Evaluation of Concepts

11Assessment 1: Evaluation of Concepts

Assessment 1: Evaluation of Concepts

Assessment 1: Evaluation of Concepts

Culture industries

In the emergence of new forms of mass media entertainment and communicating industry culture identity was used as a subsumprtion of that which was perceived as autonomous realms of culture in the market governed by instrumental logic. Culture identity provides a description of the commodification of cultural forms, which emanated from the growth of monopoly capitalism (Banks, Lovatt, O’Connor & Raffo, 2007, p. 456). This terminology plays a significant role in cementing its audience to the status quo while at the same time ensuring the transformation of culture into an ideological medium of dominion. Despite the perceived raise of culture industries, it notable that culture has not always served this role. Instead, the meaning and function of essential societal elements such as art has been experiencing an historical transformation (Cunningham 2002, p. 54). Genuine and autonomous art are the products of culture industry, which lay the role of uncovering the social conditions necessitating the rise of these forms of art. These approaches to cultural industries claim to reveal the impact of commodification of culture and on the consciousness of the society (Cunningham 2002, p. 54).

The rise of culture industries resulted from the standardization and rationalization of culture forms and this weakened and to some extent led to the destruction of the capacity of individual members of the society to engage in think and act in autonomous ways (Banks, Lovatt, O’Connor & Raffo, 2007, p. 457). Under culture industries, standardization emerges because of the capacity of those in authority to control the process of producing cultures goods by employing positivistic approaches as an attempt of formulating a scientific measure of taste and expectations of the people with the objective of increasing their profit levels. Through the development of culture industries, the process of standardization became specialized resulting in the emergence of a precisely targeted hierarchical range of goods that align with the preconceived expectations of consumers on the products (Cunningham 2002, p. 56).

Hollywood is an example of culture industries. This is because while attempting to ensure profits, the industry engaged in constant production and promotion of films. These films are classified in accordance with the tastes, expectations, and preferences of the targeted groups of viewers (Banks, Lovatt, O’Connor & Raffo, 2007, p. 459). Through this approach to specialization and standardization of the film industry, the directors and the producers of these films ensure that viewers exert next to mental energy in understanding the content and the concept presented in the films. Inasmuch as there are differences in terms of the approaches and the story lines provided in these films, through culture industries, these differences are leanest of pseudo- individualism, which seek to hide, evade the fact that the form and style of one film is identical to another (Belfiorie & Bennett 2006, p. 12). Culture industries and the resultants standardization of cultural form in the film industry have been able to use superficial imitation of individuality in masking the fundamental uniformity of all the products. This explains why studios spend most of their resources in the promotion of improved films, brands, and new stars. The promotional activities under culture industries seek to neglect the structural uniformity, which is the defining and meaningful content of the films (Belfiorie & Bennett 2006, p. 12).

The challenge presented by cultural identities is that the resulting standardization does not contribute to the stimulation of social reflection. Instead, it results in the creation of a standardized response unlike authentic art, which played a role in challenging individual perceptions and conception of existing social norms and reality (Belfiorie & Bennett 2006, p. 14). Through cultural industries, art has become a tool for reinforcing social norms considering that art presents viewers with relatively comfortable and smooth spectacles, which do not necessity deep through or elicit he need to criticize art. Through cultural industries the cultural forms have been pre-classified, those engaged in the production, and the audiences play the role of passive and unreceptive audience (Cunningham 2002, p. 57).

From this perspective, the main function of cultural industries was to extinguish the revolutionary potential of the population. This was successful through the provision relief from the stresses emanating from capitalism using brief and surface level distraction. Despite the distraction provided, cultural industries could not provide the audience with the autonomy inherent in art (Cunningham 2002, p. 57). The introduction of popularity of cultural industries eradicated the autonomy, which allowed maintaining its distance from reality. Cultural industries are therefore a new form of ideological domination, which does not seek to challenge the existing normative assumptions. Cultural industries seek to maintain the status quo by depicting the society as unquestionable and natural. This form of pseudo-realism limits critical analysis of the existing political, social, and economic order in the society hence creating a fatalism and unquestioned acceptance of existing order (Dunlop and Galloway 2007, p. 18). Through pseudo-realism, cultural identities only provide short-term pleasure, which is formal and predictable escape from reality. Furthermore, through culture industries, the society experiences limited development because of the desire to stay within existing social and artistic boundaries (Dunlop and Galloway 2007, p. 18).

