of both worlds

I am currently taking Literature and Cultural Studies. We were tasked to answer one assertion form the reading: THE CULTURE INDUSTRY: Enlightenment As Mass Deception by Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer

Chosen statement:

Real life is becoming indistinguishable from the movies. The sound film, far surpassing the theatre of illusion, leaves no room for imagination or reflection on the part of the audience, who are unable to respond within the structure of the film, yet deviate from its precise detail without losing the thread of the story; hence the film forces its victims to equate it directly with reality.

Entertainment has long been present in history, although it was shaped in a different form. People sing and dance for religious purposes, victories, and celebrations but not to the extent of providing other people sort of entertainment. The earliest stage of theater can be traced back from the 5th century in Ancient Greece. Aeschylus is a playwright that invented drama. Afterwards, drama innovated and took various forms; one is known to be called “film.”

With the emergence of technology, starting from the industrial period, the creativity of the people have increased dramatically. Due to the availability of plenty of resources, they were able to come up with diversions into making art and entertainment. What used to be performed only in stages live can now be viewed on screens and watched repeatedly in preferred time.

Dramas, the origin of films, have two main types: comedy and tragedy. These two encompasses other genres and hold a certain mystery. While the two have contrasted meanings (comedy for humor and tragedy the opposite), they portray a façade that the audience must recognize; hence, must be intrusive what’s beyond the play. Moreover, plays before emphasizes minor details as to Formalist views. It strongly highlights the structure and sees art and literature as a device—a system in which its ‘literariness’ is highly valued. Defamiliarization is a famous concept in Formalism introduced by Viktor Shlovsky. It is defined as a method that changes our responses to the world by submitting our habitual perceptions to the process of literary form. In this way, the reality is presented but in a vague way. It is the audience’s job to identify the art and if it has a correlational effect with reality (because it does not always relate).

Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer in THE CULTURE INDUSTRY: Enlightenment As Mass Deception asserts that real life is becoming indistinguishable from the movies. This statement can be true and at the same time false. True in a way that some movies are true-to-life. They have these certain elements that are observed in reality. Take for example Four Sisters and a Wedding, a Filipino film. The whole team tries to present the mundane life of an average Filipino family where they eat breakfast together with the emphasis of rice, the presence of a black sheep member, a conflict between siblings, arguing using the dialogue of Filipino sibling quarrels, focusing the concept of ‘favoritism.’ Many Filipinos can relate to this film since it is really happening in reality. However, the audience failed to recognize at that exact moment the other elements and the mysterious effect of the film. Some recognized it after rewatching or in the later time. The film apparently has symbolisms that adds to the literary effect, especially the scene in the swing where the sisters are placed in an area, divided by swing’s chains as to which one is closest to the youngest brother and to one another.

The authors’ point that the essence of illusion and mystery have vanished may be true in a sense that it is somewhat neglected by the audience since they are absorbed in the ‘reality effect’ of the film endowed by the producers. They argue that it leaves no room for imagination since what needs to be expected are already spoon-fed. Furthermore, I have to agree that entertainment industry is making it a business—because it is and there is no shame to that. The crafters of films, from the initiators to the casts to the working committees, are workers and victims of capitalism—everyone below the rich are victims, unfortunately. While it is true that these are troublesome enterprise, it is happening whether or not everyone is aware. The development of drama is spontaneous as the avalanche, swift and unstoppable. Reasons probably do not entirely rely on people’s profit purposes but rather on the demands of the chaotic society that must be emphasized. After all, change is constant, even language is dynamic.

Films nowadays have variations. Generalizing that each film lost its essence of illusion that delimits the audience’s capacity to imagine and be creative is too demarcate to conclude. Literature has many varieties as well as people have different tastes. Probably those who are inclined to scholarly perspectives can easily recognize these illusions while the masses just want to enjoy the show. More so, the creators probably have pure intentions of creating this certain type of film genre because they want to without condescending a certain theory. Literary theories have also emerged; Formalism is just one of them.

I still truly believe that the old essence of film is alive and its development shows both the strengths and weaknesses of the latter. Films recognize the possibility of a fiction and true-to-life stories. Plus, the audience hold certain preferences without removing the lingering impact of the mass media.

It may be difficult to accept but film industry is a business that does not fully rely on art anymore. In that assertion, I fully agree. However, this does not mean that all artists lost its passion. It is just that we are all victims of the society’s expectations, struggling to survive. Balance of both worlds is the best option there is to be.

-Jewel Liaison