By the nature of the creations, you can allocate the culture presented in single samples and mass culture. The first form of the characteristic features Creators are divided into folk and elite culture. Folk culture It is a single product most often nameless authors. This form of culture includes myths, legends, legends, epos, songs, dances, etc. Elite culture - The aggregate of single creations, which are created by the well-known representatives of the privileged part of society or by its order by professional creators. Here we are talking About creators who have a high level of education and well-known enlightened public. This culture includes art, literature, classical music, etc.

Mass (public) culture It is products of spiritual production in the field of art created by big circulations Based on the general public. The main thing for it is the entertainment of the widest masses of the population. It is understandable and accessible to all ages, all the segments of the population, regardless of the level of education. Its main feature is the simplicity of ideas and images: texts, movements, sounds, etc. Samples of this culture are aimed at the emotional sphere of man. At the same time, mass culture often uses simplified samples of elite and folk culture ("remixes"). Mass culture averaged the spiritual development of people.

Subculture - This is a culture of any social group: a confessional, professional, corporate, etc. It, as a rule, does not deny the universal culture, but has specific features. Signs of subculture become special rules of behavior, language, symbolism. Each society has its own set of subcultures: youth, professional, ethnic, religious, dissident, etc.

Dominant culture - Values, traditions, views, etc., divided by only part of society. But this part has the opportunity to impose them into the whole society or by virtue of that, that it is an ethnic majority, or by virtue of the fact that it has a coercion mechanism. The subculture that opposes dominant culture is called a counterculture. The social basis of the countercultitution are people to some extent alienated from the rest of society. The monitoring of the counterculture makes it possible to understand the cultural dynamics, the formation and distribution of new values.

A tendency to evaluate the culture of his nation as good and correct, and another culture - as strange and even immoral named "Ethnocentrism" Many societies are ethnocentric. From the point of view of psychology, this phenomenon acts as a factor in the unity and stability of this society. However, ethnocentrism can be a source of intercultural conflict. Extreme forms The manifestations of ethnocentrism are nationalism. The opposite acts cultural relativism.

Elite culture

Elite, or high culture It is created by a privileged part, or by its order by professional creators. It includes elegant art, classical music and literature. High culture, such as painting Picasso or music by Schnit, is difficult to understand the unprepared person. As a rule, it is ahead of decades ahead of the perception of the average humanized person. The circle of its consumers is a highly educated part of society: critics, literary critics, regulars of museums and exhibitions, theater, artists, writers, musicians. When the level of education of the population is growing, the circle of consumers high culture expands. To its varieties, secular art and salon music can be attributed. Formula of elitar culture - " art for art”.

Elite culture It is intended for a narrow circle of a highly educated public and confront both folk and mass culture. It is usually incomprehensible to wide masses and requires good preparation for the right perception.

The elite culture include avant-garde directions in music, painting, cinema, complex literature of a philosophical nature. Often, the creators of such a culture are perceived as residents of the "Elephant Tower", extinguished by their art from the real everyday life. Usually, elite culture It is non-commercial, although sometimes it can be financially successful and go into the category of mass culture.

Modern trends are such that the mass culture penetrates all areas of "high culture", mixing with it. At the same time, mass culture reduces general cultural level Her consumers, but at the same time herself gradually rises to a higher cultural level. Unfortunately, the first process still flows much more intense than the second.

Folk culture

Folk culture recognized as a special form of culture. In contrast to elite culture, popular, culture is created anonymous creators who do not have professional training . The authors of folk creations are unknown. The folk culture is called amateur (not in terms of level, but by origin) or collective. It includes myths, legends, tales, epic, fairy tales, songs and dancing. By execution, elements of folk culture can be individual (statement of legends), group (performance of dance or songs), mass (carnival processions). Folklore - another name folk creativitywhich is created by various layers of the population. Folklore is localized, i.e. is associated with the traditions of this area, and democratic, since all those who wish are involved in its creation. Anecdotes, urban legends can be attributed to modern manifestations of folk culture.

Mass culture

Mass or publicly available does not express the exquisite tastes of the aristocracy or spiritual searches of the people. The time of her appearance is the middle of the XX century, when media (Radio, printing, television, gramzapsy, tape recorders, video) penetrated in most countries of the world And the representatives of all social layers became available. Mass culture can be international and national. Popular I. pop music - A vivid example of mass culture. It is understandable and accessible to all ages, all the segments of the population, regardless of the level of education.

Mass culture is usually it has less artistic value than elite or folk culture. But she has the widest audience. She satisfies the momentary requests of people, reacts to any new event and reflects it. Therefore, samples of mass culture, in particular lumps, quickly lose the relevance, are obsolete, out of fashion. With the works of elite and folk culture, this does not happen. Pop culture - The slang name of the mass culture, and KITCH is its kind.

Subculture

The totality of values, beliefs, traditions and customs, which are guided by most members of society, is called dominant Culture. Since society breaks into many groups (national, demographic, social, professional), gradually each of them forms its own culture, i.e., the system of values \u200b\u200band rules of behavior. Small cultures are called subcultures.

Subculture - Part of the total culture, system of values, traditions, customs inherent in particular. They talk about the youth subculture of subculture of the elderly, subculture of national minorities, professional subculture, criminal subculture. The subculture is different from the dominant culture with the language, looks for life, behavior, hairstyles, dress, customs. Differences can be very strong, but the subculture does not oppose the dominant culture. Its culture from drug addicts, deaf-and-dumb, homeless, alcoholics, athletes, lonely. The children of aristocrats or middle class representatives are very different from their behavior from children from the lowest class. They read different books, go to different schools, focus on different ideals. Each generation and social group has their own cultural world.

