You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
Art forms follow a natural cycle of emergence, peak popularity and eventual decline—a pattern seen across diverse media like novels, opera, ballet, theater and film. Initially, each of these forms captivated large audiences, resonating deeply with the cultural, intellectual or social currents of their time. Yet, as society evolved, so did its tastes and means of engagement, leading many once-popular forms to lose their broad appeal.
While some art forms occasionally experience revivals, they rarely regain their former prominence, often finding themselves confined to niche audiences or elite circles. This cycle reveals a fundamental truth: Art’s appeal is intrinsically linked to the values, tastes and needs of its era. As society changes, each form must adapt, innovate or risk becoming culturally peripheral.
The rise and fall of art forms—whether in literature, performing arts or film—illustrate the shifting cultural forces that shape public interest, underscoring that art, while often celebrated as timeless, is also a reflection of its time. The transient popularity of each form highlights art’s responsiveness to societal shifts, marking its enduring relevance and its inevitable passage into niche appreciation as tastes continue to evolve.
The rise of the English theater in the 16th century illustrates how social, cultural and political forces can converge to create fertile ground for artistic innovation. Several key factors contributed to this dramatic flourishing.
As England transitioned to a Protestant state, traditional Catholic religious plays—like the mystery and morality plays that dominated medieval theater—were discouraged, creating a void for new forms of secular entertainment. Playwrights filled this gap by exploring secular themes rooted in classical myths, historical events and human-centered narratives, sparking fresh interest among audiences.
London’s rapid growth into a bustling urban center provided a ready audience for these new theatrical forms. With a surging population, London brought together people from various social classes, all seeking entertainment and an escape from daily life. The city’s density enabled the establishment of permanent theaters, such as the Theatre (1576) and the Globe (1599), which drew large, diverse audiences eager for regular performances. These theaters, accessible to all, became cultural hubs where both wealthy patrons and groundlings could enjoy the same performances, creating a uniquely communal experience.
An expanding economy and increasing social mobility fostered themes of ambition, struggle and social critique in theater, resonating with audiences experiencing changes in their own lives. At the same time, the Tudor and Stuart monarchs were strong supporters of the arts. Their patronage legitimized theater and offered playwrights the freedom to experiment with socially relevant themes, as long as they avoided direct criticism of the monarchy. With support from both the crown and nobility, acting companies like the Lord Chamberlain’s Men flourished, transforming playwriting and acting into respected professions.
Education in Latin and Greek exposed English dramatists to the works of classical playwrights like Seneca, Plautus and Terence, inspiring them to adapt classical forms to English narratives. Figures like Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare drew on these influences to develop complex characters and intricate plots, enriched further by the Italian Renaissance’s impact, which introduced new genres, archetypes and dramatic techniques such as tragicomedy and farce.
This cross-cultural exchange spurred English dramatists to experiment with character depth and thematic complexity, distinguishing English theater from other European traditions.
Permanent theaters enabled a professional class of playwrights and actors to emerge, and their innovations in storytelling and character development elevated theater as an art form. Playwrights like Marlowe, Shakespeare and Ben Jonson pushed theatrical boundaries with increasingly sophisticated plots and characters, while acting companies ensured consistent, refined performances that drew even larger audiences.
Theater also became a platform for social and political commentary. Playwrights explored class conflict, ambition and human vice—issues that resonated with audiences facing similar challenges in society. These communal performances offered a rare space where people from different social backgrounds could experience stories reflecting their lives, ambitions and struggles. The lively interaction between actors and audiences made English theater not only entertaining but also socially significant, fostering a collective experience that bridged class divides.
The novel’s rise to cultural prominence in the 18th century mirrored the emergence of an expanding, literate middle class, whose growing leisure time and desire for personal narratives made the novel an ideal form of entertainment and self-reflection. As literacy spread, readers from the middle class—shopkeepers, merchants, professionals—sought stories that resonated with their values and aspirations, distinct from the classical or religious texts favored by the elite.
