An Essay on Elitism is So Elitist, or The Nature of Critique in Our Post-Pomo Culture

What is Elitism?

The terms 'elitism' and 'elitist' are thrown around a lot these days. Phrases such as: “That’s so elitist!” are a charge many (including myself) use to critique others, but what do these mean exactly? What is elitism? In order to properly grasp the meaning behind the use of the term, we must first define elitism. According to dictionary.com, elitism is: “The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favoured treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.” Given the definition provided above, the usual meaning behind the phrase “that’s so elitist of you” usually has a negative connotation. If someone calls you an elitist, they are claiming that you hold yourself in a higher regard or position than others. Now anyone who has been called an elitist (as I have) will know that they do not consider themselves as elitist at all. Now, let me clarify something: of course there are elitists out there; there are pretentious people who do indeed regard themselves as better than others based usually on a false perception of themselves (i.e. a higher intellect comes to mind).

Elitism as a cop-out

The issue with the elitism charge is that it often serves as a cop-out. Instead of adequately dealing with an argument or a position, instead of engaging with the content and establishing a rigorous critique, people opt for the charge of elitism because it is convenient. It nullifies them from actively engaging with the perspective or person they find elitist. This aspect has very much to do with the nature of critique itself: when critiquing a film, or a piece of music, or a perspective, the more knowledge you have about the particular thing you are critiquing, the stronger the criticism will be. By labeling something or someone as elitist, the critique becomes very weak if you don’t give any explanation as to why it is elitist. Gilles Deleuze was well aware of the limits of negative critique and how easy it was for people to throw around the term elitism. For Deleuze, critique must first and foremost be a positive evaluation, rather than a criticism as such. You must first properly engage and deal with the subject at hand, understand it within its own plateau—fully—rather than generating a quick, dismissive critique that is often premature.

According to Deleuze, in order to appropriately evaluate something, you must first affirm it. Let’s use mainstream music as an example: it has become somewhat of a cultural cliché nowadays to dislike mainstream music. Indie-artsy kinds who wear their younger sister’s jeans and only buy clothes from Value Village have taught us that anything mainstream is the devil reincarnate when it comes to music. But here’s the catch: What if a band/musician starts out independent and starving, and then makes it big? The now exhausted reply is that they have ‘sold out’. Perhaps the greatest musician to ever walk the path of selling out is none other than the brilliant Bob Dylan. Dylan started out as a dirt-poor artist in New York’s Greenwich Village in the 60’s with nothing but his acoustic guitar and his voice—that is until he ‘sold out’. The thing most people who charge Dylan with selling out miss is that his music and lyrics were and still are brilliant. Again, yes, some artists do actually sell out and their music is never the same, but we must not forget that the mainstream music bashing has become a cliché which, like the charge of elitism, is used as a cop-out. Instead of actually constructing a concrete argument as to why and how Dylan sold out, the position is used to dismiss his ‘mainstream’ music as unworthy altogether.

Nature of Critique in our ‘post-pomo era’

So where does this leave us with elitism? I claim that labeling something as elitist (i.e. music, film, perspective, etc) is not only a cop-out from actively dealing with the subject matter, but that it has now become something of a cultural cliché. During his two-year presidential campaign, Barrack Obama was labeled an elitist. Whether or not this was just a ploy by the media to distract American voters from dealing with the real issues of health care and the economy is irrelevant; the point is that the term elitist/elitism, which was once used to single out the upper class elite, has now become so integrated within the (post-)modern capitalist culture that it is reproduced and disseminated by even the media. What does all of this mean? Well, I think that elitism is still a suitable form of critique if used properly and if the person making the charge fully engages and deals with the subject matter he/she finds elitist. Instead of quickly dismissing a new piece of music, or a perspective as elitist, take the time to understand it, deal with it fully, properly. Then and only then, if the subject matter/person still comes off as elitist, you will have evidence to back up your claim. As Deleuze puts it, you must first affirm the positive aspect(s) within any art, literature and philosophy before you can evaluate it. Evaluate, not critique.

Oh, one more thing. If the readers of this article think I am an elitist, I admit it. That’s right. I admit that I can come off as a bit of an elitist when it comes to certain subjects: music, video games, art, film and theory, just to name a few. But this doesn’t let you off the hook. I encourage you to take the time to understand my position of these subjects before dismissing me as an elitist!