El lugar de la literatura en la Argentina de fin de siglo. Reflexiones en torno a la revista cultural Punto de vista

‘One man’s junk culture . . .’: A state-of-the-art review on the problem of mass culture in Argentine cultural studies

“…Then, the onset of a dictatorial government in 1976 put an end to the intellectual Peronists’ optimism and forced many of them into hiding, exile, or worse. Understandably, the academic conversation on culture shifted (Pagni, 1996: 187). Beatriz Sarlo and her colleagues at Punto de Vista (1978–2008) took the lead, distancing themselves from Ford, Romano and Rivera, whom Sarlo labelled ‘old populists’ (Alabarces et al, 2008: 278).…”

“…Beatriz Sarlo and her colleagues at Punto de Vista (1978–2008) took the lead, distancing themselves from Ford, Romano and Rivera, whom Sarlo labelled ‘old populists’ (Alabarces et al, 2008: 278). Their introduction to Pierre Bourdieu and Raymond Williams’ works pulled criticism on the left away from orthodox Marxism (Vulcano, 2000: 3), cultivating a climate of ‘constant theoretical modernization’ (Pagni, 1996: 203), and made the journal the gateway through which English-language cultural studies entered Argentina (García Orsi, 2016; Grimson and Caggiano, 2010; Vulcano, 2000).…”

“…This stance was less due to ideological inclinations regarding ‘the popular’ and more to an attachment to canonical culture, which was ideological in its own way. The ‘culture industry’ and ‘mass media’ did not enjoy ‘the appreciation of Punto de Vista ’ (Pagni, 1996: 193). The more commercially successful a text was, the less literary merit it had, for sales were squarely interpreted ‘as [a sign of] submission’ to ‘the market’s norms, facilitation, bestsellerism’ (1996: 190).…”

“…The ‘culture industry’ and ‘mass media’ did not enjoy ‘the appreciation of Punto de Vista ’ (Pagni, 1996: 193). The more commercially successful a text was, the less literary merit it had, for sales were squarely interpreted ‘as [a sign of] submission’ to ‘the market’s norms, facilitation, bestsellerism’ (1996: 190). This, in turn, reduced ‘the taste and preference of the public to mere products of market manipulations’ (1996: 193).…”

“…The more commercially successful a text was, the less literary merit it had, for sales were squarely interpreted ‘as [a sign of] submission’ to ‘the market’s norms, facilitation, bestsellerism’ (1996: 190). This, in turn, reduced ‘the taste and preference of the public to mere products of market manipulations’ (1996: 193). Sarlo’s interpretation of Williams, which endure to this day, represented in analytical praxis a strong resistance to his proposal to ‘dissolve the polarization between a “high” and a “low” culture’ (García Orsi, 2016: 322), thus leaving on the cutting-room floor a feature that was highly regarded by English-speaking academia.…”