Reflective Cover Letter

Dear Bob,

The first paper I wrote for this class, as a starting point for my topic of focus for the semester, was a lesson in writing concisely. The word limit was surprisingly challenging for me, and demonstrates the importance of conveying a point succinctly and clearly. So much of rhetorical writing is verbose and convoluted that it is easy to lose the focal point of an argument, and this paper helped me to accomplish this.

Paper 2 was my favorite paper of those that I wrote for this class. While it did not concern such deep issues as racism or sexism or discrimination of any kind, it addressed something that I believe is just as important – the protection of the humanities from commercialization. This paper was the most well-written, I believe, and I will address that later in this letter. This paper helped me to identify two separate sides of an issue, and examine the issues of identification and division within the art world.

Paper 3 was a difficult paper for me to begin to write, because I was not sure how to focus my central point from the previous two papers into a thesis for a full research paper. A continuation of my research and an organizing of this research into a rough draft – extremely rough, in that much of it was just bulleted information – helped me to narrow the focus, although in retrospect I think that trying to tackle the laws of economics, consumer spending patterns, and social acceptance of pop culture versus the fine arts was perhaps too broad a topic for such a narrow paper (only 6-10 pages). Because I was very sick while writing this paper, it is clear (to me, at least) where I had a difficult time focusing my research on my thesis and I was disappointed at the exclusion of some things I felt integral to the issues due to length constraints. This paper was useful in learning to develop themes of inclusion and exclusion, or again, identification and division, and was a central factor in making me see the two in everything in society – which I believe to be a good thing. It is important to see both the highlights and the shadows of society.

While Paper 4 may be the most informal of the papers included within the portfolio (it is, after all, a blog), it was also the item that allowed the most creative and expansive thinking. I felt as though the ability to mull over a topic for an extended period of time before responding to other’s ideas, with the additional bonus of not being face-to-face with other more dominant voices, created a situation that was very conducive to critical examination of emotion, logic, and why we believe the things we believe.

What I gleaned from A Rhetoric of Motives by Kenneth Burke about the rhetoric of identification and division is that with everything, there is a without. For everything that is included, the opposing is excluded. I feel as though this has been referenced in other cultures, such as the yin and yang of Chinese philosophy – darkness and light, male and female, etc. Burke said that, “”To being with identification is, by the same token, though roundabout, to confront the implications of division…Identification is compensatory to division.”

This polarity is reflected in the political climate of this country, as well as the political philosophies around the world. Politicalcompass.org has created a compass of economic and social dimensions, from left to right (economically) and libertarian to authoritarian (socially). The following diagram illustrates my own political commitments – in that my political leanings are quite leftist, although my social leanings are, while libertarian, are not quite so extreme.

As a white female, I have experienced both the privileges that come from being born white in our society as well as being one who is considered “less” than males. I was raised to be comfortable around anyone I met, whether one’s skin was darker or differently hued than mine, or if they had two mommies, or if they spoke a language other than English. As an employee of Washington State University I have worked with several students native to Hong Kong and I feel that this has taught me that rather than being irritated or impatient with those who may come from different cultures than you, even subcultures within your own greater culture, an understanding of those cultures may lead to a mutual dialogue in which one may learn that being “different” from each other does not need to be about division of races, genders, ideologies, or sexual orientations, but can be about identification of those aspects within the different sections and how those identifications may help us come together as a more cohesive, accepting society.

Depending on how one would define a “successful writer,” I feel as though there were two specific instances where I felt particularly successful. I felt that Paper 2 was an example of some of my most eloquent, direct writing. I was proud of phrases such as “The whimsical, fantastical and thoughtful designs of avant-garde haute couture once inspired a community of artists to analyze, criticize, inspect, and admire works of art concocted from satins and silks, rather than canvas and oils” and “Where are the thought-provoking designs that serve to educate or provoke, to promote discussion, like the top hat of human hair created for Gaultier?” (Paper 2). Because writing has always come easily to me, I had stopped exerting much effort on papers that were not necessarily contributory to my (I felt) progress as a writer. This paper was the first in a long time that I made an effort to have the actual writing of the paper sound educated, and I feel that that effort paid off. However, although the ideas may have been expressed in a rougher, more off-the-cuff, manner in Paper 4, the ideas were much more expansive, thoughtful, and contemplative. In an almost “free-write” manner, I felt that my ideas were able to flow more easily and allow me to consider a variety of issues, based off of both my own views and my colleagues’, and that was reflected in the writing.

One thing I learned from the rhetoric of identification, specifically the political compass exercise, was that despite a polarizing appearance – right or left, black or white, right or wrong – is that all of those different elements may be much more like the spatial area of the political compass – that the opinions and ideas of others may be plotted on a wider plane. I feel as though this class has encouraged me to listen to other’s writing and consider their ideas as not “wrong” or “opposing” to my own views, but merely differing in a variety of ways.

The most beneficial aspect of the collaborative quality of this class was how one’s own ideas may feed and grow off of the ideas of others. Never before in a class have my own ideas been influenced – for positive and negative – as they have in this class, within a classroom setting in addition to an online forum. In this class things have been said that have opened my mind to empathy and understanding of others, and in this class things have been said that have reminded me of why I believe particular things to be true. The collaborative nature of both the class itself and the final assignment were mentally stimulating in that they encouraged both the synthesis and diversion of the ideas of those involved – reflecting yet again that identification-division nature. It has reminded me that one must listen to those around them to both understand one’s one ideas as well as the ideas of those with whom they disagree. If one does not listen, there can be no communication or discourse. The most important thing I have learned is that within a collaborative setting, the ability to listen, to truly hear, one’s peers is the most vital tool.

