James Bond Lecture
In this lecture we looked at the James Bond novels and its effect on culture. James Bond was said to be one of the biggest cultural phenominoms of the sixties along side the Beatles. Ian Fleming released the first James Bond novel, Casino Royale, in 1953. The book was released in paper back making it affordable to everyone which helped in getting it well known. By 1965 it had sold 27 million copies.
In the book, James Bond is first brought to us as a cold, brutal yet confident and charming man who likes to have fast cars, nice suits, gamble and lots of attractive women. In doing this the book itself creates adverts of consumption making this book a consumer product, about consumer products. This attracts audiences as it shows things they may not be able to have, but like the idea of having them, therefore take gratifications in reading about them, or later watching them in cinema.
This image of James Bond helped towards what is seen as ‘British’. Britain in the fifties was having a crises of faith after losing its colonies. And Bond was made in this time that showed Britain’s ideals and qualities. But in creating this man that many middle class white males would love to be, it creates an image of what Britain would like to think a British man is like and gave Britain a sense of pride in this.
However when James Bond came into cinema, his image changed as the culture did. For example when Roger Moore took over as Bond, Bond became much more cool, calm and less serious and more ironic, but still retained the attributes that make him ‘Bond’. For example when Roger Moore first appears parachuting down with the parachute as the British flag, it retains the sense of pride bond gives, but due to the culture of the time, is ironic. However the first Bond film, Dr. No, released in 1962, had Sean Connery play bond as in the books, cool yet cold showing Britain’s ideals.
The content of the books and most of the early films was that of the Cold War. Britain against Russia. Also in showing that Britain is still great, it would always be Bond he saves the day before the American C.I.A could. With the content of the films, James Bond acted as a social indicator as to what is happening in the world, for example the latest films have been centered around terrorist threats and men of power. Also in the later films, ‘M’, Bond’s Boss, is now a woman showing cultural change, especially from the time of its first release, the fifties. However the films still retain the sense of consumerism, and express it even more, like in the 2006 Casino Royale, there are ‘advertising’ shots of cars, watches, laptops, suits and phones. This acts as a good tactic for consumerism as it suggests, to be like Bond, you have to have the best stuff. The franchise of Bond also provides intertextuality in other forms of medium, such as other films based on James Bond like Austin Powers. The character of Bond and all its conventions have become easily recognizable in Britain.
Thursday 16 December 2010
Culture Industry
Culture Industries is a term coined by critical theorists Theodor Adorno (1903-1969) and Max Horkheimer (1895-1973), who argued in the final chapter of their book “Dialectic of Enlightenment”, “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception”; that popular culture is a factory producing standardised cultural goods through film, radio and magazines to manipulate the masses into passivity; the easy pleasures available through consumption of popular culture make people docile and content, no matter how difficult their economic circumstances. Adorno and Horkheimer saw this mass produced culture as a danger to the more difficult high arts. Culture industries may cultivate false needs; that is, needs created and satisfied by capitalism. Cultural industry on the other hand, is not really a value-based term. It merely refers to businesses involved in the production, sale, distribution and creation of works of creativity. While some individual businesses might determine certain goods necessitate mass production, other forms of the cultural industry are more highly selective.
Culture Industries is a term coined by critical theorists Theodor Adorno (1903-1969) and Max Horkheimer (1895-1973), who argued in the final chapter of their book “Dialectic of Enlightenment”, “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception”; that popular culture is a factory producing standardised cultural goods through film, radio and magazines to manipulate the masses into passivity; the easy pleasures available through consumption of popular culture make people docile and content, no matter how difficult their economic circumstances. Adorno and Horkheimer saw this mass produced culture as a danger to the more difficult high arts. Culture industries may cultivate false needs; that is, needs created and satisfied by capitalism. Cultural industry on the other hand, is not really a value-based term. It merely refers to businesses involved in the production, sale, distribution and creation of works of creativity. While some individual businesses might determine certain goods necessitate mass production, other forms of the cultural industry are more highly selective.
Friday 10 December 2010
James Bond Lecture/Keisha Miller
091466
The Cultural Commodity of James Bond Blog
In our final lecture we studied and discussed James Bond as a cultural commodity. James Bond was a huge international phenomenon of the 1950’s and 60’s. Prior to becoming a series of hit films, James Bond was introduced as the main protagonist in a fictional novel written by Ian Fleming in 1953. Fleming achieved great success with his bond series by creating a character that provided Britain with a sense of pride and possibilities through the notion of fantasy and escapism for the masses. James Bond encapsulated the era in which it was produced by embracing British society and conforming to its ideals in the form of fashion, music and technology.
