High culture vs. subculture

Two models of how culture is transmitted in the city

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

Everyday life and (when cultural production becomes a career) “critical mass”

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

Everyday life and (when cultural production becomes a career) “critical mass”

How is this model complicated by the culture industries?

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

Everyday life and (when cultural production becomes a career) “critical mass”

How is this model complicated by the culture industries?

Fordist mass culture: commodification of popular culture creates a new set of norms and institutions at odds with high culture

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

Everyday life and (when cultural production becomes a career) “critical mass”

How is this model complicated by the culture industries?

Fordist mass culture: commodification of popular culture creates a new set of norms and institutions at odds with high culture

Post-Fordist niche culture: commodification of marginality creates crisis of representation and authenticity

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

Everyday life and (when cultural production becomes a career) “critical mass”

How is this model complicated by the culture industries?

Fordist mass culture: commodification of popular culture creates a new set of norms and institutions at odds with high culture

Post-Fordist niche culture: commodification of marginality creates crisis of representation and authenticity

How does this model presume a historic city that might no longer exist?

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

Everyday life and (when cultural production becomes a career) “critical mass”

How is this model complicated by the culture industries?

Fordist mass culture: commodification of popular culture creates a new set of norms and institutions at odds with high culture

Post-Fordist niche culture: commodification of marginality creates crisis of representation and authenticity

How does this model presume a historic city that might no longer exist?

“Court society” and high-cultural institutions are concentrated in the city

High culture Subculture

Urban scale of reference Interurban: integrating the monarchy, nation, empire

Intraurban: wresting space from other groups and neighborhoods

Made possible by Tribute: political allegiance, wealth, trade, and the “best of the best” flow to the city

Urbanization: groups compete for material and symbolic resources, including space

Urban structural context Core-periphery Spatial differentiation: city as “mosaic of little worlds”

Latent function Centralizing and legitimating power via display and inculcation of status codes

Mitigating social disorganization via shared practices, norms & identities

Hierarchical orientation Top-down: “civilization” defined and illustrated

Inverted: “deviance” and marginality normalized

Characteristic setting The palace The enclave

Sustained by Patronage and formal institutions (e.g., music academies)

Everyday life and (when cultural production becomes a career) “critical mass”

How is this model complicated by the culture industries?

Fordist mass culture: commodification of popular culture creates a new set of norms and institutions at odds with high culture

Post-Fordist niche culture: commodification of marginality creates crisis of representation and authenticity

How does this model presume a historic city that might no longer exist?

“Court society” and high-cultural institutions are concentrated in the city

Face-to-face public space: subcultures are reproduced locally, not e.g. through the Internet