The Routledge Handbook of Popular Culture and Tourism

Christine Lundberg, Vassilios Ziakas, Christine Lundberg, Vassilios Ziakas

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781317193418
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Negocios y empresa
• Categoría: Hostelería, viajes y turismo

This handbook provides a comprehensive overview and holistic analysis of the intersection between tourism and popular culture. It examines current debates, questions and controversies of tourism in the wake of popular culture phenomena and explores the relationships between popular culture, globalization, tourism and mobility. In addition, it offers a cross-disciplinary, cutting edge review of the character of popular cultural production and consumption trends, analyzing their consequences for tourism, spatial strategies and destination competitiveness.

The scope of the volume encompasses various expressions of popular culture such as cinema, TV shows, music, literature, sports and heritage. Featuring a mix of theoretical and empirical chapters, the handbook problematizes and conceptualizes the ties and clusters of popular cultural actors, thereby positioning tourism within the wider context of creative economies, cultural planning and multimodal technologies.

Written by an international team of academics with expertise in a range of disciplines, this timely book will be of interest to researchers from a variety of subjects including tourism, events, geography, cultural studies, fandom research, political economy, business, media studies and technology.

PART I

Setting the stage

Foundations of popular culture tourism

1

WHAT IS POPULAR CULTURE?

Shirley A. Fedorak

What is popular culture? Is it the latest vampire movie, the newest fashion trends, or the writing of Ukrainian Easter eggs? Or is it a European football game, Nubian face painting, or Mexican tamales? The meaning of popular culture, its roles and power structures, and its ideological and moral constructs has generated considerable debate within and outside academia.

Johann Gottfried Herder first coined the phrase popular culture in 1784 (Parker, 2011). Herder positioned popular culture against the culture of the learned, suggesting popular culture was different and inferior to the high culture of the elite. Thus, popular culture has become a contested concept that lends itself to several questions. How is popular culture different from other elements of culture and, in particular, so-called high culture? When did popular culture first arise and is folk culture also popular culture? What roles does popular culture play in human society? and, how and why should social scientists study popular culture?

Defining popular culture

Popular culture is the culture of our everyday lives (Fedorak, 2009). This straightforward, egalitarian definition rejects elitist characterizations of popular culture, and embraces diverse forms of symbolic expression and performance. Performance is a broad term referring to many, or even all, human activities and the ritualized behavior that influences people and involves everyday life (Turner, 1986; Bohannan, 1991). Popular culture is not limited to any one class, gender, ethnicity, or status group, and is embedded in “economic circumstances, nationalism, history and heritage, human migration and transnational cultural flow, political environment and cultural resistance, religious organization, and social relations” (Fedorak, 2009, p. 15). Popular culture reveals who we are as a society. As Browne and Browne (2001, p. 3) put it, “We have seen our popular culture and it is us.” Popular culture, then, provides a window into human nature and behavior, and offers a medium for celebrating our lives and the world we live in.

Although far from an exhaustive list, the cultural artifacts and symbols of popular culture involve body art (e.g. tattoos, piercings), music (e.g. rock guitars, drums, wooden flutes), film (e.g. zombie movies, superhero movies), literature (e.g. graphic novels, genre fiction, oral stories), collectibles (e.g. car memorabilia, dolls), sports (e.g. baseball cards, jerseys), clothing (e.g. American torn jeans, Trobriander banana skirts), crafts (e.g. Doukhobor quilting, Malaysian batik painting), car culture (e.g. hood ornaments, classic models), mass media (e.g. television, cell phones), Internet (e.g. Facebook, gaming sites), and leisure (e.g. cruise ships, hiking boots). These cultural artifacts hold meaning and offer messages about the performers and the audience. They inform us about our culture and the culture of others, and how popular culture influences and impacts our society (Alvermann, Moon, & Hagood, 1999).

