From cradle to grave<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n A national treasure, hop on the table<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Cabaret days till your belly aches<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Two-toned dreams<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n In gray and pink.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n The song\u2019s title, referencing Poland’s national colors, serves as a metaphor for the country\u2019s cultural dichotomy. Grey represents the mundane reality of everyday life, while pink symbolizes the garish excesses of popular taste. Podsiad\u0142o\u2019s lyrics, though tinged with self-deprecating humor, pinpoint the aesthetic preferences of many Poles: kitsch and exaggeration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Podsiad\u0142o\u2019s song, while playfully self-mocking, captures Polish tastes accurately. The singer, a Pole himself, neatly captures what many of his countrymen enjoy. Yet he also implies these preferences are kitsch and tawdry. The lyrics echo our collective conviction about the low value of certain media and cultural works. However, how can we be certain what constitutes kitsch and what qualifies as \u201chigh culture\u201d? And why do we need such distinctions?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Contemporary cultural scholars often argue that kitsch is not so much a descriptive category as an evaluative one.<\/strong> By employing it, we point out certain features of an object (book, film, performance) while simultaneously passing negative judgment on its artistic value. Although kitsch is a broad concept resistant to unambiguous definition, its main characteristics can be identified. In her article \u201cKitsch \u2013 A Review of Theoretical Concepts and a Proposed Definition for Research Purposes,\u201d Gabriela \u017bochowska argues that kitsch is characterized by, among other things:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This catalog shows that a kitschy work appeals primarily to our emotions, not our intellect. The main goal of such an artwork is to evoke in us a sense of experiencing beauty or \u2013 as Maria Janion argues in her book Vampire: A Symbolic Biography<\/em> \u2013 sublimity and horror. \u017bochowska contends that kitsch stands in opposition to the Platonic ideal of beauty<\/a>, which was meant to remain in the realm of unattainable ideal, while in the case of \u201ctacky\u201d cultural works, it is an end in itself. The researcher argues that kitsch is further characterized by seriousness and unconsciousness (undoubtedly, we all know films and books where pathos and sublimity produce an unintended comic effect).<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Kitsch should be distinguished from camp and postmodern irony<\/strong>, which use the language of \u201ctackiness\u201d consciously, often to deconstruct currently dominant social, cultural, and political discourses. Probably few of us would consider Quentin Tarantino\u2019s films unequivocally kitschy. In the American director\u2019s cult works, such as \u201cPulp Fiction\u201d or \u201cKill Bill,\u201d exaggerated brutality and clich\u00e9d dialogues signal irony and distance towards the depicted reality and the convention to which the filmmaker refers. Thus, the language of kitsch has penetrated the cultural mainstream.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We recommend: <\/strong>\u201cFriends, You Are at War\u201d. How to Conquer a Country Without Firing a Shot<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Referencing Hermann Broch\u2019s classic monograph \u201cSome Remarks on Kitsch and Other Essays,\u201d Gabriela \u017bochowska traces the historical roots of kitsch to the development of Protestant bourgeois culture in the 18th century \u2013 distanced from the morality and \u201cgood taste\u201d of libertine aristocracy \u2013 and the birth of Romanticism at the beginning of the following century. As the researcher writes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe exalted Romanticism, resulting in an unprecedented escalation of kitsch, was in this situation an attempt to reconcile the Reformation\u2019s discovery of the absolute in every human soul, and thus the primacy of the individual, with the virtue and ideal of monogamy that distinguished the bourgeoisie from the receding aristocracy.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Romantic sentimentality, which \u2013 contrary to the original complexity of this term \u2013 we most often associate with simplified plots<\/a> of romantic comedies or melodramas, has become synonymous with kitsch and tackiness today. Many of us perceive exalted religiosity or patriotism in a similar way, expressed in parades, school ceremonies, or musical works referencing, for example, the epic of the Polish Legions. These examples show that kitsch is a historically variable category. What was an object of admiration for 19th and 20th-century audiences often appears tawdry and exaggerated to us now.