Perfection is what humans inevitably strive to accomplish in their lives for even the most menial tasks—and the Great Works are the means to do so. Through the Great Works of art and of literature, people can become the best versions of themselves and of humanity. Matthew Arnold, one of the proponents of this idea, believes in the power that inspirational authors and artists have in their works to change peoples’ lives. Through this belief, Arnold describes the human necessity to seek perfection through constant improvement of oneself and those around him or herself, which he describes as “culture.” As he unravels this concept in his writing, he says, “But the aspirations of culture, which is the study of perfection, are not satisfied, unless what men say, when they may say what they like, is worth saying,—as good in it, and more good than bad” (Arnold 38).
This view is undoubtedly the manifestation of Arnold’s belief in moral realism—the belief of the objective and independent standards of what is right or wrong in terms of what can lead us into our own happiness. Through the constant self-improvement of human beings, they work towards their goal of being happy; because whether people know it or not, some things are meant to positively or negatively attribute to your happiness, even when you yourself do not realize it. Arnold enforces the ideology of what constitutes this belief—the ideology of human perfection—by advocating for the things that ultimately lead us into this path, the Great Works of art and of literature.
Yet, what are these Great Works and why are they alone considered the passageway towards a better future? Are these Great Works considered to be based solely on the works of the past? Can today’s culture be a part of them? How does one begin to strive for human perfection—and happiness—without the means? Some people are still unable to read and write in today’s world. Most of the time, the majority of people cannot afford to bother with the Great Works. In today’s world, it is not uncommon to see many individuals in the working-class struggle to barely support themselves and their families. In this case, if one struggles solely on this, how can they even begin to think about the inequity of their current condition; of the means needed to improve their lives to a standard worth living? If these great works are not readily accessible to everyone, will those who cannot obtain them ever be able to progress in this journey? And if there are groups of people who are lacking the ability to progress, then is human perfection still achievable? After all, human perfection requires social unity to be achieved. Without a universal capability to do so, humanity would never be able to achieve the state of “what men say, when they may say what they like, is worth saying” (38). It is difficult to answer what is the correct way to go about constant improvement, especially when not many alternatives are not made known. But perhaps Arnold failed to identify some of the merits that exist in today’s culture, with its broad capabilities in spreading information through the use of media, and some of the facets that leave pop culture desirable to most.
Arnold and F. R. Leavis, another major advocate for the importance of literature, both agree that art and literature of exceptionally high standards are a “salvation” to people because of the pre-industrialized mode in which it is conveyed in an industrial society, which they deem to be a self-detrimental weapon, due to its widespread dehumanization and desensitization of people. And while Arnold sides with the necessity of social unity to achieve the objective of culture, Leavis has instead adopted a more channeled focus on the minority of people who can, in the end, save Western Civilization (Leavis 1). Although these two points contrast in the means to achieve so, they share the same goal to strive for human perfection—or, in other words, to save Western Civilization through the use of the Great Works. The Great Works are the classics in which Arnold and Leavis both advocate for and although they mostly refer to past works, they leave the possibility of exceptions in modern art and literature. Popular culture, on the other hand, is neglected and ignored, as it is believed to serve no purpose in establishing positive connections to what they define as saving the Western Civilization or the path to human perfection.
Pop culture is looked unfavorably upon because of what it represents. Contemporary pop culture is the result of the industrial societies, who have overshadowed the traditional societies that provided a richer culture. It is understandable why, however, Arnold and Leavis feel so strongly about this, as the industrialization of societies have destroyed the deeper sense of interconnection between people. As such, it is easy to lose focus of the merits of an industrialized society in the midst of its inhumane capabilities—of which render it able to have humans ignore the plights of others and instead treat these plights as common occurrences with no relation to themselves, a stark contrast to traditional societies where people recognize and feel, where people are unified. It is also easy to compare this situation with a quote from Joseph Stalin, Marxist and former dictator of the Soviet Union, where he once said, “The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic.” In this quote, he refers to the disconnect that people feel with a large number of casualties. With one individual, it is possible to get to know more about him or her and feel sorrow for them. However, once the numbers reach the point that humans find it difficult to relate to, the compassion people hold may find itself to be severely cut off. This is how Arnold and Leavis find industrialization. Due to the dehumanization that often characterizes industrial society, people no longer feel as sense of sympathy or compassion to one another, feeling disconnected from everyone else. People do not recognize, or simply do not care about, the injustices that may be occurring to those who make their clothes, or those they pass on the street, or even those who live right beside them. Looking at it from this point of view, pop culture is simply self-destructive.
