Importance of the Culture Industries - Coursework Example

INTRODUCTION The notion of ‘cultural industries’ has become a highly debatable issue over the last few decades within the literary domain. This termis basically a composition of ‘culture’ and ‘industry’ which delineates the commercialisation of cultural products to meet capitalistic goals and motives. When aesthetic is combined with capitalism, it generally arouses conflicts between the artistic genre and profitability ambitions. An understanding of cultural products and firms that constitute a cultural industry also happens to be debatable. There are several aspects that could be considered while delineating the cultural industry and differentiating it from other industries producing and providing traditional goods and services. It also remains to be an issue as to what falls in the category of cultural products and what constitute a part of conventional industries. In modern times, most of the goods and services being produced are given a touch of artistic aesthetics while considering consumer tastes, styles and fashions. This blurs the differentiation between cultural and traditional products. However there are certain elements that are highly evident in cultural products while absolutely missing or less visible in conventional goods and services. It is therefore very important to understand the elements that constitute major parts of cultural products. When culture is combined with industry or the notion of capitalism i.e. production and distribution of arts for the purpose of profit, which is mainly achieved through branding and other aspects of marketing, it has profound impact on the promotion of artistic genre. I will argue that not every commercial product can be categorised as cultural a product, because there is a fine and visible line that differentiates these two entirely distinct sectors. I will also argue that commercialisation or industrialisation of cultural products hampers the flow of artistic work to consumers in the purest form. This paper begins by defining cultural industries through various aspects and draws them apart from traditional industries. It also divides the conception of cultural products into two distinct categories viz. entertainment and fashion. Finally, it elaborates the impact that capitalism can have on the promotion and free flow of pure cultural products because of cultural industries. CULTURAL INDUSTRIES Cultural industries are considered to be integral parts of any society and its demonstration and appreciation of aesthetic qualities. The firms providing cultural and aesthetic products have gained much popularity over the last few decades and have recently been termed as industries. Ever since then, more and more firms have entered the production and distribution of cultural production within the boundaries of capitalism. Development of a profound understanding of cultural industries is crucial for the purpose of distinguishing it from other industries producing and distributing traditional goods. It is also important to delineate what products or firms should not be included in the domain of cultural industries. The term ‘cultural industry’ denotes several aspects of both the words ‘culture’ and ‘industry’. The debate associated with this term generally encompasses the boundaries that could put a firm or industry into the realm of cultural industries. Also, the combination of word culture with industry makes one get into the understanding of conflicting nature of arts and capitalism. Associating the word industry with culture entails a combination of both the aesthetic and capitalistic notions. Garnham elaborates that in cultural industries, “symbolic forms are in general produced, distributed, and consumed in the form of commodities and under conditions of capitalistic market competition and exchange” (2000, p39). Cultural industries implicate a group of firms that are involved in the commodification of notions such as arts, culture and aesthetics in a pure capitalistic manner. From production to distribution, cultural industries remain concerned with the capitalistic motives of profits and material gains. Firms in cultural industries compete amongst themselves in the production of symbolic forms just as the producers and providers of traditional goods and services complying with the conditions of capitalism. Thus features like branding, packaging etc are mainly used to differentiate cultural products, in material form rather than in terms of aesthetic sense. It is very important to delineate the conception of cultural industries and understand the firms that distinctively come under the category of cultural industries rather than the traditional industries. Lawrence and Phillips point out that “…they are products that are consumed in an act of interpretation rather than being used in some practical way to solve some practical problem” (2002, p431). Cultural products could therefore be defined as those products that are valuable for a group of consumers not because they provide a solution to certain problem but because these products provide the consumers a specific feeling, style or meaning. For example burgers, cars and clothes etc are utilised by the consumers because they provide solutions to certain problems or needs, but products like magazines, movies, music and theatre etc are consumed because of the aesthetic taste, feeling or a sense of entertainment they provide to the consumers. Hence cultural industry refers to a group of firms that provides goods and services that are valued by consumers because of the aesthetic feeling they relate with the product. Differences between Cultural and Conventional Industries Cultural industries and cultural production are different from conventional ones because the cultural products are not used by the consumers for the purpose of satisfying their physical wants rather consumers use these products because of the meaning or value associated with them. On the other hand, conventional industries produce goods and services that are used by consumers to satisfy their physical and biological needs such as food to satisfy hunger and cars to solve the transportation problem. The conventional products are bought and sold for their problem-solving characteristics, not because of the meaning connected with them whereas the greatest reason for the consumption of cultural products is the meaning, value or ‘taste’ the buyer associates with them. The authors suggest that industries producing goods that are consumed because of fashion, style or aesthetics and which can easily be abandoned because of these very factors could be termed as ‘cultural industries’. The industries producing goods and services that do not fall into this category are known as conventional industries (Lawrence and Phillips, 2002). Cultural industries are sometimes confused as another name for traditional