so I ‘ll start by talking about a
audi the announcement of an agony is not that
there were already
we have support at the beginning of the
90 is when the when citizen called
paulo whose mother wrote a book
published in brazil
called cultural industry colon
agony of a concept then my
It is my starting point that
today would have happened to the industry
culture would be in agony until today
would have died already
of course for the title of my
lecture is of course not right that she
did not die but she became
we have 2.0 to use a bit
language of technology when the
contemplated is not with a new version
It’s not good, so start talking a little.
of the origin of the cultural industry
It is interesting that since the middle of the
19th century
there is an artisanal industry of the
entertainment right that turned
radically from the appropriation of
inventions from that period, right?
like the gramophone the cinema
the radio is right and that gave birth there is
which came to be critically placed
in the 1940s by adornment and
last horkheimer under the rubric of
cultural industry
this happened first in the
Europe in the most industrialized countries
in europe mainly france great
Brittany and from century beginnings
20 there was a migration of
main industry development
cultural for the United States of
america is not and around 1915
there was a migration still internal states
united from the east coast to the west coast
North American, right?
good then the critique of adornment and
horkheimer I summarize her in five
né operators
retroactive manipulation is the first
second is the usurpation of schematism
third domestication of the fourth style
dispute in signaling the tragic and 5 is
the fetishism of cultural goods
beginning with the manipulation
retroactive to the cultural industry it is
very powerful in the sense of your
public thinks that they are choosing things
when in fact it is being at least
induced to make those choices
and this is it is this manipulation because it is
retroactive because everything that is offered
by the cultural industry is based
exactly in latent demands on your
public
there are a number of mechanisms that
I’ll say after today that they are very
perfected in that sense, right?
the second moment that is usurpation of the
schematicism is conceptually more
because it refers to the concept of
schematism that is a concept that comes
of emmanuel kant the German philosopher is from
century is that he said the following that
we have a sensitivity sensor
you né
and we have in our understanding the
our reason and they are two colleges
let’s say né
It is in our minds to speak in a way
general of our spirit completely
and that there is a need for
mechanism which is also part of the
also of our spirit that makes the connection
between which we perceive that the mode
how we process the information from the
our census this mechanism is
exactly the schematics, right?
and he as to how kant conceived is
something that as kant says come from
depths of the soul is a hidden secret
in the depths of the soul of a
subject is not
the cultural industry the idea is that
usurper of the subject
this faculty of schematism because
she offers audiovisual products for
example that already comes with its own
let’s say let’s say cast on them
themselves
the domestication of style is style is a
concept that exists in aesthetics
speak the truth from ancient times but
is a concept that has gained
aesthetics from the 18th and 19th century
and he always wanted to say the following that
the great artists who created the
called great bourgeois art and tetra
they were subject to certain
shapes for their creations but they
They had freedom within that.
continue to create and propose things
new etc and the cultural industry it
makes the style exactly the opposite
it prevents the patterns the shapes are so
violently right static properties that
there is no way that this moment of creation
of the artist valer né
tragedy traditionally since the
Greek tragedy was a time of
confrontation of an individual with
universal right
that’s what it always meant
hope that individuals could
with those powers that the
transcended much in their strength etc
but in the cultural industry
the adorning risk tell me the tragic
a formula that they reduced even in
German original text they use English
what is so
gatti at work and then guinea then
so the tragic is reduced to a
where the protagonist enters and the
end of the movie the novel of whatever is
really get out of it and the thing is reduced
this is not good
the last is the commodity fetishism
that is a criss-cross
say two important trends
né again the corner but now no more
its epistemology but its aesthetics
he said that the aesthetic object he is
an endless purpose because it suggests
the existence of a purpose for that
object but it does not explicit what
this purpose
on the other hand the cultural industry it
she does not only sell products but she
comes from status and one is part of the 12
status that the cultural industry sells
exactly is your products is opinion
in which they have not so turned to
a purpose when in fact they are
that the purpose of the market dictates
so this is the fetishism of the industry
cultural good
the cultural industry of today that has
already called the global cultural industry
and other denominations I call
cultural industry 2.0
she is she is subjected to two great
The first issue was a
very important geopolitics that occurs
it is from the beginning of the 90’s that it is the
end of the cold war the beginning of
globalization is not is is what made the
cultural industry it really was
globalized
the idea of the year makro a global
village since the 60’s it really is
can only be performed for the first time
from the beginning of the 1990s
then this is another phenomena phenomenon
is the question of the technological matrix
is so the record is not the generation
and the transmission of messages
especially audiovisual is the
scanning
so I would like to move quickly
reviewed is the five operators that
I use to study the cultural industry
from the cultural industry point of view
2.0
the retroactive manipulation as I suggested
it depended very much on the
surveys to find out which
were the latent needs of the public
and offer products that the trend is
this demand giving a formulation that
it was more interesting not to own
more public to the centers of power
economic policy etc.