But the facet of pop culture that so brings people to a level of culture is through media—much of which was made possible through industrialization. Although Arnold and Leavis preach looking for classic literature in order to imitate living as a non-industrial person in an industrial society, they fail to recognize the merits brought upon this ability to communicate so broadly with others. Media has given humans the ability to interact with someone on the other side of the hemisphere. People from different cities, countries, and backgrounds are able to speak to each other simply by dialing a number on a cellphone or sending a quick text message through Facebook. They are able to find information of virtually anything on the Internet. And even with those people, who are not as privileged as others, who are unable to afford these luxuries, messages can still be sent out to them through this pop culture. And within this pop culture, examples—of which not only fail to provide anything beneficial to our lives but instead may react negatively with us— that argue against its very essence are common, from rappers to athletes who are infamously known for their problems with drugs, domestic abuse, and more. Examples in pop culture, which preach messages that are beneficial in guiding people towards a better life, are also not nonexistent, however.
Sir Robert Bryson Hall II, otherwise known as Logic, is a famous American rapper, songwriter, and record producer, who became internationally-renowned for one of his most recent songs, “1-800-273-8255,” named after the phone number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (NSPF) and featuring other well-known artists, such as Alessia Cara and Khalid.
In this song, Logic goes from being the voice of a desperate teenage-boy contemplating suicide to a member of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline hoping to persuade the boy otherwise. The music video tells the real story, of a young black male struggling to come to terms with his sexuality in the face of bullying from his teammates on his track team and the disapproval of his father. Once his father found out about his sexuality, the disappointment and anger were too much to face for the teenager, as he ran away and even became homeless for a period of time. Although he does gain some support from his track coach and teacher, his coach could not do much until he talked to the boy’s father, convincing and talking to him about the things his son was going through. The black teenager ends up going to the house of his attraction, a white boy from school, and sleeping with him after having dinner with his family. At this point, the father of the other boy finds them, leaving both teenagers distressed. The black boy rushes out, while the father of the other helps him out, although visibly disappointed. The story of the music video has thus covered the distress that may often occur when faced with a different sexuality than what others may expect, while advocating for interracial relationships and confirming for others that it is not an abnormality to have these things happen to you.
Through all this confusion and pain and frustration that the boy goes through, he finds life too difficult to go through. Without knowing what to do, he brings a gun to his, coming close to ending his life.
Near the end, however, he wishes for and finds a glimpse of hope by calling the NSPF. And as this progression occurs, the lyrics change, from the young boy’s perspective, from “I don’t want to be alive” to “I don’t wanna cry anymore, I wanna feel alive, I don’t even wanna die anymore.” By realizing that there was support out there, somewhere, he stopped himself from killing himself. At the end, we can see him marrying, who we presume to be, his teenage crush with his parents supporting him by his side, and then holding a baby with his parents and husband. The message this music video sends is for everyone to hear. It tells you, that no matter where you are and what kind of place you are in, you are not alone. Even when you do not know what to do, there is still hope at the end. This message struck me as one of the best aspects of pop culture.
This piece breaches the rigidness and insensitivity that people have built up in response to this industrialized age and spreads a message to an international audience. In the past, in a pre-industrialized society, it would have been far too difficult to send this type of message—both because of people’s prejudices of the time and because of its magnitude. The dehumanization of others is thus challenged, as Logic shoves this story into the eyes of the world and forces them to recognize issues that no one wants to address. He plays on their emotions by sending them images of a boy trying to run away from everything that causes him pain, directly relating him with so many people who have tried to do the same, while also forcing them to recognize the consequences that their negligence on the issue may cause. Classic literature could not encompass such a wide audience, simply due to its constraints, of having the time to read such pieces or of having the ability to read and write, and further into understanding what usually comes across as cryptic messages. That is not to say that the classics and the Great Works are unable to fulfill their purpose, but it is to say that pop culture is not completely without merit, possessing the ability to spread the messages that perhaps the Great Works could not, in the way that Logic did—through media.
Works Cited
Arnold, Matthew, and Jane Garnett. Culture and Anarchy. Oxford University Press, 2009.
Bentley, Eric. The Importance of Scrutiny: Selection from Scrutiny: a Quarterly Review, 1932-
- 1948. New York University Press, 1964.
LogicVEVO. “Logic – 1-800-273-8255 Ft. Alessia Cara, Khalid.” YouTube, YouTube, 17 Aug.
2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb24RrHIbFk.