This expanding readership created a demand for long-form prose that explored everyday life, relationships and inner thoughts. Innovations in publishing, such as serialized novels, made books affordable and created a suspenseful, shared experience, as readers discussed the latest installments in homes and public spaces. Lending libraries, too, played a vital role, allowing people across social classes to access books affordably and creating a culture of reading as both an individual and social pursuit.
The novel’s focus on individual experience and inner growth aligned well with the period’s shift toward individualism. Unlike traditional literature that centered on archetypes and collective narratives, novels provided psychological depth, depicting characters’ personal journeys, moral struggles and emotional conflicts. This realism was particularly appealing to a society becoming increasingly secular, as literature shifted from religious instruction to exploring relatable themes like domestic life, personal relationships and social mobility.
Women, who were generally excluded from public life, became an important readership for novels, which addressed themes relevant to their experiences, such as marriage, family and social expectations. Female writers like Aphra Behn, Frances Burney and later Jane Austen emerged as influential voices, pioneering the exploration of women’s inner lives and social constraints. Early novels like Pamela by Samuel Richardson brought characters’ psychological depth to the forefront, catering to readers’ interest in personal, often morally instructive stories. The novel offered an accessible medium through which readers could explore human nature, social norms and identity.
Through the 19th century, as literacy rates rose and public education spread, the novel became central to cultural life, addressing the values and anxieties of an industrializing society. However, by the mid-20th century, the novel faced competition from new media. The rise of film, television and, later, digital media shifted public attention away from text-based narratives, as visual media provided a more immediate, immersive and easily digestible experience.
At the same time, the novel itself grew increasingly experimental and introspective, often exploring postmodern themes that resonated more with academic circles than with a general audience. While literary fiction continued to innovate, it often did so at the expense of accessibility, distancing itself from the relatable narratives that had once defined the genre and drawing a sharper divide between popular and literary fiction.
Today, the novel’s influence endures, though it has shifted from a mainstream cultural force to a more niche position, treasured by readers who value depth, introspection and the intricate exploration of human nature that only novels can provide.
Both English theater and the novel transcended mere entertainment, creating spaces where ideas, values and social critiques could circulate freely, often beyond the reach of political or religious authorities. By bringing audiences together in a shared cultural experience, they helped shape public identity, ignite dialogue and foster intellectual engagement with lasting social effects.
Both forms served as a “public sphere” where individuals across social classes could encounter new ideas. In the theater, audiences—from the groundlings in the pit to wealthier patrons in the galleries—experienced stories that questioned human behavior, morality, justice and power. Playwrights like Shakespeare and Jonson infused their works with social and political themes, subtly or overtly challenging established norms and authority.
The novel, as it gained popularity, offered a similarly unfiltered space for exploring social issues. Authors like Daniel Defoe, Samuel Richardson and Jane Austen addressed topics such as class, gender, morality and social mobility. Through detailed narratives, novels allowed readers to experience diverse perspectives, immersing them in lives and ideas far removed from their own.
Both theater and the novel served as mirrors reflecting society’s values and contradictions. Through satire, tragedy and comedy, theater exposed vices and virtues, holding a mirror to society. Shakespeare’s King Lear and Macbeth, for example, explored the dangers of unchecked ambition and moral decay, subtly questioning the ethics of rulers. Novels similarly examined social norms and individual choices, commenting on issues like hierarchy, gender roles and class. In Pamela and Clarissa, Richardson delved into sexual morality and virtue, with the novel form uniquely suited to exploring the complexities of individual lives and inner struggles.
These art forms fostered empathy by bringing audiences face-to-face with characters from diverse backgrounds, allowing them to experience love, betrayal, ambition and despair across class and gender lines. In theater, shared emotional experiences drew people together, while novels, often written from first-person perspectives, allowed readers to deeply inhabit the lives of others, fostering a nuanced understanding of different walks of life.
The rise of the novel paralleled the emergence of the middle class, which valued social mobility, self-invention and individual ambition. Novel protagonists like Richardson’s Pamela or Defoe’s Moll Flanders represented ordinary individuals navigating society’s complexities, reinforcing aspirations of a middle class that believed in personal effort and moral virtue as pathways to success. Similarly, the theater portrayed characters from all social strata, suggesting that worth and character transcended aristocratic birthright, promoting a more fluid understanding of merit.