This course has re-affirmed all that I have been taught about academic honesty, although after conducting my own interviews and using them in my own research, I have become even more protective of the writing of others – because I know how I would feel is someone tried to rip off my hard work.

The main thing I learned about racism as it is manifested through the prison system and the greater society as a whole, is that people are entirely too complacent about accepting things as “the way they are.” Society’s views on prisons (that blacks are more likely to commit crimes, etc.) as well as society’s views on any racial “statistic,” it seems, are perfectly contented to believe the ideas of the white hegemony that specific minorities are prone to crime, dirty, unintelligent, athletically-inclined, etc. I feel that this is nowhere more evident than within the cultural infrastructures that society has erected.

One other thing I would like to address about this course is how it has illustrated to me the merits of conversation and dialogue over those of dry research, in which one primarily utilizes the library and other’s research. The interviews I conducted, specifically that with Phil Gruen, professor of architecture, were extremely beneficial in understanding my subject better, despite not being able to use every bit of the interview within my paper. The interviews allowed me to “join the conversation,” if you will, and see the academic world in a new light.

For this course I would give myself an A-. Due to illness I was unable to participate in this course as actively as I would have liked. However, I feel that this class has opened my mind to a more broad, open, global way of thinking, one that utilizes conversations and dialogues with others – whom I realize now that I may call my peers, although they may be wiser than I am. Of the two main readings we did together as a class (Burke and the prison writings), I found Burke to be more helpful because it contained concepts that I was apply to then apply to the prison writings. This class has taught me to recognize social and cultural patterns of thought, to question whether they are just, and to examine how those social and cultural patterns were manifested within me. I have had more epiphanies, about myself, English 460, Pullman, and our society in general, than I have ever had in a class before – about the structures we build about and around ourselves, the conscious and subconscious decisions we make that affect those around us, and those patterns that need to be rethought and reworked. While I feel that this grade is justified because of the development I made as a writer, thinker, and citizen of this world, I also feel that regardless of my final grade, the lessons I have learned in this course reach beyond the classroom or university campus to have influence and impact on all areas of my life, and I will continue to apply those lessons.

Thank you for a fantastic semester,

Katie Vatter

Paper 4, Final Draft - Dec. 2, 2008

For the fourth project, our group conducted tutorials at Bohler Gym for student athletes. We then blogged about the experience, as well as any subsequent revelations concerning equality, race, othering, stereotypes, and assumptions. You can find our blog at this URL:

http://engl460wsu.blogspot.com/


.

Paper 3, Draft 2 - Nov. 4, 2008

Consumer Capitalism: The Effects of the Mass Media in Modern Fine Art

In a country where powerful conglomerates control the distribution of information, Hollywood superstars reign over both tabloids and respected media outlets alike, and the nation’s youth hold increasing fiscal power, it is unsurprising that the role of the fine arts, which once functioned as a prized form of aesthetic expression for ancient civilizations, have become relegated to museums tucked away within sprawling metropoleis and the dusty pages of history texts. The emphasis of mass media of the United States on popular culture leaves little room for the coverage of the fine arts. As the general populace’s exposure to the fine arts, or that art which is created for aesthetics rather than utility, becomes limited, the demand for it diminishes, and the demand for homogenized “popular” art increases. Consumer capitalism combined with the efforts of mass media outlets have forced the fine arts to give way to art that is mass-produced for the consumption of the general populace. This blurring of the line between the art of the masses and fine art is facilitating an inevitable conclusion of a homogenized art world lacking all innovation or imagination.

The role of the arts sector in the American economy.
In 1787, impresario Pasquale Bondini commissioned from composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and librettist Lorenzo da Pont an opera that would become one of the most famous operas of all time – Don Giovanni. The opera was performed to public and critical acclaim throughout Europe and is performed to this day; it has been sampled in a myriad of works, from Liszt’s Rémininscences de Don Juan to the soundtrack of the movie It Happened in Brooklyn. Operas such as Don Giovanni were once popular vehicles for popular thought and culture. They, along with symphonies, portraits and tapestries, cathedrals and parliamentary buildings, once presented fresh and revolutionary ideas to cultures, all in ways that were aesthetically appealing to the eye and ear. One’s socioeconomic status was partially determined by the quantity of literature they possessed and paintings adorning their walls, the structure of their homes, and attendance of the ballet or the opera. In a tradition spanning thousands of years, the foundations of Western culture have been built upon the operatic recitation of tragedies by the ancient Greeks, the symphonic stylings of Amadeus Mozart and Johann Sebastian Bach, the erection of the great Gothic cathedrals of the likes of Maurice de Sulley’s Notre Dame, the ceilings of Michelangelo and the statues of Donatello. The United States, a young nation in comparison to those spanning Western Europe, had the opportunity to incorporate historical art, music, and architecture from the émigrés appearing at its shores. Yet rather than increasing, the role of the fine arts in American society has shrunk.

