 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)recycle Hyperflake ...and 139 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614354 Today 75 Topics 127559 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
There is a debate raging on my workplace music MB about social class and music. Do you see a relationship? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Care to elaborate? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Go to Cardiff Museum on a Saturday afternoon. I know that's art and culture rather than music, but it is mainly either parents with kids, middle class tourists, art student types or generally middle class people. One of the people who introduced a lot of "this sort of music" FSOL, Fluke etc. to me was a labourer, so I guess that defeats the IDM is for middle class kids argument. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well, punk music is for punks... Serial killers listens to "hip to be square" and such. It's true! I live next door to.. oh wait... what's... noooooo* |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Are you talking about the people who make the music or the people who listen to the music? I see a direct link in both cases but in slightly different ways. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you swedish and your wacky ways!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What do you reckon Jonesy? Is art an unneccesary product of the bourgeios? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
PERCENT LIKING OR LIKING A LOT CLASSICAL MUSIC AGE GROUPS CLASS 18-35 36-59 60+ TOTAL Lower 25 32 35 30% Working 45 46 37 44% Middle 48 59 59 56% Upper 70 74 67 73% TOTAL 46% 52% 40% 50% PERCENT LIKING OR LIKING ALOT BIG BAND/SWING MUSIC AGE GROUPS CLASS 18-35 36-59 60+ TOTAL Lower 37 40 64 46% Working 43 57 66 54% Middle 47 66 83 66% Upper 50 73 83 72% TOTAL 45% 61% 75% 60% PERCENT LIKING COUNTRY/WESTERN VERY MUCH AGE GROUPS CLASS 18-35 36-59 60+ TOTAL Lower 19 47 22 30% Working 23 32 34 29% Middle 18 18 22 19% Upper 9 32 8 18% TOTAL 20% 27% 26% 24% PERCENT WITH MIXED FEELINGS OR DISLIKE OF GOSPEL MUSIC AGE GROUPS CLASS 18-35 36-59 60+ TOTAL Lower 49 25 11 30% Working 50 32 20 36% Middle 55 49 30 46% Upper 64 68 25 56% TOTAL 52% 40% 25% 40% |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
relationship between social status and aesthetic sensitivities has long been observed, producing "highbrow" and "lowbrow" distinctions of tastes. Underly such designations, of course, is the implied superiority of the former over the latter. To be "highbrow" means having cultivated aesthetic sensitivities and appreciation which the "uncultured" masses don't have as they require considerable education, sophistication, and "class." In other words, it is another dimension by which the social elite can claim specialness and worthiness of others' deference. To be "high" means not being "low" in the social hierarchy, and it is those in power positions who so label their social lessers in order to protect their power and prestige. How specific leisure pursuits and preferences--i.e., forms of sport (for instance, polo or fox hunting vs. boxing or bowling), dance (i.e., ballet vs. Western), reading (i.e., Thackeray vs. comic books) and movie (i.e., "Rambo" vs. "foreign films") preferences, and music -- become recognized as being either high or low pro provide many fascinating stories. For instance, Levine's Highbrow/Lowbrow argues how Shakespeare was considered in the nineteen century U.S. to be of the realm of popular culture, only to be transformed by the "cultural elite" into an author of messages deemed incomprehensible by the masses. Critical theorists typically argue that the elite have hegemony--defined by Antonio Gramsci (1971) as the way a "certain way of life and thought is dominant, in which one concept of reality is diffused thoughout public society in all its institutions and private manifestations"-- over aesthetic orders. Given the power of art--to maximize the meaning-carrying capacity of cultural symbols and mediums, to crystallize cultural anxieties or to push a culture's emotional hot buttons--its control should, from the elites' perspective, come from the top. Thus, the diffusion of cultural modes should be expected to flow from the upper to lower classes. However, the |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Bang on. I've often pointed out in debate that Shakespeare was (at the time) the equivalent of eastenders. There is little hidden meaning in it. A lot of what is "read into" shakespeare in the process of over-analysis is actually just people seeing the language as something more than it is. A good example would be the 2 scenes in Macbeth where the phrase "doubley redoubled" is used. I've heard English teachers claim there is some mystical implied link between these scenes. There isn't- it's just a phrase of the time meaning a lot or in greater quantity. Perhaps English teachers should study old english language before they make rash assumptions about English literature ;) Rant over. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The same is true of classical music. It was once deemed part of 'op culture' and was adopted as 'high-brow' culture by the bourgeoise. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