Counterculture

Counterculture Indicates such a subculture that does not just differ from the dominant culture, but is opposed, is in conflict with dominant values. The subculture of terrorists is opposed to human culture, and Hippie's youth movement in the 1960s. Drew the dominant US values: hard work, material success, conformism, sexual restraint, political loyalty, rationalism.

Culture in Russia

The state of the spiritual life of modern Russia can be characterized as a transient from defending values \u200b\u200brelated to attempts to build a communist society, to finding a new meaning public Development. We went out on the next round of the historical dispute between Wessengers and Slavophiles.

The Russian Federation is a multinational country. Its development is due to the peculiarities of national cultures. The uniqueness of the spiritual life of Russia is a manifold cultural traditions, religious beliefs, moral norms, aesthetic flavors, etc., which is associated with the specifics of the cultural heritage of different nations.

Currently, in the spiritual life of our country is observed contradictory trends. On the one hand, the mutual penetration of various cultures contributes to interethnic understanding and cooperation, on the other - the development of national cultures is accompanied by interethnic conflicts. The latter circumstance requires a weighted, tolerant attitude towards the culture of other communities.

1. Mass culture ____________________________________________________________

2. Elite flows in cultural studies ________________ p.9;

3. List of references __________ p.13

Luxury and mass culture.

I.Mass culture.

If we recognize that one of the main signs of genuine culture is the heterogeneity and wealth of its manifestations based on national-ethnic and class-class differentiation, then in the 20th century the enemy of the cultural "polyphony" was not only Bolshevism, in nature, not accepting any pluralism. In conditions " industrial society"And HTRs, humanity as a whole found a clearly expressed trend towards the template and monotony to the detriment of any kind of originality and identity, whether it is about a separate person or about certain social layers and groups. A modern state, like a giant car, with the help of uniform education systems and as coordinated information, continuously "stamps" faceless and obviously degraded to the anonymity of human "material". If the Bolsheviks and their followers sought violently to turn people and some kind of "screws", then from the middle of our century, the processes of standardization of everyday life have acquired worldwide, with the exception of a remote periphery, an involuntary and comprehensive character.

Changes that are noticed even with the naked eye contributed to the emergence of sociological and philosophical and historical concepts of the so-called " mass society". The theory of "mass culture" appeared on their base. Recall that another O. Spengler, opposing culture and civilization, as distinctive signs of the latter allocated in it the absence of "heroic" beginnings, technicalism, confusion and massiness. Other cultratologists adhered to close views, in particular N.A. Berdyaev. In general, the "mass" society is interpreted as a new social structure, which develops as a result of objective processes of human development - industrialization, urbanization, the rapid growth of mass consumption, complication of the bureaucratic system and of course unprecedented earlier development of media communication. Under these conditions, a person "from the street", losing the individuality, turns into a fictional statist of history, dissolving in a crowd, which no longer listens to genuine authorities, and easily becomes a victim of demagogues and even criminals devoid of any ideals.

The most complete and holistic concept of a mass society with direct access to the cultural issues was proposed by the Spanish philosopher, art historical and critick Jose Ortegoy-I-Gasset (1883-1955) - the author of the famous Essay "Mass Rezind" (1930) translated into all major languages \u200b\u200bof the world . True, long before the orthhetics in the work "Middle European as an ideal and an instrument of worldwide destruction" (1884) similar thoughts developed our outstanding compatriot K.N. Leontyev.

Ortega as a philosopher created his own doctrine "Ranovitalism", the essence of which is not a separate existence of philosophy and life, science and art, and their interoperability: a person is formed and exists like "I" and his life circumstances. As theorian of the culture of Ortega, not only one of the main creators of the theory of "mass society", but also a prominent theorist of "mass art and creative" modernism ".

José Ortega-I-Gasset was born in the family of a famous journalist and deputy of the Spanish Parliament, graduated from the Jesuit College and the Metropolitan University (1904), studied in Germany and from 1910. During the quarter of a century, he headed the Department of Metaphysics at the Faculty of Philosophy and Language of the University of Madrid, at the same time By studying publishing and political activities in the ranks of antimonarchical, and later the anti-fascist intelligentsia. From 1936 to 1948, the philosopher was in emigration in Germany, Argentina and Portugal, penetrating the ideas of Europe.

In his work, the "uprising of the masses" of Ortega is developing the idea that modern society and its culture are amazed by a severe illness - the confusion of the lambent, devoid of any aspirations of a man-in-law person, imposing its own style of life to the whole states. In the criticism of this felt by many philosophers, the phenomenon of Ortega goes after Nietzsche, Spengler and other cultural scientists.