In 1997, American consumers spent $9.991 billion on admissions to live performing arts (including opera, dance and symphony concerts). While this statistic seems a large sum at first glance, once must take into account that in the same year, consumers spent $28.290 billion on cable television (Heilbrun 7-8). Or, the estimated size of the art sector for that year is $19.583 billion, and the gross domestic product of the United States was $7,191.4 billion; therefore, the estimated size of the art sector of the economy was 0.218% of the total GDP (Heilbrun 9). The fact that fine art and culture plays such a minute role in one of the most powerful nations in the world is both surprising and troubling. (Note: the general lack of statistical data regarding the various facets of the fine arts makes it impossible for one to discern between them [Heilbrun 7].)

Consumer Capitalism and Mass Media
A large contributing factor to the demise of the fine arts in American culture is consumer capitalism. Consumer capitalism, the theoretical economic and cultural condition in which consumer demand is manipulated through mass-marketing techniques to the advantage of sellers, is capitalism on the grandest of scales. It suggests manipulation of consumer demand so potent it borders on coercion, amounting to a departure from free-market capitalism and ultimately inflicts an adverse effect on society in general (Wikipedia “consumer capitalism”). This manipulation of consumers is nowhere more evident than in the world of the fine arts, where consumers tastes are manipulated through mass-media outlets, such as television, radio, and contemporary literature. James Heilbrun, author of The Economics of Art and Culture, writes,
“Art is said to be an ‘aquired’ or ‘cultivated’ taste. [One] has to be familiar with art to find pleasure in it, and the more familiar with it you become the more pleasure you find. [If] taste itself depends on exposure, we are in danger of being trapped in a suboptimal position, in the following sense. Consumers would greatly enjoy art if they were familiar with it; however, familiarity comes only with exposure, and the public will not expose themselves to it since they have not the taste…From the point of view of high art the situation is aggravated by the collective impact of the mass media. The tastes for popular art is also an acquired one, but in this case the public gets plenty of exposure and is almost guaranteed to acquire the taste because the mass media …provide little else. The mass media cater to the taste of the majority, in this case for popular culture, such as the various forms of rock or country music; exposure through the mass media reinforces that taste; audience surveys then inform commercial producers that popular culture is what audiences want and the profit motive insures that they will continue giving it to them.” (361)

Heilbrun succinctly points the finger that the heart of the issue –the mass media’s lack of promotion of fine art drives down public demand, effectively shrinking the supply of fine art. Its converse, in which the mass media propagates popular culture, increases consumer spending.
Unfortunately, today, the only review that counts in the real world is, as one writer put is, “sales in stores” (The End of Fashion 6). These homogenized forms of so-called “art” have been popularized by the mass media for fiscal gain, to the detriment of high art as a whole. As commercialism has consumed the art world, works of art “have become quasifinancial instruments” (Heilbrun 169). George Ritzer, author of The McDonaldization of Society, claims despite its perversion of high art forms, mass media favors its current modus operandi because it offers “efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control” over consumers (xv). Heilbrun ultimately concludes that “in the competition between popular culture and high art, the commercial mass media bias the outcome very sharply in favor of the former” (361).

Painting and Printing
In the art world, a painting by a high-profile painter has commands a certain level of respect – as well as a top dollar price-tag. While this may lead the average consumer to believe that the fine arts are a lucrative industry, one must only look at basic economics to see otherwise. The demand curve of a single buyer (the purchaser of one painting, one sculpture, or one print) typically has little effect on the overall market, since a single buyer is “rarely important enough to influence the outcome in any market” (Heilbrun 66). This means that while there are the few artists, such as Jeff Koons or Damien Hirst, whose annual income tops the million dollar range, the vast majority of artists must struggle to maintain a balance between their art and being self-sustaining, in order to not become the the archetypal “starving artist.” This occasionally results in the products of artists such as Thomas Kinkade, whose multimillion dollar enterprise has produced hundreds of pastel scenes, replete with fairy-tale cottages and Biblical references, that adorn the walls of American homes. According to Heilbrun, “purchases of most types of art increase as household wealth increases…among the exceptions to this rule are so-called inferior goods, which may actually decline as wealth rise” (178). These include reproductions, posters, or prints such as Kinkade’s.

While most fine artists, such as Kevin Haas, professor of print-making at Washington State University, are dismissive of Kinkade as a “fine artist,” Haas does point out that Kinkade has made a conscious business decision to cater to the American consumer, which many artists fail to do – and then cannot earn a living. “Some art, because of who makes it or how it is made, becomes incredibly expensive and is out of reach for most people,” Haas says. While printmaking tends to be more “democratic” due to its accessibility, and does not carry the elitist connotation painting and sculpture does, all three can be intimidating and confusing to the public (Haas). This is contributory to the public’s lack of interest – and demand – for fine art. And, again, if the public does not demand certain types of art, the media will not promote it, and if the media fails to promote the fine arts, they will continue to struggle.

Architecture
High architecture, according to John Chase in The Role of Consumerism in American Culture, is an internally oriented self-referential art form that does not have to communicate with or involve the public (211). He also writes that a building is consumerist in nature “when [its] design advertises the businesses [it] houses or intensifies the experience offered therein,” noting also that “architecture that responds to consumerism deals in direct, rather than abstract, symbolism” (211). Because architecture is the most visible of the fine arts, it often appears to be more of a public enterprise – and to some extent, this is true. If something is privately owned and there is enough money to build, one doesn’t have to consider public opinion, but then again no one will develop something with private money unless there is the demand for it (Gruen). Modern architecture has become more consumerist in that it symbolically suggests specific ideas. Take, for example, banks. Modern bank architects often include classical architectures – Doric, Ionic or Corinthian columns, entablatures, etc. This “‘architectural language’ stands for permanence, assurance, and stability [inherent in ancient Greek designs],” says Phil Gruen, professor of architecture at Washington State University. Similar service-geared architecture, such as McDonald’s Golden Arches, reflects the consumerism of modern architecture. Phil Gruen concludes, “I don’t know what would be something that exists outside of this paradigm, as long as we have a society that is based on the increase of capital.”

Criticism
Not all believe, however, that commercialism has consumed the art world. Critics of the theory of consumer capitalism hold that advertising is neither coersive nor effective, and claim that allegations of a coordinated effort to manipulate public opinion are nothing more than a conspiracy theory (The Century of Self). However, one only must look at celebrity endorsements or trends in fashion, automotives and interior design to see that it is in reality quite easy to manipulate public opinion – especially a public who is so eager to be manipulated (Heilbrun 26).

While there does exist some art that is both accessible ideologically and affordable monetarily to the public, such as prints, this is due largely in part to the handmade quality of the art. Prints, for example, are ideal for one who has the interest but not the means, in that they are at once able to be reproduced but are each unique (Haas). Phil Gruen agrees, saying, “In terms of art for art’s sake – there is, have been, and will continue to be, [within] the built environment individual architects or firms that are clearly building in ways that symbolically or otherwise set their buildings apart from the public good.” Gruen refers to this as high end architecture, as opposed to the vernacular architecture – although high end occasionally samples elements of the vernacular. This effort to combine the two makes fine architecture more accessible to the public, much the way Haas’ prints do. This cultivates further taste in fine art, despite the efforts of the mass media to convince the public otherwise.

Conclusion
Will the art sector maintain its integrity, despite the influences of the media and the public? Gruen muses, “I think there are possibilities for a non-consumerist kind of architecture. I do think that there is. What that looks like in a capitalist society, I don’t know.” Despite small advances in subsets of the fine arts, it appears that for the most part the fine arts will continue to struggle, swimming upstream against a current of societal reluctance with the weight of mass media marketing tied to its ankles.


Works Cited
Cerni, Paula. "The Age of Consumer Capitalism." Cultural Logic, 2007.

Heilbrun, James, and Charles M. Gray. The Economics of Art and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Ritzer, George. The McDonaldization of Society 5. Thousand Oaks, California: Pine Forge Press, 2008.

Aristotle. “The Poetics.” Republic.< http://www.authorama.com/the-poetics-2.html>

Chase, John. “The Role of Consumerism in American Architecture.” Journal of Architectural Education. Aug. 1991. pp. 211-224. Vol. 44, No. 4. < http://www.jstor.org/pss/1425143>

Gruen, Phil. Personal interview. 2008.

Haas, Kevin. Personal interview. 2008.

Horyn, Cathy. "Fashion, but maybe beside the point." NewYorkTimes.com. 8 Sept. 2008.The New York Times.8 Sept. 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/fashion/shows/09review.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=fashion,%20but%20maybe%20beside%20the%20point&st=cse&oref=slogin >

Roulet, Norm. "Art, McDonaldization, and the Globalization of Society." RealNeo. 6 Nov. 2004.Cleveland Institute of Art.38 Sept. 2008 http://realneo.us/blog/norm-roulet/11/05/04-7-8-pm-art-mcdonaldization-and-the-globalization-of-society.

Target Brands, Inc. "Women." Target.com. Target Brands, Inc. 23 Sept. 2008 http://www.target.com/women/b/ref=nav_t_spc_1_1/601-6704314-2507318?ie=utf8&node=1041790.

The Century of Self. Dir. Adam Curtis. DVD. 2002.

Whiteley, Nigel. “Pop, Consumerism, and the Design Shift.” Design Issues,, Vol. 2, No. 2 Design Issues. Autumn 1985. pp. 31-45, Vol. 2, No. 2 < http://www.jstor.org/pss/1511416>

Paper 3, Draft 1 - Oct. 14, 2008

Consumer Capitalism: The Effects of the Mass Media in Modern Fine Art


In a country where powerful conglomerates control the distribution of information, Hollywood superstars reign supreme over both tabloids and respected media outlets alike, and the nation’s youth hold increasing fiscal power, it is unsurprising that the role of the fine arts, once functioning as a prized form of aesthetic expression for ancient civilizations, have become relegated to museums tucked away within sprawling metropoleis and the dusty pages of history texts. The emphasis of mass media of the United States on popular culture leaves little room for the coverage of the fine arts. As the general populace’s exposure to the fine arts, or that art which is created for aesthetics rather than utility, becomes limited, the demand for it diminishes, and the demand for homogenized “popular” art increases. Consumer capitalism combined with the efforts of mass media outlets have forced the fine arts to give way to art that is mass-produced for the consumption of the general populace. This blurring of the line between the art of the masses and fine art is facilitating an inevitable conclusion of a homogenized art world lacking all innovation or imagination.

