INTRODUCTIONENCYCLOPEDIA OF POPULAR CULTURE
xiii
seriousness and respect (if not always approval). In his 1924 book The Seven Lively Arts and in much of his journalism, critic Gilbert
Seldes found in silent movies, cartoons, and pop music themes and motifs fully worthy of sustained exploration. Amid the
worldwide crisis of the 1930s and 1940s, folklorist Constance Rourke limned the origins of an indigenous popular culture in books
like American Humor (1931) and The Roots of American Culture (1942). And with the rise of the Cold War underlining the
differences between democratic and totalitarian societies, sociologists David Riesman and Reuel Denny evaluated the social
currents animating popular culture in Denny’s The Astonished Muse (1957), for which Riesman, who showed a particular interest in
popular music, wrote the introduction.
European scholars were also pivotal in shaping the field. Johan Huizinga’s Homo Ludens (1938), Roland Barthes’s Mythologies
(1957), and Antonio Gramsci’s prison letters (written in the 1920s and 1930s but not published until the 1970s) have proved among
the most influential works in defining the boundaries, strategies, and meanings of popular culture. While none of these works
focused on American popular culture specifically, their focus on the jetsam and flotsam of daily life since the medieval period
proved enormously suggestive in an American context.
It has only been at the end of the twentieth century, however, that the study of popular culture has come into its own in its own right.
To a great extent, this development is a legacy of the 1960s. The end of a formal system of racial segregation; the impact of
affirmative action and government-funded financial aid; and the end of single-sex education at many long-established universities
dramatically transformed the composition of student bodies and faculties. These developments in turn, began having an impact on
the nature and parameters of academic study. While one should not exaggerate the impact of these developments—either in terms of
their numbers or their effect on an academy that in some ways has simply replaced older forms of insularity and complacency with
new ones—it nevertheless seems fair to say that a bona fide democratization of higher education occurred in the last third of the
twentieth century, paving the way for the creation of a formal scholarly infrastructure for popular culture.
Once again, it was foreign scholars who were pivotal in the elaboration of this infrastructure. The work of Raymond Williams,
Stuart Hall, and others at Britain’s Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies in the 1950s and 1960s drew on Marxist and
psychoanalytic ideas to explain, and in many cases justify, the importance of popular culture. Though not always specifically
concerned with popular culture, a panoply of French theorists—particularly Jacques Derrida, Louis Althusser, and Michel
Foucault—also proved highly influential. At its best, this scholarship illuminated unexamined assumptions and highly revealing
(and in many cases, damning) patterns in the most seemingly ordinary documents. At its worst, it lapsed into an arcane jargon that
belied the directness of popular culture and suggested an elitist disdain toward the audiences it presumably sought to understand.
Like their European counterparts, American scholars of popular culture have come from a variety of disciplines. Many were trained
in literature, among them Henry Nash Smith, whose Virgin Land (1950) pioneered the study of the Western, and Leslie Fiedler, who
applied critical talents first developed to study classic American literature to popular fiction like Gone with the Wind. But much
important work in the field has also been done by historians, particularly social historians who began their careers by focusing on
labor history but became increasingly interested in the ways American workers spent their free time. Following the tradition of the
great British historian E. P. Thompson, scholars such as Herbert Gutman and Lawrence Levine have uncovered and described the art
and leisure practices of African Americans in particular with flair and insight. Feminist scholars of a variety of stripes (and sexual
orientations) have supplied a great deal of the intellectual energy in the study of popular culture, among them Ann Douglas, Carroll
Smith-Rosenberg, and Jane Tompkins. Indeed, the strongly interdisciplinary flavor of popular culture scholarship—along with the
rise of institutions like the Popular Press and the Popular Culture Association, both based at Bowling Green University—suggests
the way the field has been at the forefront of an ongoing process of redrawing disciplinary boundaries in the humanities.
By the 1980s, the stream of scholarship on popular culture had become a flood. In the 1990s, the field became less of a quixotic
enterprise than a growing presence in the educational curriculum as a whole. Courses devoted to the subject, whether housed in
communications programs or in traditional academic departments, have become increasingly common in colleges and universi-
ties—and, perhaps more importantly, have become integrated into the fabric of basic surveys of history, literature, and other fields.
Political scientists, librarians, and curators have begun to consider it part of their domain.
For most of us, though, popular culture is not something we have to self-consciously seek out or think about. Indeed, its very
omnipresence makes it easy to take for granted as transparent (and permanent). That’s why trips to museums—or encyclopedias like
this one—are so useful and important. In pausing to think about the art of everyday life, we can begin to see just how unusual, and
valuable, it really is.
—Jim Cullen