1.The
Age of the Enlightenment began in the late 17th century. It was a new
way of understanding the world by dispelling mysterious rumors and powers with
knowledge and facts, empowering the human that earlier had been restricted by
fear of the unknown. The human became master of nature, a position prior held
by god.
2. A
myth is something that helps us try to explain what we don’t know or understand
through fictional stories. Enlightenment and science is supposed to dispel
myth. For example in China people though a dragon was devouring the sun during
solar eclipses. Science has thought us that is not the case, merely the moon
passing between the sun and Earth. However, Adorno and Horkheimer argue that
science and enlightenment itself has become myth. Instead of exploring the
unknown through myth we now claim to do so through a belief in science.
3. My
interpretation is that the difference between old and new media is how we
consume it. New media is a streamlined process to produce content for a large
audience that doesn’t reflect upon the content to any larger degree and has
therefore a larger potential to control the masses. This could be any
broadcasting media such as radio and TV. The text was written in the 1940s so
Internet was unknown to them but as a phenomena it’s a new media. The Internet
is still a very interactive media allowing people to New media also has more of a business
approach where money talks and decides what content to produce. Old media is
considered media that doesn’t reach as many is of higher quality. It allows the
viewer or listener to reflect and use his or her own imagination to a larger
extent then new media. I would consider art, books and classical music as old
media.
4,5. Culture
has been forced to give in to the capitalistic society we live in and become an
industry. When culture is being treated as a standardized product to fit a
large audience, creativity gets lost on the way an sometimes losses its
relevance. Money talks and if you don’t have financial or political backing,
your message is not likely to be heard. Those who have the right backing (often
only a few) can control and manipulate the masses that aren’t exposed to new
ideas anymore, therefore mass deception.
6. I
found the content about the culture industry and mass media to be interesting.
I agree with the notion that the culture that gets most attention these days are
often productions involving big money and are produced with almost the same
template. In the 90s there was a lot of boy bands consisting of the same type
of characters, singing similar songs and being promoted to the same audience.
This was in no way a rare occasion; today we see similar things with shows like
Idol. It’s not only music but also movies. Many movies have similar plots where
it begins with introducing the character. The character often face some kind of
challenge it has to overcome and in the end they usually do. Not very demanding
to watch but people still do since it’s what we are being fed. Today we also
see a lot more sequels to older movies. In this case, room for creativity and
introducing challenging new ideas seems far away.
Hello.
SvaraRaderaIt's true how the content produced by companies with big economic possibilities is the one that gets most attention and become the most desired by people. The content that gets less attention is basically automatically seen as not interesting or worthy (even if we haven't even seen it). Adorno & Horkheimer stated just that how the people high up in the hierarchy of society are the ones that control the culture industry. Thinking about this, everything, or a lot of things, seem to be very money-dependent in the culture industry. Without economic support, it's very difficult to have a saying in this culture industry and try to make some kind of change.
Hi Martin Johansson!
SvaraRaderaI also found the culture industry part to be the most interesting, with their standardized products and focus on the money aspect. You wrote a little bit about the Internet as a new media, but also that it is an interactive one. Since the Internet is becoming more and more used as a distribution channel (skipping the traditional CD-production for example) and with high quality recording and editing-equipment becoming cheaper everyday, I think it's pretty interesting to see if we will witness a change from big companies deciding what culture is, to the individuals deciding it. Maybe we won't even have big music corporations trying to put artists in the "boyband" or "Idol"-folder that you wrote about, which will leave the whole (or at least most of the) process to the artists and therefore getting a more diverse, non-standardized, media culture.