• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

WHAT MAKES HOLLYWOOD RUN? Capitalist Power, Risk and the Control of Social Creativity JAMES MCMAHON A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN SOCIAL & POLITICAL THOUGHT YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO November 2015 © James McMahon Abstract This dissertation combines an interest in political economy, political theory and cinema to offer an answer about the pace of the Hollywood film business and its general modes of behaviour. More specifically, this dissertation seeks to find out how the largest Hollywood firms attempt to control social creativity such that the art of filmmaking and its related social relations under capitalism do not become financial risks in the pursuit of profit. Controlling the ways people make or watch films, the thesis argues, is an institutional facet of capitalist power. Capitalist power—the ability to control, modify and, sometimes, limit social creation through the rights of ownership—is the foundation of capital accumulation. For the Hollywood film business, capitalist power is about the ability of business concerns to set the terms that mould the future of cinema. The overall objective of Part I is to outline and rectify some of the methodological problems that obscure our understanding of how capital is accumulated from culture. Marxism stands as the theoretical foil for this argument. Because Marxism defines capital such that only economic activity can create value, it needs to clearly distinguish between economics and politics—yet this is a distinction it is ultimately unable to make. With this backdrop in mind, Part I introduces the capital-as-power approach and uses it as a foundation to an alternative political economic theory of capitalism. The capital-as-power approach ii views capital not as an economic category, but as a category of power. Consequently, this approach reframes the accumulation of capital as a power process. Part II focuses on the Hollywood film business. It investigates how and to what extent major filmed entertainment attempts to accumulate capital by lowering its risk. The process of lowering risk—and the central role of capitalist power in this process—has characterized Hollywood’s orientation toward the social-historical character of cinema and mass culture. This push to lower risk has been most apparent since the 1980s. In recent decades, major filmed entertainment has used its oligopolistic control of distribution to institute an order of cinema based on several key strategies: saturation booking, blockbuster cinema and high-concept filmmaking. ii i Dedication To Marian again and again iv Acknowledgements Throughout the writing and researching of this dissertation, I was motivated by the encouragement and advice of my teachers, friends and family. I would like to thank as many of them as I can. I was very fortunate to have Profs. Scott Forsyth and Asher Horowitz on my dissertation advisory committee. Their questions, comments and criticisms were valuable at every stage in my research and writing. I am particularly thankful to them for supporting my pursuit of interdisciplinary research. Thank you to my supervisor, Prof. Jonathan Nitzan. The germ of this dissertation originated in his graduate class and, ever since then, Jonathan has freely given his time to my ideas, arguments, doubts and obstacles. I am also deeply grateful for his expertise and honest criticism. These qualities pushed me to be a better researcher and writer, and they will inspire me to keep holding to the democratic ideals of science and philosophy. Daniel Moure read a draft of this dissertation. His comments on my writing style amazed me. They helped me understand that to find one’s own voice, one must share his or her work with others. The inexhaustible Judith Hawley made my time in Social and Political Thought easier than I ever would have imagined. I am thankful for her friendliness and knowledge. I have the good fortune of having wonderful teachers and friends. A big thank you to the following people: Kristen Ali, Feyzi Baban, Joseph Baines, Caleb Basnett, Shannon Bell, Jordan Brennan, Elliott Buckland, Troy Cochrane, Elif Genc, Eric George, Sandy Hager, Jason Harman, Nadia Hasan, Chris Holman, Arthur Imperial, v Victoria Kannen, Andrew Martin, Yasmin Martin, Paul Mazzocchi, Brian McCreery, David McNally, Stephen Newman, Mladen Ostojic, Devin Penner, Omme Rahemtullah, Sune Sandbeck, Saad Sayeed, Radha Shah, Neil Shyminsky and Donya Ziaee. I would like to thank my parents, John and Theresa, and my brother and his partner, Stephen and Nicole. I would also like to thank the Tibor family, especially Romulo and Luz. I could not have gotten this far without all of your love. And to Marian, to whom this dissertation is dedicated: the weather in graduate school was all over the place, from hot to mild to cold, from sunny to stormy; but all along the way, even at points when the journey seemed too difficult, your intelligence, humour and patience inspired me to keep going. Thank you. vi Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ ii Dedication .................................................................................................................................. iv Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. v List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. x List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... xii Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 General Overview ............................................................................................................................... 2 Outline of Part I ................................................................................................................................... 5 Outline of Part II .................................................................................................................................. 8 Part I ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Chapter 1 The Economics-Politics Separation and the Marxist Concept of Totality ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Economics-Politics and the Definition of Capital ................................................................. 19 The Frankfurt School and the Historical Development of Capitalism .......................... 25 The Political Economic Ideas of the Frankfurt School........................................................ 28 Pollock on Political Power and State Capitalism ............................................................................ 31 Neumann on Totalitarian Monopoly Capitalism ............................................................................ 34 Marcuse on Automation and the Substance of Capitalist Rationality ................................... 39 Using the Frankfurt School to Look Beyond Marxism ........................................................ 44 Reincorporating the Labour Theory of Value .................................................................................. 47 Critical Theory and the Marxist Concept of Totality .................................................................... 51 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 63 Chapter 2 The Marxist Concept of Capital and the Study of Mass Culture ......... 65 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 65 Theoretical Assumptions about Capitalist Production ...................................................... 68 Concrete Labour to Simple Abstract Labour .......................................................................... 73 Creativity and Artistry? ............................................................................................................................ 74 Complex Labour ........................................................................................................................................... 79 Productive versus Unproductive Labour ................................................................................ 84 Three Definitions of Productive Labour ............................................................................................ 86 Problems with the Three Definitions .................................................................................................. 89 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 97 Chapter 3 An Alternative Approach: A Power Theory of Mass Culture .............. 99 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................

Load more

  382

Copy Link