Culture: a new belief? 
At the risk of surprise and after stating a definition of the word "culture" perhaps it should examine the cultural phenomenon became creator of myths and signs of recognition of groups: the characteristics beliefs.
There are today in the French collective culture of the individual culture. The collective culture is derived from the German word Kultur, closer to the French word civilization, and for the people and their identities, that is to say, their languages, histories, traditions, etc.. The individual culture is concerned, her knowledge, personal construction. The first definition, under the influence of German social and philosophical thought, is supplanting the second. The two meanings overlap, however, insofar as the individual belongs to a cultural entity and produces arts and history. But it's individual culture, marks a deliberate, after learning of each, which will be discussed in this article.
considerable enlargement of culture
Until the nineteenth century, everything was clear. A few dozen writers who knew perceived copyright, were painted to decorate, illustrate, and we listened to some music. The arts also spawned with crafts and artists trying to live, somehow, their creations. Culture affirmed its own aristocracy, to a lesser extent the rising bourgeoisie and the people remained illiterate.
Globalization, communications development, migration of populations that are culture in a century has passed privilege of leisure available to the greatest number. The cards have been blurred by the proliferation of references and the variety of their provenance. Today
a book (with its translations), a film (thanks to subtitles or dubbing), place (through tourism generalized) key rapidly worldwide. Just consider the success of The Da Vinci Code of Titanic, attendance of Versailles or the Louvre to realize that culture is a phenomenon of everyday life, it affects all social classes, and they represent huge investments.
not forget that we live in a global community of 6 billion people who produced some 15 000 films annually, for the France only 68,000 titles were released in bookstores in 2006. Clearly, if we rely on these figures, the potential viewer or reader awash in choices. Unable to read everything or see everything it needs resources to guide their choices.
Establishment of creation myths
Given the multitude of references and using the fascination heroes have always exercised, the twentieth century some sacralizes of cultural basis for a kind of Olympus used as the basis of thought. These are the indisputable values of our societies in terms of taste, they need to know at any cost, they can not deny that, in short, the new icons of the contemporary world.
Yet, going back a bit in history, you realize that these creators have sometimes been slow to win, he even often not until their death ... and conversely of celebrities a period could sink into oblivion a few decades later. Think that because of Van Gogh did not sell a painting in his lifetime Meissonier while at the same time, knew all the glories and honors, with sales the most expensive of all the nineteenth century? What about Eugene Sue, adored by the people for his novels The Mysteries of Paris and The Wandering Jew that literally tore through the streets under the bemused eyes of Balzac jealous that failed to make ends meet? What about Marcel Proust, who published his first novel at the author? Mozart's Don Giovanni which gave , now considered the "opera of operas", the general indifference, Mozart's rival Salieri, who then Contemporary wants to assume the role of villain programma's miserable death?
engineering would be a fluctuating concept, relating to the option periods. Who remembers now Meissonier? Why do they sell today any impressionist sketch for gold? Van Gogh sacred, idealized Meissonier forgotten ... Mozart, Salieri booed. We are told that the geniuses ahead of their time. Would it not be fairer to admit that tastes can change and some works better than others espouse our feelings today? Would it no more relevant to recognize that there is no enduring value for the artistic emotion and is therefore not conceivable to introduce universal values?
And yet, it is clear that among those who have been elevated to engineering all production is not equal, far from it. In some cases, it only takes two or three works as the rest unable to withstand our decision, in other cases it obscures any part inglorious production. Celine, after Journey to the End of the night and Death on wandered into repetitions to finally turn the anti-Semitic obsession. Balzac he wrote all the volumes of the human comedy and he painted his 6000 figures with the same genius? Picasso is it so masterful at all times? Questions that no longer poses once made sacred.
From myth to belief
Maybe we attribute to the philosophy of the nineteenth century, Nietzsche and his "God is dead" followed by "Myth the superman "(
the superman is the one who took charge of the destiny of the earth ), the superiority of some individuals acting on the mass of others. Or perhaps abandoning religious faiths she left the door open for the emergence of a new type of belief. Or is it an accumulation of works that push to make a hierarchy of creation and to overrate a game at the expense of larger. Or all three hypotheses at once. Still, the cultural world that makes a drastic selection in arbitrarily determining the immutable symbols of our culture.
If one refers to the definition: Belief is a way of thinking that can affirm, without criticism, the truth or existence of things or beings without having to provide evidence, and therefore it is not possible to prove them wrong , culture in its contemporary meaning, do not she answer?
Like all beliefs, culture is also defined by the community that supports it. And like any community, it will tend to reject those who ignore their values. Thus in a society too big, where closeness lost count, we will seek acquaintances with those who share the same cultural references than you. We will be friends if we like the same things, which is not new, but today every social category has its own signs of recognition. Agnes Jaoui in his film The Taste of Others has so clearly shown without the necessary cultural references, it becomes ridiculous evolving in a world that has them.
win Do we not question the value of symbols, opening to a broader culture than the few examples imposed by the media voice? Show a little humility, would not it considered that its own cultural values are not necessarily the only valid and respectable? Is he clairvoyant after reporting through the beliefs, falling into the same patterns as reducing the culture?
Illustration: Louis XIII Gentleman - JLE Meissonier - 1874 - (top) Portrait of Antonio Salieri (bottom)
This article was published in Agoravox
"no" screaming 
SourceMin. Justice, December 6 2007, conf. Press 