industries because in all the industries, may it be cars or clothes, aesthetic aspects like style, taste and fashion constitute an important part. Such an acknowledgement makes it difficult to differentiate cultural industry from that of the traditional ones. This is basically true that factors like taste, style or fashion form important elements of cultural industries, yet a very important aspect determining the nature of cultural industries is they way consumers comprehend the utility of product, whether material or immaterial. Gibson points out that “cultural industries are different, less so perhaps because their products contain expressive qualities that others might lack …but because they are perceived to be cultural in a distinct way, by various actors, both within and beyond specific sectors such as music, film and fashion” (2003, p202). Thus there can be no specific quality that can differentiate cultural industry from others because of the fact that the factors determining cultural products are present to some extent in the traditional goods and services also. The major element that distinguishes a cultural industry from others is the perception of consumers regarding the product it produces. The reasons why consumers opt for designer clothes is not because they are wearable but mainly because of the fact there is a certain sense of style, fashion or value that the consumers associate with these products. Because of the fact that cultural products carry a meaning perceived by consumers, they are not sold because of their material characteristics. Lawrence and Phillips illuminate that “what makes a group of firms a cultural industry is that their products compete in the symbolic realm rather than competing on some sort of material characteristics” (2002, p433). Cultural products like Wall street journal newspaper, Nike shoes, music CDs, books, orchestras and fashion magazines are not consumed because they satisfy the material needs of consumers, but because consumers gauge their utility in terms of the sense of style, value and meaning that comes with the product. On the other hand, traditional goods and services like petrol and gas are consumed because of their material characteristics. Cultural products are therefore different from traditional goods and services not due to physical traits of products, rather because of their symbolic form. In this view, every firm that produces and sells products that are valued by consumers for their symbolic meaning rather than the physical characteristics could be deemed to be a part of cultural industry. The debatable concern, however in such differentiation between cultural and traditional industries is that there cannot be determined a staunch boundary separating cultural products from conventional goods. Power also mentions this point as, “there can be no hard and fast line separating industries that specialize in purely cultural products from those whose outputs are purely utilitarian” (2004, p4). It is so because all goods in some form could be related to fashion, style, taste and aesthetics. For example, cars are today being designed using artistic features considering style, fashion and taste of consumers. Moreover, consumers are found to be willing to pay a higher price for such cars. This suggests that cultural products could be again placed on a continuum with regard to their relevance with symbolic value and interpretation. Different forms of entertainment media like movies, theatres, music CDs, books and fashion magazines could be regarded as having high relevance to the value perceived by consumers, whereas designer cars and clothes etc could be considered as having relatively low relevance to symbolic meaning, depending on the consumer perception. Cultural industries occupy a significant position among other traditional industries because of the fact that they represent a society’s culture, values and aesthetic quality. Cultural products are regarded as a way to attain a profound understanding of certain society, Hesmondhalgh and Pratt also elaborate that “the main interest in such industries is the symbolic, aesthetic and, for want of a better term, artistic nature of their output because these outputs can potentially have such a strong influence on the very way we understand society…” (2005, p6) Because traditional products do not bear the capacity to represent social norms and values, cultural products like movies, music and theatres do so in the purest manner. This is the main reason that typical cultural industries like theatres and other artistic products are highly respected by society, especially the elite class and generally run on donations. Classification of Cultural Industries Cultural industries can be demarcated into two broad categories viz. entertainment industry and fashion industry (Lawrence and Phillips, 2002). It is because these two categories can easily be related to cultural products that are consumed not because of their material characteristics but because of the value and interpretation the consumers associate with them. Lawrence and Phillips delineate entertainment industries as producing “cultural products that are consumed and interpreted directly by the consumer such as theater, sporting events, novels and music CDs” (2002, p432). These products have utility evidently in terms of the feeling the consumers derive from their usage, which is perceived and interpreted by individuals in different manner. Consumers buy these products and pay even high prices for them clearly not because of any material satisfaction provided by the entertainment products. Entertainment cultural products are basically consumed by consumers for their personal satisfaction. It depends upon individual consumer’s different taste and appreciation for art. The other category of cultural products is fashion. Fashion industries provide products and services “that are valued by consumers, at least in part, for their usefulness in constructing an image…” (Lawrence and Phillips, 2002, p432). Consumers purchase fashion clothes, shoes and accessories not because of their perception of product’s meaning or value, but because of others’ view of these products. Fashion products like Nike and Versace are consumed because of the image they entail. Therefore, they can easily be regarded as cultural products for the reason that these are consumed because of symbolic meaning i.e. the image, rather than the material characteristic of just being a shoe or clothing. Consumers take pride in using these products because of the idea that it would be admired by other people because a certain product is in vogue or fashionable. The cultural products in fashion industry are prone to decline with the changes in fashion and styles. Cultural Products and Capitalism Having discussed the notion of ‘culture’ in the context of cultural industries and differentiated them from other traditional