<\/strong> Moreover, this recognition does not only apply to older folk or popular culture but also to works that gained recognition from professional audiences in the past (would anyone today be able to genuinely admire Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz\u2019s \u201cHistorical Songs\u201d?). However, if kitsch is a category that changes over time, can anything be considered \u201cobjectively kitschy\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\n In his article \u201cWhy Do We Love Kitsch? Cultural and Evolutionary Theories,\u201d Kamil \u0141uczaj juxtaposes two strategies for studying kitsch present in contemporary science<\/a>. According to the first \u2013 derived from Charles Darwin\u2019s theory of evolution \u2013 our taste is a distant echo of the nomadic lifestyle of primitive humans.<\/strong> As the researcher writes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cTo enable accurate decisions about where to move, settle, and what activities to undertake in specific circumstances, evolution developed special brain modules that influence settlement decisions through aesthetic preferences.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to evolutionary theory, the fondness for \u201ckitschy views\u201d \u2013 as illustrations or photographs of picturesque landscapes are often called \u2013 is a relic of our ancestors\u2019 experiences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Cultural theories, derived \u2013 as the researcher argues \u2013 from Pierre Bourdieu\u2019s work, approach the issue of kitsch differently. According to these theories, taste is determined by class and economic factors. In this sense, our assessment of cultural and artistic works depends on the cultural capital we received through education and upbringing. Proponents of cultural theories argue that if we grew up surrounded by Proust\u2019s books and our parents were university professors, there is a high probability that in adult life we will reach for so-called high culture and associate its mass counterpart with kitsch and tackiness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The division of culture into high and low is inextricably linked to the thickness of our wallets. According to Bourdieu, the lack of interest in art from lower social strata stems from the need to satisfy basic existential needs<\/strong>. The French sociologist posits that economic<\/a> factors shaped a specific type of folk aesthetics, based on criteria of durability and universality, which higher classes equate with kitsch and tackiness. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The fact that the supposed elitism of art depends on financial issues is starkly indicated by the price differences between theater tickets and streaming service subscriptions. A theater performance is not always superior to an ambitious series. Nevertheless, many cultural participants maintain that we can only commune with \u201cgreat art\u201d in theaters or operas. This approach \u2013 colloquially termed high-brow<\/em> \u2013 is increasingly being deconstructed today, and kitsch has become an element of our cultural everyday life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We recommend: <\/strong>Hope in Life. When Hope Turns to Naivety<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Are we witnessing the dominance of kitsch in contemporary culture, a phenomenon of \u201cbad money driving out good\u201d? It seems that everything depends on what we consider kitsch and what value we assign to it. While it is hard to agree with a situation where disco polo or pseudo-documentaries completely replace works of art, despising \u201cfolk\u201d aesthetics can lead to obscuring our view of cultural reality. Kitsch itself is not devoid of objective value.<\/strong> A fondness for \u201cbad\u201d films and series does not always indicate poor taste in viewers. It is often the result of guilty pleasure<\/em>. Certainly, each of us has on our list a \u201cfavorite\u201d work generally considered tawdry, which we enjoy for various reasons. Is a reasonable dose of therapeutic kitsch not, therefore, essential for maintaining psychological balance? Regardless of the thickness of our wallet, cultural capital, or class affiliation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Translation: Klaudia Tarasiewicz<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the text in Polish:<\/strong> Urok kiczu. Do\u00a0czego s\u0105\u00a0nam potrzebne s\u0142abe filmy i\u00a0kiepskie ksi\u0105\u017cki?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nWhat is Kitsch, Kitschy Movies and Why is it Hard to Define?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Kitschy Movies <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"Kitschy](\"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Kitsch-2-1024x574.jpg\")
The Roots of Modern Kitsch<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Nature versus Culture… and Economics<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"Kitschy](\"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Kitsch-3-1024x574.jpg\")
Taste and Wealth<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Kitschy Movies and Guilty Pleasure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n