The influence of culture on politics. Muse for a real leader

The main impetus for writing this article was the videos in which cultural figures spoke out in support of the Maidan, the new Ukrainian government, etc. My friend and I discussed the influence of culture on politics, and the question of her child took us both by surprise: “Why is the uncle who sings badly scolding the president? Is he good at being president? To be honest, I could not immediately answer why this is possible and why we perceive this as the norm. The question is correct, but how to explain it intelligibly?

I'll try to fix it and describe it as simply as possible. Whoever wants to understand more seriously, it is better to go to the training - not a single article can explain all the subtleties. At the training, anyone will be able to understand what my conclusions are based on and make their own.

The influence of culture on politics. Right to Survival

Since the time of the first people, nature has taken care that in a small tribe a certain system necessary for survival, built on a rigid hierarchy, arises and is maintained. With the same accuracy as a human body is created with a certain set of organs, a small group is created - a primitive pack, where everyone performs the role necessary for the survival of the whole pack. Some, the owners of the skin vector, officers of the ancient pack are dexterous hunters and inventors of new tools. Others, the owners of the anal vector, were in no way suitable for hunters, but they had golden hands and the talent to convey to the younger generation all the wisdom of life with the highest accuracy. The third, the owners of the muscular vector, were strong and hardy warriors, who always had enough to do “housework”.

Each member of the pack needed food, each claimed a female and procreation. To organize all this, a leader is required - the owner of the urethral vector, the only one focused not on personal survival, but on the preservation of the entire pack.

Only in the urethral vector there is the concept of supreme justice - "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." Only the urethral vector is focused on the future, not focusing on current difficulties. In fact, the urethral measure is the future.

The urethral man is idolized by his pack and hated by strangers. This is the default power. It provides an incomparable sense of security for its own and carries a danger to strangers. True, leather workers, in pursuit of the highest rank, often aim for his place, but everyone will feel the “forgery”. And if they do not feel, the flock will inevitably perish. The history of all countries confirms that it was under the urethral rulers that active development began, the conquest of new lands, progressive social transformations (often very unpleasant for other countries).

If we are not talking about history, but about the present day, the power no longer implies the sole control of the state, as it was until recently. Although, the example of modern Belarus shows a completely systemic picture - a urethral leader with his concern for the country, the hatred of "enemies" and the grumbling of some "injured" skin workers.

The influence of culture on politics. Birth of the Muse

Of course, any leader has the right to the best female. Many novels have been written about this couple, many films have been shot, their love has been sung by poets. All lovers of the world are trying to focus on this couple, wanting to try on “relationships of the future”, based on boundless love and altruism.

The most beautiful, full of love and not having fear is a ranking skin-visual female. Only she can become the muse of the leader. For her - the best piece of prey. It depends on her where the leader will lead his flock - to victory or into the abyss.

There is a special story here. The leader's olfactory adviser is watching to prevent a skin-visual female with an insufficient level of development in vision from approaching the leader, which will be dangerous for the whole pack. A sort of primitive prototype of modern state security and censorship, which is very productive.

But back to the developed skin-visual muse. Possessing the widest emotional amplitude in the visual vector, it develops from the fear of death, given to it by nature to fulfill its specific role - warning the flock of danger, to love, as fear for the life of others. It was she who “taught” people love and emotionality. The emergence of culture was designed to additionally quench the tension between closely living relatives. To not kill each other. It was the skin-visual female, out of fear for her life, who elevated the life of each member of the pack to the highest value. It was she, with her love for the beauty of the world, that became the reason for the development of the arts, which entailed some influence of culture on the politics of relations between neighboring tribes, peoples, and countries.

Around her, a skin-visual female, anal-visual jewelers and artists, anal-sound writers, philosophers, and others began to concentrate. Those who, in one way or another, projected concepts of ethics, aesthetics, and love into the outside world.

Above, we talked about natural power as a urethral measure, as well as a visual measure can be said as the essence of culture. In any more or less civilized country there are cultural restrictions. Note that now society is defined not so much by ethnicity, but by the involvement of each of its members in certain cultural and worldview values ​​- "European values", "Eastern culture".

The influence of culture on politics. Ruler of our minds

At all times, culture has developed exclusively under the patronage of the authorities, focusing on the elite, almost without going beyond the walls of palaces. And the mass, fair, culture served more to relieve social tension than to influence the mood of the common people.

The possibilities of elite culture can best be seen in the example of the Soviet Union. No strong urethral power could maintain the integrity of a huge country without an elite culture that “pulls up” the entire population to its level. To a large extent, the victory in the Great Patriotic War was not without culture - "Katyusha", "Blue Handkerchief" and other songs supported the spirit of the fighters, united the people, helped to restore the country.

Simply put, the relationship between the urethral leader and his skin-visual muse has long gone beyond the relationship between two people, projecting onto the relationship between social groups. Power and Culture. And if everything is more or less clear with the authorities, there are still questions about culture. The influence of culture on politics today is quite ambiguous.

It is given by nature that culture is an attribute and support of power. Culture determines the mood of society. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the natural pair - the urethral leader and his skin-visual muse - serve as a guarantor of survival and development, both in antiquity and today. And not only this couple - every bearer of any vector, realizing their natural tasks for the benefit of society, determines and guarantees its survival, until they try to do “not their own business”.

What actually happens?

There is a government in the country that either performs a function befitting a urethral measure - concern for maintaining the unity and well-being of the country, or focuses solely on personal interests. Moreover, since the power of the state today is divided among a large group of people, the urethral scenario, skin archetypal theft, and anal nepotism can be present at the same time. What we are seeing.

There is a culture that carries the idea of ​​philanthropy to the masses ... or its own fears. Attempts to influence culture on politics are more like hysterics. Today there is no filter that allows only developed vision to go “upward”. In many ways, modern culture no longer serves as a unifying factor for the population, but tries to bring its own shortcomings to the public, fueling the frustrations and shortcomings of its consumer. The skin-visual muse has ceased to cope with its role, unable to restrain hatred, relieve tension. Today we see many bearers of culture with frustrations and resentments in the anal vector - the “higher ideals” are already heard in a slightly different way. This is observed.

The influence of culture on politics. The future depends on you

The reason for these processes is the current skin phase of development, which does not imply the dependence of history on personalities, as it was until recently. Standardization and globalization leave no room for a stable rigid vertical of power. Strong leaders leave the political arena, replaced by “teams”. This is happening all over the world, not excluding our country. The only difference is that our urethral mentality does not accept the skin values ​​that are so natural to the West.

Mass culture, which developed in Western society and organically fits into the values ​​and worldview of the skin mentality, is a novelty for Russia. Mass culture follows the desires of the crowd, and does not raise the consumer to its higher level, as is the case with elite culture.

Nevertheless, representatives of mass culture in Russia, out of habit, claim the role of "rulers of thoughts." The influence of culture on politics has become the subject of skin manipulation, and people who are accustomed to considering representatives of culture as carriers of “higher education” trust any statements. Today we observe that already to a much lesser extent, but still quite strongly, since for our mentality there always remains the priority of spiritual values ​​and, of course, cultural ones.

Society has ceased to be directly dependent on the mercy of the “father-king”, social transformations take place from below, giving each member of society the opportunity to influence what is happening. In fact, each representative of a culture either serves to split the society, or to unite... Or to unite "against" their own power, which is fatal for any country. And today the same can be said about anyone, even a completely "far from culture" person.

It may not yet be too common to feel one's own responsibility for what is happening in the country, however, the future depends on how much each member of society is aimed at the urethral ideals of the "general" or the skin ideals of the "private".

The time of passionate individuals has gone, the time of passionate societies has come.

The influence of culture on politics. Or on the shield, or under the shield

It is necessary to mention the sound vector, which plays no small role in culture and is the real “ruler of our thoughts” to a much greater extent - poets, writers, musicians. In the developed state, the sound vector creates and promotes ideas that, if they are progressive, the urethral measure carries further into the future. In an undeveloped state, sound closes on itself, carries the idea of ​​destruction. The carrier of the visual vector almost always trusts the sound engineer, who “removes” visual fears or, on the contrary, feeds.

Considering all of the above, one can see that the visual culture has long ceased to fulfill its role, giving way to its older brother, Sound. As it will be? It largely depends on the development and "health" of the sound vector in society - on the viability of those ideas that will unite the country.

It is quite obvious that those societies where culture works against power (whatever higher ideals explain this) are doomed.

-- [ Page 1 ] --

FROM THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE RUSSIAN STATE LIBRARY

Rybakova, Marina Gennadievna

Popular culture and its influence on the political

state image

Russian State Library

Rybakova Marina Gennadievna

Mass culture and its influence on the political image

states [Electronic resource]: On the example of the USA:

Dis. ... cand. polit. Sciences

: 23.00.04. St. Petersburg: RSL, 2006. (From the funds of the Russian State Library).

