Comments on “Counter-cultures: thick and wide”



Sasha's picture

“The countercultures obliterated the obsolete high/pop distinction.”

Isn’t this distinction still valuable?
For example, as a comparison between art and entertainment. The criterion can be the function, rather than a socio-economic class marker. Tentatively: high art is designed to elevate one morally and intellectually; entertainment (“low” or “pop”) is primarily a diversion or just experience of pleasure.

Of course, those categories can overlap and co-exist to varying degrees in the same work; nevertheless I believe they are critically important categories (in the Wittgenstein sense of “family resemblance” concepts, not definable with precise boundaries).

Add new comment


This page is in the section Countercultures: modernity’s last gasp,
      which is in How meaning fell apart,
      which is in Meaningness and Time: past, present, future.

The next page in this section is Why both countercultures failed.

The previous page is Fundamentalism is countercultural modernism.

General explanation: Meaningness is a hypertext book. Start with an appetizer, or the table of contents. Its “metablog” includes additional essays that are not part of the book.

To hear about new content, Subscribe by email subscribe to my email newsletter, Follow Meaningness on Twitter follow me on Twitter, use the Syndicate content RSS feed, or see the list of recent pages.

Click on terms with dotted underlining to read a definition.

The book is a work in progress; pages marked ⚒︎ are under construction.