Creative industries

Creative industries entail the incorporation of creative talents towards the realization of commercial ends. In the process of embracing creativity, creative industries embrace cognitive skills to generate differentiation in yields to new and significantly enhanced products and services whose eventual form is yet to be specified in advance. The challenge of creative industries emanates from the difficulty in distinguishing that, which is perceived as creative in one sector and another (Bilton 2007, p. 19). Creative industries can be considered as an improvement to cultural industries because it embraced the use of technological development in other sectors such as design, fashion and software development (DCMS 2000). Through creative industries, it has become possible for economies to engage millions of highly talented and intuitive individuals into a system of communication and culture that embraces gradual progress through a plethora of existing commercial innovations in the symbolic value of products and services (Flew 2010, p. 54). From a broader perspective, creative industries have been accused of reducing the level of creativity the moment a fixed industrial pattern has been identified.

This is an indication that through creative economy, creative industries an avant-garde system which designates that the innovative environment in which creative economies operate interface with new patterns of social communication and individual expressivity resulting in new commercial applications (Bilton 2007, p. 22). Creative industries acclimatize the society to existing possibilities provided by new technology hence necessitating economic growth and development in terms of the design of product and services. By embracing technology as an essential component of creative industries, the content of creative economy is of limited concern considering that the consumer has the responsbility and the right to decide the type of product or service that he chooses to purchase (Flew 2010, p. 57). Through applications such as the internet, essential elements such as supply and distribution of products have become relatively easier. The creative society envisioned by creative industries in which both the consumers and producers have their activities mediated through direct communication over the internet. The agenda of creative industries aims at reducing the cultural value of the economic aspects because it does not regard the value of every other aspect. Creative industries allows for the incorporation of cultural value to be implemented as an essential aspect in the production of goods and services. Other essential aspects that form part of cultural creativity include the incorporation of creative labour, creative innovation systems. These systems allow for the transformative energies related with cultural production and consumption to be disengaged from any judgment of cultural and political value (Cunningham 2002, p. 63). Whenever there are frictions between culture and economy, cultural industries facilitate the development of some form of residual elitism, which is perceived as a temporary gap between the development of new ideas and the subsequent commercialization of resources. Culture industries involves the displacement of collective cultural values which define the possibility of developing values targeting heroisms of creative entrepreneurship of individual entrepreneurs or mapped within the innovative economy. The competitive nature of innovation as defined by cultural industries provides a platform for entrepreneurs to engage in more innovative approaches that can be used in handling social problems and in the satisfaction of the needs of the society (Dunlop and Galloway 2007, p. 20).

The concept of creative industries does not only focus on the incorporation of innovations an essential component of the production process but on mass production, patterned approach to consumption and circulation. This allows for the development of a distinction between art and design. Artistic products are often presented in singular format while the work of design plays a functional instead of a symbolic role (Flew 2010, p. 53).

The introduction of creative industries as an input rather than an output it allows for the incorporation of imagination and dynamic transformation of glamorous cultural aspects in the innovative machine. Through relative innovation questions, regarding and innovation were given much focus replacing the economic implications through the explosion of internet and computer technology and the reconfiguration of essential connections between cultural production and the audience, different economies were able to incorporate creative industries in boosting employment numbers (Flew 2010, p. 54). This was because creative industries was knowledge based and only attracted sectors interested in the provision of additional knowledge in the form of information on the best strategies that can be employed in the improvement of value. Since the transformation of cultural industries to creative industries, economies improved on the approaches used by audiences in interaction, purchasing and in the adaptation of cultural text (Garnham 2005, p. 19).

Relevance of the term creative industries

The use of the terms creative industries as a business concept with regard to innovation and technology may be perceived as misleading because the concept of creativity can be applied in different fields without the incorporation of any cultural or symbolic aspects (Banaji 2007, p. 18). A new system of production of a new approach to cleaning a city can be perceived as creative necessitating the use of an Avant-grade system in the development of thoughts regarding the effective nature of creative industries with regard to innovation and the development of the society (Banks 2006, p. 456). When used outside the realm of cultural practices, the element of creativity can be applied in any professional field, which requires specific skills and intelligent judgment. There exists distinctions between different creative sectors can be perceived as the use of creativity in the mobilization of bio-political resources for knowledge and democratization of a capacity that was precisely locked as part of art for the sake of art. Furthermore, this makes the identification and attribution of a specific creative sector relatively difficult without an effective understanding of the intended meaning (Garnham 2005, p. 20).