Sociology Mass media, mass culture and propaganda Political problems of international relations and global development Full text:

http://diss.rsl.ru/diss/06/0480/060480036.pdf The text is reproduced from the copy in the RSL fund:

Rybakova, Marina Gennadievna Mass culture and its influence on the political image of the state of St. Petersburg. Russian State Library, 2006 (electronic text) 61:06-23/ Saikt-Petersburg State University

As a manuscript

RYBAKOVA Marina Gennadievna MASS CULTURE AND ITS IMPACT ON THE NOLITICAL IMAGE OF THE STATE (BY THE EXAMPLE OF THE USA) Specialty 23.00. Political problems of international relations and global development Dissertation for the degree of candidate of political sciences Supervisor doctor of historical sciences, professor B.A. Shiryaev St. Petersburg Contents Introduction Chapter 1. Mass culture as a social phenomenon 1.1. Origins and main stages of development of modern mass culture 1.2. Mass culture as a form of intercultural communication 1.3. Theoretical approaches to the issue of determining the essence of a stereotype, image, image Chapter 2 Mass culture as a reflection of American society 2.1. Historical and social conditions for the development of US mass culture 2.2. The impact of US mass culture on the world community in the context of globalization 2.3. Reflection of various countries on the expansion of American popular culture Chapter 3 US mass culture as a tool for creating a political image 3.1. Socio-economic and ethnic prerequisites for the formation of the US political image 3.2. Mass culture in Russian society 3.3. The image of the United States as a factor in strengthening political influence through mass culture Conclusion Literature Introduction Relevance research topics. The relevance of this study lies in the fact that mass culture is analyzed in connection with politics, is considered as a powerful lever for controlling the consciousness of the masses not only within the country, but also abroad, is studied as an effective form of exercising political influence in the world, corresponding to certain political goals and interests. .

Mass culture is considered as one of the tools for creating the political image of the state. These trends were especially pronounced in the 20th century in the United States, in a country that uses its mass culture to achieve political goals in the context of economic and political globalization throughout the world, to form an attractive and at the same time impressive political image with its power.

In modern international relations, the importance of culture and especially mass culture is difficult to overestimate. UNESCO at the Stockholm Conference (1998) proposed to place cultural policy at the center of development strategies, which was reflected in the final declaration. This proposal was supported. Since 1999, the World Bank began to allocate loans to developing countries that took into account cultural factors in their programs.

The attention paid by President V.V. Putin this particular importance of the problem, also affected the creation of the concept of the cultural policy of Russia in 2000 ", and is also really visible at the present time in the actions of leading Russian politicians. The role of mass culture in international politics was emphasized by many politicians, in particular, President Bill Clinton, calling legislators to increase "Foreign cultural policy of Russia - year 2000: theses / / Diplomatic Bulletin. - 2000. - No. 4. - S. 76-84.

Appropriations for External Cultural Relations (2000), figuratively stated that "Elvis Presley won the Cold War"^. In the same year 2000, the concept of the cultural policy of Germany was created. In recent years, many countries of the world community have been paying special attention to their cultural policy.

In the era of globalization and discussions about cultural imperialism, the development of foreign political relations in the field of mass culture becomes a real priority for states.

The topical aspect of our research is the study of the universal tendencies of world mass culture and their influence on political processes. In particular, the US experience in creating a certain political image of the state through culture. Over the past decades, culture and art have been transformed into one of the most important forms of activity in world politics and diplomacy. Much of this is due to the United States. The foreign cultural policy of the United States and the spread of American culture are interconnected with the process of globalization. The fact is that the foreign cultural policy of the United States and the export of American mass culture contribute to the development of globalization processes, partly being a product of these same processes;

and globalization, in turn, promotes the foreign cultural policy of the United States and the spread of American culture. Thus, these processes are in a state of interpenetration and mutual influence and are objectively one of the main and integral components of the overall multi-level process of globalization.

^ Shmagin E.A. Culture and diplomacy // International life. 2002.-.№3.-S. 61.

^ Auswaertige Kuiturpolitik - Konzeption 2000 [Electron, resource]. Access mode:

Title from the screen.

the study specifies the very term "mass culture", examines the origins and main stages of development of modern mass culture.

The formation and development of mass culture in the late XIX - early XX century was, in fact, devoid of theoretical understanding. The emergence of a critical theory of mass culture takes place within the framework of socio-philosophical reflections on the general problems of social development, in particular, the denunciation of mass society"*.

The term "mass culture" itself is defined as a concept that covers the heterogeneous cultural phenomena of the 20th century, which have become widespread in connection with the scientific and technological revolution and the constant renewal of mass media. The production, distribution and consumption of mass culture products is of an industrial-commercial nature. The semantic range of mass culture is very wide - from primitive kitsch to complex, content-rich forms^.

In modern society, the phenomenon of mass culture is characterized as all-pervasive and diverse, affecting many aspects of people's lives in the vast majority of countries around the world.

Among the manifestations and trends of modern mass culture that accompany a person from birth, we note only those that are of particular interest in the context of this study:

The so-called "industry of childhood subculture" (fiction for children, films, cartoons, industrial toys, methods of collective education of children, etc.);

"* Razlogov K.E. Mass culture theory / / New philosophical encyclopedia: in 4 volumes - M., 2001. - V. 2: E-M. - S. 504.

^ Mass culture// Big Russian Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M., 2003. - S. 908.

Radio, television, print and electronic media;

Cinematography, musical;

Jazz, rock, pop music;

Among the above manifestations of mass culture, of particular interest in the context of this study is the consideration of the interaction between the technologies of political influence, the formation of a certain political image of the country, on the one hand, and various forms and manifestations of mass culture, on the other.

It should be noted here that not only the media itself (radio, television, newspapers, magazines, the Internet), but also various forms of art (film art, variety art, literature, painting, music, etc.) become forms of influence on the consciousness of the masses, form political preferences, assuming the functions of ideology. Thus, mass culture turns into a kind of ideology, "the ruler of minds."

In connection with the simultaneous development of mass culture and political technologies in our time, which is largely predetermined by scientific and technological progress (STP), culture itself is turning into politics, so to speak, a form of powerful influence on minds, creating certain images, images, stereotypes through which masses perceive reality. At the same time, politics becomes a kind of form of mass culture, manifesting itself in the PR and art technologies of various parties and movements, becoming a form of art and a cult image in the eyes of the population.

Political activity often takes various forms of the developed system of modern mass culture, due to which the line between art and politics is blurred;

art turns into a form of political influence, and politics acts as a catalyst for the mass art industry.

The study analyzes and substantiates the theoretical understanding and formation of the concepts of stereotype, image and image.

The degree of research of the problem. The phenomenon of mass culture is not only fixed in the public mind, but has also become the subject of research by specialists from various branches of knowledge in political science, philosophy, cultural studies, psychology, sociology, and art criticism. The content of these works is diverse and often contradictory, which is largely due to the ambiguity of the definitions of mass culture.

When using sources, we relied on serious theoretical research in the field of mass culture of domestic and foreign authors.

Throughout the entire 20th century, Russian and foreign scientists have been striving to penetrate the essence of this phenomenon. Many of them came to the conclusion that the phenomenon of mass culture is not only very complex, but also has a dual nature, ambivalent, and in the context of socio-philosophical analysis, mass culture should be considered both positively and negatively. The fruitfulness of research depends on the extent to which it is possible to synthesize the approaches proposed from the positions of different scientific disciplines. Western humanitarian thought has accumulated a significant amount of research on this issue. One can name such major thinkers, researchers of the process of cultural development as O. Spengler^, ^ Spengler O. The Decline of Europe: Essays on the Morphology of World History. M., 2003.

X. Ortega y Gasset^ K.YunL T.Adorno^, R.Aron^°, D.

C.R. Mills "^ G. Tarde^^ L. White^^ O. Huxley^^ W. Eco^ In Russia, the phenomenon of mass culture at different times attracted the attention of nisagels, sociologists, publicists, philosophers, the problems of mass culture are reflected in the works of A.I. Herzen^^, D.S. Merezhkovsky"^, A.V. Lunacharsky ^", N. A. Berdyaeva ^ ^, G.KAIIrana ^ ^ N.A. Anastaseva ^ "", ^ Ortega-y-Gasset X. Revolt of the masses. - M., 2001;

Ortega y Gasset X.

"Dehumanization of Art" and other works: a collection. - M., 1991.

^ Young KG. Archetype and symbol. - M., 1991;

Young KG. Man and his symbols. - M., 1997.

^ Adorno T.V. aesthetic theory. - M., 2001;

Adorno T.V. Philosophy of new music. - M., 2001.

^^ Aron R. Democracy and totalitarianism. - M., 1993.

" Bell D. The Coming Post-Industrial Society. - M., 1993.

"^ Lebon G. Psychology of peoples and masses. - St. Petersburg, 1995.

"^ Mills Ch.R. Sociological imagination. - M., 2001.

"" * Tard G. Social logic. - St. Petersburg, 1996.

"^ White L. Selected: the evolution of culture. - M., 2004;

Selected: the science of culture. - M., 2004.

"^ Eco U. The evolution of medieval aesthetics. - St. Petersburg, 2004.

"^ Herzen A.I. Selected philosophical works: in 2 vols. T. 1.- M., 1948.

"^ Merezhkovsky D.S. Atlantis - Europe: The Secret of the West. - M., 1992;

Mereeyukovsky D.S. Sick Russia: favorites. - L., 1991. - (History of Russian culture).

^° Lunacharsky A.V. About mass festivals, stage, circus. - M., 1981.

^^ Berdyaev N.A. The meaning of creativity: [the experience of human justification]. - M., 2002. - (Peaks of human thought);

Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of creativity, culture and art: in 2 volumes - M., 1994. - (Russian philosophers of the XX century).

^^ Atin GK Bourgeois mass culture. - M., 1988;

Ashin G.K. Course of elitology / G.K. Ashin, E.V. Okhotsk. - M., 1999.

^^ Anastasiev N.A. Americans. - M., 2002;

Anastasev N.A.

Renewal of tradition: Realism of the 20th century. in opposition to modernism. M., 1984.-350 p.

A.V. Kykarkina^^ V.V. Molchanova"^^, C.H. Ikonnikova^"^, E.P. Smolshj^^ V L. Glazycheva^^, a^^ A.B.