the flexibility of digital media today
it is exactly
much greater sophistication in this
research on the latent demands the right
usurpation of schematism it depended
much
consolidate the realism of the media
technology is not like the means
are much more realistic then
there was also an increase in the possibility
of usurpation of the juice camatte by
2.0 cultural industry
there was the possibility of a diffusion
much greater say a lot of access
creators to the means of
creation of diffusion and its evident
You have to grant this with all
tranquility, right?
perhaps in relation to this has been created
so maybe small industries
parallel to the cultural industry
nor stream
but this cultural industry is an extreme
she has increased yet let’s say her rigidity
standards does not indicate the
tragic 2.0 has to do with an increase in
in the trends of spectacularization is
which was a resource already used to
play completion of the tragic
the conventional cultural industry is
mainly in relation to complying with
without this purification mechanism
of the emotions they tottenham and studied
in his poetic nee and that the adorno ro km is
come to the conclusion that oea wants something
typical of that of
tragic then the industry today
cultural 2.0 it continues and also
precisely perfected these mechanisms
of cathartics in the masses and
mainly speaking industry
cultural 2.0 linked to the large industry
really right
is exactly that idea of the cat entered
and in upper guiné can now win
undetermined contours having
seen the most realistic effects of
which never gives more than digital media
they provide
the conventional cultural industry
depended heavily on the scale of products
Thinking vinyl records was very expensive and
it’s only worth it
this thousands of discs etc today wants
say a creator can record your album
at home, not at home studio with
relatively few resources and with
unthinkable quality even much better
for the season, eh?
then with these new features of the
cultural industry
It’s just that she gets
diversify right
the cultural industry 2.0 with regard to
pestista arise is this occurs a
segmentation of the media of the
industry right
for example the question of
technological resources
yes the idea of capillarization is not the
resources
the creators they not only the creators
public has the capacity to respond
This has to do with fetishism and
segmentation I was talking about and
now to end the segmentation it is
a customization is actually occurring
then products increasingly focused on
with the public instead of profiting
economies of scale in profit
possibility of greater added value
products.
end snow is mine is exposure
asking is not because I study that
subject of global cultural industry
2.0 for over ten years 15 years and perhaps
I always have to review my own
points of view and actions by
technological development that make
sometimes obsolete statements that
I did a year two three years ago is not
so I leave the question in the air is not
that’s how it would be then the next
development of the cultural industry
ok that’s it, thank you
[Applause]
audi the announcement of an agony is not that
there were already
we have support at the beginning of the
90 is when the when citizen called
paulo whose mother wrote a book
published in brazil
called cultural industry colon
agony of a concept then my
It is my starting point that
today would have happened to the industry
culture would be in agony until today
would have died already
of course for the title of my
lecture is of course not right that she
did not die but she became
we have 2.0 to use a bit
language of technology when the
contemplated is not with a new version
It’s not good, so start talking a little.
of the origin of the cultural industry
It is interesting that since the middle of the
19th century
there is an artisanal industry of the
entertainment right that turned
radically from the appropriation of
inventions from that period, right?
like the gramophone the cinema
the radio is right and that gave birth there is
which came to be critically placed
in the 1940s by adornment and
last horkheimer under the rubric of
cultural industry
this happened first in the
Europe in the most industrialized countries
in europe mainly france great
Brittany and from century beginnings
20 there was a migration of
main industry development
cultural for the United States of
america is not and around 1915
there was a migration still internal states
united from the east coast to the west coast
North American, right?
good then the critique of adornment and
horkheimer I summarize her in five
né operators
retroactive manipulation is the first
second is the usurpation of schematism
third domestication of the fourth style
dispute in signaling the tragic and 5 is
the fetishism of cultural goods
beginning with the manipulation
retroactive to the cultural industry it is
very powerful in the sense of your
public thinks that they are choosing things
when in fact it is being at least
induced to make those choices
and this is it is this manipulation because it is
retroactive because everything that is offered
by the cultural industry is based
exactly in latent demands on your
public
there are a number of mechanisms that
I’ll say after today that they are very
perfected in that sense, right?
the second moment that is usurpation of the
schematicism is conceptually more
because it refers to the concept of
schematism that is a concept that comes
of emmanuel kant the German philosopher is from
century is that he said the following that
we have a sensitivity sensor
you né
and we have in our understanding the
our reason and they are two colleges
let’s say né
It is in our minds to speak in a way
general of our spirit completely
and that there is a need for
mechanism which is also part of the
also of our spirit that makes the connection
between which we perceive that the mode
how we process the information from the
our census this mechanism is
exactly the schematics, right?
