What Is the relation between culture and globalization?
Last time, I posted blog about 'what is globalization?' At that time. we could look into dimensions of globalization. It is the cultural, the social, the political and the economic. We learned that these dimensions are not totally distinct and they influence each other part. Today, I'll look deep into cultural globalization and talk about 'what is the relation between culture and globalization?' Before answering, let's look over the article written by John Tomlinson.
Before understanding the meaning of cultural globalization, he starts to understand two consituent terms, culture and globalization. He pointed out a deep misconception that in some readings 'culture' is described to be a inert category, something that people experience and imbibe but don't themselves produce or shape. He, rather, stresses the active, transformative nature of the appropriation of cultural goods, mentioning other opinion of scholars. According to his argument, we should think of cultural processed primarily as oriented toward the construction of socially shared meanings. What culture is for is to generate meaning in life. And the practices and processes of meaning construction inspire, motivate and orient people toward particular, individual or collective choices and actions. In other words, cultural globalization involves the systemic integration of lots of individual actions into the working of social institutions which appear autonomously to govern our lives.
Subsequently, in his article, he mentioned cultural imperialism, 'a kind of totalitarianism of culture.' He said there is an assumption that cultural globalization implies a form of cultural imperialism and a tendency to imagine globalization pushing us toward an all-encompassing 'global culture.' In similat context, there is the concept of 'Deterrtorialization.' We live local lives, but globalization is rapidly changing our experience of this locality. It means the loss of the natural relation of culture to geographical and social territories. In other words, It implies that the significance of the geographical location of a culture is eroding.
Deterritorialization refers to the reach of socialeconomic connectivity into the localities in which everyday life is experienced and conducted if globalization is the spread of complex connections arcoss distance. This results that this weakening of the traditional ties between cultural experience and geographical territory will prove to be the most far-reaching effect of cultural globalization. But, he said it is not simply the loss of the experience of a local culture. On the other hand, Localities can thrive in globalization.
That opinion and the point of veiw is so interesting thing for me. Many people including me are likely to think that many form of deterritorialization disturbs and transforms local experience, and in the long run particular locality and culture identity disappears. Before I read this article, I almost thought in that way and I was so afraid of the negative aspect only. But the writer suggested the positive potential of deterritorialization. He said that in changing our experience of local life, it may promote a new sensibility of cultural openness, human mutuality and global ethical responsibility.
And he points out identities are not something like possessions, but constructs. And all cultures construct meaning through practices of collective symbolization. It is a novel view. I think his opinion suggest new view for the people who think cultural globalization only threatens cultural identity. To add my opinion, culture identity seems to be not capricious, so it look like immovable but it do not stay unchanged. Cultures construct the people's lives and people also construct their cultures.
As John Tomlinson says, we are living in a much more globally connected world today than before. Connectivity defines our use of communications technologies such as computer, the internet, SNS and mobile phones. The technological developments-media and communication technologies- change our lifestyle environment and culture. Telemediatization is shaping our lives and values.
These days, according to increasing of connectivity, people in many other countries can follow particular thought and ideas, styles etc. In these situation, indeed, as the writer's argument, can we take an optimistic view of Cultural globalization? I agreed with the writer's opinion partly -the positive potential of deterritorialization- but I'm still worry about with side effect of cultural imperialism. In this dilemma, how could and should we do? I want to discuss this question.
No comments:
Post a Comment