Independent work has always provided a proper balance in Hollywood. The viewers experience of one may be significantly different then the other. In this sense, one of the far side extremes on the spectrum of independent & hollywood may be relatively identified as higher quality or more legitimate. For indie production, legitimacy is often associated to the concept simply because of the lack of accessibility. Our culture then acts as a major indirect influence on our art forms and what we deem to be historically legitimate. Constantly shifting perspectives have led us to evaluate and define our high brow and low brow texts as being more or less legitimate in this sense.
Independent models of television have been perceived as more legitimate because of aesthetic value, structural narratives, and attention grabbing social content. Together these package and exhibit the overall controversial topic or theme that an individual show is often built around. From this standpoint we can see how a show that stimulates a demographic to objectively think over social issues may generate associated value and legitimacy. The representation of these issues in a non-radical fashion without a doubt adds to the legitimacy of a specific text because of the lack of bias. To purely provide information and freedom to interpret will almost always be seen as high art. It should be noted then that independent films may not be exactly seen as unaccessible. However, only the recent online platforms have truly provided an easier way to access these productions. That being said, to only have a few independent films available for a subscription company such as Netflix or Hulu would still prove to leave Independent film as rather unaccessible. Old documentaries in my mind contain great value and legitimacy, but are seemingly only possible for me to find on Netflix. The themes these documentaries encapsulated have washed away along with our previous cultural perspectives.