and he as to how kant conceived is
something that as kant says come from
depths of the soul is a hidden secret
in the depths of the soul of a
subject is not
the cultural industry the idea is that
usurper of the subject
this faculty of schematism because
she offers audiovisual products for
example that already comes with its own
let’s say let’s say cast on them
themselves
the domestication of style is style is a
concept that exists in aesthetics
speak the truth from ancient times but
is a concept that has gained
aesthetics from the 18th and 19th century
and he always wanted to say the following that
the great artists who created the
called great bourgeois art and tetra
they were subject to certain
shapes for their creations but they
They had freedom within that.
continue to create and propose things
new etc and the cultural industry it
makes the style exactly the opposite
it prevents the patterns the shapes are so
violently right static properties that
there is no way that this moment of creation
of the artist valer né
tragedy traditionally since the
Greek tragedy was a time of
confrontation of an individual with
universal right
that’s what it always meant
hope that individuals could
with those powers that the
transcended much in their strength etc
but in the cultural industry
the adorning risk tell me the tragic
a formula that they reduced even in
German original text they use English
what is so
gatti at work and then guinea then
so the tragic is reduced to a
where the protagonist enters and the
end of the movie the novel of whatever is
really get out of it and the thing is reduced
this is not good
the last is the commodity fetishism
that is a criss-cross
say two important trends
né again the corner but now no more
its epistemology but its aesthetics
he said that the aesthetic object he is
an endless purpose because it suggests
the existence of a purpose for that
object but it does not explicit what
this purpose
on the other hand the cultural industry it
she does not only sell products but she
comes from status and one is part of the 12
status that the cultural industry sells
exactly is your products is opinion
in which they have not so turned to
a purpose when in fact they are
that the purpose of the market dictates
so this is the fetishism of the industry
cultural good
the cultural industry of today that has
already called the global cultural industry
and other denominations I call
cultural industry 2.0
she is she is subjected to two great
The first issue was a
very important geopolitics that occurs
it is from the beginning of the 90’s that it is the
end of the cold war the beginning of
globalization is not is is what made the
cultural industry it really was
globalized
the idea of the year makro a global
village since the 60’s it really is
can only be performed for the first time
from the beginning of the 1990s
then this is another phenomena phenomenon
is the question of the technological matrix
is so the record is not the generation
and the transmission of messages
especially audiovisual is the
scanning
so I would like to move quickly
reviewed is the five operators that
I use to study the cultural industry
from the cultural industry point of view
2.0
the retroactive manipulation as I suggested
it depended very much on the
surveys to find out which
were the latent needs of the public
and offer products that the trend is
this demand giving a formulation that
it was more interesting not to own
more public to the centers of power
economic policy etc.
the flexibility of digital media today
it is exactly
much greater sophistication in this
research on the latent demands the right
usurpation of schematism it depended
much
consolidate the realism of the media
technology is not like the means
are much more realistic then
there was also an increase in the possibility
of usurpation of the juice camatte by
2.0 cultural industry
there was the possibility of a diffusion
much greater say a lot of access
creators to the means of
creation of diffusion and its evident
You have to grant this with all
tranquility, right?
perhaps in relation to this has been created
so maybe small industries
parallel to the cultural industry
nor stream
but this cultural industry is an extreme
she has increased yet let’s say her rigidity
standards does not indicate the
tragic 2.0 has to do with an increase in
in the trends of spectacularization is
which was a resource already used to
play completion of the tragic
the conventional cultural industry is
mainly in relation to complying with
without this purification mechanism
of the emotions they tottenham and studied
in his poetic nee and that the adorno ro km is
come to the conclusion that oea wants something
typical of that of
tragic then the industry today
cultural 2.0 it continues and also
precisely perfected these mechanisms
of cathartics in the masses and
mainly speaking industry
cultural 2.0 linked to the large industry
really right
is exactly that idea of the cat entered
and in upper guiné can now win
undetermined contours having
seen the most realistic effects of
which never gives more than digital media
they provide
the conventional cultural industry
depended heavily on the scale of products
Thinking vinyl records was very expensive and
it’s only worth it
this thousands of discs etc today wants
say a creator can record your album
at home, not at home studio with
relatively few resources and with
unthinkable quality even much better
for the season, eh?
then with these new features of the
cultural industry
It’s just that she gets
diversify right
the cultural industry 2.0 with regard to
pestista arise is this occurs a
segmentation of the media of the
industry right
for example the question of
technological resources
yes the idea of capillarization is not the
resources
the creators they not only the creators
public has the capacity to respond
This has to do with fetishism and
segmentation I was talking about and
now to end the segmentation it is
a customization is actually occurring
then products increasingly focused on
with the public instead of profiting
economies of scale in profit
possibility of greater added value
products.
end snow is mine is exposure
asking is not because I study that
subject of global cultural industry
2.0 for over ten years 15 years and perhaps
I always have to review my own
points of view and actions by
technological development that make
sometimes obsolete statements that
I did a year two three years ago is not
so I leave the question in the air is not
that’s how it would be then the next
development of the cultural industry
ok that’s it, thank you
[Applause]
Please follow and like us: