16th November 2015
Today's lecture 'Class and Society' by Sean O'Dell has shown class categorization and changes in society considered from middle of the nineteenth century to the present.
From the beginning of our kind there appeared people with more skills or will for domination. In every society there are examples of better or worst assimilation and managing skills. For numerous reasons some of us do something better than the others. It's also our human nature to be competitive in some way. Unfortunately this differentiation became a necessity to develop verbal and written classification. Even if we don't really want to look at society as categorised classes and treat everyone equally, it just simply comes out anyway with some signifiers, such as clothing, profession, family background or attitude (which sometimes can be really distasteful). There is also self-definition and what other people think of us - both not necessarily the same. I think the class can change and its more (than any other time in history) dependant on people in the twenty-first century in Europe. Unfortunately again, money rules a large sphere of life, everybody needs them (survival) and surely most people want them (decencies and luxuries), being affected by extremely growing consumerism.
We still perpetuate the class system. We make easy judgements, often applying labels and stereotypes to others, by engaging classes behaviour. There is constant reinforcement of class in the TV, media, advertising and education (school dressing codes; private schools and ordinary ones).
Typically in the nineteenth century classes very driven by occupation (capitalist class, upper middle class, middle class, working class, working poor, underclass). In Karl Marx's view there was only two classes: capitalist class (bourgeoisie) and working class (proletariat) while anything else was completely irrelevant. Together with Frederick Engels he wrote 'The Communist Manifesto' (1848) in order to destroy capitalism and bring out a new system called socialism. In 1913 the class system was recognized by an analysis of skills and then updated again in 1987 with much more detailed (but not really used practically) definition.
Socialist propaganda poster (Poland, 1951) |
The middle of the nineteenth century is also a birth of avant-garde. Some avant-garde movements such as cubism (revolutionary approach that appear fragmented and abstracted in art) for instance, have focused mainly on innovations of form, others such as futurism (Italian movement that aimed to capture in art the dynamism and energy of the modern world), De Stijl (style of art based on a strict geometry of horizontals and verticals) or surrealism (movement of artists and writers who experimented with ways of unleashing the subconscious imagination) have had strong social programmes.
John Everett Millais Christ in the House of His Parents (‘The Carpenter’s Shop’) 1849–1850 Oil on canvas |
The above painting 'Christ in the House of His Parents' by John Millais shows very radical Victorian avant-garde style (an example of Pre-Raphaelites symbolic realism), depicting the Holy Family in Saint Joseph's carpentry workshop. It's very ordinary and messy and it dramatically contrasts with any previous paintings (critiqued by society). It was an artistic attack of established Victorian Church and the whole social system. Jesus is a young boy who has just injured his left hand (in the centre) showing it to his mother Mary. There is also another young boy carrying a bowl of water (Saint John the Baptist), Saint Anne and one more young man, possibly one of the twelve apostles. It's very symbolic (a white dove sitting on the ladder signifying the Holy Spirit and Resurrection, flock of sheep behind the main scene - laity, solid wooden workbench looks like an altar - Crucifixion). The triangle on the wall, above Christ's head, symbolises the Holy Trinity.
Ford Madox Brown Work (1852–1865) Oil paint |
Ford Madox Brown's painting shows importance of the working class (in the centre). It was controversial, because bourgeoisie - two men riding horses are placed completely on the back, in the shadows. Both of the painting above were commissioned by Thomas Plint (an important Pre-Raphaelite art collector).
Edouard Manet Olympia (1863) Oil on canvas |
Edouard Manet The Luncheon on the Grass (1862) Oil paint |
More controversial artwork of that time would definitely be Edouard Manet's paintings above. This French painter was one of the first 19th-century artists to paint modern life (firstly in the spirit of realism then translated into impressionism). 'Olympia' and 'The Luncheon on the Grass' both caused a lot of controversy. First one here ('Olympia') was a nude of a woman (modelled by Victorine Meurent). She's laying on a bed and black fully dressed servant brings her flowers. Her body and gaze are very confrontational what makes it really intense. She seems relaxed although she covers her pubic area with her hand and there are indicators of prostitution, accenting her nakedness, courtesan lifestyle and sexuality (an orchid in her hair, a bracelet, a ribbon around her neck, slippers). The flowers, upswept hair, orchid and black cat were all symbols of sexuality of the time.
'The Luncheon on the Grass' was another painting of critique for bourgeoisie society and challenging social order. There're two fully dressed men and a naked woman between them (and another one beside them), which was very inappropriate and disturbing for the viewer. Both of those paintings raised the issue of prostitution and the role of women within contemporary French society. There were several changes in societies and several critiques by upcoming art movements. Appearance of Dada wave brought a breakdown in perceptions; they considered how society should be seen.
Thomas Cantrell Dugdale The Arrival of the Jarrow Marchers in London, Viewed from an Interior (1936) Oil on canvas |
This work by British painter and book illustrator, Thomas Cantrell Dugdale, has shown bohemian young aristocrats and socialites in 1920s London (called Bright Young Things/People); an insight and another critique of society. Elegant, not bothered, enjoying the urban centre minority of people (appeared in the press a lot), contrasted by many poor Jarrow Marchers.
El Lissitzky 'Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge' (1919) propaganda poster, Soviet Russia |
Joost Schmidt Bauhaus exhibition poster (1923) |
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century modernism influences on industrial societies. New social housing scheme is taken into reality, apparently equal for everybody. Changes continued radically during and after the Second World War. Female society develops, together with their growing and more equal rights. We go through Cold War period and communism. After the war power in society was reversed and due to shortage of labour professions became more important. Now capitalist class was more dependant on working class. There is constructivist imagery in Russia like propaganda poster I have looked on during Matt Bowman's lecture: Alexander Rodchenko's Dobrolet Airline Poster (1923, lithograph) reminding society that knowledge is power (it's still perfectly significant today in the 21st century).
Henry Moore Grey Tube Shelter (1940) drawing |
In 1960s new consumer society appears in some parts of Europe. Pop art movement took over in the creative industry. Young people didn't struggle with getting a job (full employment in Britain; golden age) and with reasonable amount money in their pocket they could afford to go out or spend money on other things. Many subcultures, such as hippies or punks have developed and so their dramatically changed self-definition (youth culture). The working class was growing. It was a beginning of post-modern world of consumerism.
Roy Lichtenstein 'Newsweek' magazine cover (1966) |
Barbara Kruger Untitled (I Shop Therefore I Am) 1987 |
Crisis? What Crisis? The fourth album by progressive rock band Supertramp (1975) |
In my opinion recognizing society's groups (classes) is a necessity. Unfortunately. For graphic designers triadic system is definitely enough for its definition. Also unfortunately, statistics and case studies today show, that (there was a research including thousands of interviews) family background and education is significant to the class and can make things more difficult or easier. There's a 'class snobbery' as well, which makes some people think they're far more important than everybody else In the world; thinking that their money make them better and above all. On the other hand there're rich, wealthy people, who don't really like show up themselves in that way. There's a possibility to go up or down the middle class and I think it's the matter of luck or personal choice. Sometimes people can be capable of a lot, but they just choose not to do anything to improve their lives, due to simple laziness, lack of self-confidence, determination, money or ideas, personal problems etc. It all surely sort of depends on our family background, situation in our home and upbringing from early years, values and interest shared in the closest environment. Society was always classified and it won't change... However we are all equal humans and we all have the same rights... and nobody should forget this simple fact.
Resources:
O'Dell, S. (2015). Class and Society.
.