According to Ortege, an immense "mass" - coping mediocre, - instead of following the recommendations of the natural "elite" minority, rises against him, displaces the "elite" from traditional areas for it - politicians and cultures, which ultimately leads to all public troubles of our century. At the same time, the views of Ortega-I-Gasset should not like to make the Marxist teaching about the "revolutionary masses", making history. For the Spanish philosopher, the mass "Mass" is not a disadvantaged and operated worker, ready for a revolutionary feat, and above all the average individual, "anyone and everyone who does not measure themselves in good, but feels the same "Like all," and not only not dedicted, but also satisfied with its own indistinguishability. " Being incapable of critical thinking, the "mass" man thoughtlessly absorbs "that messenger of the capital truths, incoherent thoughts and just verbal garbage, which accumulated in the will of the case, and imposes it everywhere and everywhere, acting on the simplicity of spiritual, and therefore without fear and Break ". This type of creature due to their personal passivity and complacency in the conditions of relative well-being can belong to any social layer from the blood aristocrat to a simple worker and even "Lumen" when it comes to "rich" societies. Instead of Marxist division of people on the "exploiters" and "exploited" orega, based on the very typology of the human person, it suggests that "the radical only to share humanity into two classes: on those who demand from themselves a lot and behave for themselves and Obligations, and those who do not require anything and for whom to live - it is to swim in the flow, while remaining such as there is not, and not growing to paint yourself. "

Its reasoning about the appearance of a "new breed of people" - a "mass" person - the Spanish philosopher binds primarily with the European history and reinforces very expressive statistics. "Glory and responsibility for the exit of wide masses on the historical field bears the XIX century," he writes, referring to the fact that in all twelve centuries of its existence - from VII XIX century - The population of Europe never exceeded 180 million people, and during from 1800 to 1914, for a hundred years with a little, reached 460 million. So dizzying growth, according to Ortege, meant "all new and new crowds that with such acceleration They will overthrow on the surface of the story that they do not have time to be soaked in traditional culture. " "The peculiarity of our time is, - then writes Ortega, - that the ordinary souls, not being deceived about their own mining, disgustingly approve their right to her and impose it all and everywhere." That absence traditional culture In modern society leads to its spiritual degradation and a drop in morality.

Written under the impression of the First World War and on the eve of the second essay of the orthhetics "The uprising of the masses" began to be considered as a prophetic one, which was also facilitated by subsequent events: the emergence of such examples of social "pathology", as fascism, Nazism and Stalinism with their massive conformism, hate the humanistic heritage of the past , unrestrained self-ability and the use of the most primitive inclinations of human nature. Ultimately, Ortega sought to show that not at all "class contradictions" and not the notorious "incidents of imperialism", namely, anti-imaginary plants imposed by millions of wounded people in totalitarian societies, caused all tragedies of our outgoing century.

Ortega reflections are in many ways echoing with the ideas of philosophers and sociologists of the so-called Frankfurt school, "new left", or neomarcists, the largest representative of whom Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979) also believed that it was the maximum technology and bureaucratization of modern society to start him in the dead end, Cave authoritarianism and dictators.

It should not be thought, however, that the "mass society" with its adjusted, consumer life and the lack of high ideals is fatally doomed on the totalitarianism of the "right" or "left" sense. Of course, if we recognize the intelligentsia by an active subject of culture, the role of which in the "mass society" is usually adjusted, the danger of its shift to authoritarian forms of government is increasing. But just as a poorly educated and the underground subject, it becomes completely optionally to become a criminal (although the likelihood of this in this case is higher) and the "mass society" is not the only explanation of the victory of fascism or Stalinism. After all, the basis of "massiness" public Life Such non-influxed ideologies are material factors such as standardized and conveyor machinery, one way or another, unified education and replicated information, the output of a significant layer of people on a certain "average" and sleeping creative energy. If this is added to this and stabilizing the impact of the principles of democracy, the successes of which in our century it is also impossible to deny, then it should be recognized that the phenomenon of "mass society" is noticeably neutralized as a potential danger, although he pays a constant threat of totalitarianism. The geopolitical panorama of the industrial, and in some way and the post-industrial XX century shows: the symptoms and manifestations of the "mass society" with one or another degree of brightness and completeness were given and allowed themselves to be a highly developed fascist Germany, and in the Soviet Union, and in the Industrialization former countries "Socialist Commonwealth", and even more so in the highly developed countries of the West and the East, who came to the advanced frontiers of technical progress.

As already noted, the most important, if not determining, a sign of "mass society" is "mass culture". Responding to the general spirit of time, it, unlike the social practice of all previous epochs, becomes from the middle of our century, becomes one of the most profitable sectors of the economy and even gets the relevant names: "Entertainment Industry", "Commercial Culture", "Pop Culture", " leisure industry ", etc. By the way, the last of the above designations opens another of the causes of the "mass culture" - the appearance of a significant layer of workers of citizens of excessive free time, "leisure", due to the high level of mechanization of the production process. People increasingly arise the need to "kill time." Its satisfaction is natural for money, and the "mass culture" is calculated, which manifests itself mainly in the sensory sphere, i.e. In all types of literature and art. Especially important channels of the general democratization of culture over the past decades have become cinema, television and, of course, sports (in his purely spectatorship), collecting huge and not too legible audiences movable only by the desire for psychological relaxation.

Turning into the goods for the market, hostile to any kind of elititude "mass culture" has a number of distinctive features. This, above all, "simplicity", if not primitive, often turning into a cult of mediocrity, for it is designed to "man from the street." To perform its function - the removal of strong production stresses - "mass culture" should be at least entertaining; Failing to people often with insufficiently developed intellectual beginnings, it largely exploits such spheres of human psyche as subconscious and instincts. All this is true and the prevailing theme of the "mass culture" receiving large income from the exploitation of such "interesting" and understand to all people by how love, family, sex, career, crime and violence, adventure, horrors, etc. Curiously and psychotherapeutically positively, in general, the "mass culture" of life, it is difficult for truly unpleasant or depressing the audience of the plots, and the corresponding works are usually completed happy ending. It is not surprising that along with the "middle" person, one of the consumers of such products, is a pragmatically tuned part of youth, not burdened by life experience, not increasing optimism and still thinking about the fundamental problems of human existence.