Paragraph 1: The role of the arts sector in the American economy.

In 1787, impresario Pasquale Bondini commissioned from composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and librettist Lorenzo da Pont an opera that would become one of the most famous operas of all time – Don Giovanni. The opera was performed to public and critical acclaim throughout Europe and is performed to this day; it has been sampled in a myriad of works, from Liszt’s Rémininscences de Don Juan to the soundtrack of the movie It Happened in Brooklyn. Operas such as Don Giovanni were once popular vehicles for popular thought and culture. They, along with symphonies, portraits and tapestries, cathedrals and parliamentary buildings, once presented fresh and revolutionary ideas to cultures, all in ways that were aesthetically appealing to the eye and ear. One’s socioeconomic status was partially determined by the quantity of literature they possessed and paintings adorning their walls, the structure of their homes, and attendance of the ballet or the opera. In a tradition spanning thousands of years, the foundations of Western culture have been built upon the operatic recitation of tragedies by the ancient Greeks, the symphonic stylings of Amadeus Mozart and Johann Sebastian Bach, the erection of the great Gothic cathedrals of the likes of Maurice de Sulley’s Notre Dame, the ceilings of Michelangelo and the statues of Donatello. The United States, a young nation in comparison to those spanning Western Europe, had the opportunity to incorporate historical art, music, and architecture from the émigrés appearing at its shores. Yet rather than increasing, the role of the fine arts in American society has shrunk.

In 1997, American consumers spent $9.991 billion on admissions to live performing arts (including opera, dance and symphony concerts). While this statistic seems a large sum at first glance, once must take into account that in the same year, consumers spent $28.290 billion on cable television (Heilbrun 7-8). Or, the estimated size of the art sector for that year is $19.583 billion, and the gross domestic product of the United States was $7,191.4 billion; therefore, the estimated size of the art sector of the economy was 0.218% of the total GDP (Heilbrun 9). The fact that fine art and culture plays such a minute role in one of the most powerful nations in the world is both troubling and . (Note: the general lack of statistical data regarding the various facets of the fine arts makes it impossible for one to discern between them [Heilbrun 7].)

Paragraph 2: Consumer Capitalism and Mass Media

A large contributing factor to the demise of the fine arts in American culture is consumer capitalism. Consumer capitalism, the theoretical economic and cultural condition in which consumer demand is manipulated through mass-marketing techniques to the advantage of sellers, is capitalism on the grandest of scales. It suggests manipulation of consumer demand so potent it borders on coercion, amounting to a departure from free-market capitalism and ultimately inflicts an adverse effect on society in general (Wikipedia “consumer capitalism”).

This manipulation of consumers is nowhere more evident than in the world of the fine arts, where consumers tastes are manipulated through mass-media outlets, such as television, radio, and contemporary literature. James Heilbrun, author of The Economics of Art and Culture, writes,
“Art is said to be an ‘aquired’ or ‘cultivated’ taste. [One] has to be familiar with art to find pleasure in it, and the more familiar with it you become the more pleasure you find. [If] taste itself depends on exposure, we are in danger of being trapped in a suboptimal position, in the following sense. Consumers would greatly enjoy art if they were familiar with it; however, familiarity comes only with exposure, and the public will not expose themselves to it since they have not the taste…From the point of view of high art the situation is aggravated by the collective impact of the mass media. The tastes for popular art is also an acquired one, but in this case the public gets plenty of exposure and is almost guaranteed to acquire the taste because the mass media …provide little else. The mass media cater to the taste of the majority, in this case for popular culture, such as the various forms of rock or country music; exposure through the mass media reinforces that taste; audience surveys then inform commercial producers that popular culture is what audiences want and the profit motive insures that they will continue giving it to them.” (361)

Heilbrun succinctly points the finger that the heart of the issue –the mass media’s lack of promotion of fine art drives down public demand, effectively shrinking the supply of fine art. Its converse, in which the mass media propagates popular culture – such as dubbing the paintings of Thomas Kinkade “fine art” – increases consumer spending. [Burke – ignoring one thing gives attention to another and vice versa] Unfortunately, today, the only review that counts in the real world is, as one writer put is, “sales in stores” (The End of Fashion 6). These homogenized forms of so-called “art” have been popularized by the mass media for fiscal gain, to the detriment of high art as a whole. As commercialism has consumed the art world, works of art “have become quasifinancial instruments” (Heilbrun 169). George Ritzer, author of The McDonaldization of Society, claims despite its perversion of high art forms, mass media favors its current modus operandi because it offers “efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control” over consumers (xv). Heilbrun ultimately concludes that “in the competition between popular culture and high art, the commercial mass media bias the outcome very sharply in favor of the former” (361).

