dleski (1986) cites Fieldler who advocates the opposite school of thought. Fieldler protests elitist critics of mass culture, namely religious fundamentalists and feminists: "Beneath their overt rationalization lurks an underlying fear of freedom as well as contempt for the popular arts" (Modleski, 1986, p. x).
Some mass culture critics attempt to strike a balance between the two extreme approaches by analyzing audiences. Studies in England indicate that audiences do not blindly accept the force-fed messages of mass culture. Audience response ranges from acceptance to negotiation to opposition (Modleski, 1986, p. xi). Unfortunately, mass culture critics who analyze audience responses sometimes go too far. Critics who fail to distance themselves from the mass culture subject matter too often become enamored of it and view mass entertainment as a panacea for society's ills. A related danger is that critics utilize the same tools employed by contemporary capitalism, namely surveys, questionnaires, and interviews. Again, failure to maintain a critical distance becomes problematic.
For Boorstin (1973), consumerism is not the problem, it is the solution. Many of the "heroes" of the Boorstin (1973) book were instrumental in creating consumer communities, supposedly the realm of women. The author cites this description indicative of the status of women during the early 1900s: "Woman is a shopper. Out of that fact has come the modern department store. Partly by nature and partly by education, woman is a comparer of values" (Boorstin, 1973, p. 152). Granted, this description was written almost a century ago, but Boorstin (1973) fails to counterbalance this outmoded view of women.
A perusal of the chapter headings and index of the Boorstin (1973) book show that no sections are devoted to women and their achievements. Further, the achievements of women are not woven into the text. This omission underscores the stateme...