Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Has pop culture been stuck on repeat for the last thirty years? That's the thesis of a pretty interesting—if redundantly argued—essay from this month's Vanity Fair. The author, Kurt Anderson, argues that until the 1990s, each decade of pop culture had a unique look and feel to it. Since the nineties, though, pop culture has failed to innovate in any meaningful way:
New York’s amazing new buildings of the 1930s (the Chrysler, the Empire State) look nothing like the amazing new buildings of the 1910s (Grand Central, Woolworth) or of the 1950s (the Seagram, U.N. headquarters). Anyone can instantly identify a 50s movie (On the Waterfront, The Bridge on the River Kwai) versus one from 20 years before (Grand Hotel, It Happened One Night) or 20 years after (Klute, A Clockwork Orange), or tell the difference between hit songs from 1992 (Sir Mix-a-Lot) and 1972 (Neil Young) and 1952 (Patti Page) and 1932 (Duke Ellington). When high-end literature was being redefined by James Joyce and Virginia Woolf, F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway, great novels from just 20 years earlier—Henry James’s The Ambassadors, Edith Wharton’s The House of Mirth—seemed like relics of another age. And 20 years after Hemingway published his war novel For Whom the Bell Tolls a new war novel, Catch-22, made it seem preposterously antique.
Now try to spot the big, obvious, defining differences between 2012 and 1992.
Anderson's argument is compelling on its face, but he's painting in strokes that are too broad. First of all, without the benefit of hindsight, it's hard to analyze how exactly the current culture differs from that of thirty years ago. Second, contemporary culture does have a number of distinguishing features, the most obvious ones being technological (iPads, videogames, smartphones). But there are other unique features as well, like reality television, Facebook, and Twitter. Our culture may not be as creative as it once was, but it's not in paralysis either.
Anderson thinks that our culture is not innovating because we've become too fixated on the past:
But starting all at once in the early 70s, nostalgia proliferated as pop culture became fixated on the past: the 1950s and early 60s—American Graffiti, Happy Days, The Last Picture Show, Grease—and to a lesser extent the 1920s, 30s, and 40s (The Great Gatsby, The Godfather, Summer of ’42, Art Deco, midi and maxi skirts). Even the one big new Hollywood species of the mid-70s and early 80s, the special-effects adventure and science-fiction blockbusters by Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, was a re-invention of the B movies of the 40s and 50s.
I completely disagree. If anything, we've become less in tune with the past--especially our cultural past--since the seventies. Anderson wonders if we've reached the end of cultural history. If we have, it's because young people today have stopped studying the history, the literature, and the art of the West. The reason, I believe, that we're seeing revivals of The Great Gatsby, Anything Goes, and shows like Mad Men is because the culture wants to reconnect with the past and all that it has to offer.
What do you think?
- Comment (41)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments:
Jul '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Oh, sure. Once grunge came around (punk played at 1/3 speed), the fashion has been cycling around ever since. And music? I find the best bands nowadays are nearly the oldest ones.
Jan '11
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
As a teacher, it was always fun introducing students to ideas or stories that were old hat to us, but that the students were engaging for the first time. After a while, you realize just how many things we've read, and how many plot devices and character studies we've gone through.Our culture has a lot of material.
There was a time, in the movies, that when the bad guy was killed, everyone could relax. But after Halloween, everyone now knows to keep your eyes open for the surprise comeback. It was a startling trick for us when it first happened. Now it's -yawn- another plot device.
Are we now saturated? Is our landscape so cluttered with cultural references, story lines, myths, legends, symbols, archetypes ... that we've pretty much overloaded the circuitry?
Just when I think we've reached our limit, I come across the phrase "octopus foreplay," and maybe ... just maybe ... we still have room for new things.
Mar '11
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
He's absolutely correct.
If we define modernism as stripping things down to their essence (think dull modernist architecture, free of adornment) and post-modernism as the reassembly of the discarded adornment in new, often frivolous ways (think hip-hop remix) then I think we get a clearer idea of what he means.
The first wave of post-modernists were quite creative. But the subsequent waves have been essentially remixing remixes.
Finally, to your point about our becoming increasingly disconnected from our past, I think the post-modern disassembly/reassembly coupled with rapid-fire modern communication technology has had a disastrous effect on the way we think. Too much disjointed information coming at us constantly with very little time to process.
Apr '11
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
I can tell you one thing I know is a lot more prevalent today than the early 90's. Anitmated shows geared to adult audiences. While it did start in the 90's really modern TV has an abundance of such shows, not including imports from Japan that have become more widely available. (Mind you I am not claiming these are good, though I must say the wide variety of Japanese Animation does create some very fine TV shows and Movies)
I wish to also second the proposition that music really did die some time in the 90's at least quality music. All hail 70's Rock.
Edited on January 6, 2012 at 8:29pmMay '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Changes in culture throughout the 20th Century revolved on "pushing the envelope." It went from "suggestiveness" to "adult" to "graphic" and has pretty much ended up at "anything goes." Everything is explicit. Mass culture and mass norms have been replaced with niche programming and an attitude of "if you don't like it, turn it off."
Yeah, we're pretty much at the end.
Dec '11
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
I'd call it metastasis, not paralysis.
Aug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Oh yes, I'm SURE we're ALL longing for the "creativity" of the 1970s. Bell-bottoms. Disco. Cocaine. Burt Reynolds movies. Stagflation.
Or the "creativity" of the 1980s. Dayglo everything. Parachute pants. Family Ties. Valley Girls and Preppies. More cocaine.
One simply cannot judge the "culture" of a decade, or a generation, until one is at least two decades (or generations) removed.
