Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması

İrmak Karademir Hazır; Semi Purhonen

doi:10.24955/ilef.332367

EN TR

Cultural Opening, Omnivore and the Decline of the Highbrow: A Comparison of Turkey and Europe

Abstract

There is a growing literature suggesting that the classifications in arts and culture are

transforming. ‘Cultural opening’ thesis suggests that the boundaries of established arts are

becoming more permeable; allowing the emerging art/culture forms to take their place in the

higher ranks. In line with this thesis, a number of researchers point out the rise of culturally

‘omnivore’ evaluative repertories. Drawing on the analysis of a data set (N=13,161) comprised

of the cultural coverage of major newspapers from six European countries from 1960 to 2010,

this research questions: How are art and culture news distributed in terms of their field? Is there

a gradual change with respect to the journalistic attention paid to established vs. emergent

fields? Can we identify a change within the genre hierarchy operating in a given cultural form

(i.e. classical music vs. pop music)? The findings suggest that in the European context, cultural

omnivore thesis has more explanatory power than the cultural opening thesis. Compared to

Europe, cultural journalism in Turkey seems to pay more attention to the emerging fields and

popular forms. Conclusion section discusses whether this attention could be considered as a

sign of an opening or omnivorousness.

Keywords

Cultural openning,cultural omnivore,cultural journalism,taste classifications,art/ culture fields,Bourdieu

Kaynakça

1 Pierre Bourdieu, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984); Paul Dimaggio, “Classification in Art,” American Sociological Review 52 (1987); Jean-Pascal Daloz, The Sociology of Elite Distinction: From Theoretical to Comparative Perspectives (Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, 2010); Michèle Lamont, “Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation,” Annual Review of Sociology 38 (2012).
2 Özgür Arun, “İnce zevkler-olağan beğeniler: Çağdaş Türkiye’de kültürel eşitsizliğin yansımaları,” Cogito–Pierre Bourdieu Özel Sayısı 76 (2014); Irmak Karademir-Hazır, “How bodies are classed: An analysis of clothing and bodily tastes in Turkey,” Poetics 44 (2014); Bruce Rankin, Murat Ergin ve Fatoş Gökşen. “A cultural map of Turkey,” Cultural Sociology 8 (2014).
3 Paul Dimaggio ve Toqir Mukhtar, “Arts participation as cultural capital in the United States, 1982–2002: Signs of decline?,” Poetics 32 (2004).
4 Mads Meier Jaeger ve Tally Katz-Gerro, “The Rise Of The Eclectic Cultural Consumer In Denmark, 1964-2004,” Sociological Quarterly 51 (2010); J. L. Sintas, “Omnivores Show up Again: The Segmentation of Cultural Consumers in Spanish Social Space,” European Sociological Review 18 (2002); Richard A. Peterson, “Understanding audience segmentation: From elite and mass to omnivore and univore,” Poetics 21 (1992); Richard A. Peterson ve Roger M. Kern, “Changing Highbrow Taste: From Snob to Omnivore,” American Sociological Review 61 (1996); Henk Roose, Koen Van Eijck ve John Lievens, “Culture of distinction or culture of openness? Using a social space approach to analyze the social structuring of lifestyles,” Poetics 40 (2012); Mike Savage ve Modesto Gayo Cal, “Unravelling the omnivore: A field analysis of contemporary musical taste in the United Kingdom,” Poetics 39 (2011).
5 Robert M Fishman ve Omar Lizardo, “How Macro-Historical Change Shapes Cultural Taste,” American Sociological Review 78 (2013); Susanne Janssen, “Fashion reporting in cross- national perspective 1955–2005,” Poetics 34 (2006); Susanne Janssen ve Giselinde Kuipers ve Marc Verboord, “Cultural globalization and arts journalism: The international orientation of arts and culture coverage in Dutch, French, German, and the U.S. newspapers, 1955 to 2005,” American Sociological Review 73 (2008).
6 DiMaggio, “Classification,”.
7 Bourdieu, “Distinction,”.
8 DiMaggio ve Mukhtar, “Arts participation,”.

9 Nan Dirk De Graaf, Paul M. De Graaf ve Gerbert Kraaykamp, “Parental Cultural Capital and Educational Attainment in the Netherlands: A Refinement of the Cultural Capital Perspective,” Sociology of Education 73 (2000); K. Van Eijck. “No More Need for Snobbism: Highbrow Cultural Participation in a Taste Democracy,” European Sociological Review 21 (2005).
10 Paul DiMaggio, “Cultural entrepreneurship in nineteenth-century Boston: the creation of an organizational base for high culture in America,” Media, Culture & Society 4 (1982); Paul DiMaggio, “Social Stratification, Life Style, Social Cognition and Social Participation,” Social Stratification in Sociological Perspective içinde, der. David Grusky (Colorado: Westview Press, 2001)
11 DiMaggio ve Mukhtar, “Arts participation,”.
12 Shyon Baumann, Hollywood highbrow: from entertainment to art (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007).
13 Richard A. Peterson, “Understanding audience segmentation: From elite and mass to omnivore and univore,” Poetics 21 (1992).
14 Bethany Bryson, “Anything But Heavy Metal: Symbolic Exclusion and Musical Dislikes.” American Sociological Review 61 (1996).
15 Peterson, “Understanding,”.
16 Irmak Karademir Hazir ve Alan Warde, “The cultural omnivore thesis: Methodological aspects of the debate,” Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of Art and Culture içinde, der. L. Hanquinet, & M. Savage, (London: Routledge, 2014).
17 DiMaggio ve Mukhtar, “Arts participation,”; Semi Purhonen, Jukka Gronow and Keijo Rahkonen, “Highbrow Culture in Finland: Knowledge, taste and participation,” Acta Sociologica 54 (2011); K. Van Eijck ve W. Knulst, “No More Need for Snobbism: Highbrow Cultural Participation in a Taste Democracy,” European Sociological Review 21 (2005).
18 Peterson, “Understanding,”; DiMaggio ve Mukhtar, “Arts participation,”.
19 DiMaggio ve Mukhtar, “Arts participation,”.
20 Fishman ve Lizardo. “How Macro-Historical Change,”.
21 Nilüfer Göle, “The quest for the Islamic self within the context of modernity,” Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey içinde, der. Bozdag, S., Kasaba, R., (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997); Deniz Kandiyoti, “Gendering the modern: on missing dimensions in the study of Turkish modernity,” Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey içinde, der. Bozdag, S., Kasaba, R. , (Seattle:University of Washington Press, 1997).
22 Meltem Karadağ, “On Cultural Capital and Taste,” European Societies 11 (2009).
23 Tuba Üstüner and Douglas B. Holt, “Toward a theory of status consumption in less industrialized countries,” Journal of Consumer Research 37 (2010).
24 Rankin, Ergin ve Gökşen, “A cultural map of Turkey,”.
25 Özgür Arun, “Kültürel Hepçiller: Ne Seçkin ne Sıradan, Sadece Olağan! Türkiye Televizyonunda İzleyici Beğenilerinin Analizi,” Toplum ve Bilim, 133 (2015).
26 Murat Belge, “Kültür,” Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye Ansiklopedisi içinde, (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1996).
27 Meriç Hızal, “Cumhuriyet Döneminde Heykelcilik,” Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye Ansiklopedisi içinde, (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1996).
28 Fethi Naci, “Edebiyat/Roman,” Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye Ansiklopedisi içinde, (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1996).
29 Hande Tekin, Devletin sanata bakışı, Devlet-sanat kurumları ilişkisi: Türkiye-İtalya-İngiltere Karşılaştırmalı Analizi, (Basılmamış Uzmanlık Tezi, Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlğı Güzel Sanatlar Müdürlüğü, 2008).
30 Belge. “Kültür,”.
31 Marc Verboord, Giselinde, Kuipers, Susanne Janssen, “Institutional Recognition in the Transnational Literary Field, 1955–2005,” Cultural Sociology 9 (2015).
32 Pierre Bourdieu, The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993); Janssen, “Art Journalism,”; Maarit Jaakola, The Contested Autonomy of Arts and Journalism: Change and Continuity in the Dual Professionalism of Cultural Journalism (Tampere: Acta Universitatis Tamperensis, 2015).
33 Maguire J. Smith ve J. Matthews, der., The Cultural Intermediaries Reader (London: Sage, 2014).
34 Baumann, “Hollywood”.
35 Susanne Janssen, Giselinde Kuipers ve Marc Verboord,“Comparing cultural classification: High and popular arts in European and U.S. elite newspapers,” Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 63 (2011).
36 Pauwke Berkers, Susanne Janssen, Marc Verboord, “Globalization and ethnic diversity in Western newspaper coverage of literary authors: Comparing developments in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United States, 1955 to 2005,” American Behavioral Scientist, (2011): 55; Pauwke Berkers, Susanne Janssen, Marc Verboord, “Assimilation into the literary mainstream? The classification of ethnic minority authors in newspaper reviews in the United States, the Netherlands and Germany,” Cultural Sociology 8 (1) (2014); Marc Verboord, “Female bestsellers: A cross-national study of gender inequality and the popular–highbrow culture divide in fiction book production, 1960–2009,“ European Journal of Communication 27 (2012).
37 Annemarie Kersten, Marc Verboord, “Dimensions of Conventionality and Innovation in Film: The Cultural Classification of Blockbusters, Award Winners, and Critics’ Favourites,” Cultural Sociology 8 (2014).
38 Vaughn Schmutz, A. Faupel. “Gender and Cultural Consecration in Popular Music,” Social Forces 89 (2) (2010): 89; Vaughn Schmutz, Alex Venrooij, Susanne Janssen, Marc Verboord, “Change and Continuity in Newspaper Coverage of Popular Music since 1955: Evidence from the United States, France, Germany, and the Netherlands,” Popular Music and Society 33 (2010).
39 Janssen.” Fashion reporting,”.
40 Janssen vd., “Cultural,”.
41 Türkiye örneği için, çalışılan dönem içerisinde kesintisiz yayın yapan, basıldığı hiçbir tarihte tirajı marjinal kalmamış, siyaset, ekonomi, kültür gibi birçok alanı kapsayan haberlere yer veren ve örneklemdeki diğer gazetelerle en benzer profili olan gazete olan Milliyet seçilmiştir.
42 Janssen vd., “Cultural,”.
43 Arun, ”Kültürel Hepçiller.”
44 Bülent Çaplı ve Can Dündar, “80’den 2000’lere Televizyon,” Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye Ansiklopedisi içinde (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1996).
45 Janssen vd., “Comparing,”.
46 Çaplı ve Dündar, “80’lerden 2000’lere,”.
47 Karademir Hazır ve Warde, “the Cultural,”.
48 Metin Solmaz, “1980’den günümüze Türkiye’de Pop Müzik,” Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye Ansiklopedisi içinde, (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1996).
49 Peterson ve Kehn, “Changing,”; DiMaggio ve Mukhtar, “Arts participation,”; Van Eijict ve Knults, “No More,”.
50 Belge, “Kültür,” 1295.
51 Rankin, Ergin ve Gökşen, “A cultural map of Turkey,”.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

