AMERICAN CULTURE, AMERICAN TASTES

Pulitzer-winning historian Kammen (Cornell; In the Past Lane, 1997; People of Paradox, 1972; etc.) offers a thoughtful essay on the evolution of leisure in America from the late 19th century to today. In their pursuit of leisure, Kammen estimates, Americans now spend over $1 trillion a year—“far more than they spend on health care, on cars and trucks, or on housing.” Kammen proceeds to trace how Americans have spent their leisure time and money, and how critics and other authorities have perceived American culture since the emergence of popular culture in the late 19th century. Distinguishing popular culture (participatory or interactive activities on smaller scales, such as nightclubs or amusement parks) from mass culture (passive activities on a large or societal scale, such as television), Kammen divides America’s modern cultural history into three phases: the heyday of popular culture from 1885 to 1935; the period of the emergence of “proto-mass” culture from 1935 to 1965; and the growth of mass culture from the mid-—60s through the present. Within these time frames, Kammen explores such themes as the growing democratization of culture as Americans found themselves with unprecedented time and opportunity for leisure, and the decline of ideals of “high culture”; the growth and transformation of popular culture by advertising and other techniques of mass consumerism; the blurring of taste levels during the heyday of commercialized popular culture between what was formerly known as “highbrow” and “middlebrow” culture, and the decline of the authority of critics and the rise of such authorities as opinion polls, television ratings, and the corporate sponsor. The consequence of these phenomena, Kammen writes, is “an increase in cultural populism,” a decline in cultural elitism, and the growing cultural importance of powerful economic forces. A stimulating inquiry into the conflicting ways in which Americans have understood their dynamic and influential culture, more valuable for the paradigms and issues it raises than for the answers it provides.