N.N. Kozlova^^, A.Yu. Meyalvilya^^, F.F. Kuznetsova ""^ 1SE. Razlogova^^, N.N. Suvorova^^, V.A. Shapinskaya^" and others.

^ ^ Ikonnikova S.N. "Mass culture" and youth: fiction and reality. - M., 1979.

^^ Flier A.Ya. Mass culture and its social functions//Social sciences and modernity. - 1998. - No. 6. - S. 138-148.

^^ Kukarkin A.V. bourgeois mass culture. - M., 1985.

^^ Molchanov V.V. Mirages of mass culture. - L., 1984.

^^ Smolskaya E.P. "Mass Culture": Entertainment or Nolitika? - M., 1986.

^^ Glazychev V.L. Deep Russia: 2000-2002. - M., 2005.

^° Hoffman A.B. Fashion and people: a new theory of fashion and fashion innovation. - M., 1994.

^^ Zhigulsky K. Holiday and culture: old and new holidays:

sociologist's thoughts. - M., 1985.

^^ Kozlova N. Where science ends // Social sciences. - 1 9 9 0. - No. 6. - P. 116-122.

^^ Melvil A.Yu. Counterculture and the "new" conservatism. - M., 1981.

^^Kuznetsov F.F. Selected: in 2 volumes - M., 1981.

^^ Razlogov K.E. Artistry in mass culture // Vopr. philosophy. - 1997.- No. 7. - S. 63-73;

Razlogov K.E. Global and / or mass? / / Social sciences and modernity. - 2003. - No. 2. - P. 143-156;

Razlogov K.E. Global mass culture and cultural diversity // Observatory of Culture. - 2004. - No. 1. - S. 29-31;

Razlogov K.E. Culture for the Uneducated // Social Sciences. - 1990. - No. 4. - P. 168-182;

Razlogov K.E. Mass culture and modern technologies// Science of culture - step into the XXI century: Sat. materials of the annual conference-seminar of young scientists (November 2001, Moscow). - M., 2001. - S. 15-27.

Suvorov N.N. Elite and mass consciousness in culture ^ "postmodernism. - St. Petersburg, 2004;

Suvorov N.N. The Language of Elite Communication // Modern Problems of Intercultural Communications:

Sat. scientific tr. - St. Petersburg, 2003. - T. 158. - S. 34-41.

^^ Shapinskaya E.N. Mass culture of the 20th century: an outline of theories // Polygnosis. - 2000. - JS "2. - S. 77-97;

Shapinskaya E.N. Mass culture in the mirror of concepts // Science of culture - a step into the XXI century: Sat. materials of the annual conference-seminar of young scientists (November 2001, Moscow). - M., 2001.-S. 28-40.

A number of researchers devoted their work to the problem of the connection between mass culture and mass consciousness with the political processes of society.

These include 3. Freud""^ E. Fromm^^, S. Moscovici""^, M. Hevesy"**, P. Holander"^^, GG. Pochentsov"*^, A.V. Pavlovskaya"*^, B.A. Shiryaev "*^, Yu.V. Kosov^^ S. Chugrov^^, N.A. Basilieva^^ V.I. "*^ Freud 3. Psychoanalysis. Religion. Culture: a collection. - M., 1992;

^ "Freud 3. Psychology of the masses and analysis of the human "I". - M., 2004. - (Philosophy. Psychology: FP).

^^ Fromm E. Escape from freedom: man for himself. - M., 2004;

Fromm E. The human soul. - M., 1998.

^^ Moscovici p. Age of crowds: a historical treatise on the psychology of the masses.-M., 1996.

^^ Hevesy M.A. Politics and psychology of the masses// Vopr. philosophy. 1999.- No. 1 2. - S. 32-42;

Hevesy M.A. Crowd, masses, politics: ist.-filos.

essay.-M., 2001.

Rational anti-Americanism and ^^ Hollander P.

irrational. - SPb., 2000.

^^ Pocheptsov G. Communication Theory. - M.;

Pocheptsov G.G.

Imagelogy. - M.;

^ Pavlovskaya A.V. Russia and America: prob. Communication of cultures: Russia through the eyes of Americans, 1850 - 1880s. - M., 1998.

^^ Shiryaev B.A. Principles and goals of US diplomacy in the period of formation: (1775-1814) // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. 1997. - No. 4;

Shiryaev B.A. Russia and the USA: the beginning of a new relationship: (1991 1993) // Bulletin of the St. Petersburg State University. - 2001. - No. 1;

Shiryaev B.A. US foreign policy: principles, mechanisms, methods. SPb., 2006.

^^ Kosoe Yu.V. Security: geopolitical aspect// Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. - 1999. - No. 2. - S. - 79-86.

"*^ Chugrov S. Ethnic stereotypes and their influence on the formation of public opinion / / World economy and international relations. - 1993. - No. 1.

"*^ Vasilyeva N.A. The concept of development as a strategic direction of the UN // Ecology and education. - 2002. - No. 1-2.

"*^ Fokin V.I. Commission for International Intellectual Cooperation under the League of Nations // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. - 1998. - No. 1.

E.L. Boldyreva^^ N.M. Bogolyubova^^, O.A., Butsarina^^, O.V. Manzhulina ^^.

Since the phenomenon of mass culture is ambiguous, one cannot confine oneself only to the description of its functions, one must understand the essence of the system that possesses these features. We focused on the integral approach, characteristic of modern humanitarian methodology. At the same time, it is impossible to reveal the essence of mass culture without resorting to methodological approaches not only to political science, but also to philosophy, psychology, and art criticism. Throughout the last century, the attention of Western psychologists and political scientists has been attracted by the problem of the “image” of the state.

The catchiness and brilliance of the very term "image" and the subsequent emergence of such new areas of knowledge as imology and imageology became possible, in our deep conviction, only in the era of mass culture.

As noted by Daniel Burstin ^ "*, even skinny, w) shcha "image" did not become a linguistic cliché, studies began to appear devoted to profound changes in the American view of reality through the prism of the image. It is necessary to note the role of American scientists in the development of the conceptual and categorical apparatus, methods and principles of research on this phenomenon.

^° Boldyreva E.L. Comparative analysis of semi-presidential republics: (on the example of Finland and France): Ph.D. watered, sciences: 23.00.05. - St. Petersburg, 2000. - 17 p. Boldyreva E.L. The role of the press in the political system of Finland [Electron, resource] // Man. Nature.

Society: actual problems. - SPb., 2001. - Access mode:

http://sovmu.spbu.ru/main/confman-nat-soc/2001/8-10.htm. -Title from the screen.

^ "Bogolyubova N.M. On the issue of the historiography of the study of ethnic stereotypes / N.M. Bogolyubova, Yu.V. Nikolaeva // Actual problems of historiography and historical science. - St. Petersburg, 2004. - P. 255-257.

^^ Budarina O.A. Communication technologies for the formation and promotion of the image of the municipal government: (politol. analysis): author.

dis.... cand. watered, sciences: 23.00.02. - M., 2002.

^^ Manzhulina Some activities of O.A.

US government in the information and image sphere // Proceedings of the XIII annual Russian-American seminar. - St. Petersburg, 2004. - S. 179-194.

^^ Boorstin D. The image. - New York, 1992.

At the end of the 19th century, the German psychologist L. Lange (1888) discovered the phenomenon of “attitude”^^, which includes the notion of a social stereotype^^ as an integral part.

This problem was developed in the studies of the Soviet psychologist D.N. Uznadze, who developed a general psychological theory, experimentally proved the existence of a general psychological readiness of an individual to realize an activated need in a given situation and established patterns for consolidating such readiness with repeated repetition of situations that make it possible to satisfy this need, as well as in the developments of American scientists, in particular, L. Festinger^^.

In the 20s of the 20th century, the American scientist W. Lshimpman ^^ introduced a new concept - the "stereotype". It is necessary to note the special role of the American sociologist and journalist W. Lippman, whose work "Public Opinion" was the basis of all Western concepts of stereotypes. In Russian science, the definitions of stereotypes are also based on the ideas of W. Lippmann^^.

We find a continuation of the study of this problem in the work of the American researcher D. Burstin "Image"^^ which was published in the 1960s, reprinted many times and was fundamental in the development of the concept of "image".

^^ Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary / ed. L.F. Ilyichev [and others].-M., 1983.-S. 708.

^^ Social stereotype // Popular Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M., 1999.-S. 1264.

^^ Uznadze D. N. Experimental foundations of attitude psychology. - Tb., 1961;

Uznadze D.N. Psychological research. - M., 1966;

Uznadze D.N. Psychology of installation. - SPb., 2001.

^^ Festinger L. Theory of cognitive dissonance = A theory of cognitive dissonance. - SPb., 1999. - (Workshop of psychology and psychotherapy).

^^ Yrrman W. Public opinion. - Mineola, 2004.

^ Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M., 1983. - S. 654.

^" Boorstin D. The image. - New York, 1992.

The study of the concepts of "image", "image of the state", "image in international relations" was further developed in the work of Robert Jervis "The Logic of Images in International Relations"

(1970)^^. In his book, R. Jervis gives an example of the Caribbean crisis (1962), when a peaceful solution to the military problem was achieved thanks to the images of the state and their leaders N.S. Khrushchev and J. Kennedy.

