Culturl Industries nd Text Circultion - Personal Statement Example

Running he'd: CULTUR'L INDUSTRIES Cultur'l industries n'me N'me of the School Cultur'l industries 'nd text circul'tion Rapid growth and spread of cultural industries in recent decades is a reflection of the increasing convergence that is occurring in modern society between the economic order on the one hand and systems of cultural expression on the other hand. These industries produce an enormous and ever-increasing range of outputs called texts. In order to understand the nature of cultural industries, it is important to know how these texts circulate and influence the daily life of people. These texts are open to much debate and discussion amongst both cultural and political economist debate as to the level of influence and power they exert, how much influence and in what ways they influence us. However all theorists tend to agree that the cultural industries have an important influence on our daily lives. Within these texts circulated we find symbols and meanings. Are the cultural industries just there to make money and serve the interests of their owners' Or are we as an audience able to take what we want from them and look at them with a decisive nature. The best contributions to such debates suggest the complete, negotiated and often indirect nature of media influence, but of one thing there can be no doubt: the media do have an influence. We are influenced by informational texts, such as newspapers, broadcast news programs, documentaries and analytical books. We are moreover influenced by entertainment. Films, TV serials, comics, music, video games and so on provide us with recurring representations of the world and thus act as a kinf of reporting. Just in the same way, they crucially influence our privet lives while ruling by our fantasies, emotions and identities. The great amount of time that we spend absorbing texts produced by cultural industries make the latter a powerful factor that affects lives of many people. Knowledge of texts circulation helps to deal with the problem of cultural industries effects on people's lives. Studying cultural industries texts might help to realize how such texts take the form they do, and how such texts how these texts have become so crucial in contemporary societies. First, it is important to note that most texts that people consume are under circulation of influential corporations. These corporations work on profit basis and are created to support their interest in getting revenues from their activity. In societies where the cultural industries are big business, cultural industry companies tend to support conditions in which large companies and their political allies ca make money: conditions where there is constant demand for new products, minimal regulation by the state outside of general competition law, relative political and economic stability, workforces that are willing to work hard and for low payment and other conditions that result in big profits for such companies. However, in contemporary societies not all texts exist on such conditions. Many of them are based on non-profit conditions aimed at orienting their audience towards ways of thinking that do not coincide with the interest of capitalism, or of structured domination by men over women, or institutional racism. The reasons why such companies exist vary. From one hand, they are partly created for the simple economic reason that cultural companies have to compete with each other, as well as support general conditions of doing business. Competition leads to outrun of one company by another in search of meeting expectations of the audience. From another hand, such companies exist because of social and cultural factors deeply rooted in many societies. When it comes to are and entertainment, the competition is great and the audience is highly demanding and therefore, it is important for cultural industries to follow the rules of doing business in this area and to propose the audience those text that would best fit its requirements, either texts belong to the first or the second group of reasons noted in above. According to Hesmondhalgh, texts operate most effectively when the individual establishments that make up them exhibit at least some degree of locational agglomeration. In fact, the most common leitmotif that connects the following sections of the paper is their emphasis in one way or another upon the persistent tendency of producers in the cultural economy to cluster together in geographic space. This tendency follows at once from the economic efficiencies that can be obtained when many different interrelated firms and workers lie in close proximity to one another so that their complex interactions are tightly circumscribed in space and time. But agglomeration also occurs for reasons other than economic efficiency in the narrow sense. It is also partly a result of the learning processes and innovative energies that are unleashed from time to time in industrial clusters as information, opinions, cultural sensibilities, and so on, are transmitted through them, and these processes are usually especially strong in cases where transactional intensity is high. Moreover, outputs that are rich in information, sign value and social meaning are particularly sensitive to the influence of geographic context and creative milieu. This point is strongly echoed in the chapters by Rantisi, Baut's and Valette, McRobbie, Bathelt, Power and Hallencreutz, and Pollard. In the same way, Molotch (2002) has argued that agglomerations of design-intensive industries acquire place-specific competitive advantages by reason of local cultural