Pop versus High Culture

[LOT64 at aol.com]

In a message dated 96-07-01 14:29:37 EDT, hg  writes:

>I was saying that the proles' (or preterite) culture was less and less 
>vital, alive, a refuge from Their stamped and approved and dead 
>culture, since the preterite are now themselves, with the help of the 
>tube, configured, 'made over' in Their image, and so is most of the 
>garbage they churn out in response to their, ahh, situation. 

I quite agree that proles'/preterite/people's culture is less and less alive.
 The main reason for this is that popcult is now created for the most part by
professionals and hacks.  Before TV, before Radio, before the Victrola if you
wanted to hear music you had to make it yourself, or find someone local who
did.

We now live in a paradoxical time.  We have an incredible richness of music
from all over the world and all the decades of this century available at the
flick of a remote button but the obverse of this coin is that fewer and fewer
people get together and make music for themselves.  Folk culture was a vital
element that enriched popular culture but it is disappearing.  The utter
sterility and inane content of current pop culture, with exceptions of
course, seem to be due to the fact that a greater and greater percentage of
it emanates from the corporate corridors and not from the grassroots.

Of course the Tube has been particularly powerful in seducing us into apathy,
passivity, and sloth. Its a lot easier to switch it on and zone out than to
get out of one's chair and make your own entertainment. Take it from one who
knows...Anyway the net, and mailing lists like this are a refreshing step in
the other direction.

True folk culture, Delta blues, hip-hop, punk, bluegrass etc. has a
sincerity, or genuineness as hg says that can't be denied, even if you don't
happen to like that particular style.


Ron Churgin