Recently, a new field of knowledge, imageology, has also been formed in Russia. Of particular interest in connection with the topic of this study is the book of Russian professor E.A. Galumov "The international image of Russia: a strategy of formation" (2003)^^, which offers an original strategy for the formation of a positive image of Russia, based on the national interests of the Russian state.

aim this study is a systematic analysis of the influence of mass culture on the political image of the state on the example of the United States;

the use of mass culture as an instrument of political technologies in the implementation of political goals in the process of globalization.

The object of the study is the influence (expansion) of American mass culture in the process of intercultural communications in the context of the globalization of the information society.

Subject of study- mass culture as a tool for creating a political image of the United States and implementing the state's political strategy in the process of globalization.

The objectives of this study:

Consider the ideological origins and historical stages of the development of mass culture in the information society;

^^ Jervis R. The Logic of Images in International Relations. - Princeton, 1970.

^^ Galumov E.A. Russia's international image: strategy of formation. - M., 2003.

Determine the basic characteristics of mass culture as a global field of intercultural interaction;

Analyze the historical and socio-political prerequisites for the development of US mass culture;

Consider the socio-economic and ethnic foundations of the formation of the political image of the United States;

Determine the degree of influence of mass culture on the political image of the US state in the context of globalization;

To characterize the reflection (different positions) of the countries of the international community on the expansion of American mass culture.

Methodological bases and sources of research. The theoretical and methodological basis of the dissertation is a comprehensive analysis of mass culture in the conditions of the information society, which provides for a combination of a systematic approach in the study of the interaction of socio-political, economic, artistic factors of mass culture;

a comparative-historical approach in substantiating the evolutionary continuity of the stages of development of mass culture and its influence on the political image of the state;

political-institutional approach in studying the role of mass culture in the implementation of the strategic political goals of the US state in the process of globalization. As a theoretical and methodological basis for the analysis, the works of historians and theorists of mass culture, including US mass culture, scientific works of foreign and domestic authors, works devoted to the problem of "image", in its political context, "international image", "image of the state" are used. .

Scientific novelty research lies in the innovative nature of a comprehensive political science study of the influence of mass culture on the political image of the US state in the information society and the process of globalization.

Scientific novelty is specified in the following results:

The historical-cultural and socio-political analysis of the origins and stages of the formation and development of mass culture as a phenomenon of the 20th century has been carried out;

Analyzed new trends, types and genres of mass culture as a form of intercultural communication in the information society;

The influence of myths, symbols, social technologies of mass culture on the structural features of the political image of the US state is revealed;

Mass culture is considered as a characteristic "cut" of the socio-political processes of modern American society;

The forms and means of the expansion of US mass culture in the countries of the world community in the context of globalization have been studied;

The reflection (attitude, reaction) of the countries of the world community on the expansion of American mass culture is analyzed.

Abstracts submitted for defense:

1. The current stage of development of mass culture, being a consequence of a long historical development, has acquired quite powerful spheres of influence and innovative technologies for influencing the process of globalization and contains the basis for the formation of a new paradigm of information society culture.

2. Mass culture, having a certain degree of popularity and attractiveness, can act as a "soft power", which contributes to the spread of influence, the use of methods of military, diplomatic or economic pressure.

3. The mass culture of the United States in a variety of types and genres, myths and symbols is a reflection of social processes, creates in the mass consciousness a nolithic image of the United States as a superpower.

4. The countries of the world community have an ambiguous attitude towards the influence of American popular culture in cultural policy.

Scientific and practical significance of the work. The content and analytical parts of the work can be used in the preparation of general and special courses on the history of culture, the history of American culture, political science, as well as in the creation of a special course on the problems of creating the image of the state, as well as in writing the relevant sections of textbooks. Theoretical provisions and conclusions can be useful for further research on the prospects for the development of modern culture, as well as in the practical work of political scientists.

Approbation of work. The materials of the topic were included in the course of lectures "The role of mass culture in creating the political image of the state", which was read by the author at the St. Petersburg State University of Culture and Arts;

were used in seminars on the history of culture at the same university. A number of provisions of this work were presented at the scientific conferences "Modern problems of intercultural communications" (SPbGUKI, 2003), "World politics and ideological paradigms of the era" (SPbGUKI, 2004) and published in the monograph "Mass culture and its influence on the political image of the state (on US example)” (St. Petersburg, 2005).

Chapter 1. Mass culture as a social phenomenon 1.1. Origins and main stages in the development of modern mass culture The concept of "mass culture" in various sources is interpreted in different ways. Approximately it appeared in the USA in the 30th years of the last century. The terms "popular culture" or "pop culture" are also used as synonyms for this concept.

In dictionaries, mass culture is defined as a concept that characterizes the features of the production of cultural values ​​in a modern (post-industrial) society, as well as a kind of culture that orients the spiritual and material values ​​​​distributed by it to the "average" level of development of mass consumers.

The most common in modern Western science is the ordinary understanding of mass culture as a culture of everyday life, produced for perception by the mass consciousness, directly and reliably represented, primarily by the activities of the mass media. The study of the problems of mass culture, considered in this way, is carried out by the methods of empirical research of mass communication, where mass media messages take the place of the product of mass culture, and the mass audience takes the place of the consumer^. In the concept of L. White ^ ^, mass culture is seen as a generally satisfactory form ^ Giners S. Mass Society. - London, 1976. - P. 21.

^^ White L. Selected: the science of culture. - M., 2004;

Selected: the evolution of culture. - M., 2004.

democratization of modern society (in accordance with the growth of living standards and education)^^.

It is generally accepted that functional and formal analogues of the phenomena of mass culture can be identified from ancient times ^ "". Mass culture in the modern sense is born only in modern times during the processes of industrialization and urbanization, the transformation of estate societies into national ones, the formation of universal literacy of the population, the degradation of many forms of traditional everyday culture of the pre-industrial type, the development of technical means of replicating and broadcasting information, etc. Important mass culture took its place in the life of modern society as a result of the process of socio-cultural modernization of the second half of the 20th century and the transition from the industrial to the post-industrial (information) stage of technological development.

Mass culture arises in parallel with the theory of mass society at the end of the 19th century. The adoption in 1870 in the UK of a law on compulsory universal literacy can be considered her birthday. As a result, the main form of artistic creativity of the 19th century, the novel, potentially became available to the broad masses of the population. However, as soon as they learned to read, the masses ordered their literature:

Nat Pinkerton and popular fiction, and in the border area with fine art - comics.

In 1895, cinematography was invented - a new kind of art, addressed to everyone without distinction of gender, age, religion, which does not require special preparation for its perception.

The next most important section of the future mass culture (before the appearance of this term itself) is entertaining, popular music.

^^ Kukarkii A.V. bourgeois mass culture. - M., 1985. - S. 64.

^^ Mass culture // Culture and culturefology: dictionary / ed.-comp.

A.I. Kravchenko. - M., 2003. - S. 552-554.

captured radio broadcasting, and then all forms of sound recording and shared with screen creativity the glory of the "corruptor" of the broad masses.

Parallel to this, there was a process of disintegration of realism in the plastic arts, the transformation of the novel narrative into a “stream of life” and a “stream of consciousness”, aleatorics in music. And, finally, in the field of philosophy, socio-cultural theory - criticism of the classical forms of worldview by Marx, on the one hand, and F. Nietzsche, on the other, the new ideas of O. Spengler's "Decline of Europe"^^ and "The Revolt of the Masses" by X. Ortega-i -Gasset ^ "^ - all this testified to the rapid processes of disintegration and reshaping of the world of culture, including art ^ \ At the same time, avant-gardism was not only a denier, but also a successor of the classics in aristocracy, and mass culture was not only a denial, but and the continuation of the democratic orientation laid down in orthodox realism.

During the 16th and 19th centuries, the process of secularization of art took place. However, secular art in terms of themes and problems actually functioned only within the framework of the educated strata of society. Until the end of the 19th century, this art did not have access to the broad masses.

At the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries, the very principle of the functioning of culture changed in Europe and America.

The so-called "elite" culture developed mainly along the path of experimental, avant-garde searches precisely because technical means appeared that transferred life-like forms into the sphere of mass culture. The culture of modern times was a culture for the educated. Only the theater has retained a potential connection with Nietzsche's Aft. F. Human, too human: book. for free minds.-M., 2001.

^^ Spengler O. The Decline of Europe: Essays on the Morphology of World History. - M., "° Ortega y Gasset X. Revolt of the masses. - M., 2001.

""" See: Razlogov K. Culture for the uneducated // Social sciences. - 1990. - No. 4. - P. 112.

uneducated masses, and even then not in all its manifestations. It was no coincidence that the 20th century was marked by a kind of theatricalization of public life.

Born as a result of urbanization, the secularization of culture, the spread of the laws of the capitalist market to the sphere of culture, technological development and the transformation of the sphere of education, mass culture has taken over part of the traditions of the classics. The compensatory entertainment began to prevail over the traditional educational settings.

The innovation of culture at the end of the last and the beginning of this century is comparable in significance and scale to the processes of culture secularization in modern times. The 20th century witnessed mass urban development, design, television and video, which play no less important role in modern cultural development than the classical literature of the 20th century.

The Russian researcher K. Razlogov puts the current expansion of mass culture in a number of similar, in his opinion, phenomena that took place in Russian culture in the 18th century, were associated with its secularization and with energetic and uncompromising resistance to this from the patriarchal strata;

with a clash of a moderate position that recognizes the right to exist of secular culture, and calls not to confuse it with sublime cult creativity, the only one paving the way to the salvation of man. The current supporters of classical art allow the existence of a compensatory entertaining variety and screen art, so long as it is not confused with the lofty goals of the classics.

Professionals support the most difficult-to-perceive works. But the absolutization of "difficult art" is unfair. In this regard, problems arise in assessing works of art in accordance with the laws that their authors recognize over themselves.