symbologies that become congealed in their products, and that imbue them with authentic character. This intensifies the play of Chamberlinian competition in the cultural economy because monopolistic assets now not only emerge from the productive strategies of individual firms, but also from their wider geographic milieu. The association between place and product in the cultural industries is often so strong that it constitutes a significant element of firms' successes on wider markets. Place-related markers, indeed, may become brands in themselves that firms can exploit to increase their competitive positions, as exemplified by the cases of Parisian fashions, Jamaican reggae, Danish furniture or Italian shoes. Successful text agglomerations, as well, are irresistible to talented individuals who flock in from every distant corner in pursuit of professional fulfillment, in a process that Du Gay (1997) has referred to as "artistic gravitation." The gravitational forces exerted by agglomerations of creative industries and their associated cohorts of workers are often of considerable power. In the present book, McRobbie writes of artists gathering together in creative hubs in London, and Rantisi alludes to the pull of New York's fashion industry on clothing designers. Gravitational forces such as these mean that the labor pools of dynamic agglomerations are constantly being replenished by selective inmigration of workers who are already predisposed to high levels of job performance in the local area. Local supplies of relevant skills and worker sensibilities are further augmented by the specialized educational and training institutions that typically spring into being in productive agglomerations. Text industries are growing rapidly; they tend (though not always) to be environmentally-friendly; and they frequently (though again not always) employ high-skill, high-wage, creative workers. Cultural-texts industries also generate positive externalities in so far as they contribute to the quality of life in the places where they congregate and enhance the image and prestige of the local area. Moreover, as noted above, they tend to be highly localized and often place-bound industries. This fact has made them increasingly attractive to policy-makers intent on finding new solutions to problems of urban redevelopment and local economic performance. To be sure, the notion of text in the environment of cultural industries and as a source of economic development is still something of a novelty, and much further reflection is required if we are to understand and exploit its full potential while simultaneously maintaining a clear grasp of its practical limitations. In any case, an accelerating convergence between the economic and the cultural is currently occurring in modern life, and is bringing in its train new kinds of urban and regional outcomes and opening up new opportunities for policy-makers to raise local levels of income, employment and social well-being. Cultur'l industries 'nd cre'tivity Cultural industries are aimed at selling or managing in any other way their texts. This can be done in a number of creative ways that cultural companies apply to since the times of Renaissance, and especially since the Romantic Moevement of the nineteenth century. Particularly, "art" was thought to be the way to creativity in delivering texts. Art was even comared with a work not different to labour as long as both are oriented towards the production of objects or experiences. This opinion is important to consider when counting artists as some mystical persons with distinctive abilites to creat and deliver the thought to the audience. Since art has been counted as a special form of creativity in frames of cultural industry, this area of human ability is worth discussing separately. Introduction of different forms of art such as performance of stories, songs, images, poems, and jokes has been involving certain type of creativity. Through these kinds of works, authors were and are able to manipulate by symbols and therefore to create illusion of entertainment, knowledge or maybe even education. Authors are therefore the main creators of texts and dexts, by its definition, would not exist without authors, however much they rely on industrial systems for the reproduction, distribution, marketing and remuneration of their work. This does not imply that people should be fond of the art works of all musicians, authors, or film makers. It means that symbolic creativity should enrich people's lives and do it more often without relying on the profit resulted in this activity. Examples of great workd of creativity in cultural industries include the work of Raymond Williams (1981) and Pierre Bourdieu (1993), who suggested better ways of historicizing symbolic creativity, by showing how such creativity has been a more or less permanent presence in human history as well as how its management and circulation have taken radically different forms in different societies. In Europe systems of patronage gave way in the nineteenth century to the organization of symbolic creativity around the market. It was at this point that the cultural industries began to emerge. Glob'lly, Cre'tive Industries excluding softw're 'nd gener'l scientific Rese'rch 'nd Development 're s'id to h've 'ccounted for 'round 4% of the world's economic output in 1999, which is the l'st ye'r for which comprehensive figures 're 'v'il'ble. Estim'tes of the output corresponding to scientific Rese'rch 'nd Development suggest th't 'n 'ddition'l 4-9% might be 'ttribut'ble to the sector if its definition is extended to include such 'ctivities, though the figures v'ry