Popular Culture and High Culture: An Analysis and Evaluation Of Taste

by Herbert J. Gans

In this revised and updated edition, Herbert Gans extends his classic study of the roles popular culture and high culture play in American society. Gans argues in favor of all peoples' right to the culture they choose. He also looks at "dumbing down" and other examples of the new mass culture critique and lays out changes in America's taste cultures. Gans has added a new introduction and new postscripts to each chapter updating the original analysis to incorporate recent trends. The book concludes with a concerned discussion of the fate of marginal, deviant and innovative cultures in a society in which increasing inequality makes it harder to pursue the cultural aspects of the American dream.

Genres: Sociology, Nonfiction, Cultural, Research, Social Science, Cultural Studies

270 pages, Kindle Edition

First published March 11, 1975

About the author

Herbert Julius Gans was a German-born American sociologist who taught at Columbia University from 1971 to 2007.
One of the most prolific and influential sociologists of his generation, Gans came to America in 1940 as a refugee from Nazi Germany and sometimes described his scholarly work as an immigrant's attempt to understand America. He trained in sociology at the University of Chicago, where he studied with David Riesman and Everett Hughes, among others, and in social planning at the University of Pennsylvania, where his dissertation was supervised by Martin Meyerson.
Herbert J. Gans served as the 79th President of the American Sociological Association.

Reviews

[Tolga · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kitap temel olarak popüler kültürün "tehlikeli" ve "istenmedik" bir kültür olduğunu iddia edenlere karşı popüler kültürü savunuyor. Önemli olduğunu düşündüğüm kısımlarını şurada alıntıladım: http://kenardannotlar.wordpress.com/t...

Alıntılamadığım, ama yine de oldukça ilginç olduğunu düşündüğüm bir de önerisi var Gans'ın. Gans'a göre kitle medyası temel olarak üst-orta kültüre ve alt-orta kültüre hizmet ediyor. Yüksek kültürün de, pek çok varsıldan ve bunun yanında hükümetten de destek aldığı için, ayrıca sübvanse edilmesine hiç gerek yok. Bu noktada Gans, "altkültürel programlama" adını verdiği bir düzeneği savunuyor. Bu düzenekle birlikte, kendi istedikleri kültüre ulaşamayan yoksullara, gereksinim duydukları "aşağı kültür" ürünlerinin verilmesi gerektiğini söylüyor. Çünkü bu insanların kendi kültürel beğenilerini yansıtabilecek bir medyaları ya hiç yok, ya da çok sınırlı. Bunun yanında etnik kültürlere, marjinal, yenilikçi ve "sapkın" kültürlere de bu altkültürel programlamayla ayrıca destek olunması gerekliliğinden bahsediyor.

Böyle kısa bir özetten, yazarın düşüncelerinin yanlış algılanması çok mümkün. Fakat yazarın savunduğu şey, her beğeni kamusunun kendi beğenilerine ve kültürlerine sahip olduğu; bu kültürlerin de her birinin eşit değerde olduğu, her bir beğeni kamusu için belirli anlamlar ifade ettiği ve çeşitli işlevler gördüğü. Yazar bu nedenle her beğeni kamusunun kendi beğenilerine ve kültürel ürünlerine ulaşma hakkı olduğunu belirtiyor.

[Abby · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gans begins by refuting the arguments against "mass" (or popular) culture.

Interesting: “The major source of differentiation between taste cultures and publics is socioeconomic level or class. Among the three criteria that sociologists use most often to define and describe class position--income, occupation, and education--the most important factor is education . . . A person’s educational achievement and the kind of school he or she attended will probably predict better than any other single index that person’s cultural choices” (70-71).

He also delineates five cultures, based chiefly on education level: high, upper middle, lower middle, low, and quasi-folk. This is only about 20 pages of the book and can probably be found elsewhere.

Then he outlines a plan for what he calls "subcultural programming" to help achieve "cultural pluralism" and deliver culture to the groups that are underserved by what's currently offered.

I'd suggest finding Gans' ideas on the web and ditching the book. I read the older version from 1974, but apparently even the updated one isn't substantively different.

[Tuğba Sivri · Rating 3 out of 5]

Frankfurt Okulu teorisyenlerini, somut verilere dayanmaksızın, oldukça spekülatif argümanlarla eleştiren, biraz kolaycı bir kitap olarak değerlendirilebilir. Yine de popüler kültür-yüksek kültür ayrımını ve bunların günümüzdeki kullanımını anlamak açısından faydalı denilebilir.

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a good discussion of culture's role(s) in our world. It is a bit outdated, but that does not take from the importance of the points being made.

[Alissa Wilkinson · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found his analysis of different taste cultures to be helpful, but pretty much flat-out disagree with a lot of what he implies. Would have been much better to do a full update of this book, rather than a postscript that allows the writer to dodge inconsistencies between old text and current reality.

[Shreyas · Rating 3 out of 5]

accessible overview of the sociology of pop culture vs “high culture” that defines a spectrum of culture in an American context. some really interesting ideas that help explain the cultural elitism of high culture and the fallacious arguments against pop culture, but ultimately the author’s main claim is that society should aim to bring its public toward high culture as it is objectively better. the last section is some kind of bizarre rainbow of Orwellian cultural programming that really seems ridiculous 50 years later. also a lot of stuff is outdated, but the author tries to reconcile it with postscripts added 25 years on

[Helena]

litt utddatert, som han skriv sjølv i det oppdaterte forordet, men trur eg skal få bruk for noko herifra i denne oppgåva

[Tim · Rating 1 out of 5]

While I appreciate the vigorous response against elevated high culture critiques of popular culture, Gans' criticism of more perceptive critics of popular culture and his advocacy of cultural democracy seem foolish and utopian. To come against Ellul, Postman, and Marcuse is certainly possible, but Gans has neither the ideas not the style to do so effectively. His advocacy of cultural democracy established via survey and government funding is just silly. I appreciated his division of culture into five classes, but the book, and hence his description of those classes, is forty years old and the update given in 1999 was cursory and insubstantial. Overall, he underestimates the effect of corporate creation and overestimates both the liberation creation provides individuals and the agency consumers have in choosing.