I am a total film nut and this can’t help but influence my posts here. So I am going to start this one with an anecdote from the Toronto Film Festival. I saw a German film during the fest called Reclaim Your Brain (the German title is Free Rainer) directed by Hans Weingartner (who directed a brilliant film from a few years ago called The Edjukators). The film is about an ex-schlock TV exec who gathers a group of misfits to hack into the ratings system and boost the ratings of intelligent shows and deflate the ratings of stupid TV, thus creating a shift in German thinking and encouraging the mass audiences to watch intelligent television and actually think about the world.
The film had some troubling ideas for me (that there should be some kind of vanguard group deciding what is appropriately intelligent culture) despite for the most part agreeing with its message. But it is the Question and Answer session afterwards that I really want to talk about. The director was understandably very bitter about the state of cultural industries around the world, saying that there is a general dumbing down of all types of media. He explained that his film would never get a theatrical release in Canada and may never even make it to DVD. He argued that distribution companies only want films with short scenes, lots of action and violence and avoid thought provoking films like the proverbial plague. As well Weingartner explained, filmmakers like himself are also being hurt by downloading. He says he is losing his audience because those who are interested in foreign film often don’t buy dvds or go to the theatre and those who do buy dvds or go to the theatre all the time, don’t watch independent German films anyway. Obviously the director knows of what he speaks, he’s out there trying to make a go of it with politically aware (if somewhat obvious and preachy) film and being shut down by the Hollywood machine.
So here’s where the Information Studies part of my brain clicked in: what is our role as Information Professionals in promoting culture? If we become librarians what is our role in promoting “culture”? Do we have a responsibility to promote a certain kind of culture? And if we do promote it, how can we get people to listen? And if society is less interested in thinking, where do we stand? We deal with issues like this all the time. We deal with issues relating to what kinds of works to store in a collection (balancing popular titles with challenging ones). But as Information Professionals we also deal with this general laziness in culture. Just as Weingartner complains that mass audiences don’t want to do the work of unpacking the meaning of a political film, some people argue that the majority of the population now just turn to Google and Wikipedia and that is where their research ends. So are we, especially those who work in libraries, being made redundant by this? To answer that we have to ask a few more questions: Is Weingartner right? Is culture declining? And if so what kind of culture should be promoted instead? Who decides? Who decides whether television is socially relevant and intelligent enough?
I am a big supporter of non-mainstream music, movies and writing but on the other hand, I am always bothered when people start talking about how things have gotten so bad and about the brainlessness of popular culture. Those kind of statements always seem so elitist to me. Popular culture is popular because people like it, so obviously it speaks to them. Obviously less mainstream culture doesn’t speak to as many people, which is what makes it strong in my mind because it doesn’t pander to a wide majority. But there is something to be said for something that has mass appeal. However, it makes me very nervous when popular culture drowns out all other kind of culture. Weingartner’s concerns are interesting to me because similar to the issue of internet technology in Library Science, what he’s actually saying is that easier access to non-mainstream culture is in some ways hurting those industries of cultural production. The fact that people can easily download a film is good because they get to see something they might not have seen but bad because they give those weasel-y producers ammunition in rejecting intelligent, thought provoking scripts. The answer to that seems clear to me, that we need to rethink the distribution of works like film and music. Just as we need to rethink how libraries are organized, so too on a larger scale do we need to think about how we deal with such readily available information and culture. I believe this thinking must include how we will protect vulnerable industries like independent film.
I don’t really have any answers here, just lots of rambling questions. Maybe there aren’t any answers, but I think we all need to keep discussing the questions.
The film had some troubling ideas for me (that there should be some kind of vanguard group deciding what is appropriately intelligent culture) despite for the most part agreeing with its message. But it is the Question and Answer session afterwards that I really want to talk about. The director was understandably very bitter about the state of cultural industries around the world, saying that there is a general dumbing down of all types of media. He explained that his film would never get a theatrical release in Canada and may never even make it to DVD. He argued that distribution companies only want films with short scenes, lots of action and violence and avoid thought provoking films like the proverbial plague. As well Weingartner explained, filmmakers like himself are also being hurt by downloading. He says he is losing his audience because those who are interested in foreign film often don’t buy dvds or go to the theatre and those who do buy dvds or go to the theatre all the time, don’t watch independent German films anyway. Obviously the director knows of what he speaks, he’s out there trying to make a go of it with politically aware (if somewhat obvious and preachy) film and being shut down by the Hollywood machine.
