In a series of posts, Chris presents a well formulated summary of the various thesis accepted by academics when studying culture and its relationship with globalization:
- Culture and Commodity: Globalization and the Culture Industry is an introduction to the paper
- Culture and Globalization: Polarization, Homogenization, Hybridization explains in simple terms the 3 most accepted thesis.
- Polarization or the “Jihad vs. McWorld” thesis
- Homogenization or the “McDonaldization of Culture” thesis
- Hybridization which proposes a balance between the previous two
- The Commodification of Culture: Arendt and Adorno presents a couple of critics that challenge the use of culture as a commodity, which in turn provides a strong framework to refute the main thesis
- Culture and Globalization Reconsidered states the fundamental flaw of mistaking culture for consumerism and asks whether it is possible to break that deadly relationship.
I couldn’t have created a better theoretical framework to justify this project. As stated in the previous post, the objective of this project is to provide the tools for the real culture to be released of its current deadly dance with globalization and give it a chance to shape the society of the future.
Advertisement
Using Arendt and Adorno, I have attempted to put a finger on a weak spot in the three
paradigms concerning the impact of globalization on culture. Following the “completion” of this essay, I have found a few holes that should be filled. If my diagnosis is
correct this raises the question whether “culture” in the Arendtian sense
has any future in a capitalist world economy. I think this begs to question whether we can imagine an economy that would support and even encourage
such a culture. Lambert Zuidervaart explores this issue in his essay “Feminist Politics and the Culture
Industry: Adorno’s Critique Revisited” and also in his chapter
“Consuming Visions” in the book Dancing in the Dark (Eerdmans, 1991). I should
add that I think Arendt’s preferred concept of culture is elitist and anti-modern (and would make many anthropologists cringe). We
need a more expansive conception of culture, yet one that does not equate it with
the commodification of culture, as I attempted to point out.
Juan,
Thanks for the response and the addition of my paper to your website. I am looking forward to reading your article and continuing to spelunk through this website.