The popularity of creative industries is often perceived with regard to the fields of advertisements and marketing. This is because the success of marketers and advertisers is highly dependent in their ability to use the existing resources, with the help of technology to boost the confidence and improve on the possibility that more purchasers will be attracted to products and services (Banks 2006, p. 457). The introduction of creative industry in understanding political and socio-economic developments previously existing terminologies perceive it as illegitimate and unrealistic tension between culture and logic (DCMS 2000).

The concept of creative industry generates a persistent tension between expressivity and functionality and between collective and individual consumption. The imaginative and innovative perspective presented by creative industries must be perceived with regard to the development of products and services, which often resonate on the aesthetics of the major players in the commercial and lifestyle choices. Through the application of c creative skills, which are often perceived from the artistic perspective, in the service and production design, with regard to consumer choice in the production of commercially viable affordances (Garnham 2005, p. 16).

The relevance of creative industries with regard to societal growth emanates from the perception that it is an input seeking to eliminate any form of collective values implied by culture industries. Creative industries were forced on individualism with the objective of boosting intellectual property (Dunlop and Galloway 2007, p. 20). Through intellectual property rights, it became possible for individual to engage in innovative measures that could be harnessed by businesses for the realization of commercial ends. Despite the perceived difficult in the designation of a specific creative sector, instead it striped all the professional and technological practices of their collective connotation other than that of aggregate consumer choice (Cunningham 2004, p. 110).

The use of creative industry from a universal perspective presents the consequences of operations. This is because the terms creativity allows business enterprises to link with other elements of innovation in the creation of a competitive agenda (DCMS 2000). The benefits of this terminology also emanates from the understanding that it can be used in the mobilization of socially excluded groups for the purpose of regeneration and incorporation of their skills in the development of the society (Garnham 2005, p. 16). The delivery of creative entrepreneurism as an element of creative industry creative industry has been able to improve its relevance by providing an economic and social agenda delivered through existing cultural policies. Despite the proved benefits, the propagation of creative industry through cultural policy ignores existing contradictions between different objectives making it relatively unclear on the approaches to minimize duplication and enhance the relevance of intellectual property protection (Garnham 2005, p. 18). Through the elimination of possible collective nature values, creative industry combines social-cultural themes in a critical manner. This helps this approach in moving beyond uncritical celebration and assess the existing challenges from arrange of different perspectives. Furthermore, through creative industries it is relatively easier to find responses to questions regarding international development and regulation. This facilitates exploration with regard to historical trajectory and the development of potential future directions (Cunningham 2002, p. 64).


Banaji, S., and Burn, A. and Buckingham, D. 2007. The Rhetorics of Creativity: A Review of

the Literature. London: Creative Partnerships

Banks, M. 2006. ‘Moral economy and cultural work’, Sociology, 40 (3) pp. 455-472

Banks, M., Lovatt, A., O’Connor, J. and Raffo, C. 2007. ‘Risk and Trust in the Cultural

Industries’, Geoforum, 31(4), pp.453-464

Belfiorie, E., and Bennett, O. 2006. Re-thinking the Social Impact of the Arts. A Critical and

Historical Review. Centre for Cultural Policy Studies, University of Warwick, Research Paper No.9

Bilton, C. 2007. Management and Creativity: From Creative Industries to Creative Management.

Oxford: Blackwell

Caves, R. 2010. Creative Industries: Contracts Between Art and Commerce. Cambridge, Mass:

Harvard University Press.

Cunningham, S. 2002. ‘From cultural to creative industries: theory, industry, and policy

implications’, Media International Australia, 102: pp. 54-65

Cunningham, S. 2004. ‘The Creative Industries After Cultural Policy: A Genealogy and Some

Possible Preferred Futures’, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 7 (1), pp.105-115

DCMS, 2000. Creative Industries – The Regional Dimension. London: DCMS

Dunlop, S. and Galloway, S. 2007.‘A Critique of Definitions of the Cultural and Creative

Industries in Public Policy’, International Journal of Cultural Policy. 13 (1) pp.17-31

Flew, T. 2010. ‘Beyond ad hocery: defining creative industries’. Presented at Cultural Sites,

Cultural Theory, Cultural Policy, 2nd International Conference on Cultural Policy Research, Wellington: Queensland University of Technology.

Garnham, N. 2005. ‘From cultural to creative industries: An analysis of the implications of the

‘creative industries’ approach to arts and media policy making in the United Kingdom’, International Journal of Cultural Policy, 11 (1), pp.15-29