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>