A definition of high vs low culture with reference to Dominic Strinati's chapter on mass and pop

A definition of high vs low culture with reference to Dominic Strinati's chapter on mass and popular culture.

Traditionally, high culture is usually centred around activities such as going to the theatre and enjoying art as were low culture was whatever was left over. As time went on low culture became enjoying folk culture or visiting a cinema. In post-modernism, the boundaries between the two are not recognised, however in other theoretical arguments surrounding popular culture it is argued that mass culture, which is often commercialised, is a threat to the elite. In this short essay I am going to briefly explore various theoriests ideas on the topic which were discussed in Dominic Strinatis chapter on mass and popular culture.

MacDonald argues that "mass culture is a threat because it is a homogeneous culture which levels down or debases all culture." He goes onto suggest that in the 1920's the mass culture of Hollywood cinema and the high culture of Broadway theatre have distinctive differences, however "with the arrival of the sound film these distinctions began to break down", which furthers his point and brings an element of post modernism to his discussion. Moving on from him, the chapter also mentions Orwell. He argued that "intellectuals, unlike the 'common people', had by then got used to reading 'serious novels' which no longer dealt in the 'world of absolute good and evil', and which provided a clear division 'between right and wrong'"1 This is another example of the distinction between high and low culture, however this one could be argued as being threatened during the period of Americanisation.

Stritini states "elitism, like mass culture theory, tends to ignore the range and diversity of popular culture". This is due to the fact mass culture is viewed as being homogeneous, as where popular culture is open to interpretation by various social groups. As elitism is previously described as "ignorance", one could presume that biased arguments are raised. This is contradicted by a similarly negative view on mass by suggesting that the culture is harmful by creating passive audiences open to manipulation.

I found the way that this chapter was written excessively pretentious, with the author using terminology without justification. With this said, it did provide a deep insight into supporting arguments to confirm the differences between high and low culture. In summery, high and low culture cannot be directly defined as they alter throughout time. Traditionally high culture is associated with theatre as where low culture included silent film at cinemas and mass produced and commercialised entertainment. All though this is the written explanation of the differences, theoretically, I believe in more of a post-modernist society and therefore the contrast is irrelevant as it is not recognised.

1 ibid 77-78