· “In economics, consumption is the primary motivating force in the wealth or utility-maximizing paradigm…With the development of a consumer society, increasing consumer power in the market place, the growth in marketing, advertising, sophisticated consumers, ethical consumption, etc., it is recognized as central to modern life.”
· “A main concern [of economic materialism] is that materialism is unable to offer a proper raison d’être for human existence.” (Wikipedia)
· “One needs to look no further than the celebrity endorsement of products to dissuade the notion that American population makes its own decisions and modens itself as a group of individualists.” (Wikipedia “consumerism”)
· “My experience in lecturing on this theme shows that audiences generally support McDonaldization and feel protective toward it.” (Ritzer xv)

Paragraph 3: Painting
· “ ‘Production’ in the fine arts is carried out by painters and sculptors, and distribution of the product is handled by dealers and galleries. Unfortunately, we lack data on the value of these goods and services and so must omit it from the table.” (Heilbrun 9)
· Instead, artists like Thomas Kinkade have created a new niche, in which art is produced solely to attract consumers, rather than to inspire introspection or thought. Kinkade’s pastel portrayal of glowing bucolic scenes, replete with fairy-tale cottages and Biblical references, might inspire a regurgatory reflex in some critics, but have also earned Kinkade $53 million between 1997 and 2005 – myth has it that one in twenty American homes possess a Kinkade print.
· Heilbrun 176 – price impact of supply increase by artist
· “The demand curve of a single buyer, however, is not usually of much interest, since a single buyer is rarely important enough to influence the outcome in any market.” (Heilbrun 66)
· “According to the theory of asset demand, the decision to acquire art depends on the following: wealth, expected return on the asset relative to the return on all potential substitutes, expected risk, liquidity, tastes and preferences.” (Heilbrun 177)
· “Households that are wealthy can buy more assets, including art, than those that are not…Accordingly, we would expect purchases of most types of art to increase as household wealth increases. Among the exceptions to this general rule are so-called inferior goods, purchases of which may actually decline as wealth rises. Examples from the art world might include reproductions or art posters, which is many households are relegated to the basement of storage closets in response to growing affluence.” (Heilbrun 178)

Paragraph 4: Architecture
· John Chase, author of The Role of Consumerism in American Culture, writes that a building is consumerist in nature “when [its] design advertises the businesses [it] houses or intensifies the experience offered therein” (211). He also notes that “architecture that responds to consumerism deals in direct, rather than abstract, symbolism” (211).
· “the aesthetic of which all served as cultural and political symbols for spiritual and social systems”
· the history and provenance
· The McDonaldization of America, Ikea – page 5
· duplicative architecture – fast food restaurants, store chains, Walmart, Safeway, etc.

Paragraph 5: The Performing Arts
· Growth of the arts sector: Between 1984 and 1993, there was a 5.1% decrease in the attendance at five major dance companies. (Heilbrun 25) Between 1988 and 1995, there was a decrease of 13% and 15.3%, respectively, of symphony orchestra concerts offered, and attendance, despite a 17.2% rise in disposable personal income (Heilbrun 25).
· Disposable income is “the income available to consumers for spending or saving” (Heilbrun 13)
· Consumer spending as a percentage of disposable personal income has remained steady throughout the decades, from 0.155 (1929), 0.111 (1947), 0.091 (1980), and 0.134 (1990) to 0.170 (1997).

Paragraph 7: Criticism
· Critics of the theory of consumer capitalism hold that advertising is neither coersive nor probably effective…and that allegations of a coordinated effort to manipulate public opinion are nothing more than a conspiracy theory. (Stiegler, The Disaffected Individual – Ars Industrialis – read manifesto)

Conclusion:
· swimming upstream against a current of societal reluctance with the weight of mass media marketing tied to its ankles.

Works Cited

Cerni, Paula. "The Age of Consumer Capitalism." Cultural Logic, 2007.

Heilbrun, James, and Charles M. Gray. The Economics of Art and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Ritzer, George. The McDonaldization of Society 5. Thousand Oaks, California: Pine Forge Press, 2008.

Aristotle. “The Poetics.” Republic.< http://www.authorama.com/the-poetics-2.html>

Chase, John. “The Role of Consumerism in American Architecture.” Journal of Architectural Education. Aug. 1991. pp. 211-224. Vol. 44, No. 4. < http://www.jstor.org/pss/1425143>

Horyn, Cathy. "Fashion, but maybe beside the point." NewYorkTimes.com. 8 Sept. 2008.The New York Times.8 Sept. 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/fashion/shows/09review.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=fashion,%20but%20maybe%20beside%20the%20point&st=cse&oref=slogin >

Roulet, Norm. "Art, McDonaldization, and the Globalization of Society." RealNeo. 6 Nov. 2004.Cleveland Institute of Art.38 Sept. 2008 http://realneo.us/blog/norm-roulet/11/05/04-7-8-pm-art-mcdonaldization-and-the-globalization-of-society.

Target Brands, Inc. "Women." Target.com. Target Brands, Inc. 23 Sept. 2008 http://www.target.com/women/b/ref=nav_t_spc_1_1/601-6704314-2507318?ie=utf8&node=1041790.

Whiteley, Nigel. “Pop, Consumerism, and the Design Shift.” Design Issues,, Vol. 2, No. 2 Design Issues. Autumn 1985. pp. 31-45, Vol. 2, No. 2 < http://www.jstor.org/pss/1511416>

Paper 2, Draft 2 - Sept. 30, 2008

Commercialization in the United States: The Escalation of Consumerism in Modern Fine Art

Since the days of Thorstein Veblen’s theories of conspicuous consumption, consumerism in capitalist society has proved itself to be arguably the most powerful social and economic force in the United States. Nowhere is this more evident than in the sprawling stretches of suburbia, where Kinkade prints line écru walls and pairs of stilettos by Isaac Mizrahi™ for Target® rest in every closet on an Ikea shelf. With every housing development built and clothing line unveiled, a new bastardization of a pure art form is revealed. The fine arts expounded upon in the discourses of Aristotle have given way to an assortment of artists who mass-produce their art for the consumption of the general populace, rather than create an intrinsically abstract self-referential piece of art. The line between the art of the masses and fine art, or art created for aesthetics rather than utility, appears to have been blurred beyond recognition in 21st century Americana, with its inevitable conclusion of a homogenized art world looming ominously on the horizon.