Works of mass culture are built according to different laws than classical masterpieces. and avant-garde works. "Elite"

art presupposes a detached perception (to a certain extent it is characterized by the inhibition of direct human experiences). "Mass culture is based on universal psychological, even psychophysiological mechanisms of perception, which are activated, absolutely regardless of the education and degree of preparedness of the audience"^^.

Referring to the opinion of a number of authors, K. Razlogov believes that in order to truly enjoy mass art, “it is better to be an artistically uneducated person. Artistic education here is not a stimulus, but an obstacle... It is no coincidence that all great works of this type are highly appreciated by the professional environment after the fact, after a certain time, usually at least 10-15 years.

(V. Vysotsky, 3itlz "). The time interval creates the necessary distance" "^. Let us disagree with this point of view.

Ignorance, ignorance have never been a plus, but on the contrary, they are the circumstance that casts this type of culture into the category of the lowest, contributing to the creation of a base, marginal image of mass culture. The fact that the works of the Beatles were evaluated by the professional environment, and V. Vysotsky after a certain time, is also not entirely true, since connoisseurs and professionals immediately appreciated these phenomena, and secondly, after a certain time, the best and real really crystallize, and everything empty and unnecessary disappears.

Razlogov K. Culture for the uneducated. - S. 111.

Ibid.-S. 112.

Thus, at the forefront of the artistic development of the 20th century are not so much various kinds of experimental trends as the highest achievements of mass culture (for example, the work of Ch. Chaplin, E. Warhol). After the 1960s, “radical equality of all traditions and trends” was established, which was called postmodern.

In less than 20 years, the network of mass culture has covered the entire space of culture, confronting us with a new historical phenomenon for which we were not ready. It is not only about the struggle within the culture, but also its transformation into mass culture, dominating and dominating.

A significant component of "mass culture" is the direction of "pop art".

The phenomenon of pop art (English pop a r t - from popular a r t - popular art) is one of the most common trends in Anglo-American art of the mid-20th century, which also influenced the art of other countries, on the basis of which many artistic practices of the second half of the 20th century were formed. . It arose in the early 1950s almost simultaneously in Great Britain and the USA as a reaction to the elitism of the most advanced avant-garde areas of fine art by that time. It reached its apogee in the 1960s. Pop art is a typical product of a technological industrial society of mass consumption. It found a peculiar artistic expression of the fundamental antinomy of that time, one of the main antinomies of the emerging postculture, which manifested itself in the avant-garde of the beginning of the century, and later on at other levels was posed and resolved in more sophisticated forms by postmodernism: the romanticization of the industrial society of mass consumption (its ideals , idols, images.

stereotypes, technology and its products) as the only and universally valid reality of modern life, and ironic distancing from this society, sometimes even rejection and a sharp protest against it ^ "*.

The term "pop" was introduced by the critic Allway"^ to designate a virtually new aesthetic consciousness, a new aesthetic position that asserted the artistic significance of objects, events, fragments of the everyday life of a mass person in an industrial society, which were previously considered non-artistic, anti-artistic, kitsch by the artistic and aesthetic elite. , bad taste, etc. Pop art undertook a large-scale and effective attempt to equalize their rights with the phenomena of "high culture", to merge the elite culture with the consumer popular (pop!) subculture.

Pop art artists discovered a peculiar poetics of the mass production of urban culture, finding it in banal and trivial things, events, gestures, in their consumer environment and commercialized reality: in Hollywood action films and popular "stars", in newspaper and magazine photos, in American standard of living based on technological progress in advertising, billboards, posters, newspapers, household items, comics, science fiction, tabloid literature. Removing elements and images of mass culture from the everyday environment and placing them in the context of the artistic space created from them, pop artists built their works on the basis of playing with the meanings of mass stereotypes (new contextual connections, a different scale, color, sometimes deformations, etc.). ) in a new semiotic environment.

Lexicon of non-classics: artistic and aesthetic culture of the XX "* century / under the general editorship of V.V. Bychkov. - M., 2003. - P. 341.

"T and mzhe.-S. 341.

The origins of pop art in America were Robert Rauschenberg and Jesper Johns. In the future, the cohort of American pop artists was replenished by such figures as E. Warhol, R. Lichtenstein, K. Oldenburg, D. Dine, T. Wessenman, J. Rosenquist, J. Segal, E. Kienhold and others.

In its spirit and internal orientation, pop art entered the history of culture as a product of the American industrial-consumer civilization. It was in the United States that it reached extraordinary proportions and was very quickly recognized in artistic circles as the most influential movement in the art of the second half of the 20th century. In terms of content, material, manner of execution and types of artifacts, pop art artists differ greatly from each other and by this once again indirectly demonstrate their deep belonging to the motley, albeit standardized, everyday life of mass society.

Mass culture is a child of a market economy; it organically fits into the democratic organization of society, into the rule of law. The equality of the artist and the public, the unity of mankind at the level of mass consciousness and mass culture are affirmed. In the mutual support of commerce and creativity, one can see a powerful stimulus for social and spiritual progress, and in mass culture, a form of shobal psychotherapy of universal human significance.

However, mass culture reflected not only the progress of civilization, but also its negative costs, everything that makes up the tragedy of a person of the 20th century, his alienation, non-contact, apathy, dullness of consciousness, the dissolution of individuality in the mass of a crowd of thousands ... Connection with the market economy not only good. "Mutual support of commerce and creativity" did not always lead to progress. Commercial was the salon art of the 19th century, but it was a luxury item available to a few. The 20th century changed the situation radically. Commercial art appealed to the masses of the city by the thousands. Radio, cinematography, gramophone, television, tape recorder, video have made it possible to reproduce and disseminate throughout the world that which was by its nature unique. There have been dramatic worldwide changes in the forms of existence of art.

Replication is just a technique. You can replicate and elite, and folk, and mass art. But it is mass art that is profitable to replicate, because it brings the greatest profit.

Business puts everything into circulation if it makes a profit, exploiting not only lofty motives, but also base ones, pictures of atrocities, crimes, tickling the nerves, inflaming sensuality. The “industry of art” rather cynically included these properties of the crowd into circulation, built a business calculation on them.

According to M. Chegodaeva, it is quite obvious that there is no single mass culture that could be unequivocally described as “art, where the perception of creativity turns into pleasure rather than suffering for the audience.” - “Like the entire 20th century, its mass culture is full of contradictions;

like any art, it contains the highest ups and downs of the creative spirit, but long masterpieces "for centuries" and passing, mediocre, hacky crafts ... Trying to reduce all the most complex functions of culture in the life of modern people, all the variety of perception of art to one "psychological rehabilitation", something like a pill to relieve stress, to say the least, lightweight. To deprive modern mass culture of what was inherent in it from the very beginning of the ability to empathize, bring spiritual purification, serve as a catharsis, the elevation of a person, replacing everything with one “pleasure”, caused by what? - talent, skill or a picture of sadistic torture? - means, according to essentially, cross out all human culture"^^. Human memory selects all the best in art, making no distinction between "mass" and "elitist". The commercial success of "one-day" is forgotten along with them.

Mass culture is a concept that generally expresses the state of culture since the middle of the 20th century. Mass culture reflected not only the development of mass media - radio, cinema, television, gigantic circulation of illustrated magazines, cheap pocket books, gramophone records, but also the relative democratization of culture, an increase in the level of education of the masses. In the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution, the use of mass media transforms culture into a branch of the economy, forming it as a "mass culture""""". Through the development of the communication system, mass culture covers the vast majority of members of society, orients them through the mechanism of fashion, subjugates a huge layer of human existence - from the style of housing and clothing to the type of hobby, claims to embrace and subjugate the culture of the whole world, its "cultural colonization".

Of course, mass consciousness, mass culture were known long before the 20th century, and the "mass" itself has always been an integral part of the population of any society. However, the modern phenomenon of mass man has a certain novelty due to a number of reasons, which, in their totality, characteristic of modernity, have never appeared before. The man of the masses has never before constituted such a large group in terms of numbers, which was really capable of exerting a very noticeable influence on social processes. In addition, such groups have never been so characteristically united, and this is their ^^ Chegodaeva M. Art was originally massive // ​​Social sciences. - 1990. - No. 6. - S. 16.

^ "Mass culture // Big Encyclopedic Dictionary. - Access mode: http://www.rea.ru/misc/enc3p.nsf/ByID/NT0002EBB2. - Head.

from the screen.

the association had never before been formed consciously and was not then supported by special means.

There are rather contradictory points of view on the origins and prerequisites for the emergence of "mass culture". Some researchers consider it an eternal by-product of culture and therefore discover it already in the ancient era. There are much more grounds for attempts to link the emergence of "mass culture" with the scientific and technological revolution, which gave rise to new ways of producing, distributing and consuming culture. On the one hand, this democratized the sphere of culture, on the other hand, it contributed to its penetration into the sphere of commercial and political interests. More J.-J. Rousseau in the 18th century criticized the existing art, which is created and propagated by the ruling class and thus serves its interests. It should be noted that the connection of culture with class interests can affect culture in two ways. It can make it intolerant of any culture but its own, or it can lead to the ideal of a world state where only a uniform world culture will exist. This is especially evident in such a form of mass culture as world cinema. But the most effective means of replicating and spreading such a culture is television, which spreads certain political preferences, on the one hand, and brings a colossal commercial effect, on the other.

