However, whether this definition makes high culture elitist is a matter of opinion. The definition of high culture can make some people think that high culture is a type of culture which is only available and made accessible to the upper classes and more affluent people in society only. As works that are deemed to be ‘high culture’ are works that are considered by scholars and critics to be superior to others, many may consider that these works can only be fully understood and appreciated by people who are superior to others. Also, the fact that works of high culture are by definition works of writers, artists, and composers makes high culture seem inaccessible to some members of society as works of high culture do not tend to be forms of entertainment that have mass appeal, such as television. The definition of high culture considers it to be artwork, music which is generally not classed as popular of ‘pop’ music, and books. These have a more limited appeal than forms of entertainment such as television and cinema, and therefore make high culture more elitist by making it something which is enjoyed by less people.
For example, those who are less well-educated will not be able to appreciate the plays written by Shakespeare or novels written by Dickens. Books which are regarded to be ‘high culture’ such as War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy cannot be appreciated fully by those who are less well-educated because they will not fully understand the language and therefore will gain less from the book than someone who is better-educated and can understand the book better.
Yet, the definition of high culture also shows that high culture is not elitist and is available and accessible to all classes and groups of people in society. The definition of high culture states that it is only ‘associated’ with the educated and more affluent people. This term means that it is usually only enjoyed by these people, however, it can also be accessed and enjoyed by others as well. The term ‘associated’ does not make high culture seem elitist because it shows that it is available to all of society.
For example, with music which is considered to be works of ‘high culture’. Simply because it is deemed to not be ‘popular’ music and therefore is not designed to appeal to the masses does not make it any less available and accessible to all members of society. It can be enjoyed by anyone – it is simply a matter of their tastes.
In my opinion though, high culture is elitist. I think this because I deem that works of high culture are those which have an intellectual value and so require thought into their meaning. The members of society who are not educated (as I feel that whether they are affluent has no relevance), will not be able to appreciate this and gain from the works. However, high culture is available to everyone for them to enjoy and access as they wish. There is nothing which sets works of high culture aside and will not allow certain members of society to access it – it is simply lack of knowledge that may prevent them from being able to fully understand it and therefore gain from it and appreciate it in any way.
In conclusion, I think that high culture is by definition only, elitist, as the works which are considered to be of ‘high culture’ are generally those which do not appeal to everyone and can only be fully understood and appreciated by those who are more educated and therefore more capable of being able to appreciate the intellectual and aesthetic value of the works.
