The creative industries are a booming field, and not an unproblematic one. While dichotomies such as counterculture versus mainstream are naive in their clear cut good/bad division, observing countercultures and positioning them within the mainstream can shed light on how creativity can be used as critical tool. This blog post, after a brief survey on the evolution of the cultural and creative industries, focuses on Solarpunk, a small creative movement that uses creativity as tool to societal criticism. The aim of this post is to exemplify Kember and Zylinska's 'creative criticism' in an accessible way.
A matter of definition
When Adorno coined the term ‘culture industry’ in the late 20th century, he unveiled how Fordism framed symbolic goods. The car industry and the music industry shared “the same dynamics of fabrication, distribution, and commercialization, the same market principles (investment of capital, mechanical reproduction, division of labor), and the same routines of production (minimizing costs and maximizing profits by means of standard patterns in the shape of a framework of invariables and an ample but limited number of interchangeable parts)”[1]. Despite standardization being a rule in the cultural industry, symbolic goods were still marketed as novel and ‘original’ in light of the creative force behind them--a paradox that Adorno explained with the concept of pseudo-originality, “a trait, conceived as an optional variation of the standard product, to be able to justify its claim to novelty and originality,” trait present in all industries[2]. Pseudo-originality made the recipient focus on the artist as main creative force instead of on the industry that produced the symbolic good in the first place[3]. As the borders between culture and entertainment blurred, Adorno attacked the industry, arguing that amusement, or the consumption of symbolic goods, was the prolongation of the work process that happened on the workplace--the principles of mechanization, programmation and mass-production were a common denominator of both[4]. Adorno had forecasted an uncritical culture, the perpetuation and self-legitimization of the Gramscian hegemony[5], which was later revisioned through the ‘critical recipient’ and resistance of imposed meaning through subversion[6].
The distinction between culture, leisure, and creativity today has led to the lumping of these three industry in one[7], as can be seen by the 2010 Green Paper authored by the European Union, in which the “culture and creative industries” encompass eight activities (from heritage preservation to performing arts to media) and six functions (“preservation, creation, production, dissemination, trade/sales, and education”)[8]. The model suggested in the paper is a radiating one, with the creative idea as core[9]. The model exemplifies an older trend, started in the UK, in which creativity is seen as a product in itself and can therefore be exported[10], neoliberalism at its finest. But the aforementioned subversion comes in against the commodification of creativity; ‘tactical media’ or activist projects are an example of socially engaged and critical creativity[11].
A movement of the Anthropocene
Solarpunk is an example of socially engaged creative movement that is highly critical of the mainstream and of wider culture. It belongs to the wide speculative science fiction genre, and it advocates for a sustainable technology that works with and through nature, and heals the environment from the damage already done. “This sub-genre and cultural movement has so far largely been discussed only on social media sites such as Tumblr and Twitter,” writes Australian Broadcasting Corporation editor Nogrady; one of its most important features is optimism: born as reaction to dystopia, Solarpunk’s aim is to reframe how people think about climate change.
Jeans designed
by animals
The online publication Hopes and Fears describes Solarpunk as a creative movement that responds consciously and positively to the Anthropocene, the most recent geological period in which human influence is a major cause for climate and environment change. It centers on marginalized groups and challenges society’s standards regarding ableism and sexuality. “Solarpunk is all about envisioning a positive future, deeply rooted in sustainability, community, and acceptance” writes indie author Arseneault. A manifesto of the movement is available online and outlines innovative dissent as main ideal, as well as the visual aesthetic. A small independent press is already established and the free published works are financially supported via crowdfunding and donations--alternative economic models.
Belgian architect Luc Schuiten’s
orchad metropolis
The origins of Solarpunk are literary and digital. The community is small but active in sharing content and making artists and designers that do not necessarily associate with the movement known to its members--an example is the plant-made music that combines technology with nature. From fashion to architecture (more on vegetal cities can be found on City Lab), what Rodrìguez-Ferràndiz argues about design, that it “is exactly what its etymology suggests: A de-sign, an indication or an evocation of a communicative operation. Sense and destiny are mixed in design” holds true for Solarpunk[12]. Design and technology are focal points of the movement, whose members argue that eco-friendly change is already possible with the technology of today, as can be seen especially in architecture: visually appealing solar panels, algae canopies that produce oxygen and living, edible furniture.
The edible microalgae
functions as protein-packed snack and furniture
The latter resonates with Kember and Zylinska critique of technology, seen not as a tool for the human master, but as intrinsic part of the human body[13]; Living Things not only functions as light source, it also becomes part of the body being eaten (and becoming byproduct).
Solarpunk is certainly subcultural resistance, but its discourse is limited and the movement should not be blindly idealized[14]. Many aspects of the movement are not defined yet and the community nature of Solarpunk, originated on social media, retains reflexive idealism, something tackled by Hudson in his On The Political Dimension of Solarpunk Medium piece, in which he places the movement in the context of the ecological disasters happening all around the globe, and warns the members not to fall into solar-utopia: “the beautiful clothes and buildings solarpunk envisions are likely to be surrounded by something very different — the cracked concrete of decaying infrastructure, the smudged plastic of cheaply made gadgets, the intimidating glass and steel of finance fortresses”. Still, what the movement does in its still young formation is use creativity in an alternative, political way in opposition to “the all-consuming power of creative industries’ narratives and practices.”
Conclusion
After a brief survey on the meaning of cultural and creative industries, this blogpost has focused on Solarpunk, a small creative movement that, positioning itself against the mainstream, functions as criticism though creativity. By being political and working with the redistribution of power, and being essentially a digital born social movement, it challenges contemporary media and offers interesting ideas for the cultural and creative industries: from fiction to design, from infostructures to fashion.
When a counterculture gets appropriated by the mainstream, is its quintessential rebellious nature lost?
DL, NS, EH, LD, KH
Works cited
Sarah Kember & Joanna Zylinska, ‘Remediating Creativity:
Performance, Invention, Critique’, in: Life After New Media: Mediation as a
Vital Process. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2012, pp. 173-200.
Main points: guerilla people work within industry
Raúl Rodrígez-Ferrándiz (2014), ‘Culture Industries in a
Postindustrial Age: Entertainment, Leisure, Creativity, Design’, in: Critical
Studies in Media Communication 31 (4), pp. 327-341.
[1] Raùl Rodrìguez-Ferràndiz,
“Culture Industries in a Postindustrial Age: Entertainment, Leisure,
Creativity, Design” in Critical Studies in Media Communication
329
[2]
Ibid.
[3]
Ibid.
[4]
Ibid., 332
[5]
Ibid., 328
[6]
Ibid.
[7] Ibid.,
338
[8]
Ibid., 336-7
[9]
Ibid., 337
[10] Sarah
Kember and Joanna Zylinska, “Remediating Creativity: Performance, Invention,
Critique” in Life After New Media: Mediation as a Vital Process 174
[11]
Ibid., 177
[12] Raùl Rodrìguez-Ferràndiz,
“Culture Industries in a Postindustrial Age: Entertainment, Leisure,
Creativity, Design” in Critical Studies in Media Communication
330
[13] Sarah Kember and Joanna
Zylinska, “Remediating Creativity: Performance, Invention, Critique” in Life
After New Media: Mediation as a Vital Process 193
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten