Week 2 - - Making Something Out Of Nothing
Does this mean it is open to everybody or is it something that can only be learnt by years of training?
Do you agree with Gracia's claim that the success of the television sit-com Seinfeld ('the show about nothing') lies in its attention to the 'insignificant'?
About Gracia’s claim I agree that the insignificant in Seinfeld becomes significant. But to claim that this alone justifies the unusual success of Seinfeld, I cannot confirm. There are many more comedy series out there that take the same approach and are/were very successful: Two and a Half Men, King of Queens or even the classic Bewitched. In all of these series nothing of significance happens, but I think, this is what most people’s lives are like. Rather than looking at their life as an ongoing tragedy, because everything significant seems to happen in high places (Partridge Family, Dallas, Denver), shows like Seinfeld provide some identification for the average person. Characters like Seinfeld are human rather than superhuman, just like you and me.
Do you agree that comedy therefore shares something with Garfinkel's ethnomethodology?
I agree to this about comedy in the vein of Seinfeld. However, there is other comedy out there. When you look at Southpark, Simpsons or the Italian Signor Rossi, those are animated comedies that play with the tragedy of the average person, their little feats and their little David triumphs over Goliath. Those I would not relate to Garfinkels ethnomethodology, as they mix everyday life experience with outright ridiculous events that are not possible in real life. Still, I know humans who relate to these cartoon characters and see parts of themselves featured.
Week 3 - Goffman on Self / Mass Culture Debate
What kind of information does Goffman think individuals 'give off' when they interact with each other?
Two exchanges of information characterize each person: the expression that he gives and the expression that he gives off. Giving off encourages symptomatic readings. They are non-verbal theatrical but unintentional. Individuals appearing before others always give off a form of analysis/definition of the establishment they are in. Ethnomethodology calls this a formulation.
Provide examples of what he means by the 'front' setting in which role-performances take place?
Front and setting are defined individually. The front is like the front of a stage, where the individual appears in the open, displayed to the audience, the observers. The front is the expressive equipment of the performance.
The Setting is defined as an environment that is established and provides the surroundings for the performance to be given by the individual.
Why does Goffman's interest in everyday activities make the playwright Alan Bennet wake up in a 'cold sweat'?
I think it is specifically the meticulous way in which Goffmen explores human behavior from a sociologists perspective. Especially his analysis of double meanings not only in words, but also in conversations seem to frighten him as a playwright. Goffman actually lectures him about human behavior. Comprehensible conversations and management of different stages as performed in the descripton of Goffman’s performer are crucial for a good play.
Week 4 - Using Surveys?
The sociology of taste is based on the notion that our choices in music, food, movies or clothing are not simply 'individual choices' but rather 'symbolic expressions' of who we are and what kinds of persons we imagine ourselves to be. Taste is not random. We find patterns that suggest that factors such as class, age, gender, race and ethnicity, shape what we like and dislike. The reason for this is that taste is taught in the family, and we continue to be socialised into liking certain things as we go to school, participate in peer groups, and become employed in certain kinds of work places.
But what kind of patterns of cultural consumption have researchers detected? In this tutorial we look at data produced by the Australian Everyday Culture Project, a research project that attempted to map the kinds of cultural consumption Australians engage in. Focusing on consumption of radio and television we find that income and education are factors in both the types of stations/channels we regularly consume, as well as our preference for particular kinds of programs.
In table B3 which is the 'independent' and 'dependent' variable (NB: The independent variable is the one that is causing or explaining variations in the other variable)?
The independent variable in the first table is whether participants attended a tertiary educational institution.
The independent variable in the second table is the household income.
The dependent variable is a number of radio stations.
Identify what could be regarded as 'high-brow' or 'low-brow' forms of consumption in tables B3 and B8. Are there any stations or programs where it is unclear as to whether it is a 'high-brow' or 'low-brow' form of culture?
I understand low-brow to be popular culture versus high-brow being high culture. As the word popular expresses, this is about mass appeal. Applying this mindset to the first table of B3, I would simply express that high brow is the highest ranking radio station amongst respondents with a tertiary education, while low-brow is the highest ranking radio station amongst respondents without a tertiary education. Interestingly both respondent categories seem to have the same preferences with commercial FM. At the same time ethnic and community radio are both far more popular with low-brow respondents, while classical music and the Triple J program are heard much more frequently by a high-brow audience.
The second table makes no sense at all to me. I don’t understand what the income of a household tells me about the status of the audience of any particular radio station. If I have three kids and my wife has to care for them, I am the only person to have an income. I might earn well under 60K in a job that requires me to have a tertiary education. But what if my wife answers the questionnaire, not having any income at all? Is she low-brow? Or is she high-brow? Another example would be a well paid crane driver in an Australian harbour. These workers do not need any tertiary qualification, but are top earners at the same time due to the demand the job puts on them (stress, precision working etc.).
The exact same analysis applies to tables B8.
In table B3 what seems to be the stronger determinant of a stated preference in particular for 'high-brow' radio stations - income or education? What about 'low-brow' preferences? Are there any other variables that you think could be influencing the percentages (eg living location, age)? How would this effect interpretation of the data?
I cannot determine any high-brow radio stations. Although preferences are clearly visible, they don’t indicate anything that would justify for the allocation of any particular radio station to one of both groups. In my personal opinion, household income or education are not necessarily the major factors to tell high-brow from low-brow.
First of all I would have analysed the programs of each single radio stations. Then I would have tried to find similarities between radio stations as well as factors that help distinguish them from each other. After that, rather than asking survey participants about their favourite radio station, I would have asked them, why they prefer any radio station. What is it that attracts the respondent about this particular station? Further, it is not the household or the income that listens to radio, these are individuals. Each individual has a different taste. It might have been more meaningful to survey individual consumers of radio and TV and then to find similarities between these individuals to research listening/watching patterns.
On the basis of these tables and your knowledge of Australian culture do you think we have a clear demarcation between 'high-brow' and 'low-brow- tastes in Australia? What might you use as evidence in mounting your case?
Whether you call it high-brow or low-brow, popular culture or high culture, in my view the borders are blurred. So far I have not found any defining data that clearly distinguishes between both. Australia is a unique amalgamation of different cultures, the major influences coming from Western and Asian culture. To retrieve meaningful data it might be necessary to find out about the cultural heritage of survey participants in the aim to better understand listening and watching patterns. Although popular radio and TV stations clearly cater for the Anglo Saxon taste (lots of British and US-American TV programs, lots of British and US-American pop music), they do not necessarily reflect the taste of the Asian population that definitely not belongs to western world culture.
Week 5 - Ethnography and Narrative Analysis
Herbert Adams Pot Pie: The Australian Women's Weekly, August 2003
1.List the various signifiers you found in the advertisement.
Arranged cutlery, arranged glasses, earth wear dish with food, text ‘The complete meal.’, packaging image.
2. What signifieds do you think are attached to the signifiers you have identified?
Five course meal:
· Arranged cutlery - four sets of forks and knifes and a spoon and fork for desert
· Arranged glasses – three glasses to provide the appropriate drink with each course
A main course providing the experience of a multiple course meal:
· Text ‘The complete meal’
3. Do you think the predominant signs in this image work iconically, indexically or as pure symbols?
Partly indexical, partly symbols:
Indexical:
· The setup of the cutlery and the three glasses are indexical signs for a multiple course meal.
Symbols:
· The quality of the cutlery (sparkling, polished) is a symbolic sign for wealth/status.
· The wooden table sans table cloth and the pot containing the pie are symbols for down to the ground, no-fuss food serving.
4. What mood, feelings or associations does the picture connote? Can you deduce from the image who the intended audience for this advertisement is?
In my opinion this advertisement is designed to transport the message that Herbert Adams’ Pot Pie is a top quality product. It can fill in for an entire course meal, from entrée to desert. I have to admit that my perception would have expected a beer glass with a pie, but all three glasses suggest wine with it. Regardless, the target group in this particular case is certainly women (advertisement taken from Women’s Weekly), maybe that is why a beer glass is missing. It would be interesting to find out if there are other examples from different magazines that are read by men more frequently than Women’s Weekly.
Using warm brown colours the mood is inviting to take a seat and give Herbert Adams’ pie a chance instead
of a posh meal. You may use some high quality cutlery to give it a try.
I assume that Herbert Adams is targeting a high culture audience, people who do not just eat to satisfy their basic needs, but who like to enjoy a good meal. Food has always been popular with Australians, but the overwhelming success of TV shows around food (Hell’s Kitchen, The Cook and The Chef, Poo’s Kitchen, etc. pp.) as well as successful publications like The Good Food Guide annual, issued by The Age newspaper in Melbourne, indicate that quality has become a major issue with Australian Foodies. Good food is not cheap and it takes some effort to prepare it. I believe that Herbert Adams make the suggestion that their pot pie belongs into this food category.
5. Do you think the image is intended to be polysemic? If so, how and why?
As long as the person reading the advertisement is familiar with upper class dinner settings, there is no space for polysemic interpretations. For this group of people the message is pretty straight forward. However, it might be confusing to those in Australian society who don’t know what a course meal is, people who only cook at home for the purpose of feeding the family and those who do not go further than McDonalds, the local fish’n’chips shop, the pizza take away or a food court for dining out.
Week 6 - Ethnography
Ethnography or participant observation is a research method where the observer engages with a given social scene, and tries to understand and explain it through direct experience of it. The underlying premise of ethnography is that culture and social life aren't static and that in order to capture the 'lived experience' of subjects we need an 'empathetic' or deep understanding of the social group, including their way of doing things and the meanings they attribute to social actions. It is especially well suited to small-scale observation where the group interacts within the 'frame' of a particular setting (for eg, a pub, street corner or mall, neighbourhood, etc).
Try to formulate an ethnographic research project. Imagine that you are a researcher who has been provided with funding to study any aspect of popular culture and you have to justify why you are carrying out the project you have in mind. The questions refer to issues such as: the selection of topic; the social setting; the gathering of data; the validity of conclusions; and the need to be 'reflexive' (for eg, sensitivity to questions of ethics).
Formulating a Research Project
Consider the following questions:
What kind of popular culture did you select for your study? Why do you think ethnography or observation is particularly suitable for studying this aspect of social life?
Although I don’t know if play as in children playing can be seen as popular culture, it is an important aspect of social life, as play is an essential part of learning to interact socially.
I would like to investigate the difference between children playing in the 1970s to children playing in the 2000s. My target group would be adults who were between 5 and 10 years of age in 1971 and children who are between 5 and 10 years old at the time of the research.
What setting will allow you to research this topic (for eg, a pub, park, sports arena, restaurant, etc)? How does the setting 'frame' the cultural activity in question?
I would research the place where I grew up myself – a suburban locality: A street in the country town of Morwell, in the Gippsland district of Victoria. Playing in 1971 happened either on the street, in the neighbour’s backyards or in the cow paddock behind the backyard fences. The housing situation has hardly changed since then and I expect to find families in the area that were already local in 1971. This neighbourhood will have their own children and newly arrived people will have settled in as well. There will be children around at the age of 5 to 10 years, but will they experience play the way the kids did in 1971? What are the defining aspects that changed the way kids play?
How long do you think you would have to spend in this setting to obtain the data you require?
It would take approximately six weeks from the beginning of the year (summer holidays) to the first two weeks into the new primary school term. School is a place where kids are outside the control of their parents. I would like to investigate if kids interact (play) differently at school.
What do you think you can claim or not claim on the basis of the research time and effort you have proposed in Question 3?
I think I can claim that play has significantly changed over the last 40 years. While play in the 1970s was all about kids doing things together, I believe that today’s kids spend more time in isolation with technological devices. I further believe that parents prefer their children to stay at home as they are worried that something could happen as soon as they lose direct contact (see, hear, talk), giving away control to third parties.
In my view two factors have changed the way children play and are allowed to play: Technology and Media
Technology: Modern technology can help parents to keep total control of the kids. Modern communication devices like mobile phones and computers, providing modern communication devices.
There are two qualities of control:
• The active control taken by parents, I regard as a dominant control. This sort of control is aimed at the kids of anxious parents, who try to stay ahead of every move their kids make. Examples are that parents text message with friend’s parents when the kid is over there and make sure that at least one adult always has control over where the kid is. This severely reduces the opportunities for play and social experiences being made outside parental control.
• Then there is what I call the immobilizing control of modern technology. Computers, TV, game devices. Kids no longer have to leave the house to catch up with their friends. Artificial interaction is provided by computer games, mobile phone applications (apps) and in front of the TV.
• It would be interesting to further investigate at a later time in the future if these kids develop social deficits.
Media: As I already made clear, I believe that media is responsible for modern parents constantly panicking about the security of their kids. This makes it hard for them to leave their kids unobserved. I believe the reason for this irrational behavior is irrational news coverage as we know it and artificially produced fear and worry through so called reality soaps. The biggest questions constantly asked in the media are focused on fear: ‘Do we have to be scared?’ ‘Can this situation repeat itself in my family?’ Although times are safer than ever, parents are worried more than ever about everything including the safety of their kids.
