Historians talk often of “top-down” change (an agenda carried out by
elites) vs. “bottom-up” change (a groundswell of ideas from everyday people.) Where do you see examples of each kind? Can there be such a thing as a purely
“top-down” or “bottom-up” piece of popular culture? Explain.
Some examples of bottom up would be Disco and Hip-Hop music, because they both started either locally or underground. Disco existed largely in the underground scene and made its rise for a moment in time and Hip-Hop started in the Bronx and it began to spread down the east coast. An example of top down would be shopping centers, because they were carried out by business men looking to take advantage of the GI Bill's effects.
ReplyDeleteI agree that a good example of bottom up culture would be Hip-Hop music. Hip-Hop emerged from the lowest economic class at the time and eventually spread much further, both geographically and socially. A top down example could be the popularization of college football. It originally was played exclusively in colleges before it became a highly popular recreational sport among all social classes.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that Disco is a good example of bottom-up change. Disco was first widely accepted by african american and gay cultures, which were mostly underground at the time, before becoming somewhat accepted by upper and middle class white cultures. However, this movement upwards made certain groups, especially middle class white males, very unhappy, and Disco could no longer succeed outside of its original sphere of influence. I think the culture and effects of the fast food industry is hard to categorize into either top-down or bottom-up, but rather a combination of the two. The industry leaders and franchise owners at the top obviously influence what is sold and how it's sold to the lower-middle class consumers. The low-paid workers within the various industries associated with fast food, however, have their own culture and changes that have begun to spread upwards through attempts at unionizing and employing fair working conditions. This bottom-up change, however, has been greatly opposed by the higher-ups of the company, as the importance of low food costs and quick production is their main concern, not the safety or well being of their workers.
ReplyDeleteFast food is an example of a top-down change that brought bottom-up influence. Fast food provided families a low cost way to eat out more, effectively outsourcing their food preparation. This change allowed for the abolishing of traditional gender roles, since the house did not need to be maintained as much more women could enter the work force. In addition to providing a means for families to increase revenue though having a second job, these restaurants allowed individuals to purchase a franchise and become one's own boss (even if it came with severe restrictions), and even provided low skill jobs for those just starting out in life.
ReplyDeleteA more pure bottom-up change would be graffiti and street art. While it may have started out a simple tagging to mark one's territory, the art form that evolved from it can brighten up a community for every one and even be momentarily valuable (e.g.: Modern-day street artist Banksy).
I think that in some cases, it is clear that there is such a thing as top-down or bottom-up culture. As previously mentioned, graffiti and street art were purely artistic expressions of everyday people, certainly not elites. But as time progressed, this type of art form changed and was eventually appreciated by all types of people for the creativity it possessed. However, I think it can be difficult to classify certain things as strictly one or the other. Popular culture like movies and songs seem to blur the boundaries since there is such a wide array of people who produce and enjoy them.
ReplyDeleteI think more so than prior examples, hip-hop music and graffiti provide a purer bottom up change, because it started in the Bronx and spread further by word of mouth and by means of more graffiti artists tagging new areas. These practices did not need an elite to spread the popularity as much because individuals in similar situations from other cities picked up on it and as more people engaged, more of the East coast took part. Hip-hop and graffiti eventually made its way to the top and we see the result of that, but it was a relatively pure bottom-up change. I believe it still takes a group effort more often than not for something to get popular as seen with fast food. Elites may start something, but the lower classes often need to engage for it to be a real success and vice versa. There takes a certain amount of interaction between classes for pieces of popular culture to become successful and important, however that amount varies widely.
ReplyDeleteThere is definitely some top-down needed to make bottom-up culture mainstream. The spread of hip-hop though traveling DJ's was definitely not something that could happen though the people who were rapping about their real life struggles as it would have been unaffordable. The DJ's would have been weather than the people who could relate to it, but without the people to relate to the music the DJ's would not have culture to spread. Both the rich and the poor need each other to spread culture that people can relate to, even though different classes relate to different things.
ReplyDeleteI consider fast food to be a bottom-up culture, because it was specifically designed for middle to lower classes and the "modern family". While fast food today is manufactured from above, historically fast food restaurants and chains were started from those who had nothing growing up. Fast food's founding fathers for the most part came from poor, rural backgrounds with little to know formal education past a high school age. After they gained some success and fast food was able to diffuse more broadly it gave people from the same background as the owners the chance to experience "restaurant food"- a decidedly upper class luxury at the time. While restaurant food itself could be considered top-down (speaking strictly of chains, like Applebee's that provided dine-in style experiences with a fraction of the cost) fast food really is bottom-up as it started at an extremely accessible point. The fast food and "Speedee Service" phenomena did not devolve from higher class dining but rather created their own, new form of dining completely breaking from the past, breaking the structure of "top-down" theories. This immediate accessibility from the birth of the culture was something completely new and I argue it could be considered one of the purest form of bottom-up culture there is. Fast food started from those at the very bottom and consistently remained accessible at all times in its history for the bottom, allowing middle and upper classes to dabble as they please. Fast food gave lower class families a very real, affordable luxury, designed specifically for them and "by" them. Even presently a take out fast food meal is advertised as a meal to be celebrated as a treat (see KFC's "Bucket Meal" commercials) that any family could enjoy and should enjoy, as a break from the monotony of the week- whether it be an 80 hour blue collar week, of a 40 hour bourgeois one.
ReplyDelete