The Question of Culture

Culture is continuously changing. Though the prevailing culture in a country may be collectivist or polychronic, one can easily find co-cultures within the culture that may be staunchly individualistic. Even if one manages to dissect a culture into pieces like this, it's impossible to place each part into one category or the other, for these guidelines are more like opposing ends on a scale than two absolutes that one must choose between.

Is the American culture experiencing a shift even as this blog entry is typed? Absolutely. As a reactionary entity, it is impossible for any culture to be static. We are undergoing a communication shift just as people in the past have. Before printed media, all cultures were oral cultures; those involved in the culture didn't have a choice but to receive their information purely from verbal exchanges with other people. As printed communication became more efficient and widespread, the information people received came from these physical resources rather than from their neighbors. Now that we are entering a new era of communication through electronic media, people try to compare it to the past by labeling it as being more like a print or oral culture, but this line of reasoning seems faulty at best.

In today's culture, one has to choose how he wants to receive his communication. Each individual person determines for himself whether he lives in a primarily print or oral culture. Does he keep himself enlightened through newspapers and literature? Then he participates in the active print culture. Does he keep his world view smaller through only hearing the local news from his friends? In this case, he lives in an oral culture.

What if the individual turns on the radio or watches CNN? What kind of culture do these media belong in? This is where the confusion begins. Are electronic media a part of print culture in the sense that the source is impersonal and not instantaneous? Are they part of oral culture, considering that the viewer listens in to the newscasters' "conversations"?

Because this is an entirely new way of getting information, putting television and radio into the categories of oral or print communication can ever be completely accurate since it contains aspects of both. Perhaps it exists on the continuum between oral and print cultures. Until we can dream up of a definable category for electronic media to claim for itself, we should accept that we can't fit it into the classifications we currently stand by. The prevailing American culture today can not be neatly tucked away into the definitions of print or oral culture; America's obsession with individual choice forces that option upon each citizen. Therefore, the only culture any person can define is for himself.

So - which culture do you live in?

Media Artifact Analysis

Fiona Apple beautifully illustrates the confusion of a naturally destructive person in her music video "Fast As You Can." Through most of the song, she warns the listener to cut her out of his life before she has too much of a hold on him. Fiona's haunting facial expressions and unkempt appearance pair with her intense lyrics in a desperate attempt to push the listener away from her. Simply watching her mouth reveals so much about her real disposition. After declaring that her "pretty mouth will frame the phrases that will disprove your faith in man," we're treated to a particularly menacing half-smile.

She'll tear your world apart... and love it.

Fiona's haggard image is made even more disconcerting by the intentional mismatch of audio to video applied sporadically throughout. It makes her seem off-kilter and unstable, which is exactly what she's trying to get across.

She also employs another unusual technique: touching the camera itself. By dirtying the lens, the viewers are limited to only exactly what she wants them to see. The bridge of this song is sung through this visual effect, sometimes shielding Fiona's entire face. She seems uncomfortable with this softer, more vulnerable aspect of herself illustrated through this section. She cleans the camera as she's singing to give the viewers a better glimpse of her, but she does this intentionally badly. She wants to look like she's letting her guard down without actually leaving herself vulnerable and easily hurt by disclosing anything more to the intended receiver. One could also view this section as Fiona's attempt to clean up the mess that she's left this relationship in. She only puts forth the minimal effort to give the appearance that she cares, but in reality, she has little attachment to the viewer himself. She wants a relationship, but she obviously has no idea what she actually needs from it for herself. After all, who offers to be another person's pet? Even if the relationship does continue like she half-hopes it will, it won't be healthy. The smudges on the camera hide how she's feeling, and she obviously intends to keep that shield up. After the revelation that she does want to be with this person she's so desperately trying to push away, a look of disgust flashes across her features as she smears the camera again with her dirty cloth, effectively undoing any progress she had made.

The song ends over clips of Fiona smiling in various degrees of sincerity and certainty. She herself isn't sure of the validity of the message she's sending or whether she should have said anything at all. Either way, what's done is done, and she'll accept that with a grin.