The difficulties with developing an inclusive, nonbiased, yet substantive definition of popular culture are legendary in academia. Oftentimes discourse on the nature of popular culture becomes caught up in dichotomies and etymology. Terms such as “highbrow” and “lowbrow” culture, “legitimate” and “illegitimate” culture, and “pure” and “mass” culture all create perceptions of popular culture’s value, and what is worthy of academic study and what is not. Some definitions have focused on the folk or common aspects of popular culture, while in others the degree of popularity or lack of any qualities that authorities would consider high culture are the distinguishing factors. Mass-produced and consumed culture is also a distinction commonly made between popular culture and high culture (Bennett, 1980; Storey, 2006). More recent definitions assert that popular culture emerged in the Industrial Revolution as an outcome of urbanization and capitalism. None of these limited spatial and temporal views do justice to popular culture; they not only exclude eras before industrialization, they also exclude certain forms of popular culture, potential audiences, and the popular culture of small-scale societies.

Whether popular culture is labeled folk culture, common culture, public culture (Ortner, 1998), or the culture of the people (Delaney, 2007), and whether it is mass produced and consumed, or its origins, is not the point. Popular forms of expression hold meaning regardless of what they are called, and they play an important role in creating cultural identity and social solidarity. As Kidd (2007, p. 81) notes, popular culture is “an important element in the dynamics of contemporary social life,” and can be as complex and worthy of study as great works of art or literature.

Popular culture is most often associated with urban, industrialized societies. However, it is not the exclusive domain of Western, capitalist countries, nor is it a recent phenomenon. All cultural groups are surrounded and immersed in their popular culture. Indeed, for most of human history, people have produced music, art, theater, and festivals to entertain and celebrate their world. Archaeological evidence verifies that humans as long ago as 40,000 years created musical instruments (e.g. flutes), made toys, and likely told stories and celebrated with gatherings and games.

Artistic or performance expressions before the Industrial Revolution are commonly referred to as folk culture. Here too, the distinction is vague. Roman circuses and plays in the Theater of Dionysus in Athens can hardly be called folk culture (Parker, 2011), yet they occurred before industrialization. The American Folklife Center maintains that folk culture “is part of everyone’s life. It is as constant as a ballad, as changeable as fashion trends. It is as intimate as a lullaby, and as public as a parade” (DeGarmo, 2012, n.p.). Outsiders may call an artistic expression from a small-scale society folk culture, but to the locals, these performances are popular culture.

According to Parker (2011) artwork that is not recognized by authorities in the art world is popular culture, not high culture. The same goes for other forms of expression; they must be recognized by an authority to be legitimate. The philosophical argument that art produced for entertainment and profit is lowbrow popular culture and lacks artistic integrity if not fully authorized presents some challenges, most notably its elitism, by suggesting that the arts should be purifying and serious, and only available to the few who can appreciate them. The question of who is an authority also arises. A classic example is genre fiction, which is generally considered popular culture rather than literary fiction. Yet, until recently, most genre fiction was published by traditional publishing houses. Are these houses an authority? Or are the audience and the market the authority? If so, the value placed on genre or literary fiction originates with the audience rather than officials.

If the distinction between popular culture and high culture is based on class or the status of the audience, then the line between the two becomes even vaguer. Popular culture is increasingly accessed by those of high status, (e.g. football games). The elite, especially youth, partake of popular culture that might be considered pedestrian, such as youth raves. Cultural artifacts and performance that began as popular culture may over time become high culture. For example, Shakespearean plays were originally considered trashy and lowbrow. In the mid-nineteenth century, Shakespearean plays were “florid rhetoric, vivid characters, tempestuous gestures, and moral design” (Warner, 1990, p. 728) that appealed to the general population. As these plays became more restrained and refined, they lost their appeal with all but the elite. Today, Shakespeare is considered high culture, but is also popular with lower classes.

