UDC 321.911(477)
Oleksandra Oliinyk
Institute for Cultural Research, National Academy of Arts of Ukraine, Kyiv.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37627/2311-9489-18-2020-2.156-164
Keywords: cultural production, aesthetic value, commodification, functions of art.
Abstract. The paper discloses the phenomenon of the commodification of cultural production in course of evolutionary transformation of technic, technologic and economic capacities of society. Economic issues, including the definition of cultural product as a commodity, form the apparatus for the objectification of creative intention that does not impact directly on the creativity as freedom. Albeit the tension of social apprehension spoken in words by either intellectual critics or market demand and dependence on the market laws reflecting either the labor issues or distribution and consumption evoke the shift in the function of art, in particular — the loss of critical and regulative functions. Thus, the article seeks the logic dependence of the functional shifts in art on the phenomenon of commodification. The paper aims to justify the hypothesis that the commodification is an auxiliary tool for communication between the artist and audience, barely directly causing the leveling of aesthetic artistic value. Considering that the comprehension of commodification relies mostly on the philosophic criticism leaving the economic research of cultural production aside and missing the discourse of aesthetic and artistic essence, this paper concludes that the commodification of symbolic production, as the consequence of social and economic development, rather implies communicative capacity for artistic value than the destructive or leveling impact factor causing the shift of social functions of art.
Author Biography.
Oleksandra Oliinyk, Ph.D. (Culturology), Head of the Department of Theory and History of Culture, Institute for Cultural Research, National Academy of Arts of Ukraine, Kyiv.
aleksandra.oley@gmail.com
References:
Abbing, H. (2002). Why Are Artists Poor? The Exceptional Economy of the Arts. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam. 369 p.
Hesmondhalgh, David. (2007). The Cultural Industries. Second edition. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. 346 p.
Huyssen, A. (1986). After the Great Divide: Modernism, Mass Culture, Postmodernism. USA, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. 244 p.
Jones, Alan, de Coppet, Laura . (1984). The Art Dealers. NY Clarkson N. Potter. 322 p.
Martin, S. (2007, November/December). The absolute artwork meets the absolute commodity. Radical Philosophy, # 146, 2007. P. 15–25
Maxwell, R. & Miller, T. (2005, December). The Cultural Labor Issue. Social Semiotics. Vol. 15, Number 3. Routledge: Taylor & Francis. P. 261–266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330500309980
Pavlova, O. Yu. (2017). Do definitsii poniattia “kulturna industriia”: deskryptsiia symptomiv ta analiz tendentsii [To the definition of the concept “cultural industry”: description of symptoms and analysis of trends]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats “Kulturolohichni Studii” Ukrainian cultural studies. №1 (1). Kyiv: KNU imeni T. H. Shevchenka, VGC Kyiv University. P. 39–47 (in Ukrainian) DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/ucs.2017.1.09
Riff, David. (No date). Kogda iskusstvo vnov’ stanovitsja poleznym [When art once again becomes useful]. Transl. by A. Skidan. Restored from http://chtodelat.org/ar_4/nr_9/ (in Russian)
Shmatko, N. A. (2003). Analiz kul‘turnogo proizvodstva P‘era Burd‘e [The analysis of Pierre Bourdieu’s cultural production]. Restored from http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/822/693/1231/016.SHMATKO.pdf (in Russian)
Velthuis, O. (2005). Imaginary Economics. Contemporary Artists and the World of Big Money. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers. 144 p. https://thesurpluslibrary.com/books/147
Velthuis, O. (2005). Talking Prices: Symbolic Meanings of Prices on the Market for Contemporary Art. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 264 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt4cgd14.20
Published: August 10, 2020.
Section: APPLIED CULTURAL STUDIES AND CULTURAL PRACTICES.