In connection with such generally accepted features of the "mass culture", as a commercial nature is emphasized, as well as the simplicity of this "culture" and its prevailing orientation on entertainment, the lack of large human ideas in it, one important theoretical question arises: "Mass culture" existed In the Soviet Union collapsed now? According to the listed features, apparently - no. But, undoubtedly, there was its own special "Soviet" or "Soviet" culture of totalitarianism, which was not elite and not "mass", but reflected the overall equalization and ideological character of Soviet society. However, this question requires a separate cultural research.

The "mass culture" phenomenon described above in terms of its role in the development of modern civilization is estimated by scientists not definitely. Depending on the elite or populist image of thinking, cultural studies are inclined to consider it or something like social pathology, the symptom of the degeneration of society, or, on the contrary, an important factor in its health and internal stability. To the first, in many ways feeding ideas F. Nietzsche, O. Spengler treated, X. Many others. The second are represented by L. White and T. Parsons already mentioned. The critical approach to "mass culture" comes down to its accusations in neglecting by classical inheritance, in the fact that it allegedly is a tool of conscious manipulation by people; enslaves and uniform the main Creator of all culture is a sovereign person; contributes to its alienation from real life; distracts people from their main task - "spiritual and practical development of the world" (K. Marx). Apologetic approach, on the contrary, is expressed in the fact that the "mass culture" is proclaimed by a natural consequence of irreversible scientific and technological progress that it contributes to the cohesion of people, above all youth, regardless of any ideological and national-ethnic differences in a stable social system And not only does not reject the cultural heritage of the past, but also makes his best samples in the property of the widest folk layers by replication through printing, radio, television and industrial reproduction. The dispute about the dangers or beneficiaries of "mass culture" has purely political aspect: both democrats and supporters of authoritarian authorities are not without reason seeking to use this objective and very important phenomenon of our time in their own interests. During the Second World War and in the post-war period, the problem of "mass culture", especially its most important element - the mass media, was studied both in democratic and in totalitarian states.

As a reaction to the "mass culture" and its use in the ideological confrontation of "capitalism" and "socialism" to the 70s. Our century in certain layers of society, especially in a youth and materially secured environment of industrialized countries, develops an informal complex of behavioral attitudes that called "counterculture". This term was proposed by the American sociologist T. Rzzazak in his work "Formation of a counterculture" (1969), although in the whole ideological preteach of this phenomenon in the West consider F. Nietzsche with his adherence to the "Dionysian" beginning in culture. Perhaps the most visible and vivid expression of the counterculture was the movement of the so-called "hippie" in all continents, although it does not exhaust this widespread and sufficiently uncertain concept. To its adepts can be attributed, for example, "rockers" - fanatics of motor silos; and "skinheads" - britheads, usually with fascidizing ideology; and "punks" associated with musical motion "Punk rock" and having incredible hairstyles of different colors; and "Tands" - ideological enemies of "Pankov", protecting physical health, order and stability (Wed. We have a recent confrontation of "hippies" and "lubers"), and many other informal youth groups. Per lately, due to a sharp property bundle in Russia, the so-called majors appeared - usually the most prosperous Yunsi from the commercial semi-graded world - "rich", behavior and life attitudes of which will go up to Western "Popper", American "JOPI", seeking externally show yourself "cream society." Naturally, they are focused on Western cultural values \u200b\u200band act with antipodes of both the prommunist guardians of the past and youth national patriots.

The movements of "hippies", "hipsters" and other social phenomena have been a rebellion against post-war nuclear and technotronic reality, threatening with new cataclysms in the name of an alien "free" person of ideological and domestic stereotypes. Preachers and adherents "countercultures" distinguished the shocking man in the manner of thinking, feeling and communication, the cult of spontaneous, uncontrolled by the mind of behavior, a tendency to mass "parties", even orgies, often with the use of drugs ("narcotic culture"), the organization of various kinds of youth "commune" "And" collective families "with open," randomly ordered "intimate connections, interest in the occultism and religious mystics of the East, multiplied by the" sexually revolutionary "" mystic body ", etc.

As a protest against the material well-being, conformism and confusion of the most "rich" part of humanity, the counterculture in the person of her followers made the main object of his criticism, or rather, their contempt, existing social structures, scientific and technical progress, opposing ideologies and post-industrial "consumption society" in Overall with his everyday standards and stereotypes, the cult of meshchansky "happiness", the storage, "life success" and moral compounds. Property, family, nation, ethics of labor, personal responsibility and other traditional values \u200b\u200bof modern civilization were proclaimed by unnecessary prejudices, and their defenders were considered as retrograde. It is easy to see that all this resembles the eternal conflict of "fathers" and "children", and indeed, some scientists paying attention to the mostly youth character of "countercultural", consider it as social infantilism, "children's disease" of modern youth, whose physical maturation is much ahead of her civil formation. A lot of former "rebetes" become late completely law-abiding representatives of the "Eastball".

And, nevertheless, questions arise: how to treat youth, "informal", often rebellious culture? Will it be for her or against? Is it a phenomenon of our century or existed always? Answers are clear enough: youth subculture should be treated with understanding. Reject aggressive, destructive, extremist start: both political radicalism and hedonistic-narcotic escapism; Support the desire for creating and novelty, remembering that the greatest movements of our century - in defense natural environment, anti-war movement, movement for the moral update of mankind, as well as the newest art schoolsBorn from a bold experiment - became the result of disinterested, although sometimes the naive impulse of young people to the improvement of the surrounding world.