Wayne (2014) suggests that lower classes do not have as much access to high culture; however, this is not entirely accurate. The previous discussion of Shakespearean plays demonstrates that although upper classes have greater access to high culture because of financial means, today lower classes are also gaining greater access to some forms of high culture. The National Gallery in London, for example, welcomes people from all classes to view great works of art, as do most museums. Accessibility, then, cannot be used to distinguish popular from high culture as it is a fluid situation. Popular culture, then, is increasingly crossing social barriers, partly due to the transnational flow of popular culture via mass media. The futility of limiting popular culture to certain classes is particularly evident in tourism.

Tourism is a great equalizer in that tour groups take their middle-class charges to the opera or to the theater, and leisure activities that were formerly the sole domain of the elite, such as cruising, have now become accessible to people from lower status groups. Conversely, leisure activities formerly the domain of lower classes, such as hiking or attending crafts fairs, may be adopted by people in upper classes. Film-induced, mass media-induced, and literary-induced tourism commonly crosses social barriers. Youth from all classes loved the Harry Potter books and movies, and those able flock to visit Harry Potter film locations such as the site of Hogwarts at Alnwich Caste, Northumberland, England and ride the Jacobite steam train Harry Potter traveled on in Lochaber, Scotland. More recently, the hugely popular Outlander novels and television series have led to an increase in tourism to Scotland, particularly Scottish castles. Although popular culture may reflect social stratification to a certain extent, this is changing as the boundaries between low and high culture continue to blur and even disappear.

Popular culture is often associated with mass production and commercialization. Although Western popular culture tends to be mass produced, local popular culture, such as singing, dancing, painting, theater, and craft fairs, is likely not mass produced. In small, often rural communities in Ukraine and on the Canadian prairies, writing eggs with intricate designs during Easter is an age-old tradition that is popular among Ukrainians and non-Ukrainians alike. The eggs are handcrafted, not mass produced, yet production and performance of these cultural artifacts holds deeply embedded meaning and creates social bonding and community solidarity. Over-commercialization is also used to separate popular culture from high culture. Yet, virtually all cultural artifacts, whether high or popular, are sold in some kind of market. Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony is mass produced and sold in the form of CDs, just as Rod Stewart’s popular music is sold. The difference is popular culture is produced and consumed at a much higher rate than high culture.

Ultimately, any definition of popular culture that restricts the types of performance and expression to certain times, places, and audiences is too limiting, and has been influenced by the “politics of pleasure” (Alvermann etal., 1999). Although no definition is entirely inclusive, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan defines popular culture as “culture produced in the everyday lives of ordinary people” (Seaton & Yamamura, 2015, p. 5). This definition comes closest to recognizing popular culture in all forms, places, and times.

Why and how we study popular culture

The study of popular culture is most often the domain of cultural studies. Cultural studies is a critical approach to “how human subjects are formed and how they experienced cultural and social space” (Miller, 2001, p. 1). Body politics and power relations, including ethnic,¹ class, gender, national, and sexual identity, have become important themes in the study of the human condition, from the quest for women’s body rights to self-expression, activism, and resistance.

Popular culture also plays a powerful role, whether on a local or global scale, in social and political commentary. As an example, the “Buffy studies” or Buffyology, investigate “moral philosophy, gender constructs, textual analysis, and linguistic culture” (Wayne, 2014, n.p.), through an exploration of the hugely popular Buffy the Vampire and Angel television series. Social commentary, the way our society is reflected in these television programs, and the fandom that emulates tribal or cult elements have all become areas of study. According to Joss Whedon, the creator of these shows,

I think it’s always important for academics to study popular culture, even if the thing they are studying is idiotic. . . . We think very carefully about what we’re trying to say emotionally, politically, and even philosophically while we’re writing it.

(New York Times, 2003, n.p.)

Two theoretical perspectives dominate discussions on popular culture: mass culture theory and populist theory. Mass culture theory suggests that high culture (e.g. opera) is more valuable and enlightening than popular culture that appeals to the masses who accept it without questioning its value. Populist theory, on the other hand, recognizes that popular culture is vibrant and offers both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, and avenues for e...