Fleming also encouraged a patriotic attitude by creating Bond to be a British icon that society could be proud of at a time of political and social unrest during the cold war and when there was a general awareness that Britain was rapidly losing its title of greatness. The union Jack is a predominant feature in Bond films and a product of popular culture almost as a way of shining humour on the awareness that Britain is not so ‘Great’ anymore. James Bond is also a fantasy in which Britain prevails over America and Russia, the two super powers of the world. Spies were a common occurrence at this time thus Bond’s character proved fitting and provided the ability to relate to society. Bond’s character related to society in various ways particularly by exploring the notion of consumerism, this is demonstrated by Bond’s expensive taste and choice to be accustomed to the finer things in life and is evident in his automobiles, alcoholic beverages, locations and even his female companions. This extravagance attracted the audience who did not have the ability to experience these things for themselves.
The role of women is James bond has been heavily criticised since its creation. Feminists argued that females were degraded as sex symbols and continuously portrayed as the stereotypical damsel in distress branding the series, both novel and film as misogynistic. However this is a questionable perspective as the character of ‘M’ was later introduced to the Bond films in 1995 and gender became one of the central focuses of the film. Other critics of the cult Bond series have argued that Fleming’s character encourages the corruption of consumerism, materialistic attitude and promiscuity into society deeming it unacceptable.
Ultimately James bond can be considered as a window into a certain period of current events in Britain and even the world. It possessed the ability to become a huge cultural phenomenon because it was made available to the working class in terms of the novel itself and its ideologies. All classes, races and genders could relate to his character whether it be through the trials and tribulations of society or through sharing a culture. It is apparent that there has been a role reversal where films are keeping the books alive opposed to how it used to be. This indicates a reflection on society and it is evident from this that we ourselves make cultural production.
By Keisha Miller
The Cultural Commodity of James Bond Blog
In our final lecture we studied and discussed James Bond as a cultural commodity. James Bond was a huge international phenomenon of the 1950’s and 60’s. Prior to becoming a series of hit films, James Bond was introduced as the main protagonist in a fictional novel written by Ian Fleming in 1953. Fleming achieved great success with his bond series by creating a character that provided Britain with a sense of pride and possibilities through the notion of fantasy and escapism for the masses. James Bond encapsulated the era in which it was produced by embracing British society and conforming to its ideals in the form of fashion, music and technology.
Fleming also encouraged a patriotic attitude by creating Bond to be a British icon that society could be proud of at a time of political and social unrest during the cold war and when there was a general awareness that Britain was rapidly losing its title of greatness. The union Jack is a predominant feature in Bond films and a product of popular culture almost as a way of shining humour on the awareness that Britain is not so ‘Great’ anymore. James Bond is also a fantasy in which Britain prevails over America and Russia, the two super powers of the world. Spies were a common occurrence at this time thus Bond’s character proved fitting and provided the ability to relate to society. Bond’s character related to society in various ways particularly by exploring the notion of consumerism, this is demonstrated by Bond’s expensive taste and choice to be accustomed to the finer things in life and is evident in his automobiles, alcoholic beverages, locations and even his female companions. This extravagance attracted the audience who did not have the ability to experience these things for themselves.
The role of women is James bond has been heavily criticised since its creation. Feminists argued that females were degraded as sex symbols and continuously portrayed as the stereotypical damsel in distress branding the series, both novel and film as misogynistic. However this is a questionable perspective as the character of ‘M’ was later introduced to the Bond films in 1995 and gender became one of the central focuses of the film. Other critics of the cult Bond series have argued that Fleming’s character encourages the corruption of consumerism, materialistic attitude and promiscuity into society deeming it unacceptable.
Ultimately James bond can be considered as a window into a certain period of current events in Britain and even the world. It possessed the ability to become a huge cultural phenomenon because it was made available to the working class in terms of the novel itself and its ideologies. All classes, races and genders could relate to his character whether it be through the trials and tribulations of society or through sharing a culture. It is apparent that there has been a role reversal where films are keeping the books alive opposed to how it used to be. This indicates a reflection on society and it is evident from this that we ourselves make cultural production.