Youth informal culture, which is by no means reduced to the prefixes of counter and sub-, existed at all times and in all peoples, as there were eternally defined intellectual and psychological potencies of a certain age. But as well as a separate person, it is impossible to break the young man and old man and youth culture can not be artificially separated from the "adult" and "Starikovskaya", because they are all mutually bated and enrich each other.

II.Elite flows in cultural studies.

With all the simplicity and transparency of the thesis on the beneficiamentation of democracy for the fate of culture, his closer examination shows that for many outstanding representatives of public and cultural thought, it turns out to be far from indisputable. "Who will behave," asks X. Ortega-I-Gasset, - that dictate mass will not force the state to abolish the person and the finally pay off hope for the future? ". In certain historical conditions, democracy as the domination of the people can turn into "physiocracy" - the domination of mediocreness or, even worse, in the "coolness" - the domination of the crowd. "The autocracy of the people, - the Spanish Philosopher Berdyaev, - the most terrible autocracy, for a person from the unrefined quantity depends in it, from the dark instincts of the masses. The will of one or will of a few cannot so far to extend their claims as the will of everyone. You can still guard a part of your existence from the Will, but it is more difficult to protect him from the will of the autocratic people. " Even the Great Pushkin allowed himself to doubt the right on the autocracy of "Cherni":

Silence, meaningless people,

Rubber, slave needs, worries!

You are the worm of the earth, not the son of heaven;

You would use all - by weight

Cadmir You appreciate Belvederensky ...

If democracy in political life may be almost an ideal, then in the field of science and art as domination of scientists or mid-level artists, it looks pretty doubtful, most clearly embodied in the mass culture, which consciously orients material and spiritual values \u200b\u200bfor some averaged and standardized samples. . Being a product of consumer society with his pragmatism and confusion, mass culture becomes both a social drug distracting people from the deeper spiritual and practical development of the world.

It is quite natural that the widespread offensive of mass culture, usually accompanying democratic processes, could not help but cause anxiety in the most refined circles of the global scientific and artistic intelligentsia, especially in the part of its part, which adheres to the theory of "elite" and "heroes" as the main driving forces of cultural and the social process.

One of the most striking spiritual fathers of the elitar idea in the development of culture was the outstanding German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) with his concept of "superhuman" and attacks on a democratic ideology, allegedly fixing the "old instincts" of the crowd. He fully divided the advantageous thought of Voltaire that "when black is accepted to reason - everything is lost!".

From a cultural point of view, Nietzsche is interesting not only as an original thinker and master of the Aphoristic Word, but also as the author of many works directly related to the theory of culture. As the Machiavelli, who gave birth to Machiavelism, Nietzsche, called the bourgeois liberals with the "evil genius of Europe", laid the beginning of Nischeunce - a derivative and a rather controversial system of ideas that were widespread at the turn of the two centuries, including in Russia. True, its much deeper creative heritage is not at all boosts to "nice." The denial of Christianity and religious morality, the preaching of the "Rights of Strong" and "Superman", in force "on the other side of good and evil," the cult of war and contempt for the weak ("little man") - here are some postulates of nice, taken by weapons, totalitarian regimes, First of all, National Socialism and Fascism. Supporter of "strong" power and the enemy of democracy, he believed that "disregard for the state, decline to treat states is detassed by a private person ... There are consequences of the democratic concept of the state; In this, his mission ... "," modern democracy is the historical form of the fall of the state, "claimed Nietzsche.

He was born in the pastor's family who had Polish nozzles, and for mothers - related ties with the circles of the hereditary German intelligentsia. The future philosopher has greatly studied in Bonn, and later at the Universities Leipzig, without defending the dissertation, became an honorable doctor, gradually moving from classical philosophy to wide ideological generalizations. In 1869, Nietzsche, refusing to German citizenship, moved to Switzerland, where a professor of the Basel University worked for 10 years and worked closely with the Great german composer Richard Wagner, who had a great influence on him (later this friendship turned into hostility). In 1879, Nietzsche, with young years, suffered from nervous depressed, became practically intimensional and his creative activity was completely stopped.

As noted, Nietzsche consider idean Father Nihilism of the end of the last century, inspirer of modern rioty youth and ideologue of violence and war as a "refining" and "cleansing" means. But, despite this, who was undoubted the merit of the German philosopher, who considered the modern "middle" man "shame and disgrace" of history, became ostive criticism Bourgeois-mesh mass culture, which reduces people to the level of "herd" mediocreness. That is why Nietzsche was hostile to democracy and socialism, ruthlessly opening their existing imperfections and disadvantages. With the culture of Russia, Nietzsche tying his sympathy for Slavs, good knowledge of Russian literary classics And first of all, Dostoevsky, acquaintance with the work of which he ranked to the "beautiful luck" of his life.