Here's an easy test to refute this clown's logic. Look at the high school yearbook photos from a single high school in 1955, 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015, and THEN tell me that cultural innovation somehow stopped in 1989.
Aug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
We can debate whether our pop culture has been innovating in the past few decades. What cannot be denied is that it has become increasingly coarser to the point that much of our culture is the celebration of the debauched, profane and nihilistic.
Edited on January 6, 2012 at 9:07pmAug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
I'll have to read through the entire article, but I can't think that I'll be much in agreement with this "pop culture of other eras was unique" thesis.
I don't think I'll have to go into a discussion of the expansion of Geek Chic and the acceptance of video gaming culture as a mainstream phenomenon or various other movements that are going on right now.
Suffice to say that every era is a rehashing of some prior era's pop culture with a unique contribution from the current generation.
"Shop Around the Corner" was remade as "In the Good Ol' Summertime" and as "You've Got Mail" so remakes are nothing new.
Cover songs? Please! A whole generation has a freakin' Songbook that the artists all performed for decades...DECADES! We still cover these things.
The Swing movement of the 90s was a rehash, but it was also new.
The beats were a rehash, but were also new.
What was Andy Warhol's crew except a rehash of Toulouse Lautrec and his crew?
"Moulin Rouge" is a pop-culture inspired rehash of "La Boheme"
Art/Culture is a dialogue, and some old "arguments" are cool.
Dec '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
The key passage:
We're living in a technologically-enabled version of the sanctuary at the end of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 415: we use Google and YouTube to access the descriptors of the past and then remodel ourselves to share all this "neat" stuff we found, a kind of living "mash-up" of then and now.
When people expressed shock at my knowing some bit of trivia from the past - "Creque, that was before you were BORN!" - I told them I studied the primitive cultures of the past: the '50s, '40s, '30s. Now everybody has that power at their fingertips.
Mar '11
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Burt Reynolds movies.
“My movies were the kind they show in prisons and airplanes, because nobody can leave.” - Burt Reynolds
Aug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
First:
Ecclesiates 1:9 What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done and there is nothing new under the sun.
Second:
I started to type something else several times but I think the above sums it up about as well as can be.
Edited on January 6, 2012 at 9:14pmAug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Watch "Singles" followed by "Can't Hardly Wait" and you'll see significant differences in the teens. Follow this with an episode of Teen Mom 2 or Jersey Shore or GLEE or High School Musical.
These things are very different.
Compare High School Musical to Grease, on the other hand, and you see a society becoming more "prude." They are essentially the same film, but without the Slutification of Sandy. There is no "now she's a super sexualized greaser" in High School Musical. Both are wonderful pieces of entertainment that give a glimpse into their respective generations.
Aug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Our culture is as creative as ever. There is an explosion of entertainment, both original and derivative. The same as there always has been. There is more worthwhile entertainment in existence today than can be experienced in a lifetime dedicated to the pursuit of consuming entertainment.
We are in a golden age of creativity and creation. It is a myth to think the past didn't have remakes. It is a myth to think there are no new stories today.
Jun '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
The first problem: we have yet to develop a consensus name for the last decade. Say "the seventies" and you immediately think disco and bell bottoms, or "the nineties" and it's grunge and Seattle coffee. But what came after the 90's? The "two thousands?" The "aughts?" The "new millennium?" Or my personal favorite: "the naughties."
Of course the decade will remain a cultural enigma if we can't even decide on what to call it.
Aug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Nathaniel Wright: The Swing movement of the 90s was a rehash, but it was also new.
The beats were a rehash, but were also new.
What was Andy Warhol's crew except a rehash of Toulouse Lautrec and his crew?
"Moulin Rouge" is a pop-culture inspired rehash of "La Boheme"
Agreed, but still, not every "movement" has to be labeled as a rehash. Often they're simply the next stage of a continuum.
Punk evolved into post-punk, which evolved into New Wave, which evolved into Hip Hop, which evolved into Techno, which evolved into House, which evolved into Industrial, which evolved into Dubstep, etc, etc, etc, with offshoots like Grunge or Nerdcore branching off from time to time.
The next step in the continuum only looks like stagnation if the observer is obsessively fixated on the previous steps of the continuum.
Aug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Joseph Stanko: The first problem: we have yet to develop a consensus name for the last decade. Say "the seventies" and you immediately think disco and bell bottoms, or "the nineties" and it's grunge and Seattle coffee. But what came after the 90's? The "two thousands?" The "aughts?" The "new millennium?" Or my personal favorite: "the naughties."
Of course the decade will remain a cultural enigma if we can't even decide on what to call it. · Jan 6 at 12:17pm
Hmm, now that you mention it, I can't really pigeonhole the cultural era between 1900 and 1919 either. Could this simply be a problem of numerology?!
Dec '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Case in point to illustrate how the past holds the present captive: Mashup of Radiohead "15 Step" and Dave Brubeck Quartet "Take Five"
Aug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Exactly. The author completely ignores the immeasurable amount of new cultural content being created and distributed independently on-line.
One of my personal favourites is 5-Second Films, who put out a brand new burst of creativity every single day. There's College Humor, Funny or Die, VODO.net, etc. Here's a site that features open source movies that you can legally edit and republish is you want.
Maybe the problem for the author of the original article is that because there is such a HUGE amount of new content being created DAILY, he simply cannot possibly hope to pigeonhole all of it with a single label. Poor guy.
Edited on January 6, 2012 at 9:40pmAug '10
Re: Is Pop Culture in Paralysis?
Not necessarily. One could argue that virtually any song that is measured in 5/4 time will inevitably be compared to Take Five, since Take Five is probably the best-known song in 5/4 time ever recorded. The fact that both songs are in 5/4 time is really the only thing that connects them.