I would like to proof that both technology and modern media have a severe impact on the way that kids are brought up. Children’s understanding of play has changed dramatically.
To prove my thesis I will design a questionnaire and…
…interview local members of the neighbourhood who were in the age group of 5 – 10 in 1971 upon their playing habits. Interview teachers and parents who brought up kids between the age of 5 – 10 in 1971 and ask them how kids behaved in their surroundings and what hey did during breaks at school. Ask parents which measures they took to keep control over their kids when they were playing.
…interview local kids from the neighbourhood who are 5 – 10 during observation time upon their playing habits. Interview teachers and parents who are bringing up kids between the age of 5 – 10 today and ask them how kids behave in their surroundings and what they do during breaks at school. Ask parents which measures they take to keep control over their kids when they are playing.
The results will then be analysed, allowing to confirm or to rebut my thesis.
Week 7 - Food/Shopping
To what extent is eating food a ritualistic activity?
In my view eating food is a ritual as long as it is not only a means to satisfy a basic need. Through history there have been many ways of ritualizing eating food. The ritual of sacrifice, religious ceremonies around food, the funeral feast, a picnic, BBQs, the Japanese tea ceremony and many others are evidence for the vast diversity of ways to celebrate the act of eating. In her article 'The Meanings of Food in the Public Domain' (1989) Joanne Finkelstein goes to quite some extent explaining the beginning of ritualizing food after the French Revolution, when the bourgeoise were looking for places to celebrate their new status and fortunes. ‘Ci la rinse’, ‘ci la russe’ and ‘ci la francaise’ are just a few of the many ways food could be served and eaten.
Elias is talking about ‘The Art of Consumption’ (1983) in his study of the French court society.
Finkelstein proposes that 'To enjoy the practice of dining out the individual has learned by observation, imitation and practice how to behave appropriately in the restaurant' (p. 52). List at least five 'rules of conduct' that you think are present in the dining experience.
To make a list of rules it s important to decide for the setting. There is a difference between the rules in a fast food restaurant and those in more sophisticated places. For my list I will choose a more sophisticated place:
· Formel dress code
· Using cutlery from outside to the inside (especially with a course meal.
· Using appropriate glasses for different wines, aperitives, digestives and water
· Waiting for all meals to arrive before starting to eat.
· Taking time to eat.
· Switching off mobile phones
Is McDonaldization exactly the same as rationalization for Ritzer?
On his Web site, Ritzer is cited saying, “I'd like to see a society in which people are free to be creative, rather than having their creativity constrained or eliminated." This is a further aspect of his work around the phenomenon of McDonaldisation. In the chapter about McDonaldisation of society, Ritzer says, “Employees are expected to finish a task with little attention paid to how well it is handled. For instance, IRS agents who receive positive evaluations from their superiors for managing large numbers of cases may actually handle the cases poorly, costing the government thousands or even millions of dollars in uncollected revenue. Or the agents may handle cases so aggressively that taxpayers become angered.”
Further he talks about dehumanization. The experience of eating food in a restaurant equivalent to the McDonalds chain has been robbed of any sensitivity, emotion and experience. As Ritzer puts it, it is only about efficiently satisfying a need before moving on to another activity.
Ritzer also makes remarks about Max Weber’s work on bureaucracy, in which every single task is broken down into a formal structure, each task in the process being standardized. This is also part of the way McDonalds restaurants are run. I think he tries to say that bureaucracy helps to increase rationalization.
What kinds of 'calculations' does the making of a 'Big Mac' entail (see pp. 64-6)?
Make it really big.
In the Weber piece we find a distinction between 'formal' and 'substantive' rationality. Write a sentence about each.
The formal rationality refers to the bureaucratic measure of the calculability. As it seems this measure is not at all related to reality, it is a mathematical measure that provides the highest possible output.
Substantive rationality refers to the effectively achievable outcome, taking all sorts of factors into account that might not be considered in the formal rationality.
Week 8 - Fashion and Gender/ The Significance of Brands
According to Finkelstein (pp.48-50), gender-specific dress is one of the ways in which gender is on 'public display'. How does clothing do this?
According to Silverman, this is done through subtle differentiation between clothing designs. Although there is a certain level of amalgamation between male and female style clothing, both styles can still be distinguished. There are suits for women which may have feminine buttons or a feminine cut, while e.g. blouses for men (pirate style) are tailored with broader shoulders. As a result, the bigger picture tells that this woman is wearing a suit and this man is wearing a blouse, but by supporting the female attributes in traditional male clothing and vice versa, traditional roles are still in place.
What kind of characteristics are attributed to the 'new man'?
According to a survey recently published by the Sinus Institut, Heidelberg, Germany (2009), classic attributes like toughness and superiority are only admired by a minority of modern men. At the same time, classic feminine attributes like understanding the feelings of others, showing sensitivity and fondness are on the rise.
However, the new man as such doesn’t seem to exist. There seems to be a large variety of men with an expressive demand for orientation, security and stability. These men seem to be on the outlook for a role model, but a practical and easy to use pattern for daily life seems to be missing.
One part of so called new men are first of all impacted by topics around equality between man and woman. Although these men share the emancipated norm perspective of their partner, society only leaves very small leeway for couples like these to practice their convictions. A significant number of these couples possess a higher education and therefore hold higher positions in economy, where tolerance for alternative models to conventional partnership structures is even narrower.
The other part cultivate a more hedonistic approach. These men regard themselves as postmodern and flexible. They look at themselves in a playful and relaxed way, and only grant limited validity to both traditional and modern patterns. Equality between men and women is of no specific interest to these men. Interestingly a significant number of these men like the idea behind Girl’s Day (annual day for employers to attract women into professional men’s domains – mostly technical jobs). However, neither the focus on this nor on the principal of secondary wage earning and equal partner model are in high gear. Living a life as a single would also be an option for this part of the new men’s society.
Reference:
Wippermann, Dr. C, Calmbach, Dr. M, Wippermann, K (2009),‘Männer: Rolle vorwärts, Rolle rückwärts?‘, Sinus Institut, Heidelberg, Germany, viewed 28 January 2011, http://www.sinus-institut.de/fileadmin/dokumente/downloadcenter/Soziales_und_Umwelt/Handout_Maenner_Rolle_vorwaerts_-_Rolle_rueckwaerts.pdf
According to Mort, what role did magazines (such as The Face) play in fashioning this new gender type?