From other early advocates of the decisive role of personalities and elites, Thomas Carlel (1795-1881) is allocated - the English writer and historian, which largely anticipate the views of Nietzsche, the herald of the "cult of heroes", the artists of the "Divine Providence" and the spiritual fathers of the historical process, towering over anonymous "mass. "Lay a person who is capable of this country, put it so high as you can, invariably honor it," Karllyl wrote, - and you will get a completely perfect government, and no running box, parliamentary eloquence, voting, constitutional institution, no in general Mechanics cannot already improve the provisions of such a country any iota. "

Thomas Karlalil was the "ruler of the Dum" in the cultural life of Europe XIX century. and deep criticism of sociocultural processes that determined the reality of that time. He is extremely revered in his homeland, whose conservative and hierarchical tradition, he passionately and expressively prevented in his polemical writings, Carlel, a person is informally very religious, became an authoritative opponent of atheistic materialism, utilitarianism and spiritual equalization generated by the French bourgeois revolution with its farewell ideals "Freedom, Equality and fraternity. " In modern cultural studies, Karlal was a pillar of the elite approach to the cultural and historical process, in his anticipation of the views of such thinkers as F. Nitsche, K.N. Leontiev, as well as other philosophers and sociologists of anti-democratic sense.

The most famous work of Karlalyl, who determined his unique face in the history of European culture, - "Heroes, reverence of heroes and heroic in history" (1841) - was not blind apologetics "Rights of Strong", for the genius and heroes, who were playing, in Karlalyl, history, Not as an example of the Nietzshean "superhler", fundamentally anti-religious, had divine origins and were always associated with some transcendental truth. For a fundamental opponent of democracy and parliamentarism, who identified them with the All-Russia "Cherni", the examples of historical geniuses were Cromwell, Napoleon and Friedrich the Great. Contemporary political culture The West, based on the ideals of the bourgeois revolutions, is explicitly contradiction with the main idea of \u200b\u200bKarlalyl, but it still remains its meaning. This is a priority that Karlyl gives the divine-personal beginning to the "government-based" and the massiness that is now expressed in "mass culture"; continuing the principle of spiritual hierarchism in the life of any society; Criticism of the Tortgashesky Spirit of modern Europe, incompatible with genuine culture; The protection of the thesis that the spiritual health of society, and, consequently, the culture is generally not due to the purely material consumer well-being. Diligence, honesty, courage, responsibility - here are ideals that in a brilliant literary form proclaimed Karlal in his works and without which, in his opinion, impossible to develop humanity.

If you do not go into the details of the total elite approach to culture in all its individual and conceptual versions, then it is based on a fairly simple and not easily refuted thought:

any spiritually not bound group of people, the crowd, the nameless mass itself is passive. People can become carriers of civilization or barbarism depending on whether there is a person among them that can take on a generally accepted burden of supremacy. As the addition of a set of "gray" people cannot be obtained by genius, and it is impossible to obtain high culture from the addition of mediocre.

So, if democracy as a form of power, with all its undoubted advantages, it is in the field of culture that detects some inconsistency, and the mechanical majority is not always a carrier of truth, good and beauty, what should be the optimal structure of society to support and develop talents? After all, the identity of the next tyrant is as true of the original creative personality, how old the overthrow of his "Cherni". Where is the way out? The answer to this question again can be found at N.A. Berdyaev, who relies on the achievements of modern sociology with its concepts of social stratification, developed, in particular, P. Sorokin. Ultimately, we are talking about the eternal hierarchical structure of society due to the initial inequality of people, some are born by smart and talented, others deprived of these inborn qualities. This is the hierarchism of human qualities and gifts, opposed to the formal hierarchism of physical strength, of origin and positions. So in conditions of democracy, social differentiation, based on real merit and talents of individual personalities, should be maintained and maintained. Therefore, in fact, and went, although not without costs, after the Great French Revolution, Western culture successfully combining a democratic start with hierarchical. "A consistent democracy that depresses all hierarchism," writes Berdyaev, "never happened and could not. Such a consistent democracy is an anarchy ... "; "Civilized peoples can not allow overthrew their existence into anarchic chaos and therefore keep in the ever-updating and reviving hierarchical principle."

III. List of used literature.

In modern society great value Bought mass and elite culture.

Mass culture They call such a type of cultural product that is every day produced in large volumes. It is assumed that mass culture consume all people regardless of the place of birth and the country of residence. This culture of everyday life, represented by the widest audience on various channels, including media and communications.

Mass culture has shown himself for the first time in the US turn XIX - XX explosive In social terms, the mass culture forms a new social system, called the "middle class".

The purpose of mass culture It is not so much to fill leisure and removal of stress and stress in a person of industrial and post-industrial society, how much to stimulate consumer consciousness in the viewer, listener, reader, which, in turn, forms a special type of passive non-critical perception of this culture in humans. In other words, it is manipulating the human psyche and exploitation of emotions and instincts of the subconscious sphere of human feelings and primarily the feelings of loneliness, guilt, hostility, fear.

Performs specific social functions . Among them is the main thing illusory compensatory:promotion of a person to the world of illusory experience and non-efficient dreams. And all this is combined with an open or hidden propaganda of the dominant lifestyle, which has its ultimate goal distraction from social activity, the adaptation of people to the existing conditions.

XXI century He entered the history of mankind as a century of fear. In the implementation of the instinct of fear, the modern cinema producing in huge quantities Horror. The psyche of man, "trained" films-catastrophes, gradually becomes insensitive to what is happening in real life.

Today, the attitude of people to violence in artistic culture is different.

Artistic culture has always provided a huge impact per person calling certain feelings.

As an antipode of mass culture, many cultural scientists consider elitar culture Complicated content for unprepared perception. The manufacturer and consumer of elite culture from the point of view of representatives of this area is the highest preferred layer of society - elite. The cultural studies received an understanding of the elite as a special layer of society, endowed with specific spiritual abilities. Elite- This is part of the society that is most capable of spiritual activities gifted by high moral and aesthetic deposits.