Describing mass culture as a phenomenon, it should be noted that although it is intended for consumption by the people, it does not always reflect the consciousness of the people, but is a commercial cultural industry, often hostile to truly popular culture. Claiming to be "^ Samokhvalova V.I. Mass man is the reality of the modern information society // Polygnosis. - 2000. - No. 1. - P. 33.

popular, she appeals to a huge audience, often appeals to humiliated consumer tastes and instincts, but, in essence, she does not know traditions, she has no nationality, her tastes and ideals change with dizzying speed in accordance with the needs of fashion.

Associated with the means of mass communication, this culture affects the mass consciousness, sometimes manifesting its manipulative nature, which poses a great threat to an independent person, is a powerful instrument of suggestion. Another important feature of modern mass culture is the mythologization of public consciousness. The behavior of mass culture is based, just as in myth, not on the distinction between the real and the ideal, not on knowledge, but on faith.

Historically, the appearance of a man of the masses was prepared by the entry of the broad masses of the people into socio-political life, which became an essential factor in the internal movement and development of society.

The "mass society" is characterized by industrialization, urbanization, standardization of production, mass consumption, the spread of mass communication and information, and, as a result, the spread of mass culture.

The development of mass culture in the 20th century is connected with the formation of a mass man. This transition was due to the development of mass media and the subsequent informatization of society, which, proceeding at different times, in different forms and with different intensities, contributed to the creation and dissemination of mass culture and in the modern phase brought up a mass person - its product, its consumer and "hero". ". The isolation of a mass person from the bowels of a mass society meant the final transition of the massization process from a quantitative phase to a qualitative one, because a new type of personality was formed with a specific set of certain forms and characteristics, with certain life roles and social functions.

The middle of the 20th century can be considered the time when mass culture was formed into a certain type. Possessing not always a certain value in comparison with the elite or national culture, mass culture at the same time has the widest audience. It satisfies the momentary needs of people, reacts to any new event and reflects it. Therefore, its samples, in particular hits, quickly lose their relevance, become obsolete, go out of fashion. This does not happen with works of elite and folk culture.

Along with this, in our time there is a certain interaction between elite and mass art. The same can happen with concrete works of art. For example, Bach's organ mass is one of the highest examples of classical art, but if it is used as musical accompaniment in figure skating competitions, it is automatically included in the category of mass culture, without losing its belonging to art.

Numerous orchestrations of Bach's works in the style of jazz or rock music do not compromise classical music at all, but make it closer to a wide audience, while affecting each person individually. At the same time, there are such genres of literature (fantasy, detective stories and comics) that are usually referred to as popular or popular culture.

Domestic scientist L.S. Vygotsky notes that “form is what distinguishes art from non-art”^^. In other words, the art form, which has always been the property, as a rule, of high, elite art, practically ceases to be a hallmark of art in mass culture. At the beginning of the last century, the Russian poet M. Voloshin wrote the following about his understanding of the difference between mass and truly high art: “If Vygotsky L.S. Psychology of art, - M., 1965. - S. 278.

the principle of democracy is true and necessary, the principle of aristocracy is just as necessary for the spiritual world. The principle "art for all" is deeply false. It reveals a false democratization. "Art for all" does not at all imply the necessary clarity and simplicity, that would be fine - no, it contains a disastrous demand for cutting down the growth of the master to the level with his contemporary ignorant and bad taste, the demand for "publicity", alphabeticality and usefulness. Art never appeals to the crowd, to the masses, it speaks to an individual in the deep, hidden recesses of his soul. Art should be "for everyone", but by no means for everyone " ^*^.

Since about the middle of this century, mass culture has become one of the most profitable branches of the economy;

this is reflected, as mentioned above, in the corresponding names: “entertainment industry”, “commercial culture”, “pop culture”, “leisure industry”, etc. (It should be noted here that the last of the given designations opens another of reasons for the emergence of "mass culture" - the appearance in a significant layer of working citizens of an excess of free time, "leisure", due to the high level of mechanization of the production process.) Turning into a product for the market, hostile to any kind of elitism, "mass culture" also manifests itself in general a number of distinguishing features. This is, first of all, its "simplicity", if not primitiveness, often turning into a cult of mediocrity. In addition, in order to fulfill its function, "mass culture" must be at least entertaining, it is cheerful, its works often end with a happy ending. Thus, the ideas about time and space, which significantly changed at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century, changed not only within the framework of the scientific picture of the world, but, to a greater extent, Voloshin M. Russia crucified. - M., 1992. - S. 85.

degree, in relation to human existence as a whole, manifesting itself in a new type of culture.

The history of the 20th century has affirmed universality in the trends of global problems: the formation of world-class economic systems (the world market, international banks, transcontinental monopolies);

the emergence of a global information network that makes it possible to involve the whole world in the affairs of individual countries;

the emergence of environmental problems, the solution of which is often possible only through the efforts of all mankind;

the wars of the 20th century become world wars, they cover dozens of peoples and states, the problems of international terrorism arise, while the scale of human destruction reaches unprecedented proportions.

The introduction of the principles of mass production into the realm of culture meant that cultural artefacts could be treated like any other mass-produced product. This meant, from the point of view of critics of mass society and popular culture, that cultural products such as films could not be considered as art because they did not have the aura of genuine and authentic works of art. At the same time, they could not be attributed to folk culture, since, unlike folklore genres, they did not come from the broad masses of people and could not reflect their experience and interests. Therefore, the problems of a new type of culture are associated by its researchers with a change in social structures and cultural orders in the industrial era.

A new type of society - "mass society" - has its own culture, embodying the values ​​and lifestyles of the broadest sections of the population.

Despite the fact that the debate on the essence of mass, folk and popular culture has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment, it became especially acute in the 20s of the XX century, when the technologies of mass replication of works of art became widespread and such mass cultural forms arose. like movies and radio.

It was this time that is characterized by the emergence of theoretical interest in the problems of mass culture.

The phenomenon of mass culture from the point of view of its role in the development of modern civilization is assessed by scientists far from being unambiguous. Depending on the inclination towards an elitist or tsopulist way of thinking, culturologists tend to consider it either in something like a social pathology, a symbol of the degeneration of society, or vice versa, an important factor in its health and internal stability. The nerves mainly include European thinkers F. Nietzsche, O. Spengler, X. Ortega y Gasset, E. Fromm, N.A. Berdyaev and many others. Among the second - American scientists L. White and T. Patterson. A critical approach to popular culture boils down to its accusations of neglecting the classical heritage, that it is an instrument of conscious manipulation of people;

enslaves and unifies the creator of any culture - a sovereign personality, contributes to its alienation from real life. The apologetic approach, on the contrary, is expressed in the fact that mass culture is proclaimed a natural consequence of irreversible scientific and technological progress, that it helps to unite people, especially young people, regardless of any ideologies, into a stable social system and not only does not reject the cultural heritage past, but also makes its best examples available to the widest strata of the people by replicating them through the press, radio, television and industrial reproduction. The debate about the harm or benefit of "mass culture" must also be attributed to the political aspect: both democrats and supporters of authoritarian power, not without reason, seek to use this objective and very important phenomenon of our days in their own interests.

Mamontov SP. Fundamentals of cultural studies. - M., 1999. - S. 30.

As in the case of culture, there is still no universal definition of mass culture. This situation has its own rational explanation. The fact is that as a scientific and philosophical category, "mass culture" includes three concepts. First, "culture" as a special character of the product. Secondly, "mass" as the degree of distribution of the product. Thirdly, "culture" as a spiritual value.

Mass culture is an integral part of society.

However, the products of mass culture are short-lived. Being largely a consumer culture, it instantly reacts to emerging demand for one or another of its products. With the disappearance of demand, the products designed to satisfy it also disappear.

Mass culture, while generating a huge number of its one-day works, is at the same time quite conservative. Her works can be unmistakably attributed to one or another genre, the plots have a clear, repeating structure from time to time. And although often, her works are devoid of deep meaning, they have a certain charisma.

Sometimes the best way to please the tastes of the public, according to some culturologists, is not novelty, not innovation, but banality.

Popular culture often takes on a formal character:

functioning, it is deprived of the essential content and traditional morality, being a special cultural phenomenon, it is an autonomous entity in which form and content often break. In this regard, A.B. Hoffman notes that mass culture is a special state of culture in the crisis period of society, when the process of disintegration of its content levels develops.

From the point of view of another approach, mass culture appears as a phenomenon that characterizes the features of the production of cultural values ​​in modern society. It is assumed that mass culture See: Hoffman A.B. Fashion and people. - M., 1994, - S. 17.

not consumed by all people, regardless of the place and country of their residence.

Mass culture is also due to the fact that it is massively produced every day. This is the culture of everyday life, presented to the audience by means of mass communication.

One of the most interesting and productive is the approach of D. Bell, according to which mass culture is a kind of organization of everyday consciousness in the information society, a special sign system or a special language in which members of the information society reach mutual understanding ^ "*. It acts as a link ) a link between a highly specialized post-industrial society and a person who is integrated into it only as a “partial” person.

Communication between such people, narrow specialists, is carried out, apparently, only at the level of mass consciousness, that is, in a public language, which is mass culture.

As we have already noted, mass culture is estimated by various authors inconsistently. Representatives of one group (T. Adorno, G. Marcuse and others) give a negative assessment of this phenomenon. In their opinion, mass culture forms a passive perception of reality among its consumers. In addition, some theorists of mass culture believe that under its influence the value system changes - the desire for entertainment and entertainment becomes dominant. The negative aspects include the fact that culture is based not on a reality-oriented image, but on a system of images that affect the unconscious sphere of the human psyche.