The Face emerged at the right time in the right place. The break of New Wave and New Romantics did not appear, because Face and magazines the like were emerging. These magazines were successful because of fashion sensitive youth. As always, adolescents find a major way to express themselves through music and to express the kind of music you like you dress the way your idols do. The Face made use of this relation and mirrored what current youth culture would be all about. Rather than opting for one category they tried to expresses the emerging postmodern sensibility within popular culture, the enactment of a structure of feeling which made sense to an influential minority. Bands like Bauhaus (Goth), The Cult (New Wave), The Misfits (Psychobilly), Duran Duran and Spandau Ballet (New Romantics) and many others who were popular at the beginning of the eighties gave indication and The Face reflected on this, making claims that they had authority on matters of consumption, together with the forms of knowledge which made such claims possible. Men got interested in fashion, as something completely different from old fashioned male dominated Rock’n’Roll had emerged.
Week 9 - Deviance and Youth
In your own words, explain what 'deviance' is?
Deviance occurs where there is an occurrence or a behavior that is outside the norm. The norm on the other hand is what regarded as normal by the society in which the deviance occurred.
The funny thing about deviance is that what one person regards as a deviance may be experienced as the norm by another. There are many examples: The Moral Majority eg. was an US American organization that claimed leadership in Christian moral issues and representing those who were morally stable in the US. Another example is the extent to which people’s sexual orientation is regarded as outside the norm. While heterosexuality is regarded as the norm in western culture, homosexuality and bisexuality are still regarded as deviant though, the acceptance of devian sexual orientation has increased. An article in the Washington Post (Harris, 1965) showed that in the US over 70% of US Americans thought that homosexuals were more harmful than helpful to American life. Another survey taken in 1998-1999 (Herek, 2002, p. 52) showed that this number has dropped significantly and indicating that men as well as women feel more uncomfortable with homosexual people of the same gender. In my opinion this is an indicator for a more liberalized society. There are many other examples of constantly changing deviant perceptions worth exploring.
Reference
Harris, L (1965), “Public Registers Strong Disapproval of Nonconformity” September 27, p. A2, Washington Post, Washington, PH.
Herek, G. M. (2002), GENDER GAPS IN PUBLIC OPINION ABOUT LESBIANS AND GAY MEN, Public Opinion Quarterly Volume 66:40–66, American Association for Public Opinion Research, Deerfield, Il.
What is the crucial insight of Becker's 'labelling theory' of deviance?
Although these people may neither have committed a crime nor done harm in any way, they all have one thing in common – they are labeled as outsiders. Becker defines the outsider as an individual that is seen as a rule-breaker by a social group that the individual had a transaction with.
What is a moral panic?
Moral panic was coined by sociologist Stanley Cohen’s book, Devils and Moral Panics. The Creation of Mods and Rockers (1972/1987). He defines the condition of moral panic as ‘a condition, episode, person or group of persons emerging to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests; its nature presented in a stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media, the moral barricades are manned by editors, bishops, politicians and other right-thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnoses and solutions; ways of coping are evolved or (more often) resorted to; the condition then disappears, submerges or deteriorates and becomes more visible.’
Mass media have plaid a major role in constructing outbreaks of moral panic. The latest I can remember is the release of child molester Dennis Ferguson. Besides the understandable rejection from communities to have an individual around their children, media caused significant panic on his case after he was released from jail. (Gearing, 2009)
Reference
Gearing, A (2009), “A House for Dennis”, The Drum Unleashed, ABC, viewed 29 January 2011, < http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/27244.html>
Do they simply represent 'irrational fears'?
I guess that by mentioning “they” you are talking about the media. My answer is that they do not simply represent irrational fears. I think that they pick-up on the general opinion of society on subject matter about individuals or groups that deviate from the mainstream and try to generalize the case and amplify it in forms of news and reports to their audience - the broader community. Further my experience specifically with TV-news and reports is that the more provocative the story, the higher the coverage. This seems to be distinctively the case with private TV-channels as they rely on as many viewers as possible in the aim to sell advertising slots, the reaction is more important than the story.
Week 10 - Bohemianism & Cool
Who or what is a Bohemian?
In Cowleys (1994) definition, Bohemians are individuals idealising self-expression and paganism. Rather than planning for the future, the Bohemian lives for the moment. Bohemians despise middle class style (Puritanism) of living although happily engaging in consumerism.
According to Wilson we are living in the age of 'bohemia for the masses'. Does this mean that today anybody can be a bohemian? Or does it imply that this kind of lifestyle is dead?
I personally think that the life style was never dead, but it lost its meaning as an alternative to the puritan or bourgeoise life style. Today these old categories make no sense anymore.
In the 2000s Bourgeoise were the square practical once, standing for tradition and middle class morality, working for corporations and living in suburbs.
Meanwhile there were the Bohemians, free spirits, artists intellectuals hippies and beats. They kept clinging to the values of the radical 1960s while the Bourgeoise had the yuppie spirit of the 1980s.
In the late 1990s, the American Bohemians and Bourgeoise were all of a sudden all mixed up. It was getting harder and harder to distinguish anti-establishment from pro-establishment.
It seemed like this was the consequence of the information age. The world of information merges with the world of money and also intellectual capital and cultural industries. People who engage in this world have one foot in the creative world of the bohemia and one foot in the ambitious world of capitalism. They are members of a new intellectual elite.
As a result bohemianism seems to have become more of a mainstream attitude.
Reference
Cowley, M. 1994, ‘Exile's Return: A Literary Odyssey of the 1920s’. Penguin Classics, New York, NJ
Week 11 - Charisma & Celebrities
Do you think it can be extended to sporting and popular culture figures who command respect by virtue of special gifts?
According to Max Weber, ‘charisma is endowed with powers and properties regarded as extra ordinarily and attributed to a person. In this respect we can relate to virtue and special gifts as extra ordinarily and attributed (Alberoni, 1962). The above group was referred to by Alberoni as the powerless elite, as their power is not institutionalized like that of representatives of power like leaders in church, politics or industry. However, using modern media, the celebrity status of specially gifted celebrities has been discovered as a powerful boost to sell products to the public. In this respect, sporting and popular culture figures contribute their being special as a form of power to help industry sell their product. Obviously, a refinement process takes place, elevating products to a higher level of perceived quality due to the fact that celebrities recommend these products to the consumer.
How significant do you think celebrities are in contemporary culture?
Without celebrities, who would give testimonial about the brilliance of products in TV advertisements or on bill boards? Celebrities are significant marketing tools as they represent certain charismatic aspects in contemporary culture: coolness, hipness, sex, fitness, beauty and many others. It is the fact that celebreties attract universal attention that makes them so important for industry. People idolize celebrities fort their way of life.
Reference
Alberoni, F 1962, ‘L’Elite irresponsable; tbéorie et recherche sociologique sur le divismo’, Ikon vol. 12 -40/1, pp. 45-62.
Does this mean it is open to everybody or is it something that can only be learnt by years of training?
Do you agree with Gracia's claim that the success of the television sit-com Seinfeld ('the show about nothing') lies in its attention to the 'insignificant'?
About Gracia’s claim I agree that the insignificant in Seinfeld becomes significant. But to claim that this alone justifies the unusual success of Seinfeld, I cannot confirm. There are many more comedy series out there that take the same approach and are/were very successful: Two and a Half Men, King of Queens or even the classic Bewitched. In all of these series nothing of significance happens, but I think, this is what most people’s lives are like. Rather than looking at their life as an ongoing tragedy, because everything significant seems to happen in high places (Partridge Family, Dallas, Denver), shows like Seinfeld provide some identification for the average person. Characters like Seinfeld are human rather than superhuman, just like you and me.
Do you agree that comedy therefore shares something with Garfinkel's ethnomethodology?
I agree to this about comedy in the vein of Seinfeld. However, there is other comedy out there. When you look at Southpark, Simpsons or the Italian Signor Rossi, those are animated comedies that play with the tragedy of the average person, their little feats and their little David triumphs over Goliath. Those I would not relate to Garfinkels ethnomethodology, as they mix everyday life experience with outright ridiculous events that are not possible in real life. Still, I know humans who relate to these cartoon characters and see parts of themselves featured.
Week 3 - Goffman on Self / Mass Culture Debate
What kind of information does Goffman think individuals 'give off' when they interact with each other?
Two exchanges of information characterize each person: the expression that he gives and the expression that he gives off. Giving off encourages symptomatic readings. They are non-verbal theatrical but unintentional. Individuals appearing before others always give off a form of analysis/definition of the establishment they are in. Ethnomethodology calls this a formulation.
Provide examples of what he means by the 'front' setting in which role-performances take place?
Front and setting are defined individually. The front is like the front of a stage, where the individual appears in the open, displayed to the audience, the observers. The front is the expressive equipment of the performance.
The Setting is defined as an environment that is established and provides the surroundings for the performance to be given by the individual.
Why does Goffman's interest in everyday activities make the playwright Alan Bennet wake up in a 'cold sweat'?
I think it is specifically the meticulous way in which Goffmen explores human behavior from a sociologists perspective. Especially his analysis of double meanings not only in words, but also in conversations seem to frighten him as a playwright. Goffman actually lectures him about human behavior. Comprehensible conversations and management of different stages as performed in the descripton of Goffman’s performer are crucial for a good play.
Week 4 - Using Surveys?
The sociology of taste is based on the notion that our choices in music, food, movies or clothing are not simply 'individual choices' but rather 'symbolic expressions' of who we are and what kinds of persons we imagine ourselves to be. Taste is not random. We find patterns that suggest that factors such as class, age, gender, race and ethnicity, shape what we like and dislike. The reason for this is that taste is taught in the family, and we continue to be socialised into liking certain things as we go to school, participate in peer groups, and become employed in certain kinds of work places.
But what kind of patterns of cultural consumption have researchers detected? In this tutorial we look at data produced by the Australian Everyday Culture Project, a research project that attempted to map the kinds of cultural consumption Australians engage in. Focusing on consumption of radio and television we find that income and education are factors in both the types of stations/channels we regularly consume, as well as our preference for particular kinds of programs.
In table B3 which is the 'independent' and 'dependent' variable (NB: The independent variable is the one that is causing or explaining variations in the other variable)?
The independent variable in the first table is whether participants attended a tertiary educational institution.
The independent variable in the second table is the household income.
The dependent variable is a number of radio stations.
Identify what could be regarded as 'high-brow' or 'low-brow' forms of consumption in tables B3 and B8. Are there any stations or programs where it is unclear as to whether it is a 'high-brow' or 'low-brow' form of culture?
I understand low-brow to be popular culture versus high-brow being high culture. As the word popular expresses, this is about mass appeal. Applying this mindset to the first table of B3, I would simply express that high brow is the highest ranking radio station amongst respondents with a tertiary education, while low-brow is the highest ranking radio station amongst respondents without a tertiary education. Interestingly both respondent categories seem to have the same preferences with commercial FM. At the same time ethnic and community radio are both far more popular with low-brow respondents, while classical music and the Triple J program are heard much more frequently by a high-brow audience.
The second table makes no sense at all to me. I don’t understand what the income of a household tells me about the status of the audience of any particular radio station. If I have three kids and my wife has to care for them, I am the only person to have an income. I might earn well under 60K in a job that requires me to have a tertiary education. But what if my wife answers the questionnaire, not having any income at all? Is she low-brow? Or is she high-brow? Another example would be a well paid crane driver in an Australian harbour. These workers do not need any tertiary qualification, but are top earners at the same time due to the demand the job puts on them (stress, precision working etc.).
The exact same analysis applies to tables B8.
In table B3 what seems to be the stronger determinant of a stated preference in particular for 'high-brow' radio stations - income or education? What about 'low-brow' preferences? Are there any other variables that you think could be influencing the percentages (eg living location, age)? How would this effect interpretation of the data?
I cannot determine any high-brow radio stations. Although preferences are clearly visible, they don’t indicate anything that would justify for the allocation of any particular radio station to one of both groups. In my personal opinion, household income or education are not necessarily the major factors to tell high-brow from low-brow.
First of all I would have analysed the programs of each single radio stations. Then I would have tried to find similarities between radio stations as well as factors that help distinguish them from each other. After that, rather than asking survey participants about their favourite radio station, I would have asked them, why they prefer any radio station. What is it that attracts the respondent about this particular station? Further, it is not the household or the income that listens to radio, these are individuals. Each individual has a different taste. It might have been more meaningful to survey individual consumers of radio and TV and then to find similarities between these individuals to research listening/watching patterns.
On the basis of these tables and your knowledge of Australian culture do you think we have a clear demarcation between 'high-brow' and 'low-brow- tastes in Australia? What might you use as evidence in mounting your case?
Whether you call it high-brow or low-brow, popular culture or high culture, in my view the borders are blurred. So far I have not found any defining data that clearly distinguishes between both. Australia is a unique amalgamation of different cultures, the major influences coming from Western and Asian culture. To retrieve meaningful data it might be necessary to find out about the cultural heritage of survey participants in the aim to better understand listening and watching patterns. Although popular radio and TV stations clearly cater for the Anglo Saxon taste (lots of British and US-American TV programs, lots of British and US-American pop music), they do not necessarily reflect the taste of the Asian population that definitely not belongs to western world culture.
Week 5 - Ethnography and Narrative Analysis
Herbert Adams Pot Pie: The Australian Women's Weekly, August 2003
1.List the various signifiers you found in the advertisement.
Arranged cutlery, arranged glasses, earth wear dish with food, text ‘The complete meal.’, packaging image.
2. What signifieds do you think are attached to the signifiers you have identified?
Five course meal:
· Arranged cutlery - four sets of forks and knifes and a spoon and fork for desert
· Arranged glasses – three glasses to provide the appropriate drink with each course
A main course providing the experience of a multiple course meal:
· Text ‘The complete meal’
3. Do you think the predominant signs in this image work iconically, indexically or as pure symbols?
Partly indexical, partly symbols:
Indexical:
· The setup of the cutlery and the three glasses are indexical signs for a multiple course meal.
Symbols:
· The quality of the cutlery (sparkling, polished) is a symbolic sign for wealth/status.
· The wooden table sans table cloth and the pot containing the pie are symbols for down to the ground, no-fuss food serving.
4. What mood, feelings or associations does the picture connote? Can you deduce from the image who the intended audience for this advertisement is?
In my opinion this advertisement is designed to transport the message that Herbert Adams’ Pot Pie is a top quality product. It can fill in for an entire course meal, from entrée to desert. I have to admit that my perception would have expected a beer glass with a pie, but all three glasses suggest wine with it. Regardless, the target group in this particular case is certainly women (advertisement taken from Women’s Weekly), maybe that is why a beer glass is missing. It would be interesting to find out if there are other examples from different magazines that are read by men more frequently than Women’s Weekly.
Using warm brown colours the mood is inviting to take a seat and give Herbert Adams’ pie a chance instead
of a posh meal. You may use some high quality cutlery to give it a try.
I assume that Herbert Adams is targeting a high culture audience, people who do not just eat to satisfy their basic needs, but who like to enjoy a good meal. Food has always been popular with Australians, but the overwhelming success of TV shows around food (Hell’s Kitchen, The Cook and The Chef, Poo’s Kitchen, etc. pp.) as well as successful publications like The Good Food Guide annual, issued by The Age newspaper in Melbourne, indicate that quality has become a major issue with Australian Foodies. Good food is not cheap and it takes some effort to prepare it. I believe that Herbert Adams make the suggestion that their pot pie belongs into this food category.
5. Do you think the image is intended to be polysemic? If so, how and why?
As long as the person reading the advertisement is familiar with upper class dinner settings, there is no space for polysemic interpretations. For this group of people the message is pretty straight forward. However, it might be confusing to those in Australian society who don’t know what a course meal is, people who only cook at home for the purpose of feeding the family and those who do not go further than McDonalds, the local fish’n’chips shop, the pizza take away or a food court for dining out.
Week 6 - Ethnography
Ethnography or participant observation is a research method where the observer engages with a given social scene, and tries to understand and explain it through direct experience of it. The underlying premise of ethnography is that culture and social life aren't static and that in order to capture the 'lived experience' of subjects we need an 'empathetic' or deep understanding of the social group, including their way of doing things and the meanings they attribute to social actions. It is especially well suited to small-scale observation where the group interacts within the 'frame' of a particular setting (for eg, a pub, street corner or mall, neighbourhood, etc).
Try to formulate an ethnographic research project. Imagine that you are a researcher who has been provided with funding to study any aspect of popular culture and you have to justify why you are carrying out the project you have in mind. The questions refer to issues such as: the selection of topic; the social setting; the gathering of data; the validity of conclusions; and the need to be 'reflexive' (for eg, sensitivity to questions of ethics).
Formulating a Research Project
Consider the following questions:
What kind of popular culture did you select for your study? Why do you think ethnography or observation is particularly suitable for studying this aspect of social life?
Although I don’t know if play as in children playing can be seen as popular culture, it is an important aspect of social life, as play is an essential part of learning to interact socially.
I would like to investigate the difference between children playing in the 1970s to children playing in the 2000s. My target group would be adults who were between 5 and 10 years of age in 1971 and children who are between 5 and 10 years old at the time of the research.
What setting will allow you to research this topic (for eg, a pub, park, sports arena, restaurant, etc)? How does the setting 'frame' the cultural activity in question?
I would research the place where I grew up myself – a suburban locality: A street in the country town of Morwell, in the Gippsland district of Victoria. Playing in 1971 happened either on the street, in the neighbour’s backyards or in the cow paddock behind the backyard fences. The housing situation has hardly changed since then and I expect to find families in the area that were already local in 1971. This neighbourhood will have their own children and newly arrived people will have settled in as well. There will be children around at the age of 5 to 10 years, but will they experience play the way the kids did in 1971? What are the defining aspects that changed the way kids play?
How long do you think you would have to spend in this setting to obtain the data you require?
It would take approximately six weeks from the beginning of the year (summer holidays) to the first two weeks into the new primary school term. School is a place where kids are outside the control of their parents. I would like to investigate if kids interact (play) differently at school.
What do you think you can claim or not claim on the basis of the research time and effort you have proposed in Question 3?
I think I can claim that play has significantly changed over the last 40 years. While play in the 1970s was all about kids doing things together, I believe that today’s kids spend more time in isolation with technological devices. I further believe that parents prefer their children to stay at home as they are worried that something could happen as soon as they lose direct contact (see, hear, talk), giving away control to third parties.
In my view two factors have changed the way children play and are allowed to play: Technology and Media
Technology: Modern technology can help parents to keep total control of the kids. Modern communication devices like mobile phones and computers, providing modern communication devices.
There are two qualities of control:
• The active control taken by parents, I regard as a dominant control. This sort of control is aimed at the kids of anxious parents, who try to stay ahead of every move their kids make. Examples are that parents text message with friend’s parents when the kid is over there and make sure that at least one adult always has control over where the kid is. This severely reduces the opportunities for play and social experiences being made outside parental control.
• Then there is what I call the immobilizing control of modern technology. Computers, TV, game devices. Kids no longer have to leave the house to catch up with their friends. Artificial interaction is provided by computer games, mobile phone applications (apps) and in front of the TV.
• It would be interesting to further investigate at a later time in the future if these kids develop social deficits.
Media: As I already made clear, I believe that media is responsible for modern parents constantly panicking about the security of their kids. This makes it hard for them to leave their kids unobserved. I believe the reason for this irrational behavior is irrational news coverage as we know it and artificially produced fear and worry through so called reality soaps. The biggest questions constantly asked in the media are focused on fear: ‘Do we have to be scared?’ ‘Can this situation repeat itself in my family?’ Although times are safer than ever, parents are worried more than ever about everything including the safety of their kids.
