First I should ask, is there such a thing as American culture?
I have heard it said that the only uniquely American thing is its music, which is primarily a result of slavery.
The argument goes (Blues/Gospel–> Rock and Roll–> Pop/Dance–> Rap–> whatever is next)
Everything else is either wholly European and is an algamation of various other cultures that form the American culture and thus define it.
Second, even if we decide that there exists in America a culture that can be denoted as American, is it on its decline? While all the arts seem to be increasingly stagnant and unoriginal, this could also be said to be true for Politics, Religion, some of the Sciences, the language, and so on.
Or, am I mistaking American culture as dying when it is simply becoming more homogenous. I have also heard it said that we are at the end of an epoch… we are moving from an age of reading as communication and into an age of Visualization as communication. And that, in the new age, the appearence of a thing will determine its importance…
Would this also mean that there will be little to no room for human reason?
Yes I think there is an American culture as well as a particular American thought. I will post some links to some of my previous posts about this very subject (primarily because I’ve been writing various things all day and I’m tired of the english language). I do not think that American Culture is declining or becoming less rational or more homogenized.
I think we are witnessing the demarxification of the nation (for better or for worse) ,the hispanification of the nation (something that will leave us much better off think I, but then I’m not threatened by Spanish speaking Catholics, being as I am one - but not hispanic)
I think america is the only country in the world that actually fights like hell against the formation of a State within itself. There is a section of the american soul that is profoundly terrified of government and state power. I love some aspects of that portion ( the Left Aspects) and hate others (The Christian Identity wack-jobs).
I think America is a vast and complicated nation and that american philosophy/thought is widely widely misunderstood because it is approached from a European perspective that grossly misunderstands it. The ONLY European philosopher that has come close to understanding the American Perspective is Gilles Deleuze. (Meaning in the 20th century. I’m split on Detocqueville he was dead on about somethings and comlpetely wrong about others.)
Also - Clint Eastwood once said that there are three indigenous American artforms - Jazz, baseball, and the Western.
here’s one where you actually participated in. Some aspects of my statements undermine my argument here but consitency is the hobgoblin of feeble minds as my old roomate used to quote
I once heard American culture described as the culture of No Culture. Other cultures pass essential wisdom about how to live to the next generation. While we pass nothing down. This is because the way to live in America changes so rapidly that there is nothing useful worth transmitting.
Take books like, “Who Moved My Cheese?†This book delivers a message that change is inevitable, so you have better just get used to it. Job stability is a thing of the past.
This is unlike Taoist themes where the flux in the universe is part of a grand harmonious cosmic cycle.
There is a homogenization of the country. Part of this is due to the ruthless efficiency of the merchant machine. National companies streamline products into hard target specialty stores. All bookstores across the country become the same bookstore. All places become more and more the same place. Why go anywhere else? Local flavor gets increasingly diluted in favor of the national chain store. Everywhere the same stores selling the same mass-produced products. Advertising is national, so that every product must be available everywhere.
Music, no longer an expression of the soul is firmly entrenched as a product, a commodity to be bought and sold. Radio stations are control by a limited number of influential figures that limit diversity to ensure consistent profits. Economically conservative corporations act to minimize risk. Music becomes homogenized, kept to a narrow spectrum of guaranteed projected sales.
Born from an elitist dream of rational rule America leans more and more towards pathos, thus becoming more and more pathetic.
In America, culture is pop culture. I think mass production is one reason, and another one may be that we are spread out over vast distances and not bordered by a lot of other countries and we are a young country, unlike European ones. I too welcome the Hispanic influx, anything to breath life into this amorphous blob. America needs immigrants to provide definition.
the real question I pose is why the pessimism and general feeling of malaise towards the States. Sure we have a mountain of problems and we have this damn problem of the Wal-Martization of the US, but we also have huge strands, cables even of traditions in the States that run counter to all of this dumb capitalist crap. The interesting capitalist crap is the best fun of all.