Both theater and novels played a significant role in advancing literacy and education. Lending libraries made books more accessible, creating a literate public increasingly informed about different ideologies and ways of life. Theater also contributed to intellectual engagement by dramatizing philosophical and social questions, making complex ideas accessible to a broad public. Shakespeare’s soliloquies, for instance, invited audiences to ponder themes of fate, identity and moral responsibility.
These forms also helped create a shared culture. Theater was a communal event where diverse audiences reacted collectively, establishing cultural references and mutual understanding across social boundaries. The novel, too, fostered shared conversations among readers, as popular books became topics of discussion across towns and cities, enriching social cohesion and public discourse.
Plays often contained political undertones, questioning authority and exploring justice and governance, implicitly promoting civic awareness. Novels brought social issues to the forefront, making topics like poverty and child labor accessible and emotionally resonant, urging readers toward social reform.
Through these art forms, England in the 17th and 19th centuries gained not only entertainment but a framework for public dialogue, critique and collective reflection. Theater and the novel helped give rise to a public sphere where ideas flowed freely and questions of identity, ethics and society could be explored, fostering a more cohesive and engaged public with a shared cultural consciousness.
The public sphere is an arena where individuals gather to discuss and debate ideas, issues and values, ideally free from political or economic influence, fostering public opinion and supporting democratic decision-making. The German philosopher Jürgen Habermas explored this concept extensively in The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1962), which remains a foundational text across fields including sociology, political theory, cultural studies and media studies.
According to Habermas, the public sphere enables democratic societies by providing a space where citizens can engage in open discourse, influencing political action without interference from the state or market.
Habermas traced the origins of the public sphere to 18th-century Europe, where spaces like coffeehouses, salons and newspapers emerged as venues for citizens to discuss governance, ethics and culture. This era marked a shift from feudal society, where power was private, to a modern, democratic society demanding transparency and accountability from leaders. Habermas argued that the early public sphere promoted rational debate among individuals as equals, fostering consensus-driven politics crucial to liberal democracy.
However, he noted that with the rise of mass media and corporate interests, the public sphere had gradually deteriorated, as public discourse became more passive and commodified and less critical.
Scholars have since expanded and critiqued Habermas’s model. Nancy Fraser, for instance, argued in Rethinking the Public Sphere (1990) that Habermas’s vision was exclusionary, often marginalizing women and lower social classes. She introduced the concept of “counterpublics”—alternative public spheres created by marginalized groups to discuss and advocate for their own interests outside mainstream norms. Fraser proposed that a robust democracy requires multiple public spheres to ensure representation for diverse perspectives.
Similarly, Oskar Negt and Alexander Kluge critiqued Habermas in Public Sphere and Experience (1972), arguing that capitalist structures constrain the public sphere, limiting genuine democratic engagement. Michael Warner later expanded these ideas in Publics and Counterpublics (2002), suggesting that counterpublics form their own spaces, values and identities in response to exclusion from dominant cultural narratives, emphasizing the need for multiple public spheres to sustain true inclusivity.
The rise of mass and digital media has significantly influenced debates on the public sphere. Scholars like John Thompson argued in The Media and Modernity (1995) that while mass media can democratize information, it often prioritizes entertainment and sensationalism over substantive discourse, weakening public engagement.
Digital media further complicates the public sphere. While some see online platforms as democratizing, critics argue that social media fosters polarization, misinformation and echo chambers. Yochai Benkler, in The Wealth of Networks (2006), argued that the internet could bypass traditional media gatekeepers, fostering more inclusive discussions, while Sherry Turkle warned in Alone Together (2011) of the internet’s potential to isolate individuals and degrade meaningful discourse.
The public sphere remains a crucial concept for democratic governance, as it frames how public opinion forms and influences state policies. Democracy, as Habermas and others argue, requires an informed, engaged citizenry capable of discussion free from manipulation. The health of the public sphere thus reflects the vitality of democracy itself.