Markova G.I. Mass culture: content and social: thesis .... cand. philosophy Sciences. - M., 1996. - S. 37.

^ "^ Bell D. The Coming Post-Industrial Society. - M., 1993. P. 96.

^^ Marcuse G. Eros and civilization. One-Dimensional Man: Research.

ideology of the developed industry. islands. - M., 2002.

Researchers who adhere to an optimistic point of view on the role of mass culture in the life of society indicate that it attracts the masses who do not know how to use their free time productively^^;

gives the audience an opportunity to get acquainted with the works of traditional (high) culture^^.

The well-known English writer O. Huxley, analyzing the specifics of mass culture as an aesthetic phenomenon, also notes such reasons for its popularity as recognition and accessibility^^. Society needs confirmation of great truths, although mass culture does this at a low level and tasteless.

Mass culture, taking into account all these features of consciousness, presents products that are easily perceived, allow you to plunge into the world of dreams and illusions, and create the impression of addressing a specific individual.

In connection with the widespread dissemination of mass culture, the question of its geographical status also arises. Mass culture is a universal phenomenon that has nothing to do with the social structure of society.

Thus, it is necessary to note one more important feature of mass culture - its cosmopolitanism.

The formation of mass culture took place over a long period of time. The most important factors that played an important role in the spread of mass culture were technological progress, the processes of democratization and globalization in the modern world. Noting the most important stages in the development of mass iQoibTypbi, it can be noted that in the most general terms this phenomenon can be found even in the culture of ancient civilizations.

Teplitz K. Everything for everyone: mass culture and modern man // Man: image and essence. - M., 2000. - S. 261.

^ "Shapinskaya E.N. Mass culture of the XX century // Polygnosis. 2000. - No. 2. - P. 80.

^^ Huxley O. Eternal Philosophy. - M., 2004.

Researchers associate a new stage in the development of mass culture with the invention of book printing in Europe, which contributed to the spread of book knowledge and the involvement of a wide range of audiences in the cultural and spiritual process.

An important role in the formation of mass culture was played by the era of modern times, the processes of secularization, and the expansion of the geography of cultural interaction.

The most important inventions and technical progress of the 19th century had the greatest significance for the subsequent formation of mass culture.

It was at this time that the basic principles of mass culture were formed, types of creativity appeared that were designed for a wide consumer, and a universal “language” of mass art was formed. Moreover, in the 19th century, the first research works appeared that were directly devoted to issues of mass culture, in which the authors sought to identify both negative and positive features of this phenomenon.

The trends laid down in the 19th century found their continuation in the 20th century. Thus, from the 19th to the 20th centuries, a certain type of culture takes shape from individual phenomena, which takes on a comprehensive mass character.

Based on the analysis of trends in world cultural development, it can be concluded that the prerequisites for mass culture are ancient, rooted in ancient times. Having emerged in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance in the form of a tradition of folk theatrical performances, mass culture received a new impetus to development in the Age of Enlightenment, and then in the era of the scientific and technological revolution, which led to the emergence of an industrial-consumer civilization.

The emergence of a new type of culture is associated with a change in social structures and international relations in the post-industrial era. A new type of society - "mass society" - has its own culture.

embodying the values ​​and life principles of the broadest sections of the population.

1.2. Mass culture as a form of intercultural communication Being closely connected with the process of global informatization of society, mass culture is formed, spread and preserved.

The 70s - 80s of the 20th century passed under the sign of the political struggle for the creation of a new international space. Developing countries advocated equal relations in the field of informatics and information exchange, seeing in the expansion of developed industrial powers an attempt to establish a monopoly not only of an economic, but also of a political nature. In the political system, the functions of informing, the relationship between people and organizations are traditionally performed by the information and communication system. In a sense, information rules the world. It consists of many views, attitudes, ideas, value orientations. By what means is information disseminated? There are three ways of communication.

This method Communication through informal contacts.

communication through personal connections is important in primitive, or traditionalist societies. But it remains important in advanced societies, even in the midst of the rise of the mass media.

Communication through organizations. This way of communication presupposes, first of all, political, business, scientific, educational and cultural contacts. This can include an extensive network of scientific and scientific information institutions whose object of activity is the study of politics and the accumulation of political information.

The scientific and informative infrastructure is widely developed and is represented by scientific institutes and consulting centers. In the process of globalization, broad intercultural communications arise in the business sphere, through the development of business contacts, the emergence of transnational corporations and common economic zones, which, for example, is the European Economic Union (EEC). The development of the educational world system also contributes to the expansion of communication through the involvement of an increasing number of countries in international educational projects, such as the Bologna Process.

Communication is developing especially brightly in the modern world through the political contacts of states, because despite the impressive successes of modern civilization, the development of technologies and broad cultural contacts, the situation in the world in the political and conflictological sense is constantly aggravated. The process of development of political technologies has always been closely connected with the sphere of culture, which, being a universal form of communication, appeals to what is understandable to all people, to universal values. In this sense, mass culture and its communication technologies are the ideal means for politics.

Communication is actively carried out through the media. We are talking about print (press, books) and electronic media (radio, television, Internet) mass media.

Mass media are one of the most important institutions of modern society. They perform a variety of functions, including informing the population about events taking place in the country, education and socialization, advertising, entertainment, public and cultural enlightenment, etc. The media have an impact on almost all spheres and institutions of society, including politics, education, culture. These circumstances are of particular relevance and importance against the background of the ever-increasing penetration of the media into the political sphere, their transformation into one of the most important tools for implementing the political process.

The peculiarity of modern media is that they have the ability to directly address the public, to immediately cover such traditional institutions as the school, family, political parties and organizations, etc. This ability of theirs is used by politicians, political parties, etc. The media are an active subject of political life and in this role they can do a lot, including with regard to influencing mass culture.

For a long time, the main source of information for a wide audience was the press - newspapers and magazines. Many of them emerged as organs of various political parties, or are involved in the political process in one form or another.

Significantly expanded the possibilities of exploiting mass communication processes for political purposes radio and television.

The invention of radio at the end of the 19th century radically and forever changed the mechanism of information transmission, making it possible to transmit it across state borders and over long distances without the physical presence of the transmitter. During the Second World War, radio became one of the main means of political mobilization of society and the most important propaganda tool. Its role increased even more in the post-war period, when it appeared progenitally in all corners of the developed countries.

For television, the period from its inception to becoming an important political tool turned out to be even shorter than for radio, which is mainly due to the rapid pace of its development and distribution. At present, it has become one of the dominant mass media, it has great potential to influence public opinion.

The role of the media in politics cannot be assessed unambiguously. The media is a complex and multifaceted institution, consisting of many organs and elements designed to implement diverse tasks informing the population about current events and phenomena in each particular country and around the world. Mass culture plays an important role in this, influencing the masses not only rationally, as political information does, but irrationally, forming the faith and beliefs of people, which then become the most important lever and guiding force of social processes.

Mass culture in modern conditions of informatization and globalization of society can be treated differently, but, undoubtedly, it is an objective and stable phenomenon of modern culture, which cannot be ignored and which needs to be explored and, to the extent that, transform its development into a more positive and beneficial one. direction for society.

In the last decade, in connection with the expansion of Russia's international relations with other countries, issues of intercultural communication have become of particular theoretical and practical interest. International relations are not limited to the discussion of various issues and problems at a high governmental and diplomatic level, but are increasingly becoming part of people's daily lives. Therefore, in our time, mastering the art of intercultural communication is becoming increasingly relevant and significant.

The concept of "intercultural communication" is derived from the concepts of "culture" and "communication". In order to determine what “intercultural communication” is, one needs to delve into the essence of the concepts of its components - communication and culture.

C) there are many definitions of the term "communication", since it can be considered a necessary and universal condition for human life and one of the fundamental foundations of society. Society is not so much a collection of individuals as those connections and relationships in which these individuals are located. In many ways, this explains such a close interest in communication on the part of representatives of various scientific fields.

Here are just a few definitions of communication found in the literature:

Communication is a mechanism by which the existence and development of human relations is ensured, including all mental symbols, means of their transmission in space and preservation in time (Ch. Kyli^^).

Communication - in a broad sense, the social unification of individuals with the help of language or signs, the establishment of generally valid sets of rules for various purposeful activities.

Communication is a specific exchange of information, the process of transferring emotional and intellectual content (A.B. Zverintsev^^ A.P. PanfshIOva^^).

It is necessary to give your own definition of communication or agree with the definitions given above.

For example: The above definitions reveal the various features of this phenomenon and allow us to conclude that communication in a broad sense is a mechanism for disseminating a variety of information that ensures the development of human relations, as well as the establishment of sets of rules for purposeful activity.

Cooley C.H. Human nature and social order. - M., 2001.

^^ Fundamentals of communication theory: textbook. for universities / ed.

M.A. Vasilika. - M., 2003. - S.I.

^ "Zverintsev A.B. Communication management: working book.

PR manager. - St. Petersburg, 1997.

^^ Panfilova A.P. Business communication in professional activity: textbook. allowance. - St. Petersburg, 2005.

If we talk about the term "culture", then it is among the most ambiguous. This is explained by the fact that culture itself is an extremely complex and multifaceted phenomenon that expresses all aspects of human existence.

It is precisely for this reason that many sciences study it, each of which singles out one of its aspects as the subject of its study, while formulating its own understanding and definition of culture.