-

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

İrmak Karademir Hazır
Oxford Brookes Üniversitesi
United Kingdom

Semi Purhonen
Tampere Üniversitesi
Finland

Yayımlanma Tarihi

30 Mayıs 2017

Gönderilme Tarihi

2 Ağustos 2017

Kabul Tarihi

13 Mart 2017

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 1970 Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.332367

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA77CF56EZ

Kaynak Göster

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Hazır, İ. K., & Purhonen, S. (2017). Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi, 4(1), 29-58. https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.332367

AMA

1.Hazır İK, Purhonen S. Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi. 2017;4(1):29-58. doi:10.24955/ilef.332367

Chicago

Hazır, İrmak Karademir, ve Semi Purhonen. 2017. “Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması”. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi 4 (1): 29-58. https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.332367.

EndNote

Hazır İK, Purhonen S (01 Mayıs 2017) Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi 4 1 29–58.

IEEE

[1]İ. K. Hazır ve S. Purhonen, “Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması”, Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi, c. 4, sy 1, ss. 29–58, May. 2017, doi: 10.24955/ilef.332367.

ISNAD

Hazır, İrmak Karademir - Purhonen, Semi. “Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması”. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi 4/1 (01 Mayıs 2017): 29-58. https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.332367.

JAMA

1.Hazır İK, Purhonen S. Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi. 2017;4:29–58.

MLA

Hazır, İrmak Karademir, ve Semi Purhonen. “Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması”. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi, c. 4, sy 1, Mayıs 2017, ss. 29-58, doi:10.24955/ilef.332367.

Vancouver

1.İrmak Karademir Hazır, Semi Purhonen. Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi. 01 Mayıs 2017;4(1):29-58. doi:10.24955/ilef.332367

I'm a traditionalist, I Don't like pizza and street food: The relationship between cultural consumption habits and food preferences

International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2024.100932

Kültürel Açılım, Hepçillik ve Seçkin Sanatın Düşüşü: Türkiye-Avrupa Karşılaştırması

Cultural Opening, Omnivore and the Decline of the Highbrow: A Comparison of Turkey and Europe

Abstract

Keywords