Analytical and Response Essay – 3rd Draft (other than need to work on ending still!)

Ignorance?

In The Chance for Popular Culture, Paul Goodman claims that culture and art are mass-produced and media-induced attractions, never quite filling, and leaving people with an empty feeling inside which creates a desire for even more unfulfilling art. He suggests, "People are excessively hungry for feeling, for stimulation of torpid routine, for entertainment in boredom, for cathartic release of dammed-up emotional tensions etc." (Goodman, 80). He writes of an endless cycle of attaining a sliver of enjoyment out of an "art" and then craving more as it does not fill the emptiness inside.

According to Paul Goodman, "An art-hungry public is not unfeeling; in fact the Americans are too vulnerable because of their passivity (and ignorance), so that small novelties effect crazes and fads" (Goodman, 85). Fads are the absolute best. It's amazing how quickly they cycle; I remember the 1980's being, well the 1980's; high heels and skinny jeans, big hair and flashy make-up, plaid shirts and leggings. I would grow frustrated with french-rolling my pants just right and trying to control my wayward hair and achieve full hair height with teasing. It's made its return in 2010 and I laugh out loud seeing kids looking just as I looked in my formative years. I remember the aforementioned decade fondly and am decidedly thrilled to hear a 1980's song I was desperately tired of after playing it until my cassette warped.

Paul Goodman also states that there is too much "art", and despite that, Americans are still hungry for more. I agree that art in certain aspects is mass-produced. Magazines that tell us what to read, watch, do and look like spill-over racks at every grocery store. Radio stations play the popular songs until they are burned into the audiences' brains. Movies with the same theme over-populate our theatres. Millions of dollars are spent at the theatres. Trailers shown in thirty-second increments become the biggest inducement to the American public to see the newest and best. Many times I have walked out at the end of a movie thinking I must have seen a thousand movies just like it. I now take that into consideration before I go to the theatres, routinely waiting for the DVD release.

Television with its reality shows, talk shows, Hollywood gossip news giving fifteen minutes of fame for people like the Octo-mom confirm Paul Goodman's statement, "he cannot fail to see that the stupid and preposterous are rewarded" (Goodman, 82). It amazes me that people with no talent and no self-worth become famous and are on the same level as hard-working and dedicated artists. Media-induced "news" of celebrity scandals, hook-ups and break-ups have created an obsessive fascination that overwhelms the American psyche.

However, as I researched the 1940's era in which "The Chance for Popular Culture" was first published, I became increasingly puzzled as to the source of Paul Goodman's dissatisfaction. I recognize names, television and radio shows, music, dances, famous actors and movies. It occurs to me that the 1940's may have been the start of the "greats." Celebrated movies like Casablanca and Fantasia were produced; dances emerged such as the jitterbug, a lively toe-tapping dance; patriotism rang through America and pregnant women proudly showed off their protruded stomachs with drawings of "Kilroy was here" (Goodwin). Rhythm and blues were introduced with names that ring through to this decade such as Ella Fitzgerald and Billie Holiday. In the 1940's, radio was what television is to us today. It was a lifeline of the American public, broadcasting news, music and entertainment. Television became more popular after the war ended and by 1951, 17 million television sets had been sold (Goodwin). Television has degenerated over time, while in the 1940's and 1950's there was quality programming such as GE Theatre, an often live dramatic production; today we have Wife Swap.

The Chance for Popular Culture shows a lack of appreciation for what America and the rest of the world was recovering from, viewing horrific war images and absorbing terrifying news for years. The entire world was emotionally sucked dry for most of the early 1940's from World War II. According to Sue Goodwin in American Culture History 1940-1949, "To show the raw emotions, art became more abstract, was chaotic and shocking in an attempt to maintain humanity in the face of insanity" (Goodwin). Artists will always suffer for their work. Hence the cliché of the "suffering artist." Some artists will be lost in the shuffle while others will rise to fame as I scratch my head wondering if that's really supposed to be considered "art." I would be more apt to agree that Paul Goodman made valid observations in regards to mass produced art if his critique was directed at today's culture versus 1940's culture.

The Chance for Popular Culture conveys an embittered Paul Goodman who seems to feel his good work is going to waste as no one appreciates it, other than a small following of like-minded folks. It is a written lashing of culture that did not heartily accept his work, reflected when he writes about the good, but starving artist, "unless he is rarely philosophical this makes him bitter and envious and, by reaction, foolishly boastful (Goodman, 82)."

In "The Radical Individualism of Paul Goodman", Richard Wall writes that in the late 1940's when The Chance for Popular Culture was first published (referring to Paul Goodman), "he was the prototypical starving artist, discouraged and marginalized, only just making ends meet with his poetry, his fiction and his essays." (Wall) Paul Goodman apparently did not understand that while he may have his pleasures, others may not have the same taste. I believe that everyone has his/her own taste. His judgments of the culture based on generalizations are unfair. There are always going to be "Stepford" wives or drones of some kind, followers and not leaders.

Nonetheless, I do not agree that our chance of having viable culture is based on whether or not we agree with Paul Goodman. Intelligence includes the ability to see and appreciate that people have different tastes. While I may enjoy the finest art in the loftiest of museums, others may not. I also think that he could have reached countless more people without being so abrasive and wordy. It is more effective getting the point across directly and in a way people can understand. I attempted to read more of Paul Goodman's work and was as lost as I would be if I was blindfolded and dropped off in the middle of nowhere.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

 

Goodman, Paul. "The Chance for Popular Culture." Essay (1949): 79-87.

Goodwin, Sue. Lone Star College - Kingwood. 9 7 1999. 3 3 2010 <http://kclibrary.lonestar.edu/decade40.html>.

Wall, Richard. LewRockwell.com. 28 02 2003. 3 3 2010 <http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/wall10.html>.