It is she who provides public progress, so art should be focused on meeting its requests and needs.

Commercial benefit is not a goal for the creators of elite works of art, seeking innovation, full self-expression and artistic embodiment of their ideas. In this case, the appearance of unique works of art, which sometimes bring their creators not only recognition, but also a considerable income, becoming very popular.

The main elements of the elite cultural concept are contained in the philosophical writings A. Shopenhauer and F. Nietzsche.

In the cultural concepts of F. Nietzsche "so spoke Zarathustra"(1884), the elite concept manifests itself in the idea of \u200b\u200b"superman". This "superhuman", having a privileged position in society, is endowed with the thought of F. Nietzsche, and unique human susceptibility.

The culture of modern society can be divided into three levels of quality: "Higher" ("exquisite"), "middle" ("mediocre") and "lower" ("vulgar") culture.

Distinctive features of "Higher Culture" Serve is the severity of the elected main theme and affected issues, deep penetration into the essence of phenomena, the refinement and wealth of pronounced feelings. "Higher Culture" is not connected with social status.

"Low" culture,the works of which is elementary. Some of them have genre forms of "medium" or even the "highest" culture, but here are both games, spectacles (boxing, jumps), which have a minimum internal content.

It is generally accepted that the culture of mass society has a detrimental effect on the general consuming potential not directly, but indirectly: he rather seduces what the artist restricts, providing huge revenues to those who agree to the conditions offered by the "mediocre and lower" cultures.

Ortega-and-Gassette Spanish philosopher "Elite Cultural Concept" It writes that the society has always been a movable unity of minority and mass. The minority is a set of persons allocated especially; Mass - not allocated by anything. Mass is the middle person. To create a minority, it is necessary that each for reasons for a particular, more or less personal, disappeared from the crowd. Ortega-I-Gasset writes that in essence, to sense the mass as a psychological reality, human copies are not required. On a single person can be determined, the mass is or not. Massa - anyone and anyone who does not measure themselves in good, but he feels the same, "like everyone else", and not only not dedicted, but pleased with his own indistinguishability. Usually, speaking of a "chosen minority", redistribute the meaning of this expression, preferably forgetting that the chosen is not those who scratch themselves above, but those who require themselves more, even if the requirement for themselves is simply.

Thus, the division of society to the masses and elected minorities - typological and does not coincide with a division into social classes, nor with their hierarchy. In fact, within any class there are own masses and minorities.

Ortega-and-Gasset writes that the mass- This is mediocrity, and, believe in his gifts, would have a place not a social shift, but with just self-deception. The peculiarity of our time is that the ordinary souls, do not be deceived about their own order, weanly approve their right to her and impose it to everyone and everywhere.

In 1925, it turns out the most famous essay Spanish philosopher, called "Degumanization of Art", devoted to the problems of the difference in old and new art. The main difference between the new art from the old one - according to Ortege - is that it is drawn to the elite of society, and not to its mass. Therefore, absolutely not necessarily art should be popular, that is, it should not be generally integrated, universal.

Elite - Orteg - This is not a generic aristocracy and not preferred sectors of society, and the part of society that has a special "body of perception". It is this part of society that contributes to public progress. And it should be the artist who should contact her works. New art and should contribute to that "... so that the" best "know ourselves, ... learned to understand their purpose: to be in the minority and fight with the majority" (ibid. P. 221--222).

Cultural theories that oppose each other massive and elite cultures are a reaction to the processes established in the art. A typical manifestation of elitar culture is the theory and practice of "pure art" or "art for art", which has found its embodiment in a number of currents of domestic and Western European artistic culture.

Cultural Studies: Abstract Lectures of Yenikeeva Dilnar

Lecture number 11. Mass and elite culture

As part of a certain historical era Always existed various cultures: International and national, secular and religious, adult and youth, western and eastern. In modern society, massive and elite culture acquired great importance.

Mass culturethey call such a type of cultural product that is every day produced in large volumes. It is assumed that mass culture consume all people regardless of the place of birth and the country of residence. Characterizing her, american philologist M. Bell stresses: "This culture is democratic. It is addressed to all people without the difference in classes, nations, the level of poverty and wealth. " This culture of everyday life, represented by the widest audience on various channels, including media and communications.

Mass culture is called differently: entertainment art, the art of "anti-expature", kich, semi-courtyard, pop culture.

Mass culture has shown himself for the first time in the United States at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. Famous American political scientist Zbignev Brzezinsky he loved to repeat the phrase, which eventually became a comma: "If Rome gave the world right, England - parliamentary activities, France - culture and republican nationalism, then modern USA Dali the world scientific and technical revolution and mass culture. "

In social terms, the mass culture forms a new social system, called the "middle class". The processes of its formation and functioning in the field of culture are most specpated in the book french philosopher and sociologist E. Morena "Spirit of Time" (1962). The concept of "middle class" has become fundamental in western culture and philosophy.

The purpose of the mass culture is not so much filling the leisure and removal of tension and stress in the person of industrial and post-industrial society, how much to stimulate consumer consciousness in the viewer, the listener, the reader, which, in turn, forms a special type of passive non-critical perception of this culture in humans. In other words, it is manipulating the human psyche and exploitation of emotions and instincts of the subconscious sphere of human feelings and primarily the feelings of loneliness, guilt, hostility, fear.