So here’s where the Information Studies part of my brain clicked in: what is our role as Information Professionals in promoting culture? If we become librarians what is our role in promoting “culture”? Do we have a responsibility to promote a certain kind of culture? And if we do promote it, how can we get people to listen? And if society is less interested in thinking, where do we stand? We deal with issues like this all the time. We deal with issues relating to what kinds of works to store in a collection (balancing popular titles with challenging ones). But as Information Professionals we also deal with this general laziness in culture. Just as Weingartner complains that mass audiences don’t want to do the work of unpacking the meaning of a political film, some people argue that the majority of the population now just turn to Google and Wikipedia and that is where their research ends. So are we, especially those who work in libraries, being made redundant by this? To answer that we have to ask a few more questions: Is Weingartner right? Is culture declining? And if so what kind of culture should be promoted instead? Who decides? Who decides whether television is socially relevant and intelligent enough?
I am a big supporter of non-mainstream music, movies and writing but on the other hand, I am always bothered when people start talking about how things have gotten so bad and about the brainlessness of popular culture. Those kind of statements always seem so elitist to me. Popular culture is popular because people like it, so obviously it speaks to them. Obviously less mainstream culture doesn’t speak to as many people, which is what makes it strong in my mind because it doesn’t pander to a wide majority. But there is something to be said for something that has mass appeal. However, it makes me very nervous when popular culture drowns out all other kind of culture. Weingartner’s concerns are interesting to me because similar to the issue of internet technology in Library Science, what he’s actually saying is that easier access to non-mainstream culture is in some ways hurting those industries of cultural production. The fact that people can easily download a film is good because they get to see something they might not have seen but bad because they give those weasel-y producers ammunition in rejecting intelligent, thought provoking scripts. The answer to that seems clear to me, that we need to rethink the distribution of works like film and music. Just as we need to rethink how libraries are organized, so too on a larger scale do we need to think about how we deal with such readily available information and culture. I believe this thinking must include how we will protect vulnerable industries like independent film.
I don’t really have any answers here, just lots of rambling questions. Maybe there aren’t any answers, but I think we all need to keep discussing the questions.
4 comments:
As per popular culture - "Same as it ever Was" David Byrne. - gord
The main problem i have with elitist approaches is their solutions is usually they want the government (everyone) to pay for their cultural worldview, the 'low-brow' masses never get grants or subsidies...hardy seems democratic does it - but then there is a tendency for many elitists towards a 'we know what's best' approach...aka big brother
My argument would be that certain films will never be popular like hollywood releases, but they should not want to be. Does anything think the current crop of stars are good actors and that they appear in good films?
The Internet provides a distribution method where art or low interest or niche films (jules dassin - riffifi) could be marketed profitably - there may only be 1,000 people who will want to watch eraserhead but you can now reach them. People can search out and find what they want and get it. Right now this is underground thru bittorrent but the technology exists to make it commercial...
I completely agree that independent film should not try to mimic Hollywood or hope for the same kind of success. The national cinemas of the globe are littered with ill-fated copies of Hollywood films which fail because no one can do Hollywood like Hollywood. (btw, I'm so curious about how well Hollywood J-horror remakes sell in Japan)
I also agree that the internet is pretty much where it is at for new strategies of distributing films. There is a need for some film equivalent of iTunes or a site like that. I just think there are a lot of interested parties (production companies, distribution companies) who are living in the past and refuse to get with the program, even though they are losing enourmous amounts of money.
Hi Rachel,
As the professor mentioned, it is more convenient to download a movie or a song instead of going to the cinema or purchasing that CD, DVD or DVD Audio.
In North America as far as I know it is illegal to download but unfortunately in Canada it is not being enforced. The Canadian tax levy on blank media (like DVD blanks or MP3 players) on one hand helps small movie producers or local music industry but on the other hand gives carte blanche to online piracy.
We leave in a market driven economy where the technology changed many facets of the movie and music industry, thus making it more accessible to the public.
Post a Comment