High culture vs. subculture Two models of how culture is transmitted in the city.
-
Upload
laurence-fleming -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
1
Transcript of High culture vs. subculture Two models of how culture is transmitted in the city.
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