For social movements, the public sphere is essential for mobilization and policy change. Movements like civil rights, feminism and environmentalism have relied on public spheres, both mainstream and alternative, to spread ideas, build coalitions and press institutions for change. Today, online spaces enable rapid mobilization, though they also face challenges from misinformation and reduced face-to-face engagement.
Scholars today debate how to protect or revitalize the public sphere amid challenges like media conglomeration, commercialization and declining trust in institutions. Some advocate for media reform, public funding for journalism and media literacy education to safeguard public discourse. Others call for platforms that promote civil dialogue across divides or for policies that protect digital spaces as public utilities supporting free, inclusive discussion.
The public sphere highlights the importance of open, rational discourse for a functioning democracy. Originally theorized by Habermas as an ideal of participatory democracy, the public sphere concept has evolved through critiques of its exclusivity, challenges posed by media and new forms of engagement enabled by technology. It continues to prompt vital questions about how democratic societies can sustain vibrant public discourse and ensure spaces for inclusive dialogue in a shifting media landscape.
Marshall McLuhan’s insight “the medium is the message” applies strikingly to 17th-century theater and 18th- and 19th-century novels, as each form’s structure, accessibility and style conveyed cultural messages that extended beyond their content. These media provided novel ways of engaging with ideas and narratives, creating an inherent message about society, identity and the human experience.
For 17th-century audiences, theater was a public, social and performative medium, offering a communal experience that contrasted sharply with private or intellectual pursuits. The structure of the play—with its immediacy, dialogue-driven format and emphasis on live performance—emphasized certain societal values and ideas. The act of gathering in playhouses made theater a shared experience, uniting diverse audiences in witnessing social and political themes together. This format communicated a powerful message: that morality, governance and power dynamics are issues worthy of collective reflection and discourse.
Theater presented complex characters and moral dilemmas, encouraging audiences to empathize with people across social classes. Plays by Shakespeare and Marlowe, for instance, placed royal figures alongside commoners, underscoring the intrinsic value of every individual, which suggested a democratic message about human worth. The emotional intensity of live performances also fostered a form of catharsis, prompting audiences to confront societal tensions and consider them openly.
As novels emerged and gained popularity in the 18th and 19th centuries, they offered a different form of engagement: private, immersive and sustained reflection on narratives. The experience of reading a novel became a highly personal journey, cultivating a unique message about self-identity, inner life and the role of imagination. The private act of reading encouraged introspection and engagement with characters’ internal lives, emphasizing the importance of individual emotions and thoughts.
The novel’s long, detailed and introspective structure suggested that every person’s story and inner life held meaning, creating a message that resonated deeply with readers. By presenting morally complex situations and intimate portrayals of characters’ thoughts, novels led readers to engage in ethical reflection, promoting nuanced moral judgment and empathy. This form encouraged readers to understand others’ perspectives and question simplistic views of right and wrong.
Through novels, readers encountered unfamiliar settings, classes and cultures, expanding their worldview and sense of empathy. This broadened experience implied that personal growth and open-mindedness were integral to an informed life, fostering a nascent public sphere where shared literary experiences allowed readers to relate to one another through the ethical and emotional journeys encountered in novels.
Both plays and novels extended beyond their plots to convey messages about what society valued. Theater celebrated collective experience, public discourse and emotional release, inviting audiences into a form of cultural democracy where social issues were explored communally. Novels emphasized private life, personal reflection and empathy, highlighting a shift toward valuing individual identity and inner life.
In McLuhan’s terms, theater and novels redefined social and cultural norms by creating spaces for public discourse and personal introspection. They shaped new ways for people to see themselves and their society, affirming that both societal issues and personal struggles deserve deep consideration. In doing so, these art forms laid the groundwork for a more reflective, self-aware and engaged society.
