Bridgewater Review Volume 21 | Issue 2 Article 4 Dec-2002 Philosophy and Popular Culture: A Philosopher Seeks Value in The impS sons Aeon J. Skoble Bridgewater State College, [email protected] Recommended Citation Skoble, Aeon J. (2002). Philosophy and Popular Culture: A Philosopher Seeks Value in The impsS ons. Bridgewater Review, 21(2), 3-5. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/br_rev/vol21/iss2/4 This item is available as part of Virtual Commons, the open-access institutional repository of Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, Massachusetts. Editor’s Notebook Philosophy and Popular Culture: Keeping the Home Fires Burning A Philosopher Seeks Value in The Simpsons by Michael Kryzanek by Aeon J. Skoble Photograph by Greg Thomas Photograph by Greg It’s important sometimes to reflect on how we live in the United States compared to the rest of the world, especially those countries of the less developed world. It is not enough to state that we are rich and they are What possible value to philosophy is popular culture? ters that makes them excellent in the first place. One is poor or that we are “advanced” and they are “deprived.” That question is put to me as often by non-philosophers hard pressed to find a more compelling and dramatic Being an American in the global economy means that as by philosophers, but for the most part it is academics investigation of the theme of law versus civil disobedi- our wealth and power come at a price, particularly an and intellectuals who ask it. Non-academics tend to ask ence than Sophocles’ “Antigone.” Shakespeare’s “Henry energy and environmental price. A little data may help the opposite question: what relevance to popular cul- V” is perfect for discussions of the tenets of Just-War drive this point across. The United States has about 280 ture is philosophy? As a co-editor of philosophical theory. Ibsen’s dramas offer endless inquiry into themes million people, or 5% of the world’s population, but we But the real issue about American wealth and resource books on the television program The Simpsons and on of conformity and integrity. Hemingway, Beethoven, consume 22% of fossil fuels and we generate 24% of car- utilization is more of a matter of balance and propor- the films of Woody Allen, and a contributor to similar Aeschylus, Camus—the list goes on and on. It’s plain bon dioxide emissions, the key contributor to global tionality than of sustaining the current growth pattern. volumes on J.R.R. Tolkien and on the television pro- warming. Furthermore, an average American uses 185 Americans, both consumers and corporate leaders, need gram Seinfeld, I need to have an answer for these gallons of water a day, a figure that only means some- to ask themselves whether it is necessary to feed the questions. thing when compared to the 8 gallons of water a day thirsty machine with ever larger items that suck up There are different ways of connecting philosophy to that are used by a resident of Senegal. And when it energy and destroy the environment? We have forgot- popular culture. One way is to act as though popular comes to plain old overkill, an American consumes ten about conservation in this country and we certainly culture objects are no different from high-culture about 53 times more goods and services than a resident have forgotten about living in a way that is modest and objects, and thus are equally profound. After all, the of China. efficient. Madison Avenue advertisers tell us that we argument goes, Shakespeare and Sophocles were “popu- need all this “stuff” and we march in lock step to the One common defense of these excesses and disparities lar culture” in their day. So if these great dramas are fit checkout counter. That Sengalese farmer who gets by is that the United States is the world’s most developed subjects for philosophical analysis, why not a Top-40 on a little water or that Chinese worker who lives a nation and as a result consumes more as it creates song or a sit-com? But this argument is weak. The mere meager existence is not even on our radar screen. wealth, fosters innovation, and provides for the general fact that some popular-culture artifacts come to welfare of its citizens. But there is a contrary view. Be- So how do we as a country begin to change our buying be considered high-culture doesn’t entail that all of coming the world’s most powerful country, the United and living habits so that there is some balance and pro- them could be. More to the point, not all popular-cul- States has built its wealth upon a foundation of con- portion to our consumer culture? The realistic answer ture objects are sufficiently interesting to lend them- sumer greed and corporate irresponsibility. Americans is that such a task is nearly impossible and may take a selves to philosophical discussion. are not just satisfied with having all the latest con- generation of buying habits to change. The beginning I favor a different approach. Since some objects from sumer “stuff,” they have to have all the biggest, energy- of bringing balance and proportionality back does, the popular culture have greater depth than others, they draining, environmentally dangerous “stuff.” From however, begin with national political and economic are better vehicles for motivating philosophical think- gigantic SUVs to golf courses on the desert to oversized leadership. Governmental and business heads need to ing, especially among people who might not otherwise mansions to throwaway diapers, beer cans and paper express to the American people that economic growth consider such questions. So one answer to the question MICHAEL KRYZANEK plates, the American economic culture is one huge con- can be achieved through efficiency rather than through about the value of popular culture to philosophy is that sumer machine with a thirst that is unquenchable. excess. This country needs leaders who talk about fuel philosophers can sometimes use popular culture objects efficient cars not gas guzzlers; this country needs lead- It should come as no surprise that the United States to encourage interest in philosophy. In general, the arts ers who advocate for more housing not eight bathroom gobbles up the world’s resources in order to enhance its are frequently invoked by philosophers as examples or mega-homes; and this country certainly needs leaders economic standing; after all ours is a market-based sys- illustrations of attitudes, consequences, or dilemmas. who accent the importance of conserving all its natural tem that responds to consumer demand and private The point of doing so is typically as a short cut to get- resources rather than expending them in a reckless wealth accumulation. The United States has not be- ting students or readers to conceptualize a problem. The manner. come the wealthiest country in the world because it has best works of high art are perfectly suited to serve this been reluctant to transform the resources on this planet The 1990s were the golden years of consumer con- need, as it is frequently their grappling with such mat- into everything from computer chips to potato chips. sumption in the United States. We lived well and The defenders of American energy use hold firm to the enjoyed the benefits of residing in the wealthiest coun- EDITOR’S NOTEBOOK belief that our future as the world’s great superpower try in the world. But now in the 21st century it is time depends on a continuation of full-scale energy use. to think about a consumer diet and stopping the machine from eating away our future. —Michael Kryzanek is Editor of the Bridgewater Review BRIDGEWATER REVIEW DECEMBER 2002 3 enough that the arts are of tremendous value to philos- new "dark ages," where not only the notion of expertise, als take over the town. In this episode, Lisa joins the ened and resentful. We have a respect for authorities ophy, in terms of the ways in which artists can prompt but all standards of rationality are being challenged. local chapter of Mensa, which already includes when it suits us, and embrace relativism in other cases. contemplation of philosophical problems in a way that This clearly has significant social consequences, and is Professor Frink, Dr. Hibbert, and Comic Book Guy. The “we” here is, of course, a generalization: some peo- is different from the discursive style of philosophical an issue well worth exploring. I have argued that The Together they end up in charge of Springfield. Lisa rhap- ple manifest this conflict less than others (or in a few argumentation. But philosophers’ ability to appeal to Simpsons skillfully illustrates this American ambiva- sodizes about the rule of the intellectuals, a true ratio- cases not at all), but it seems an apt description of a the arts is limited by the audience’s familiarity with the lence about expertise and rationality. Homer, the father, nalist utopia, but too many of their programs alienate general social outlook. Unsurprisingly, The Simpsons, arts. Sad as it is, any reference I might make in class to is a classic example of an anti-intellectual dolt, as are the regular citizens of the town (including, of course, our most profoundly satirical TV show, both illustrates Ibsen these days would be a complete waste of time. most of his acquaintances, and his son Bart. But his Homer, who leads the charge of the idiot brigade). It and instantiates it. But popular culture has the advantage of being, well, daughter, Lisa, is not only pro-intellectual, she is smart would be easy enough to see this sequence of events as a Other issues that have been fruitfully explored in The popular.