Page 58 - AC-3-1

Arts & Communication Bakhtin and Groys: Pop culture and hieratic senses

scenes and figures, it is important to remember that it was hypothesis can be posited regarding the persistence of a
originally a religious concept that later found widespread hieratic dimension within our media culture: there exists
application in media and consumer society. The icon, in a primordial relationship between the icon, cult, and
32
its Byzantine Christian origins, represented intermediary fanaticism, a fetishistic order that, according to both Groys
figures of God, before whom the believer would pray and and Bakhtin, seems to underpin all cultures. Drawing from
honor, but never worship. Pop culture, however, challenges these enduring meanings within our secularized societies,
this tradition: the prohibition against idolatry seems to pop culture constructs its pantheon of media icons and
have been forgotten by the great Andy Warhol, who, as commercial deities, culminating in what can be described
a child, was captivated by these images in the churches as a “cult of celebrity.” 36
of Pittsburgh, where his family continued to practice
Byzantine Catholicism after emigrating from Slovakia. 4. Conclusion
33
Inspired by these religious images – their materiality, A non-exhaustive interpretation of Groys and Bakhtin’s
their use of tempera and wood, embroidery, and mosaic – contributions allows us to think that the function of
Warhol developed the pastiche form that would define his hieratic senses is, at least, two-fold: past and present.
work, a synthesis of popular and mass culture (one needs This premise is corroborated by the ecstatic dissolution
to only recall his “Gold Marilyn Monroe” from 1962). of subjectivity and the persistence of idolatry in icons,
Since then, pop culture has continually produced icons. two tendencies that the Dionysian mystery, Bakhtinian
Consumer society, with its inclination toward commodity carnival, and media culture seem to equally share.
fetishism, has even mass-produced idols: emblematic Through the contrapuntal reading of these two authors,
32
models of masculinity (Elvis Presley, Rock Hudson, Brad the article maintains the interest in highlighting the
Pitt, Henry Cavill, and among others), largely promoted current permanence of a certain religious and hieratic
by Hollywood cinema and the fashion industry (with dimension: an original semiotic function that, in our
brands such as Calvin Klein, Abercrombie & Fitch, and media and postmodern culture, comes back in the
Versace), stereotypes of femininity primarily fostered by manner of a cultural “return of the repressed,” as Grüner
37, p.115
the music industry (Madonna, Britney Spears, Rihanna, would say. Thus, one can suspect that this problem
and Taylor Swift, to name just a few), and even situations is a tangle that must be unraveled to understand what
1
that have become iconic in recent cultural memory, thanks truly is “the popular” in a culture, a question that Bakhtin
to the very cinematography Groys celebrates (for instance, seems to suggest when he traced his study of carnival
the shower scene in Psycho, the ape wielding a bone as a back to Saturnalia and ancient archaic festivals. There are
weapon in 2001: A Space Odyssey, or the flying bike ride good reasons for thinking that, in these “deeper” frames
in E.T.). of meaning-making, Groys rescues from Bakhtinian
theory what Cultural Studies seem to have ignored by
A more thorough theorization of the term, which trying to enclose the Russian philosopher in the collective
has become embedded in our everyday language, could celebration and the mere democratization of voices. Other
provide valuable insights into how our “official culture” fruitful premises nest in his cultural theory because, as
(now driven by the market, rather than the church or Groys advises, in media culture with its tendency toward
the emerging bourgeoisie as Bakhtin once thought) the spectacular, one may verify how Bakhtin’s conception
manipulates signs through what Jean Baudrillard describes of carnival truly becomes a paradigm of modernity. 12
as a “semiological reduction.” 34, p.98 This reduction, which Groys, however, stumbles when he assumes that the
condenses all values into mere sign exchange and usage, is carnival is merely a spectacle and a staged event, as those
particularly significant in an era where meaning-making who participated in it experienced a true contradiction
appears increasingly confined to an iconic dimension of lives, resulting from the collision of two conflicting
(e.g., avatars).
temporalities (medieval and modern). This is even more
As Sebeok notes, 35,p.104 systematic research is necessary pertinent when considering that Bakhtin appears to
to uncover “the suggestive power of iconic signs, and the use the carnival merely as an excuse to explain cultures
implications of this puissance for the history of culture,” during periods of historical transition. Although
for iconism underpins every ritual system within cultures, reductionist, Groys’ reading nonetheless complicates the
even as its foundational element. It is worth remembering simplistic interpretation of Bakhtinian thought, which
that, since the times of animism and shamanism – long is exclusively tied to Marxism, thereby overlooking
22
before religion became intertwined with power – humans the nuances it suggests, as Bakhtin’s theory “both
35
have coexisted with objects to which they attribute emphasizes and affirms the cruel and destructive aspect
agency, often as vessels for spiritual beings. Another of carnival.” 23, p.9

Volume 3 Issue 1 (2025) 8 doi: 10.36922/ac.3978