In domestic literature, culture is most often seen as a historically defined level of development of society, the creative forces and abilities of a person, expressed in the types and forms of organizing the life and activities of people, in their relationships, as well as in the material and spiritual values ​​​​created by them. In such an interpretation, culture appears as the sum of all the achievements of mankind. This is an extremely broad understanding of culture. It can be used to characterize:

certain historical eras (for example, ancient culture, medieval culture);

specific societies, nationalities and nations (for example, Russian culture, Chinese culture);

specific spheres of human activity (culture byga, labor culture, political culture, artistic culture)^^. In a narrower sense, culture is understood as the sphere of the spiritual life of people.

In English, the word culture (culture) is most often interpreted as:

Way of life, general customs and beliefs of a certain group of people at a certain time ^ "*;

Customs, civilization and achievements of a certain era or It can be said that in almost all English definitions of the word culture (culture) the word customs (customs, traditions) is repeated.

^^ See: Fundamentals of Communication Theory. - S. 579.

""* Cambridge International Dictionary of English. - Cambridge Univ.

^^ The Concise Oxford Dictionary. - Oxford, 1966.

the word (beliefs) is repeatedly used, as well as the phrase beliefs the way of life (way of life).

In German, the word Kultur (culture) has the following main meanings:

The totality of all spiritual, artistic, creative achievements of society as an expression of a high level of human development;

The totality of characteristic spiritual, artistic, creative achievements created in a certain society in a certain era (oriental culture, Renaissance culture, etc.)^^. The similarity of all the proposed interpretations lies in the fact that culture can be considered as a general, universal for society (ethnos, nation) system of value orientations, forms of communication and organization of joint activities of people that are passed down from generation to generation. It influences the perception, thinking, behavior of all members of society and determines their belonging to this society. In this interpretation, culture appears as an integrity that differs from others due to religious, national-state boundaries or a set of ethnic characteristics.

This understanding of culture is the most functional in terms of the topic under consideration.

Intercultural communication is characterized by the fact that when representatives of different kupyurs meet, each of them acts in accordance with their own cultural norms. The classical definition of intercultural communication is an adequate mutual understanding of two communicative actors belonging to different national cultures^"".

^^ Duden Deutsches Universalwoerterbuch. 2. Aufl. Mannheim, Wien, Zurich, 1989.

^ "^ See: Vereshchagin E.M. Language and culture / E.M. Vereshchagin, V.G. Kostomarov. - M., 1990. - P. 26.

The problem of intercultural communication is not reduced solely to the language problem. Knowledge of the language of a native speaker of a different culture is necessary, but not yet sufficient for an adequate mutual understanding of the participants in a communicative act.

The life activity and relationships of people are determined by the norms that exist in a particular culture, which regulate broad areas of human thinking and behavior and have a great influence on the nature of perception, evaluation and interpersonal relationships. Education and upbringing, historical memory, traditions and customs, the rules dictated by society, the very language in which people communicate, develop an orientation system that helps them cope with various everyday situations and problems in their own way.

Any person sees the world in a certain cultural framework. But these cultural limits, as a rule, are not realized by the individual, since most often they are so inherent in him that they form part of his personality. Awareness of the norms of behavior and thinking of one's own culture is possible only when there are contacts with people who, in their behavior, are guided by other cultural norms. People, to one degree or another, expand the boundaries of their cultural horizon by visiting other countries, learning foreign languages, reading foreign literature, communicating with foreigners.

However, such interaction can cause discomfort or even lead to conflicts, often difficult to explain.

Behavioral and evaluation mechanisms that worked as long as communication was carried out within the same culture begin to falter.

At the end of the forties of the last century, the term "mass culture" appeared, that is, a culture designed for the vast masses of people. Popular culture is yellow newspapers, and pop music, and soap operas. Something that usually exists for the purpose of "relaxing", for example, after a long day at work. Mass culture is for many, but not for all. And that's why.

Imagine a welder Vasily, who received a secondary special education. How would he prefer to spend his leisure time? What will he choose, watching some talk show on TV or reading a volume of Dostoevsky? Obviously the first. Now imagine Nikolai Petrovich teaching philosophy at one of the universities. Is it possible to think that in the evenings he watches Malakhov's show? Thus, we can conclude that the need for mass culture exists, first of all, among poorly educated people. This is the working class and people employed in the service sector. Mass culture is most prevalent in industrialized countries such as Russia, where the working class is predominant. I am not saying that it is not available in post-industrial countries - it is, but of a higher quality.

It would seem that this mass culture exists, and okay. But, unfortunately, its spread leads to the most negative consequences for society. Since its task is to satisfy the needs of a huge number of people, it should be simple and understandable to everyone. Therefore, its main characteristic is primitiveness. This primitiveness is detrimental to society. Maybe the welder Vasily can no longer be convinced that the Beatles are better than the Lesopoval group, but he has a daughter who is brought up as a criminal.

Mass culture shapes the younger generation. And the problem is that it basically does not make you think. This leads to degradation. As a result, we have a weak-willed, non-thinking society, suitable only for the service sector. If the frenzied dynamics of increasing popularity of mass culture that exists now continues, then in a few decades we may find ourselves in the world described by the famous science fiction writer Ray Bradbury. In a world without books, in a world where a huge TV set is enough to satisfy all spiritual needs.

Of course, the direction in which society develops largely depends on the state. But it, in particular ours, does not seem to deliberately try to restrain the spread of mass culture. There is only one answer to this - it is not profitable. After all, it is much easier to manage people whose thoughts are occupied with those who slept with whom in show business than those people who think about freedom and social justice.

A philosophical question arises: "What to do?". First, as trite as it may sound, you need to start with yourself. It is necessary to restrain your primitive needs in mass culture, not to be led by them, not to succumb to the temptation to watch an evening reality show, not to buy yellow newspapers with another sensation from the world of show business, not to fill your player with albums of one-day stars.

Instead, read as much as possible, engage in self-development, reflect on real issues, and not urgent ones. Secondly, try, if not directly point out, then at least hint to people around you that everything popular is bad, because the understanding of this should come to them by itself. It seems that this is the duty of every person who, using a metaphor, does not float on the surface, but looks deep into. We must ensure that all people show interest in traditional and elite culture, regardless of their level of education or social status. It depends on us what our society will be like in the future. It depends on us whether we will be able to move to a new, truly civil society, or we will continue to stagnate, inventing new idols for ourselves and living someone else's life, the life of the heroes of serials for housewives, a festive life, but deceptive and false.

The concept of "culture" is very ambiguous, has different content and different meanings not only in everyday language, but also in different sciences and philosophical disciplines.

The concept of "culture" must be disclosed in its differential-dynamic aspects, which requires the use of the categories "social practice" and "activity", linking the categories "social being" and "public consciousness", "objective" and "subjective" in the historical process . In modern domestic philosophical literature, the concept of “activity” appears as one of the most fundamental characteristics of human existence. At the same time, it is also generally accepted that a person is an “active natural being”, which affirms itself in the world, in its being. Thus, we can say that the specificity of the social form of the movement of matter is expressed through the concept of “activity”.

If we admit that one of the main features of a true culture is the heterogeneity and richness of its manifestations, based on national-ethnic and estate-class differentiation, then in the 20th century, not only Bolshevism turned out to be the enemy of cultural “polyphony”, which by its nature does not accept any pluralism. In the conditions of "industrial society" and scientific and technological revolution, humanity as a whole has found a distinct tendency towards pattern and uniformity to the detriment of any kind of originality and originality, whether it is a question of an individual or of certain social strata and groups. The modern state, like a gigantic machine, with the help of unified education systems and equally coordinated information, continuously “stamps” faceless and obviously doomed to anonymity human “material”. If the Bolsheviks and their followers sought to forcibly transform people into a kind of “cogs”, then since the middle of our century, the processes of standardizing everyday life have acquired an involuntary and comprehensive character all over the world, with the exception of the remote periphery.

The culture of modern society is a combination of the most diverse layers of culture, that is, it consists of the dominant culture, subcultures and even countercultures. In any society, high culture (elitist) and folk culture (folklore) can be distinguished. The development of mass media has led to the formation of the so-called mass culture, simplified in terms of meaning and art, technologically accessible to everyone. Mass culture, especially with its strong commercialization, is capable of crowding out both high and folk culture. But in general, the attitude towards mass culture is not so unambiguous.

The phenomenon of "mass culture" from the point of view of its role in the development of modern civilization is not unambiguously assessed by scientists. Depending on the inclination towards an elitist or populist way of thinking, culturologists tend to consider it either something like a social pathology, a symptom of the degeneration of society, or, conversely, an important factor in its health and internal stability. O. Spengler, X. Ortega y Gasset, E. Fromm, N.A. Berdyaev and many others. The latter are represented by L. White and T. Parsons, already mentioned by us. A critical approach to "mass culture" comes down to its accusations of neglecting the classical heritage, that it is supposedly an instrument of conscious manipulation of people; enslaves and unifies the main creator of any culture - the sovereign personality; contributes to its alienation from real life; distracts people from their main task - "the spiritual and practical development of the world" (K. Marx). The apologetic approach, on the contrary, is expressed in the fact that “mass culture” is proclaimed a natural consequence of irreversible scientific and technological progress, that it helps to unite people, especially young people, regardless of any ideologies and national and ethnic differences, into a stable social system and not not only does not reject the cultural heritage of the past, but also makes its best examples available to the widest strata of the people by replicating them through the press, radio, television and industrial reproduction. The debate about the harm or benefit of "mass culture" has a purely political aspect: both democrats and supporters of authoritarian power, not without reason, seek to use this objective and very important phenomenon of our time in their own interests. During the Second World War and in the post-war period, the problems of "mass culture", especially its most important element - the mass media, were studied with equal attention both in democratic and totalitarian states.