By Keisha Miller
Thursday 2 December 2010
Lectures 11 & 12/Richard Mills
In this week's lecture, we will looking at the cultural phenomenon of James Bond. We will look at Bond as a cultural icon from the first novel: Casino Royale (1953) to the most recent film staring Daniel Craig.
There are still five students who have to review a lecture: Britney Carroll, Kasim Campbell, Zoe Hamilton, Gabriella Russo and Steve Stedman. The remaining students should review the James Bond lecture or Adorno's The Culture Industry essay: the choice is yours! Ideally, both will be reviewed. I will ask you in the lecture which one you would like to review.
Next week (December 9th) is a revision session, so bring your revealed exam question to the class and we will discuss strategies for answering it.
Happy Blogging,
Richard
There are still five students who have to review a lecture: Britney Carroll, Kasim Campbell, Zoe Hamilton, Gabriella Russo and Steve Stedman. The remaining students should review the James Bond lecture or Adorno's The Culture Industry essay: the choice is yours! Ideally, both will be reviewed. I will ask you in the lecture which one you would like to review.
Next week (December 9th) is a revision session, so bring your revealed exam question to the class and we will discuss strategies for answering it.
Happy Blogging,
Richard
Wednesday 1 December 2010
Newspapers and Magazines
Newspapers and Magazines: Lecture 9.
In Lecture nine we looked at how newspapers and magazines have influenced our culture. In the 19th Century newspapers only contained text and information on serious issues and there were rarely any images included, this continued up until the late 20th Century when coloured images were introduced. Newspapers changed from being serious to being a way of making money. This led to Tabloid stories being personalised by using first names, puns and jokes. Adverts were also being put in newspapers, this was another way of making money.
Newspapers used to be more intellectual, they used more serious and formal language. However, due to consumer influence, today, they are easier to read and compact. There is an idea that consumers want material that is relevant to their lives so, newspapers try to mimic how we speak. The reading becomes more sociable, lively and informal, for example; The Sun uses casual language that everyone can understand which is reader friendly. People like to read popular press, for example articles about celebrities being criticised or doing stupid things, it’s entertaining and is a form of escapism. Newspapers use gossip and untrue stories to cover up real news. This can be linked to ‘sceptical laughter’, this is the idea that we join in with the puns, jokes and language of the press even though we don’t necessarily believe everything we read; there is a pleasure in not being gullible and not taking in everything that’s written because we know it’s not all true. We are sceptical subjects; a stupid story encourages us to be sceptical and wary about what we read.
It is clear that over the years newspapers have changed. This maybe down to popular culture, as people are more interested in articles that are relative to their lives and what is popular at the time. The style of the popular press is sensational and scandalous, although they do have a moral tone to them, they tell us what is meant to be right and wrong, and they tell us what to think about an issue. In this sense, tabloids are half way between fiction and documentary, news and entertainment.
In Lecture nine we looked at how newspapers and magazines have influenced our culture. In the 19th Century newspapers only contained text and information on serious issues and there were rarely any images included, this continued up until the late 20th Century when coloured images were introduced. Newspapers changed from being serious to being a way of making money. This led to Tabloid stories being personalised by using first names, puns and jokes. Adverts were also being put in newspapers, this was another way of making money.
Newspapers used to be more intellectual, they used more serious and formal language. However, due to consumer influence, today, they are easier to read and compact. There is an idea that consumers want material that is relevant to their lives so, newspapers try to mimic how we speak. The reading becomes more sociable, lively and informal, for example; The Sun uses casual language that everyone can understand which is reader friendly. People like to read popular press, for example articles about celebrities being criticised or doing stupid things, it’s entertaining and is a form of escapism. Newspapers use gossip and untrue stories to cover up real news. This can be linked to ‘sceptical laughter’, this is the idea that we join in with the puns, jokes and language of the press even though we don’t necessarily believe everything we read; there is a pleasure in not being gullible and not taking in everything that’s written because we know it’s not all true. We are sceptical subjects; a stupid story encourages us to be sceptical and wary about what we read.
It is clear that over the years newspapers have changed. This maybe down to popular culture, as people are more interested in articles that are relative to their lives and what is popular at the time. The style of the popular press is sensational and scandalous, although they do have a moral tone to them, they tell us what is meant to be right and wrong, and they tell us what to think about an issue. In this sense, tabloids are half way between fiction and documentary, news and entertainment.