A recent article in the New York Times decried the blatant consumerism present at Bryant Park during New York Fashion Week. “Now that the runways are a medium for just about everything – celebrity, marketing, corporations – you can never be sure of the message, if there is one at all,” author Cathy Horyn gripes, adding, “Young designers tend to dress the women around them rather than provide direction of their own.” Her critique is harsh, but deserved. The whimsical, fantastical and thoughtful designs of avant-garde haute couture once inspired a community of artists to analyze, criticize, inspect, and admire works of art concocted from satins and silks, rather than canvas and oils. Today, anyone who entertains the notion may become a fashion designer (note Sarah Jessica Parker’s Bitten line for retailer Steve & Barry’s), and even those who are qualified are more preoccupied with popular consumption than the pioneering of fresh and progressive designs. Designers Isaac Mizrahi and the men behind fashion line Proenza Schouler, Lazaro Hernandez and Jack McCollough, all of whom were educated at Parson’s School of Design and interned at couture houses, prefer to focus energies and capital on Target Corporation’s Go International™ line. Where are the thought-provoking designs that serve to educate or provoke, to promote discussion, like the top hat of human hair created for Gaultier’s surrealism-themed Autumn 2006 line, or Miguel Androver’s surcoat fashioned from a mattress found on the streets of Manhattan? Horyn’s assessment of the fashions displayed at Fashion Week reveal very few. Haute couture has become a farce, played out by designers whose primary goal is to make their designs applicable to the masses, thus losing the individuality and abstraction that earned its status as an art form.

Haute couture is not the only art form to fall for the seduction of mass consumption. The traditional art world, that of painting and printmaking and sculpture, is similarly captivated by the sales figures of mass-produced artwork. This is not the pop art of Lichtenstein or Warhol, which was a response to abstract expressionism and took material from popular culture for contemplation and discussion. Instead, artists like Thomas Kinkade have created a new niche, in which art is produced solely to attract consumers, rather than to inspire introspection or thought. Kinkade’s pastel portrayal of glowing bucolic scenes, replete with fairy-tale cottages and Biblical references, might inspire a regurgatory reflex in some critics, but have also earned Kinkade $53 million between 1997 and 2005 – myth has it that one in twenty American homes possess a Kinkade print. This debasement of one of the very tenets of fine art, that a piece need not communicate with, nor even involve, the public, manages to pervert the art form beyond recognition. Unfortunately, Kinkade’s success serves as a lesson for future artists, the same one young fashion designers learn; that they who possess the technical skills can find more success by applying those skills to products with mass appeal, than by producing intelligent, reflective works.

It is a sad commentary on the state of consumerism in the United States that Kinkade’s paintings and Mizrahi’s apparel fit seamlessly into the American scene. This is not surprising, however, in a country where shopping malls and theme parks are built and remodeled more often than libraries and universities. John Chase, author of The Role of Consumerism in American Culture, writes that a building is consumerist in nature “when [its] design advertises the businesses [it] houses or intensifies the experience offered therein” (211). He also notes that “architecture that responds to consumerism deals in direct, rather than abstract, symbolism” (211). In the place of the pyramids of the Egyptians or the colosseums of the Romans or even the Art Deco skyscrapers of the 1930s, the aesthetic of which all served as cultural and political symbols for spiritual and social systems, modern America erected sprawling strip malls and cookie-cutter developments (which perhaps on some level do function as symbols of American spiritual and social systems).

Some proponents of so-called “art” for the masses would no doubt disagree with the assertions made in this essay. Isaac Mizrahi, of course, would dispute the claim that he is surrendering to corporate America, claiming to simply be making high fashion available to the public at affordable rates. Thomas Kinkade would object that his paintings are not homogenous and empty, rather, they emphasize the simple pleasures of life. John Chase would argue that high art architecture has faltered because modern architects have yet to fully understand the suburban landscape. While these claims are superficially true, and there do exist a few artists today who are committed to creating true fine art, it cannot be denied that the vast majority of modern fine art lacks innovation as well as imagination. The people of the United States desperately need to demand fine art that is intrinsically reflective, art whose essential nature is contributory to society in a way that broadens and expands the minds of the people, stimulating question and discussion, to save society from descending into a quagmire of unseeing thoughtless and limitless apathy.

