lunes, 16 de noviembre de 2009

Porn Capitalism

Sigmund Freud defines the id in his structural model of the psyche as the uncoordinated, instinctual trends of human beings; it is the most primitive part of our being. Our society has been fighting against its own “id”, imposing a super ego model full of taboos. Sexual and sensual expressions have been hidden from the public eye during the last centuries. Lust, sensuality, transgression have always been present in the different artistic trends. Dadaists and Surrealists started introducing sex and eroticism to burgueois circles, however sex was still something oppressed and forbidden. During the 50s, the 60s and the 70s the Beat Generation first, and the Hippie movement later, transgressed the public sphere with the sexual revolution. However, what started as the most subversive social movement has ended up as another part of the capitalist system.

One of Dick Hebidges methods to restore “subcultures” into the dominant culture consists of taking the subcultural signs and converting them into the dominant culture. The capitalist system knew how to take that subversive cultural expression and convert it into their own system. Sex is now a product, another consumer good held to the demand and offert laws.

We can consider Britney Spears as a great example of this phenomenon. Why the girl who started at the Mickey Mouse Club is now singing out loud about threesomes and stating that living in sin is the new thing? Britney Spears' transition to a sexualized image has been on of the most rentable marketing plans of the last decades. Everything was planned from the start. While she was swearing about her virginity, her lyrics and movements started to be more provocative little by little. Even her non sexualized image was part of this whole plan. Why was she talking about her “virginity”? Did she really have to? While her sexual life became part of the market, her products, her music and her performances started to include more implicit sexual content. But Britney is no the only artist who has suffered this transition. As Adorno claims, the “standarization”is proper of the capitalist system. Once one pattern has been proved successful, it is exploited to commercial exhaustion, culminating in the “crystallization of standards.” Britney is just the first one in a long list like Christina Agulera (remember her “dirty” époque), Jessica Simpson, Lindsay Lohan and why not? Miley Cyrus, (her skirts get shorter every day).



The consequence of this process can be considered as a “standarization of sexuality”. Sex has been separated from every religious, moral or spiritual meaning. The capitalist system has converted it into part of the market. It is true that sex sells. It appeals to consumers’ id, to their most primitive parts of their beings. In the public sphere the id has defeat the ego. I do not want to make a moral critique about this issue; however, I would like our society to think about this process. What is the next step? What used to be transgressor twenty years ago is now normal for 8 year old kids. How are media conglomerates going to sell their products when sex becomes not enough?

domingo, 15 de noviembre de 2009

"Gitanos"

“La faraona ha muerto” (The Pharaoh has died); these words covered the front pages of all the Spanish newspapers May 16, 1995. The death of Lola Flores, a gipsy flamenco singer, was the turning point of a cultural process that ended with the ignorance of the gipsy folk culture in Spain. Currently, Spanish pop music is riddled with a wide amount of music groups that have sold their gipsy influences to the tastes of the mass audience. A few years ago, it was inconceivable that thousands of mindless screaming teenagers would pack football stadiums to see their gipsy idols. Groups like “Andy y Lucas”, “Los Caños” or “Fondo flamenco” with a clear gipsy and flamenco influence constitute a huge pop phenomenon in Spain. Other artists such as Sara Baras and Joaquin Cortés sell tickets to their shows for more than two hundred dollars all over the world, and they have exalted flamenco as a “high” cultural expression. Is this dialogue between the mass audience and the gipsy folk an enriching experience or is just another consequence of the capitalist standardization?


The Romani people, most known as “gitanos” (Spanish word for gipsy) migrated out of the Sindah, Rajasthan and Punkjab regions of the Indian subcontinent into Europe during the eleventh century. Although this is true, their life and their culture was highly influenced by the Moorish, Arabic and Sephardic Jewish traditions. All over the ages, political institutions in Spain have ignored the gipsy community and their culture. For about three hundred years Romanis were subject to a number of laws and policies designed to eliminate them from Spain as an identifiable group.


In his article “Publics and Counterpublics”, Michael Warner presents the counterpublic as the group that is conflicting with the dominant public; they are fully aware of their subordination to the dominant class. We can clearly consider the Spanish gipsy community as a counterpublic due to the centuries of social, economical and cultural marginalization. Warner also states that the counterpublic is a self-organized group where the members feel a sense of belonging. The gipsy community has always cultivated some distinctive signs from the rest of the Spanish society; for example, they usually call white Caucasian Spanish people “calés.” The idea of their racial and cultural differences is very important to them. The gipsy community has used their own signs to use a particular style. For example, they consider that only gipsy people can properly dance and sing Flamenco; white Caucasian people do not have the ability to perform it; they don’t have the “duende” as they say.


However, during the last decades we have witnessed an integration process of the Romani culture into the popular Spanish culture. Dick Hebidge presents two methods to restore “subcultures” into the dominant culture. The first method is the most effective in a capitalist society; it consists of taking the subcultural signs and converting them into the dominant culture. The second one consists of having dominant, authoritative groups identify any short of deviant behavior.


If we analyzed the musical characteristics of the now so-called “flamenco” groups (“Andy y Lucas”, “Los Caños”, “Fondo Flamenco” or ”Kiko y Shara”) we cannot tell the difference between this music and regular pop music. These groups’ music, apart from some of the classic flamenco guitar harmonious or some gipsy slang, has no difference from some other pop international groups. In fact, the quality of this music is low. Their lyrics tend to be cheesy and the melodies repetitive. We could take the structure of an international famous pop song, add some guitar harmonious, some clapping and a little bit of audible footwork and we would have a pop flamenco song. Nowadays, that is the formula for creating music hits in Spain.

Although they consider themselves as the new flamenco representatives, they have sold their roots to the trade interests. Flamenco and gipsy patterns have been widely simplified in order to satisfy the demands of screaming teenagers. Their music is a great example of what Adorno calls the “standardization” proper of the capitalist system. Once a musical and or lyrical pattern has proved successful it is exploited to commercial exhaustion, culminating in the “crystallization of standards”. Some rhythmical, catchy flamenco patterns and some outlines of the gipsy traditions that have proved successful are repeated again and again by these groups.







This success that some of these Romani artists have at the moment in the pop music industry in Spain could lead us to the conclusion that social and racial boundaries have been overcome. However, this repetition of conformed patterns and attitudes just help to build wrong stereotypes of the gipsy community. Although these stereotypes have nothing to do with the image that the white Caucasian community of Spain use to have centuries ago, the general acceptance of the “gitanos” has improved a lot during the last decades. There is still a general idea about what gipsy people can do. People think that the only thing they can do is sing and dance Flamenco. They have the role of entertaining the rest of the population. This stereotype is being fed by the capitalism and mass production of standardized flamenco music. If the industry sells pop Flamenco new star as a gipsy singer it will for sure have more success than if he is not sold as a gipsy, even though this artist has not gipsy background at all.

On the other hand we have the so called elite of gipsy artists, Joaquín Cortés, Sara Baras, Falete, Farruquito artist that have managed to perform in some of the most famous and prestigious theatres around the world and have exalted flamenco as a “high” cultural expression. Tickets’ prices can vary from 200$ to 500$. In my opinion, it is important to recognize their talent and the importance of the export of the gipsy culture; however, they also standardize these artistic expressions in order to make them more accessible to a wider international audience. For example, although Joaquin Cortes’ talent as a dancer is undeniable his performances tend to give more importance to the visual or audible aspects of the performance rather than proper Flamenco patterns.

In conclusion, I think that it is important to analyze the relationship between an ethnic group and a cultural expression and how this art can influence the social position of this ethnic group. If we want to understand real flamenco we should not look into fancy theatres all over the world or the last summer hit list. We have to search the streets of Andalucia and look at the way gipsy people dance or sing before these cultural expressions are totally contaminated by capitalists principles