Do you all out there recognize an interesting/good form of capitalism? I have no problem with small businesses, with trying to merge environmentalism with capitalism, with globalization in general. I think the whole process really ain’t that bad. What’s bad - “Hey there’s this country north of Kuwait that really Needs a Wal-Mart”. In my opinion, anything that centralizes power and destroys “difference” is bad - Walmart bad, Indian engineers outpricing american engineers - good. Child labor, Chinese people smuggling - bad, microlending and appropriate technology, good. UN World Government = Walmarts on every street corner EVERYWHERE
the second question I pose is this. What do y’all think about American literature? Washington Irving, Cooper, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Whitman, Melville, Twain, Sinclair Lewis, Miller, Steinbeck, Hemingway, Kerouac, De Bois, Hughes, and thousands of others. I mean in terms of literature alone we stand head and shoulders above most nations.
So you’re saying we’re better because we produce more literature? Wouldn’t that be the wal-martization of literature? Or perhaps i have misunderstood you?
I suspect someone could write a damn fine term paper using that line as inspiration.
Currently, I agree we stand above all others in quantity. Quality wise though??? Notice damn near everyone you mentioned is gone (is Miller still alive?)… My creative writing class is taught by a woman who has published 30+ works of fiction under her name and aliases, she has been doing it for a good number of years now. I have asked her if there is room for great literature in the modern publishing industry… her reply was no. Publishers want what will sell, as for great literature they are happy to label some white southern guy “the next Faulkner” every year without the first bit of desire for taking any real literary risks.
American Literature has become as vanilla as mass marketed music, film, art, you can buy them all at the nearest Baskin Robbins with sprinkles on top.
Well, I suppose there is still a little life left in photography and performance art… that is if they can survive the moral majority.
Supposedly, the backbone of American culture rests on our unique brand of individualism… with teeny boppers getting tattos to conform, most men slavishly worshipping the next 16 year old blond anorexic with implants, and most women lusting for the next chiseled hunk with inflatable abs and 50 grand in dental work (the rest of us just settle for those whitening strips) everything has become one thing, the same thing, and of value… nothing.
Somewhere out there in America… some sincere, caring, intelligent person is crying. Because all they want is something real, something true. Just something unique that their culture can give them or teach them. They won’t find it here, I don’t think.
I just don’t agree with you, GCT. Cormac McCarthy is still writing novels to blow the socks of Yahweh himself. Don Delillo, Phillip Roth, and Tom Wolfe are producing things that are fine and lovely. Neil Gaiman, although not strictly American, sure as hell writes fine like one. Chuck Palahniuk (although I’m not a fan) sure ain’t writing baby food for the masses. And these are but a few of 'em
I guess my thing is this - popular culture has always been this way. My dad said that he used to be sad about the burning of the Library of Alexandria until he realized that the library probably was filled with Hellenistic Danielle Steel novels.
Quality is always more scarce than some damn art commodity. Also why is quality supposed to be anathema to popularity? Remember Dickens and Shakespeare were wildly popular in their day. I think it’s just one more goddamned thing from Modernism’s will 1. "To be good you must be obscure and difficult and hate"d - bah fuck you, Elliot. 2 “To be creative you must be original”, bah!
My point wasn’t that what is good and what sells must be seperate… in the publishing industry what sells is what is pushed, for example did you know that publishers buy space on the shelves of bookstores to hock certain titles… which titles do you think they push?
From a NYT Bestseller list I found…
HARDCOVER FICTION
Top 5 at a Glance
THE DA VINCI CODE, by Dan Brown
THE FIVE PEOPLE YOU MEET IN HEAVEN, by Mitch Albom
SKINNY DIP, by Carl Hiaasen
VISIONS IN DEATH, by J. D. Robb
LOST CITY, by Clive Cussler with Paul Kemprecos
PAPERBACK FICTION
Top 5 at a Glance
THE NOTEBOOK, by Nicholas Sparks
ANGELS & DEMONS, by Dan Brown
THE TEETH OF THE TIGER, by Tom Clancy
BLEACHERS, by John Grisham
HELLO, DARKNESS, by Sandra Brown
Some of these authors I have read, some I have not. Of those that I have read , none of them I consider to consist of any appreciable literary merit. Tom Clancy puts his name on books written by a staff of ghost writers (not all of them, but still) In every facet of writing my twelve year old niece is superior to John Grisham. Some of the others might be good, but considering what little I know of how the publishing industry works, to have a book pushed by a publisher it must be written in a certain formula fitting that particular genre. If you aren’t at the stage of having a personal editor, they can supply aspiring writers with “guides” detailing what it is that they require in a work of fiction before they will even talk about publishing it.