I would like to proof that both technology and modern media have a severe impact on the way that kids are brought up. Children’s understanding of play has changed dramatically.
To prove my thesis I will design a questionnaire and…
…interview local members of the neighbourhood who were in the age group of 5 – 10 in 1971 upon their playing habits. Interview teachers and parents who brought up kids between the age of 5 – 10 in 1971 and ask them how kids behaved in their surroundings and what hey did during breaks at school. Ask parents which measures they took to keep control over their kids when they were playing.
…interview local kids from the neighbourhood who are 5 – 10 during observation time upon their playing habits. Interview teachers and parents who are bringing up kids between the age of 5 – 10 today and ask them how kids behave in their surroundings and what they do during breaks at school. Ask parents which measures they take to keep control over their kids when they are playing.
The results will then be analysed, allowing to confirm or to rebut my thesis.
Week 7 - Food/Shopping
To what extent is eating food a ritualistic activity?
In my view eating food is a ritual as long as it is not only a means to satisfy a basic need. Through history there have been many ways of ritualizing eating food. The ritual of sacrifice, religious ceremonies around food, the funeral feast, a picnic, BBQs, the Japanese tea ceremony and many others are evidence for the vast diversity of ways to celebrate the act of eating. In her article 'The Meanings of Food in the Public Domain' (1989) Joanne Finkelstein goes to quite some extent explaining the beginning of ritualizing food after the French Revolution, when the bourgeoise were looking for places to celebrate their new status and fortunes. ‘Ci la rinse’, ‘ci la russe’ and ‘ci la francaise’ are just a few of the many ways food could be served and eaten.
Elias is talking about ‘The Art of Consumption’ (1983) in his study of the French court society.
Finkelstein proposes that 'To enjoy the practice of dining out the individual has learned by observation, imitation and practice how to behave appropriately in the restaurant' (p. 52). List at least five 'rules of conduct' that you think are present in the dining experience.
To make a list of rules it s important to decide for the setting. There is a difference between the rules in a fast food restaurant and those in more sophisticated places. For my list I will choose a more sophisticated place:
· Formel dress code
· Using cutlery from outside to the inside (especially with a course meal.
· Using appropriate glasses for different wines, aperitives, digestives and water
· Waiting for all meals to arrive before starting to eat.
· Taking time to eat.
· Switching off mobile phones
Is McDonaldization exactly the same as rationalization for Ritzer?
On his Web site, Ritzer is cited saying, “I'd like to see a society in which people are free to be creative, rather than having their creativity constrained or eliminated." This is a further aspect of his work around the phenomenon of McDonaldisation. In the chapter about McDonaldisation of society, Ritzer says, “Employees are expected to finish a task with little attention paid to how well it is handled. For instance, IRS agents who receive positive evaluations from their superiors for managing large numbers of cases may actually handle the cases poorly, costing the government thousands or even millions of dollars in uncollected revenue. Or the agents may handle cases so aggressively that taxpayers become angered.”
Further he talks about dehumanization. The experience of eating food in a restaurant equivalent to the McDonalds chain has been robbed of any sensitivity, emotion and experience. As Ritzer puts it, it is only about efficiently satisfying a need before moving on to another activity.
Ritzer also makes remarks about Max Weber’s work on bureaucracy, in which every single task is broken down into a formal structure, each task in the process being standardized. This is also part of the way McDonalds restaurants are run. I think he tries to say that bureaucracy helps to increase rationalization.
What kinds of 'calculations' does the making of a 'Big Mac' entail (see pp. 64-6)?
Make it really big.
In the Weber piece we find a distinction between 'formal' and 'substantive' rationality. Write a sentence about each.
The formal rationality refers to the bureaucratic measure of the calculability. As it seems this measure is not at all related to reality, it is a mathematical measure that provides the highest possible output.
Substantive rationality refers to the effectively achievable outcome, taking all sorts of factors into account that might not be considered in the formal rationality.
Week 8 - Fashion and Gender/ The Significance of Brands
According to Finkelstein (pp.48-50), gender-specific dress is one of the ways in which gender is on 'public display'. How does clothing do this?
According to Silverman, this is done through subtle differentiation between clothing designs. Although there is a certain level of amalgamation between male and female style clothing, both styles can still be distinguished. There are suits for women which may have feminine buttons or a feminine cut, while e.g. blouses for men (pirate style) are tailored with broader shoulders. As a result, the bigger picture tells that this woman is wearing a suit and this man is wearing a blouse, but by supporting the female attributes in traditional male clothing and vice versa, traditional roles are still in place.
What kind of characteristics are attributed to the 'new man'?
According to a survey recently published by the Sinus Institut, Heidelberg, Germany (2009), classic attributes like toughness and superiority are only admired by a minority of modern men. At the same time, classic feminine attributes like understanding the feelings of others, showing sensitivity and fondness are on the rise.
However, the new man as such doesn’t seem to exist. There seems to be a large variety of men with an expressive demand for orientation, security and stability. These men seem to be on the outlook for a role model, but a practical and easy to use pattern for daily life seems to be missing.
One part of so called new men are first of all impacted by topics around equality between man and woman. Although these men share the emancipated norm perspective of their partner, society only leaves very small leeway for couples like these to practice their convictions. A significant number of these couples possess a higher education and therefore hold higher positions in economy, where tolerance for alternative models to conventional partnership structures is even narrower.
The other part cultivate a more hedonistic approach. These men regard themselves as postmodern and flexible. They look at themselves in a playful and relaxed way, and only grant limited validity to both traditional and modern patterns. Equality between men and women is of no specific interest to these men. Interestingly a significant number of these men like the idea behind Girl’s Day (annual day for employers to attract women into professional men’s domains – mostly technical jobs). However, neither the focus on this nor on the principal of secondary wage earning and equal partner model are in high gear. Living a life as a single would also be an option for this part of the new men’s society.
Reference:
Wippermann, Dr. C, Calmbach, Dr. M, Wippermann, K (2009),‘Männer: Rolle vorwärts, Rolle rückwärts?‘, Sinus Institut, Heidelberg, Germany, viewed 28 January 2011, http://www.sinus-institut.de/fileadmin/dokumente/downloadcenter/Soziales_und_Umwelt/Handout_Maenner_Rolle_vorwaerts_-_Rolle_rueckwaerts.pdf
According to Mort, what role did magazines (such as The Face) play in fashioning this new gender type?