products, it is important to elaborate the concept of ‘industry’ associated with this term. Industry in general sense implies capitalistic means and motives behind production as well as distribution of goods and services. When combined with the word ‘culture’, it presents a rather perplexed vision due to different natures of arts and capitalism. Industries producing cultural products are increasingly being diverted to capitalistic motives rather than the artistic ones. Cultural products are now being taken as commodities and the senses like aesthetics, taste and symbolic means as products. Lawrence and Phillips propound that “instead of some measure for artistic merit, the rule for measuring the success of popular cultural production is wonderful in its capitalistic populism: If it is profitable, you are doing the right thing, and if it is very profitable, you are a hit” (2002, p434). Because of the association of capitalism with aesthetics, now profitability and market gains rather than the artistic genre are widely being taken to gauge the performance of art. Capitalism has shaped cultural products into commodified objects produced not to satiate the artistic desire, but to cater to the market. There is now more focus on technicalities and management than the pure genre of arts in contemporary cultural products. Cultural products in the form of media like movies, theatres, newspapers and magazines have turned out to be utilising business tactics for production, distribution and marketing of these products rather than focusing on artist and aesthetics. Lawrence and Phillips assert that “larger and larger proportions of cultural production become not just show business but just business” (2002, p434). As evident today, cultural products have increasingly become business products deviating from the real artistic notion. The capitalistic aims of profitability and materialistic gains have led the production from pure aesthetics and symbolic meaning to just business products. Cultural products when combined with capitalistic industrial form can hamper the flow of pure arts and aesthetics from artists to the consumers because of profit motives. When cultural products are produced entirely in order to manipulate consumer choice to earn profits, it seriously affects promotion of cultural arts and aesthetics. Branding of cultural products on the part of different companies has promoted them as fashion and style symbols, yet it presented the final consumers of cultural products with less choice. McGuigan also says that “despite claims about increasing consumer choice, in effect the cultural industry administered the cultural exploitation of the mass consumer with, in reality, quite a limited range of products, however much they were distinguished according to brand” (1996, p77). This criticism of associating culture with industry is valid to some extent because cultural art in its purest form is likely to fade away behind branding and marketing of these products. Basically the vast differences between the realms of culture and capitalism suggest that the artistic genre that differentiates cultural products from the traditional goods has become highly obscure in the age of cultural industry. McGuigan puts forward that “the authentic work of art had a uniqueness and ‘aura’ that distinguished it fundamentally from the mass-produced commodity” (1996, p76). However, when cultural industries produce and distribute products under capitalistic motives, they put the profit ambitions above the concept of symbolic meaning and aesthetic value that constitute the intrinsic elements of cultural products. Thus the way capitalism treats cultural products can be detrimental to promotion of arts and accessibility of consumers to aesthetic products. CONCLUSION This paper elaborates the conception of cultural industries and distinguishes it from the other industries producing traditional goods and services. It points out that cultural products are significantly different from traditional products and can be distinguished with the help of intrinsic qualities that are inherent in both kinds of products. What differentiates cultural industries from traditional industries is that the former involves firms that produce and distribute products that are consumed because of their symbolic meaning, value or interpretation specific to consumers. The traditional industry encompasses firms that produce and distribute products that are consumed for their material characteristics i.e. problem solving nature. Although it might appear that almost all firms endeavour to relate their products with aesthetics, style, fashion and taste of consumers, cultural products are distinguishable because they are consumed only for their inherent meaning not because they provide a solution to a need or problem of consumers. According to their nature, cultural industries can be broadly categorised into two forms viz. entertainment and fashion. These categories elaborate the reasons as to why consumers purchase cultural products. Consumers value these products because of the feeling they provide in terms of consumer’s perception. These products are also sometimes consumed by a consumer because other people value it, for example fashion and style related products. Cultural industries are very important aspects of a society’s cultural and aesthetic understanding. Firms providing pure cultural products such as art works and theatre etc are considered respectful in the society and finance their operations mainly through gifts and contributions. Another dimension of the term ‘cultural industry’ suggests an association of culture with the capitalistic motives for profit. Firms producing and distributing aesthetic and cultural products are concerned with accumulation of wealth. Cultural products are highly different from the traditional commodities. The way a commercial product is produced, distributed and marketed does not suit the artistic products. Capitalism rather transforms the view of cultural products to just commercial products. Commercialisation of cultural products through capitalistic means of marketing and branding has the capacity to restrict the free flow of art from artists to the consumers. References Garnham, N. ‘Emancipation, the Media and Modernity’, Oxford University Press, 2000 Gibson, C. ‘Cultures at Work: Why ‘Culture’ Matters in Research on the ‘Cultural’ Industries’, Social & Cultural Geography, June 2003, 4(2), pp. 202-215 Hesmondhalgh, D. and Pratt, A.C. ‘Cultural Industries and Cultural Policy’, International Journal of Cultural Policy, 2005, 11(1), pp. 1-13 Lawrence, T.B. and Phillips, N. ‘Understanding Cultural Industries’, Journal of Management Inquiry, Dec 2002, 11(4), pp. 430-441 McGuigan, J. ‘Culture and the Public Sphere’, London: Routledge, 1996 Power, D. ‘Cultural Industries and the Production of Culture’, London: Routledge, 2004 Read More