Bestsellers nowadays are all formula. Formula is not art. Does that mean great books arent being written? No, and if I gave that impression in my previous argument I apologize and admit my mistake. What I mean to say is that what might qualify as great literature is rarely pushed by publishers, thus it will rarely sell at the level that these generic titles do, thus the large portion of the public (and therefore the culture) is not getting a fair chance at reading what is the best… merely what is predetermined to sell.
And I agree that “pop culture” is almost always a lower standard… there was probably a reason behind the term vulgar being applied to that which was enjoyed by the masses. It is just… now, thats really all you have to choose from. Which isn’t a choice at all I do not believe.
I have never asked her, but she probably considers Touched to be her best work to date, if you want to read it and judge if she knows what she is talking about, I believe it is out in paperback.
There are essentially two kinds of writers. Those who write for a ‘deep’ audience and those who write for a ‘broad’ audience. Either you write for the ages or you write for the masses, rarely both. I believe William Blake was right, to an extent. Money destroys art. Depth is not popular and superficial popularity drives book sales.
gentleman, very few times in life have i seen a de facto example of what a Harvard scholar cited in a colliquium. that is why i do so ever love this little thread. according to this american studies professor, the typical response to the layman when asked to describe american culture is either: a) that there is no culture or (b) that is incredibly low brow. the response generally depended on the soci-economic position of the person; the upper class picked the latter, the lower classes the former.
while a sound arguement can be constructed for the post-colonial aspect of american culture, as america is a post-colonial nation, no sound arguement can be constructed for a culture having no culture. it’s redundant and stupid and illogical. honestly peeps, let’s remember first year logic class. further, there is a study of americn exceptionalism that is a hot topic among scholars. if america has no culture, then that would be american culture, wouldn’t it?
while american culture is changing, in a world increasingly facing globalization what fucking culture isn’t having to adapt to this new world order?? further, perhaps the old definitions of culture itself is changing – this article suggests that classical music is changing: denverpost.com/Stories/0,141 … 26,00.html. maybe we should include music videos, or the personalization of the local wal-mart/mcdonalds (b/c each one in every town is different) to elements of culture.
I agree, and would point out this discussion is asking if (and if so, what) culture exists in America, as a nation.
Consider it a questioning of the presupposition. For example, I submit that America, as a nation, has a culture that is, by and large, Euro-Centric. What we think of as American culture is really European culture with some differences. Do these differences qualify the consideration of the American version as being its own entity? And if it does, does the mass consumerism reflected in politics, media, entertainment, religion, etc mean that the culture in America (as a nation, to avoid your confusion on the topic) is dying?
Look at it like this, someone argues:
American culture is unique enough to stand on its own when compared against its European counterparts. It is the differences that make it unique.
Globalization is removing those unique qualities in not only America, but around the world as it removes the differences for one universal standard… that being that which is fast, cheap, and soulless. Thus American culture is dying.
Or someone could maybe argue that Globalization is simply the spread of American culture to the world, and not vice versa. It should be asked what was it, culturally, that made America unique as a nation… and has that spread so that America , as a nation, no longer has a culture that is unique?
Yes folks, prices on books are dropping everywhere here at walmart! Get your cheap dime store romances here!
Hello GateControlTheory.
I also mean’t non-difference which leads to indifference, which is why the ‘in’ is italicized… In Revolt of the masses by Ortega Gasset he says that in order to have culture there must be that which commands and that which obeys. in a totally globalized-democratized society where is the difference which will drive culture? unless you do not think difference drives culture in which case i would ask that you state what culture means to you.
I see the merit in that argument, in fact I anticipated it when I mentioned
I also think one could argue, based on the sheer number of folks in the prison population, that America’s brand of Exceptionalism does hint at a mighty strand of indifference. Be that either to the commission of crime or the causes thereof.