Works Cited:


Aristotle. “The Poetics.” Republic.< http://www.authorama.com/the-poetics-2.html>
Chase, John. “The Role of Consumerism in American Architecture.” Journal of Architectural Education. Aug. 1991. pp. 211-224. Vol. 44, No. 4. < http://www.jstor.org/pss/1425143>

Horyn, Cathy. "Fashion, but maybe beside the point." NewYorkTimes.com. 8 Sept. 2008.The New York Times.8 Sept. 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/fashion/shows/09review.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=fashion,%20but%20maybe%20beside%20the%20point&st=cse&oref=slogin >

Roulet, Norm. "Art, McDonaldization, and the Globalization of Society." RealNeo. 6 Nov. 2004.Cleveland Institute of Art.38 Sept. 2008 http://realneo.us/blog/norm-roulet/11/05/04-7-8-pm-art-mcdonaldization-and-the-globalization-of-society.

Target Brands, Inc. "Women." Target.com. Target Brands, Inc. 23 Sept. 2008 http://www.target.com/women/b/ref=nav_t_spc_1_1/601-6704314-2507318?ie=utf8&node=1041790.

Whiteley, Nigel. “Pop, Consumerism, and the Design Shift.” Design Issues,, Vol. 2, No. 2 Design Issues. Autumn 1985. pp. 31-45, Vol. 2, No. 2 < http://www.jstor.org/pss/1511416>
Agins, Teri. The End of Fashion : How Marketing Changed the Clothing Business Forever. New York: Harper Paperbacks, 2001.

Paper 2, Draft 1 - Sept. 22, 2008

If one were to view the extraordinary concoctions made popular in the nineteen seventies by John Paul Gaultier, or Bob Mackie’s whimsical creations of the late eighties, or the fantastical designs of John Galliano in the nineteen nineties, one would perhaps comprehend a fraction of the fantasy, the escapism and the story inherent to high fashion. Couturiers have long paraded garments feathered and leathered, bustier-ed and bustled, sequined and beaded down the runways of fashions most elite cities, all with the most powerful of socially constructed messages. The gaping discrepancies between the whimsy of couture fashions and the practicality of prête-à-porter (off-the-rack) garments has always been accepted, much like the abstraction of Picasso is accepted while a young art student must toil to create the most accurate human form.

A recent article in the New York Times, heralded as a beacon of intellectual truth since its inception in 1851, bemoans the state of high fashion today, writing, “Now that the runways are a medium for just about everything…you can never be sure of the message, if there is one at all.” Author Cathy Horyn decries the impact of mass consumerism and designer apathy on an apparently disintegrating fashion industry in an article that both critiques stagnant designers as well as lauds the exceptional few. Horyn claims, “Young designers tend to dress the women around them rather than provide direction of their own,” which is a far cry from the avant-garde couture creations of years past. Is high fashion merely in a downswing created by the pendulum of fresh and stale ideas? Or is the state of high fashion declining due to the mass commercialization of the entire industry?

Point 1: lack of creative designs/imagination/fresh ideas/a message in couture fashion

“Ultimately tens of millions of dollars will be spent on collections, but…you have to wonder what you’re supposed to understand?”

“Jonathan Saunders, who is based in London, is an exception among young designers — or, anyway, he belongs to the school that doesn’t think it hurts to properly make a seam and actually propose something thoughtful as well as eye-catching.”

Point 2: greater number of designers designing for the masses – ex. Proenza Schueller and Isaac Mizrahi for Target (Target.com) – rather than for fantasy, leading to the specific marketing of garments to an actual demographic rather than the designer having a message for his viewers.

Point 3: women have more outlets today than ever to exercise their fantasies – the internet, vacations, more opportunities available, etc. – and combined with the more casual trend in fashion need extravagant clothing less and less, and the fantastical designs appeal to them less and less.

Cathy Horyn writes, “Women love to exercise their fantasies, and that is why we have designers.”

Conclusion

Works Cited:
1. Target Brands, Inc. "Women." Target.com. Target Brands, Inc. 23 Sept. 2008 http://www.target.com/women/b/ref=nav_t_spc_1_1/601-6704314-2507318?ie=utf8&node=1041790.

2. Horyn, Cathy. "Fashion, but maybe beside the point." NewYorkTimes.com. 8 Sept. 2008.The New York Times.8 Sept. 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/fashion/shows/09review.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=fashion,%20but%20maybe%20beside%20the%20point&st=cse&oref=slogin..

Paper 1, Draft 2 - Sept. 16, 2008

New York Fashion Week: Leave the Consumerism Comments Outside the Tents

To the Editor,

I am writing in reference to Cathy Horyn’s piece, “Fashion, But Maybe Beside the Point,” from Monday’s Fashion & Style section. While it is true the piece is a review, and therefore subject to the author’s interpretations, it does not necessarily follow that the Horyn needs to spend the first half of the piece bemoaning the state of consumerism in today’s fashion industry. Horyn states, “Now that the runways are a medium for just about everything…you can never be sure of the message, if there is one at all,” then follows this closely with, “Ultimately tens of millions of dollars will be spent on collections, but…you have to wonder what you’re supposed to understand?”

Although Horyn does not say so directly, she apparently assumes that her readers would prefer to hear her dwell on what hors d’oeuvres were served outside the tents, rather than hear details about actual collections. My own view, however, is that if one is reading a review of New York Fashion Week in the New York Times, one perhaps might have more than a passing interest in the fashions shown there. By failing to capture the magic and escapism of fashion, it is insulting to the reader to whom these are inherently present. In the future, I suggest that Horyn focus her comments on the subject her readers want to read about, and leave her irrelevant remarks out.

Sincerely,

Katherine Vatter