W6. Cultural globalization / Chaehyeon Lee

What is the relation between culture and globalization?

 

1) Summary

This article is about globalization of culture, a relationship between globalization and culture. We need to sort out globalization to understand the meaning and characteristics of cultural globalization. It is likely that globalization will accept the claim that economic, political, environmental change and cultural development, especially in the fields of media and communication technology, are simultaneous processes. In modern society, globalization can be explained by the word "connection". Globalization is a network in which interconnections and interdependencies develop and are constantly tight. This connectivity is evident in our lives. Connectivity can be found in our lives without difficulty. Through the network, we are all connected. You can also contact the person on the other side of the earth in real time, and send the necessary data directly. We live in a society that is far more global than twenty years ago. As a result, interdependencies are now quite high.

Clifford Geertz said that culture is not a power, something to which social events can be causally attributed. This means that culture must think about the socially shared meaning of culture. The best answer to the question of ‘what is culture?‘ is that it creates meaning. Also, the culture is thus not only 'a context in which events may be meaningfully interpreted', it is the primordial context in which the human agency arises and takes place. Cultural signification and interpretation constantly motivate and orient people, individually and collectively, towards particular choices and actions. In terms of Anthony Giddens, cultural globalization includes an increase in 'reflexivity' of modern life. Speaking of global culture, one common assumption about the globalization process will lead to a single global culture. However, increasing global connectivity does not necessarily mean that they are unified economically or politically. This is a frequent problem in the field of development research.

 

What is called the 'Third World' is because it does not engage in globalized communication in the same way as a globalized economy or developed countries. An important global economic system has a major impact on the fate of African nations. But this is far from being a part of a single unified world of economic prosperity and social and technological development. Globalization is not quite global. However, some Western critics continue their trend toward 'global culture'. It is premised on the assumption that cultural globalization will result in cultural imperialism. Western companies influence markets and cultures around the world. But there is a caution here. A simple cultural product should not be confused with the culture itself. Eating McDonald 's hamburger does not mean that it has turned into a Western culture.

There is another way to approach cultural globalization. Globalization is rapidly changing our experience of 'locality', and one way to identify these changes is 'deterritorialization'. The concept of deterritorialization implies a loss of natural culture and geographical and social territory. Though we tacitly accepted that culture forms a spatially defined entity, it is no longer limited to local circumstances. The relationship between territory and culture has weakened. In short, it can be said that deterritorialization means the integration of distant events, processes and relations, not our daily routines.

 

In addition, identity is not only a description of the experience of cultural affiliation, but also a kind of treasure of local community. This ensures cultural connectivity between place and experience. Identity is structure, not property. Therefore, it can be changed according to the situation of the world. So we need more flexible and tolerant cultural concepts than we have ever had.

 

 

2) Interesting

As I read this article, it was interesting that simple cultural products should not be confused with the culture itself. I knew that cultural products themselves were not cultures, but I understand more through examples of McDonald. McDonald 's open in our country doesn’t mean that we eat hamburgers as staple food. There are many multinational companies that have expanded in Korea. But they do not turn into ours. Even if a new culture comes in, culture will exist in various forms such as culture coexistence, cultural fusion, and cultural assimilation. Even if we adopt a new culture, our traditional culture does not necessarily disappear. Of course, it is also necessary to make efforts to protect the original culture. This applies to all countries as well as Korea.

 

 

3) Discussion

I have a question about interesting points. Even if multinational companies enter other countries, the change in culture itself does not necessarily happen. But I think that there will be differences between developed countries and developing countries. The difference will be created by the size of capital in developed countries and developing countries in cultural globalization. I think it is different for multinational companies to enter advanced countries and for developing countries. The impact of large multinational companies on developing countries will be significant. Would not it be more likely in developing countries to go beyond simple cultural products to culture itself? It means that they may be dominated by a new culture beyond their own culture. In cultural globalization, there are subjects and objects, which I think is due to the recognition that developed countries are subject and developing countries are objects. As the subjectivity of developed countries' culture becomes stronger, the culture of developing countries can not help but weakening. Therefore, I think it is necessary to think about the positive and negative effects of cultural globalization on developing countries.