The Face emerged at the right time in the right place. The break of New Wave and New Romantics did not appear, because Face and magazines the like were emerging. These magazines were successful because of fashion sensitive youth. As always, adolescents find a major way to express themselves through music and to express the kind of music you like you dress the way your idols do. The Face made use of this relation and mirrored what current youth culture would be all about. Rather than opting for one category they tried to expresses the emerging postmodern sensibility within popular culture, the enactment of a structure of feeling which made sense to an influential minority. Bands like Bauhaus (Goth), The Cult (New Wave), The Misfits (Psychobilly), Duran Duran and Spandau Ballet (New Romantics) and many others who were popular at the beginning of the eighties gave indication and The Face reflected on this, making claims that they had authority on matters of consumption, together with the forms of knowledge which made such claims possible. Men got interested in fashion, as something completely different from old fashioned male dominated Rock’n’Roll had emerged.
Week 9 - Deviance and Youth
In your own words, explain what 'deviance' is?
Deviance occurs where there is an occurrence or a behavior that is outside the norm. The norm on the other hand is what regarded as normal by the society in which the deviance occurred.
The funny thing about deviance is that what one person regards as a deviance may be experienced as the norm by another. There are many examples: The Moral Majority eg. was an US American organization that claimed leadership in Christian moral issues and representing those who were morally stable in the US. Another example is the extent to which people’s sexual orientation is regarded as outside the norm. While heterosexuality is regarded as the norm in western culture, homosexuality and bisexuality are still regarded as deviant though, the acceptance of devian sexual orientation has increased. An article in the Washington Post (Harris, 1965) showed that in the US over 70% of US Americans thought that homosexuals were more harmful than helpful to American life. Another survey taken in 1998-1999 (Herek, 2002, p. 52) showed that this number has dropped significantly and indicating that men as well as women feel more uncomfortable with homosexual people of the same gender. In my opinion this is an indicator for a more liberalized society. There are many other examples of constantly changing deviant perceptions worth exploring.
Reference
Harris, L (1965), “Public Registers Strong Disapproval of Nonconformity” September 27, p. A2, Washington Post, Washington, PH.
Herek, G. M. (2002), GENDER GAPS IN PUBLIC OPINION ABOUT LESBIANS AND GAY MEN, Public Opinion Quarterly Volume 66:40–66, American Association for Public Opinion Research, Deerfield, Il.
What is the crucial insight of Becker's 'labelling theory' of deviance?
Although these people may neither have committed a crime nor done harm in any way, they all have one thing in common – they are labeled as outsiders. Becker defines the outsider as an individual that is seen as a rule-breaker by a social group that the individual had a transaction with.
What is a moral panic?
Moral panic was coined by sociologist Stanley Cohen’s book, Devils and Moral Panics. The Creation of Mods and Rockers (1972/1987). He defines the condition of moral panic as ‘a condition, episode, person or group of persons emerging to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests; its nature presented in a stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media, the moral barricades are manned by editors, bishops, politicians and other right-thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnoses and solutions; ways of coping are evolved or (more often) resorted to; the condition then disappears, submerges or deteriorates and becomes more visible.’
Mass media have plaid a major role in constructing outbreaks of moral panic. The latest I can remember is the release of child molester Dennis Ferguson. Besides the understandable rejection from communities to have an individual around their children, media caused significant panic on his case after he was released from jail. (Gearing, 2009)
Reference
Gearing, A (2009), “A House for Dennis”, The Drum Unleashed, ABC, viewed 29 January 2011, < http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/27244.html>
Do they simply represent 'irrational fears'?
I guess that by mentioning “they” you are talking about the media. My answer is that they do not simply represent irrational fears. I think that they pick-up on the general opinion of society on subject matter about individuals or groups that deviate from the mainstream and try to generalize the case and amplify it in forms of news and reports to their audience - the broader community. Further my experience specifically with TV-news and reports is that the more provocative the story, the higher the coverage. This seems to be distinctively the case with private TV-channels as they rely on as many viewers as possible in the aim to sell advertising slots, the reaction is more important than the story.
Week 10 - Bohemianism & Cool
Who or what is a Bohemian?
In Cowleys (1994) definition, Bohemians are individuals idealising self-expression and paganism. Rather than planning for the future, the Bohemian lives for the moment. Bohemians despise middle class style (Puritanism) of living although happily engaging in consumerism.
According to Wilson we are living in the age of 'bohemia for the masses'. Does this mean that today anybody can be a bohemian? Or does it imply that this kind of lifestyle is dead?
I personally think that the life style was never dead, but it lost its meaning as an alternative to the puritan or bourgeoise life style. Today these old categories make no sense anymore.
In the 2000s Bourgeoise were the square practical once, standing for tradition and middle class morality, working for corporations and living in suburbs.
Meanwhile there were the Bohemians, free spirits, artists intellectuals hippies and beats. They kept clinging to the values of the radical 1960s while the Bourgeoise had the yuppie spirit of the 1980s.
In the late 1990s, the American Bohemians and Bourgeoise were all of a sudden all mixed up. It was getting harder and harder to distinguish anti-establishment from pro-establishment.
It seemed like this was the consequence of the information age. The world of information merges with the world of money and also intellectual capital and cultural industries. People who engage in this world have one foot in the creative world of the bohemia and one foot in the ambitious world of capitalism. They are members of a new intellectual elite.
As a result bohemianism seems to have become more of a mainstream attitude.
Reference
Cowley, M. 1994, ‘Exile's Return: A Literary Odyssey of the 1920s’. Penguin Classics, New York, NJ
Week 11 - Charisma & Celebrities
Do you think it can be extended to sporting and popular culture figures who command respect by virtue of special gifts?
According to Max Weber, ‘charisma is endowed with powers and properties regarded as extra ordinarily and attributed to a person. In this respect we can relate to virtue and special gifts as extra ordinarily and attributed (Alberoni, 1962). The above group was referred to by Alberoni as the powerless elite, as their power is not institutionalized like that of representatives of power like leaders in church, politics or industry. However, using modern media, the celebrity status of specially gifted celebrities has been discovered as a powerful boost to sell products to the public. In this respect, sporting and popular culture figures contribute their being special as a form of power to help industry sell their product. Obviously, a refinement process takes place, elevating products to a higher level of perceived quality due to the fact that celebrities recommend these products to the consumer.
How significant do you think celebrities are in contemporary culture?
Without celebrities, who would give testimonial about the brilliance of products in TV advertisements or on bill boards? Celebrities are significant marketing tools as they represent certain charismatic aspects in contemporary culture: coolness, hipness, sex, fitness, beauty and many others. It is the fact that celebreties attract universal attention that makes them so important for industry. People idolize celebrities fort their way of life.
Reference
Alberoni, F 1962, ‘L’Elite irresponsable; tbéorie et recherche sociologique sur le divismo’, Ikon vol. 12 -40/1, pp. 45-62.
