drafts, they talked about mass culture but
later replaced that expression with ‘culture industry’. They did this so that
they could exclude the interpretation of a set of intellectuals who advocated
that mass culture arose spontaneously from the masses and is the contemporary
form of popular art. He says that the culture industry instead merges the old
and familiar into a new quality and all its products are tailored for
consumption by the masses and manufactured according to a plan. Further, it forces
together high and low art to the detriment of both. For Adorno, the masses are
simply an “object of calculation” and the customer is never the king. The
cultural commodities of this industry, as Brecht and Suhrkamp have expressed
earlier are guided by their realization as ‘value’ and not by their own
individual content, and the profit motive is primary for the entire practice of
the culture industry. So, cultural entities in the culture industry are no
longer also commodities, but they are
commodities. While culture in the ‘true’ sense, not only adjusted itself to
human beings but also honoured them by raising a protest against their living
conditions. But what comes across in the culture industry as something new and
progressive however remains disguised under an “eternal sameness”.
Adorno suggests to not take the word industry “too
literally” but understand it with reference to a certain standardization of
content and he takes the example of a Western that is familiar to every movie
goer. With reference to cinema as a central sector of the culture industry, he
says that although its production process may involve division of labour and
there may be a conflict between artists and the industry that controls them,
there still exists an individual form of production. But for Adorno, this
individuality serves to reinforce ideology. Cinema’s ideology makes use of the
star system that for him is borrowed from “individualistic art and its
commercial exploitation.” The culture industry is industrial in a sociological
sense in that it incorporates industrial forms of organization even when
nothing is manufactured. For instance in the rationalization of office work
rather that anything being really produced. There is no inner logic to the technique
of the industry except for that of distribution and mechanical reproduction
which always remains external. Walter Benjamin designated the traditional work
of art with the concept of the ‘aura’ but for Adorno, the culture industry
“conserves the decaying aura as a foggy mist”. Despite this, he feels that the
industry is important as a “moment of the sprit that dominates today” and
ignoring its influence would be naive. Yet, there is a “deceptive glitter”
about the position to take it seriously. He thinks even though something
touches a large number of lives, it is no guarantee of its quality and hence it
would be required to take it seriously in a critical way. It is common for some
intellectuals to simultaneously keep reservations against it and respect its
power. For them products like pocket novels, family television shows or even
horoscope columns are harmless and even democratic because it responds to a
demand, even if it is a stimulated one. But any advice gained from it is empty
and the emerging behaviour patterns “shamelessly conformist”.
This “two-faced irony” is not restricted to just the
intellectuals but also the consumers. The consumers are split between the fun
they get from the culture industry’s products and not a well concealed doubt about
its blessings. Adorno thinks that the phrase, “the world wants to be deceived”
has become truer than ever and consumers will fall for anything that will
provide them a fleeting gratification even though its underlying structure lays
transparent to them. The order that arises from the culture industry is never
confronted with what it claims or whether it is in any real interest of human
beings, and conformity gets replaced for consciousness behind which lie the
most powerful interests. Adorno gives an example of how American producers are
heard to say their films must appeal to the level of eleven year olds. The entire system of the culture
industry surrounding the masses follows the same formulas and hardly deviates
and the attitudes and stereotypes that the industry calls for are anything but
harmless. Hence it is a “mass deception” that restricts the development of
independent individuals.
Author: Harmanpreet Kaur
No comments:
Post a Comment