Wednesday 24 November 2010
Lecture 9- Newspapers and Magazines
In our lecture on Newspapers and magazines we discussed how they have changed from the 19th century, with no pictures, being very formal and mostly text. To the newspapers we have today which are described to be like ‘tv screens’, shrunk down in size, full of imagery and considered to some a commodity to everyday life.
An example of a newspaper that we looked at in the lecture was The Sun. Tabloid newspapers became very popular by making jokes, showing pictures and personalising their stories. However you can not believe everything that is printed in these papers. This is mainly because it has become their aim to entertain rather than just there to inform us of the news. For example, in 1833 the papers were known to be printing stories about how you could see aliens on the moon from a new telescope. However this was during the time where slavery was abolished in England and did not get covered by the papers. This form of entertainment meant that many stories involve a lot of celebrity gossips and mis-fortunes. They can also be very persuasive in telling us what is right and what is wrong, they do this by adapting a chatty tone and taking sides.
We also talked about how aware/unaware people can be to the papers misleading stories. People can be very cautious when reading papers or magazines of these sorts, sometimes people read the stories with ‘sceptical laughter, knowing the stories are over the top and laughing at how over exaggerated they are.
You could say we have a type of commodity that creates a sense of identity, running stories on immigration and local events encourage people to understand a sense of belonging. Due to the media Nationalism was created, as it was not around 200 years ago. This shows how important these papers are in showing us the world we live in. Now in modern times, there are other ways of checking the news and much faster ways of finding a story, and that is buy computer or mobile devices. This has lead in the drop of sales of papers and is slowly being replaced by technology. However the main question is do these text contain any meaning to them, do they make us think or are they just another everyday commodity we buy into?
-Rebecca Walters
Tuesday 16 November 2010
TV as a Cultural Phenomenon
TV is a 20th Century phenomenon. Yet, in 1940 2/3 of the UK had never even set eyes on a television set. TV became increasing popular as years past, people enjoyed the idea of home entertainment rather than having to go off to the theatre. As TV became more popular, it also became more affordable. By the 1960's 72% of people had access to a TV. There were two main channels that dominated the screens during this period, BBC and ITV, unlike the plethora of channels available to us today. In the 60's, TV was seen as a dominant cultural force which had the power to affect people's lives. Left wing politics was hostile to this idea. They argued that TV was Dope and that people were being brainwashed. Despite this, people saw television as a real sense of nationality and togetherness. It was a ritual to sit in front of the television. It was an opportunity for families to get together and watch key events, such as the coronation of the queen and the world cup final. Even if you didn't have a TV yourself, you would go over to your neighbours and watch it on theirs.
We see today the rivalry today between the BBC and ITV and this has been going on for many years. People trusted and accepted the BBC. It was factual and represented high culture. ITV on the other hand, began to show American quiz shows such as 'Opportunity knocks'. This created a watching culture of Americanism and Commercialism. The BBC would teach and ITV would entertain.
There was a competition between populism and elitism starting to develop. ITV became so popular that the BBC had to act. The BBC decided to compete with ITV and put on 'Social Realist Plays' that paved the way for soap operas like Eastenders. Soap operas like Eastenders and Coronation Street became the most popular genre on TV. People could identify with soaps, thus TV was beginning to move from a luxury item to a necessity. Coronation Street started on the 9th September 1960 and is still going strong. Within a year, 20 million people tuned in to see Ken Barlow and co strutting their stuff! We can see the first example of Fandom developing. It became a regional identity. Even the then prime minister Harold Wilson stated that he loved the show in order to keep the voters happy!
One key idea I took from the lecture is that TV is thought provoking. I disagree with R. Hoggart's point that TV is anti-culture and hostile to intellectual activity. TV can be liberating. It can be argued that it is the main source of how people understand the world beyond their own experience. Meanings and messages are encoded and decoded whilst watching TV. Meaning just doesn't happen, it's an ongoing process. It all comes down to the creativity of the audience. The Cultural industry wants us to be commodity consumers and TV does show growth of a commodity culture. e.g. "TV dinners" and the "Tea-V-Tray." Stereotypes are created by TV.
In conclusion, TV is key in how people view the world. The original message may be portrayed as something else. We don't know how the audience will respond. For example, Fandom is evident when we see Star Trek and Dr Who conventions. People respond to things they enjoy. Fan's of TV create more than the text.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)