Mass culture B. artistic creativity Performs specific social functions. Among them, the main thing is illusory-compensatory: the admission of a person to the world of illusory experience and non-efficient dreams. And all this is combined with an open or hidden propaganda of the dominant lifestyle, which has its ultimate goal distraction from social activity, the adaptation of people to the existing conditions.

Hence the use of such genres of art as a detective, western, melodrama, musical, comic. It is within the framework of these genres that simplified "versions of life" are being created, which reduce social evil to psychological and moral factors. This serves such ritual formulas of the mass culture, as "virtue is always rewarded", "Love and Faith (in Himself, in God) always wins everything."

XXI century He entered the history of mankind as a century of fear. In the implementation of the instinct of fear, modern cinema, producing horror films in a huge number of horror films. Their main plots are disasters, monsters (monsters), devils, perfumes, aliens.

Recently, the tragic events of political life - acts of ill terrorism and abduction of people have become increasingly used as a reason for the image of a catastrophe on televisers. And as a result, a person's psyche, "trained" films-catastrophes, gradually becomes insensitive to what is happening in real life.

Today, the attitude of people to violence in artistic culture is different. Some believe that anything terrible theme of violence does not contribute to real life. Others believe that the image of violence in artistic culture contributes to an increase in violence in real life. Of course, see the direct connection between the works in which violence is promoted, with increasing crime, would be a simplification. Of course, impressions of perception artistic work Only a small share of the total amount of impacts rendered to a person with the conditions for its real life. Artistic culture has always had a huge impact on a person, causing certain feelings.

As an antipode of mass culture, many cultural scientists consider elite culture, complex in content for unprepared perception. The manufacturer and consumer of elite culture from the point of view of representatives of this direction is the highest preferred layer of society - elite (from Fran. Elite - the best, selected). Determination of the elite in various sociological and cultural theories ambiguously. Italian sociologists R. Mihuel and T. Mosca it was believed that the elite compared to the masses characterizes high degree activities, productivity, activity. However, in philosophy and cultural studies, the understanding of the elite as a special layer of society, endowed with specific spiritual abilities. From the point of view of this approach, the concept of "elite" is indicated not just an external layer of society, its ruling top. Elite is in every public class. The elite is part of the society that is most capable of spiritual activities, gifted by high moral and aesthetic deposits.

It is she who provides public progress, so art should be focused on meeting its requests and needs. Mass spectator, the listener may not pay any attention to them or not understand.

Commercial benefit is not a goal for the creators of elite works of art, seeking innovation, full self-expression and artistic embodiment of their ideas. In this case, the appearance of unique works of art, which sometimes bring their creators not only recognition, but also a considerable income, becoming very popular.

The main elements of the elite concept of culture are contained in philosophical writings. A. Shopenhauer and F. Nietzsche.

In its fundamental work "Peace as a Will and the presentation", completed in 1844, A. Shopenhauer in sociological terms shares humanity into two parts: "people of genius" (i.e., capable of aesthetic contemplation) and "people's people" ( i.e. oriented only on purely practical activity).

In the cultural concepts of F. Nietzsche, formed by him in the famous works " Merry science"(1872)," human is too human "(1878)," Birth of a tragedy from the spirit of music "(1872)," So said Zarathustra "(1884), the elite concept manifests itself in the idea of" superhummer " This "superhuman", having a privileged position in society, is endowed with the thought of F. Nitsche, and unique human susceptibility.

What are the modern difficulties in the ratio of mass and elite cultures in the conditions of information civilization?

The culture of modern society can be divided, at least three levels of quality set by the help of aesthetic, intellectual and moral criteria. These are the so-called "highest" ("exquisite"), "medium" ("mediocre") and "lower" ("vulgar") culture.

Distinctive signs of "Higher Culture" are the severity of the elected topics and affected issues, deep penetration into the essence of phenomena, the refinement and wealth of pronounced feelings. "Higher Culture" is in no way connected with social status, which means that the degree of perfection in it is not determined by the public situation of the creators or consumers of cultural facilities, but only the truthfulness and beauty of these objects themselves.

At the third level, there is a "low" culture, the works of which are elementary. Some of them have genre forms of "medium" or even the "highest" culture, but here are both games, spectacles (boxing, jumps), which have a minimum internal content. The total vulgarity of sensations and perception is its characteristic feature.

"Higher" culture is invariably richer in content than all others, for it includes both modern products, and much of what was created in this regard and other era. "Mediocre" culture poorer not only due to the worst quality of what it produces at the moment, but also because these objects have a relatively short life expectancy.

The highest scope has acquired the distribution of "mediocre" and "lower" cultures, and the proportional supply of the "highest" culture objects has declined sharply. The current ratio of three levels of culture is a sharp contrast with the position that occurred in the preceding epochs. The cultural life of consumers of the "Middle" and "lower" cultures was then in relative silence, inaccessible to the eye of the intellectual.

Now the creative intelligentsia can not boast of the encyclopedism of thinking, which was characterized by her in past centuries. Nevertheless, the creative layer of the intelligentsia is constantly updated and expands.

However, together with the growth of a truly creative intelligentsia in modern era Another one is developing, a much more powerful layer of producing "mediocre" culture. They produce their own traditions, standards and criteria.

It is generally accepted that the culture of mass society has a detrimental effect on the general consuming potential not directly, but indirectly: he rather seduces what the artist restricts, providing huge revenues to those who agree to the conditions offered by the "mediocre and lower" cultures.

The popularity of the works of "mediocre" and "lower" cultures will definitely reduce the demand for the works of the "highest" culture.