Free Critical Review Looking for Fun in Cultural Science Essay Sample
Alan McKee in his article “Looking for fun in Cultural Science” provides instrumental argument from different authors on the importance and distractions of fun within cultural studies. McKee unveils that the tension among the authors surrounds various concepts, such as pleasure, amusement, playfulness, desire, celebration and distraction. In so doing, they provide strong arguments for and against fun citing different challenges and benefits. So do various fun advocates, such as Adams (1992), William (1974) and others, have points? What is the essence of having fun in the society? Which authors present strong arguments over the matter? Are they those advocating for fun or those against it? These are some of the questions we are trying to review within the article.
Various aspects pertaining to fun in cultural studies have been discussed, criticized and evaluated by different authors. Some of these aspects include:
Fun is medicinal bath for amusement and distraction
According to Frankfurt school philosophers, such as Adomo and Horkhiemer (1944), fun is termed as dangerous distraction; hence entertainment is not desirable at all. They argue that fun within cultural studies has been found to adversely affect the work process and recruitment strength, hence it should be avoided. However, in reality, the evaluation based process reveals that fun has nothing to do with work place and hence people should be allowed to have fun and remain happy across the world. However, the greatest challenge is that philosophers must struggle to make sense of the whole claim about fun being a medicinal bath.
Fun involves pleasure and celebration
In addition to that, there is the second essential fault line that involves tension between those advocating for fun and those against it. According to Lewis (2002), the presence of fun leads to media creating attention of the audience, hence eventually creating pleasure and celebrations. This pleasure tends to be a challenge to capitalism and hence some philosophers who call for it perceive fun as a threat. Therefore, big guns (fun opposers), such as McGuigan, claim that humor and playfulness are the worst things in societal growth. However, the greatest weakness with the argument is that it lacks utilitarian and hence cultural studies to reject it. However, according to my own evaluation, fun is essential in attracting the audience attention and hence leads to celebrations and pleasure.
Fun involves desire and playfulness
Third, we also find a great contestation over fun among various authors and especially the post-modern theorists. The post-modern authors, such as Deleuze and Guattari (1983), believe that people are driven by desires, something that has experienced great opposition from big guns (fun based opposers). According to evaluation, it is essential for anti-fun to accept that human beings’ desire for fun is normal and thus it should be politically grounded. However, there is a challenge to the post-modern philosophers to testify further that there exists a strong bond between fun and desires.
To conclude, the article represents an essential argument for and against fun in cultural studies. However, on our further criticism, it is essential to agree that in some occasions fun leads to the pleasure, humor and celebrations. However, some further studies must be conducted to evaluate whether we have good or bad fun and secondly, whether some human beings have fun for the sake of something.