Historically, the arts have provided a platform for dramatizing and debating complex societal issues. From ancient Greek theater, which addressed questions of justice, fate, honor, family loyalty and civic duty, to Renaissance plays that delved into power, legitimacy and the psychological complexities of ambition, to 19th-century social realist novels examining class and inequality, art forms have long served as powerful arenas for public discourse. While this role has evolved, the arts continue to offer a unique medium through which society confronts its most pressing questions.
Today, even mainstream popular genres like superhero movies have become platforms for exploring contemporary cultural issues. Despite their commercial origins, recent superhero films often grapple with whether heroes are inherently virtuous or if their unchecked power brings them dangerously close to villainy—echoing broader societal debates on authority, surveillance and the ethics of intervention.
Superheroes are frequently depicted as outsiders who don’t conform to societal norms, opening space for reflection on themes of identity and acceptance. The X-Men franchise, for instance, has been read as an allegory for racial, sexual and social otherness, examining how society treats those perceived as different or threatening.
Although superhero movies may not replicate the public sphere’s historical depth, they serve as accessible entry points for ethical discussions. By framing questions about power, responsibility and justice within a fantastical context, these films allow audiences to explore complex issues with some detachment, reducing polarization in these conversations.
With broad, cross-generational appeal, superhero films reach a wide audience, sparking shared conversations across diverse groups. Engaging both casual viewers and dedicated fans, they create opportunities for discussions about contemporary moral and social concerns. While they may not address these issues with the same depth as traditional art forms, superhero movies reflect—and sometimes shape—societal narratives.
For example, Black Panther sparked widespread discussions on African heritage, representation and cultural pride, fueling debates on identity and legacy. In this way, superhero films contribute to shaping collective values, perceptions and aspirations, demonstrating the ongoing role of the arts in public discourse.
Today, various cultural and communicative forms echo the societal impact once wielded by theater and the novel. Film and serialized television (such as streaming series) engage broad audiences with complex social issues, fostering public dialogue around class, technology and gender and offering platforms for critique akin to 17th-century theater.
Social media platforms like X, Instagram and TikTok have democratized expression, allowing diverse voices to participate in real-time discussions on social issues. Despite their fragmentation, these platforms form a modern public sphere where trends, ideas and debates reach millions instantly. Video games with expansive narratives, such as The Last of Us or Red Dead Redemption, provide immersive spaces to engage with ethical and social themes interactively, allowing players to explore identity and social issues within community-driven environments.
Podcasts and online forums like Reddit serve as digital public squares where people discuss topics ranging from politics to personal stories, forming communities centered around shared interests and identities.
However, public engagement with these forms of content is increasingly segmented by identity factors like age, class, gender, race and political affiliation. People often consume media that aligns with their views and avoid content that challenges their values. This raises questions about whether these new forms truly function as a communal public sphere as theater and novels once did.
Yet precisely because of these divides, the arts remain vital for addressing today’s issues and fostering empathy. Colleges, in particular, can play an essential role in exposing students to literature, theater, film and visual arts as pathways to understand others’ experiences. Such exposure can bridge divides, encouraging students to consider issues on both a moral and emotional level.
In today’s globalized world, art forms from diverse cultures are more accessible than ever, contributing to a global public sphere that enables discussions across cultural lines. Colleges can help students understand the arts as vehicles for public dialogue by integrating literature, theater, film and visual arts into broader discussions on history, ethics and culture. Courses that blend social sciences, humanities and the arts teach students to analyze artistic works within their social, cultural and political contexts.
Encouraging students to critique and publish analyses of art and performances deepens their engagement with cultural works and hones their analytical skills, allowing them to actively participate in the public sphere. Through critical writing, students learn to engage thoughtfully, expressing and defending their perspectives on complex issues.
While the role of the arts in the public sphere has evolved, it remains essential for fostering dialogue, empathy and critical thinking in a divided society. By actively incorporating the arts into the college experience, institutions can equip students to tackle societal issues through art, cultivating skills necessary for thoughtful public discourse. In this way, colleges can ensure that the arts continue to serve as a dynamic, inclusive public sphere where students explore, challenge and contribute to the pressing issues of our time.