signific'ntly between different countries. T'king the UK 's 'n ex'mple, in the context of other sectors, the Cre'tive Industries m'ke ' f'r more signific'nt contribution to output th'n Hospit'lity or Utilities 'nd deliver four times the output due to 'griculture, Fisheries 'nd Forestry. In terms of employment 'nd depending on the definition of 'ctivities included, the sector is ' m'jor employer of between 4-6% of the UK's Working Popul'tion, though this is still signific'ntly less th'n employment due to tr'dition'l 're's of work such 's Ret'il 'nd M'nuf'cturing. Within the Cre'tive Industries sector 'nd 'g'in t'king the UK 's 'n ex'mple, the three l'rgest sub-sectors 're Design, Publishing 'nd Television/R'dio. Together these 'ccount for 'round 75% of revenues 'nd 50% of employment. The convention'l model of cre'tivity is b'sed on the rom'ntic ide' th't cre'tivity is the sign of genius, ' "superior 'ptitude of the spirit th't m'kes somebody c'p'ble of cre'tions, of inventions which 'ppe'r extr'ordin'ry." (Scott, Urry, 1994). 'ccording to this definition, the cre'tive genius is 'n inspired person. This is the im'ge of cre'tivity 's epiph'ny, ' gift received by me'ns of inspir'tion, me'ning "to receive from ' mysterious 'uthority, in ' w'y ch'rged of 'll the ch'r'cteristic op'city of the cre'tive 'ct, the secrecy of ' discovery" (Rouquette, 1973:10).This model is especi'lly interested in the n'rr'tion of the intellectu'l 'nd psycho'n'lytic'l tr'its of the genius. 'ctu'lly, for post-modern culture 'nd p'rticul'rly for contempor'ry 'rt, the 'rtist-genius who cre'tes works opposing previous movements 'nd styles is considered to be highly stimul'ted by psycho'n'lytic phenomen'. E'ch work of 'rt origin'tes from ' h'llucin'tion or delirious vision. This model 'lso explores the whole set of conditions th't m'ke it possible to rele'se cre'tivity 's ' potenti'l property of the spirit. Then it seeks correl'tions between cre'tivity 'nd ' number of hum'n conditions: feelings of guilt, m'dness, need for 'utonomy, 'ttitudes tow'rds risk, sex, 'ge, intelligence, money 'nd non-conformism. The im'ge of the cre'tive genius is, therefore, rel'ted to ' liter'ry 'nd psycho'n'lytic conception of cre'tivity, 's in the c'se of the cre'tive inventor. While this model offers ' liter'ry description of genius, it would require ' lot of jumping through intellectu'l hoops in order to derive from it ' gener'l definition for cre'tivity, 'nd in the process, one would inevit'bly be forced into the logic of convention'l definitions. In the end, examining changes in the cultural industries allows us to think about how symbolic creativity has been organized and circulated in our own lifetimes and ,crucially, how this might be changing. Cultural industries and its impact on social and economic change Cultural industries have a great impact on social and economic progress of society. Such an impact can be described by the existence of knowledge-based economy which is a relatively new term describing the progress of economic mind and policy. International organizations have been keen to investigate and launch activities designed to shed light on these new ways of operation in advanced economies. The science and technology system is envisaged as carrying out key functions in the knowledge-based economy. Its performance and relevance will thus be under close public scrutiny. But new policies will have to be devised: let us understand why. Cultural economy concerns the importance allocated to meaning in the conduct of economic life. For whereas "political economy" has tended to emphasize features such as the distribution of income, patterns of corporate ownership and control, the dynamic nature of market economies, capital accumulation and the generating and uses of economic surplus, it has had rather less to say about the meanings these processes come to have for those involved in them. As a result of this process, the cultural dimensions of economic activity - the meanings and values these activities hold for people - are evacuated. The role of government in a modern economy is incompatible with conducting operations too close to the market. So, what is being left to government policy and action is the building-up of infrastructure (including the development of human resources--the notion of human capital); the support of networking activities (and hence the concept of human mobility); the financing of research programs in basic "pervasive" technologies. Science policy will have to be closely linked to policies in all other fields of knowledge, from the arts and humanities to the cognitive and social sciences. Further, implications of the free circulation of knowledge will have to be recognized and fostered: disciplinary knowledge (such as sciences, philosophy, aesthetics) can only evolve inside a strong communications framework which will enable the operation of sharing transactions to bear their full potential. And their relations with the body of explicit knowledge (technologies, specialized crafts, laws and regulations, management, fine arts) will need special attention in terms of the diffusion of new learning abilities throughout civil society, leading to the buildup of better capacities. Learning will have to be seen as a genuinely life-long activity, from cradle to grave. Knowledge and the human condition will then enact a true marriage: till death does them part. The greatest barriers to this change stem from short- term vested interests and from misconceptions concerning the long-term interaction of knowledge and power. Early attempts to measure the contribution of the cultural industries to economies deployed indirect, impact or multiplier analyses. This approach seemed to support the notion that it was problematic to directly measure the value of cultural activities. The U.K. Mapping Documents draw upon a different tradition, one that seeks to measure direct effects. Researchers seeking to measure employment in the arts sector developed some early approaches. O'Brien and Feist's (1995) work, for example, used a combination of occupational and industrial taxonomies to pinpoint only those cultural workers who actually worked in cultural industries; such an approach seeks to highlight only cultural occupations and to ignore the institutional framework within which such work takes place. More recently systemic models of the cultural industries have been advocated that seek to capture the whole "production chain" from inception to consumption. This holistic view seeks to recognize that cultural industries, as do all industries, rely upon, sustain and promote significant manufacturing, distribution and consumption activities. In practice the key difference between the "occupational" and the "production chain" models is that the latter include the range of allied and support activities that make cultural industry outputs possible. Pratt's (2003) model of the cultural industries production system (CIPS) is an example of a production chain model that entails the production system within which cultural goods are produced. It effectively deepens the definition of the creative industries. In the initial formulation four "moments" in the cultural production system were identified: 1. Content origination. The generation of new ideas - usually authors, designers or composers - and the value derived from intellectual property rights. 2. Manufacturing inputs. Ideas must be turned into products and prototypes using tools and materials, for example the initial recording of a song or the manuscript of a book; these activities necessarily include the production and supply of things as diverse as musical instruments, film or audio equipment and paint. 3. Reproduction. Most cultural industry products need to be mass produced; examples include printing, music, broadcasting and mass production of original designs. 4. Exchange. The relationship to the audience or market place. This takes place through physical and virtual retail, via wholesalers and distributors, as well as in theatres, museums, libraries, galleries, historic buildings, sports facilities and other venues and locations. Later work, drawing upon proposals from the United Nations and the European Union, has suggested an extension of this concept to six moments by adding the following two: Education and critique (to cover both training and the discourse in critical ideas), and Archiving (to include libraries and the "memory" of cultural forms). Whilst this 6-phase model is conceptually more robust, data availability constraints mean that it is impractical to use at the present time; however, it serves as an aspirational model of data collection. The systemic model of cultural production has many similarities with models of innovation in that they offer a perspective on the embedded nature of cultural industrial production, and point to the complex web of networks surrounding cultural production. From a public policy perspective there is additional value in using a systemic model of the cultural industries in that potential points of policy intervention can be reviewed and assessed. The richer understanding of the production process offered opens up the possibilities of identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, as well as an assessment of the sustainability of those activities. However, as indicated above, the operationalization of a systemic model of cultural production has a number of problems associated with it. The central issue concerns the dominant taxonomies of industries, the Standard Industrial Classification; this classification is used as a basis for all government data collection related to businesses, whether it is employment or output data. In the U.K. the Standard Industrial Classification has a mixed logic: it is partially based upon a final product classification (mostly for manufacturing), and partially based upon an activity classification (mostly for services). Moreover, services are generally described in far less detail, and have fewer unique classification categories, than manufacturing, even though at the current time most economic activity and employment is concentrated in them. It is an unfortunate fact of life that contemporary industrial classifications are founded upon historic industrial structures; as a consequence the service sector, and the cultural sector, are poorly served, tending to be little more than a residual to manufacturing within such a framework. Such taxonomy has both a powerful rhetorical effect of making these service-sector activities appear to be less significant than they actually are, as well as framing any data produced on the basis of them as poor and imprecise compared to manufacturing figures. This further undermines claims to legitimacy for these industries. Bibliography: 1. Du Gay, Paul ed., 1997, Production of Culture, Cultures of Production, Sage Publications, London 2. Lash, Scott and John Urry. 1994. Economies of Signs and Space. Thousand 3. Oaks, CA: Sage. 4. Pratt, A. (2003) "Cultural industries: guest editorial," Environment and Planning A, 29: 1911-17. 5. Molotch, H. (2002) "Place in Product," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 26: 665-88. 6. Zukin, S. (1995) The Cultures of Cities, Oxford: Blackwell. 7. Webster, Frank (2002). Theories of the Information Society. Read More