I’ve always assumed that globalization impeded on cultural sovereignty. I assumed it was part of the culturally constructed definition of the word. It wasn’t until reading Waisbord that I realized globalization didn’t always mean the glittery smooth overtaking of a helpless culture by George Clooney and Britney Spears and that globalization could actually strengthen local identifies. The degree to which western culture overshadows local identity, I believe, is dependant on the depth of the existing culture. When there’s a strong national or societal identity, than the flow of western culture mingles and co-exists with it. But, what happens in situations where there is no strong codifying culture? What if a society identifies itself by only several key elements, but not as a collective whole? Or, what happens if the individuals are becoming disillusioned with their collective identity? Does western culture have greater power to fill in in the vacuum?
I ask this because I have a friend who comes from one such cultural background and his personally identity sheds light on the effects of western media and globalization. Ekbar, or Eko, was 20; his father was Palestinian and his mother Syrian. He was born and raised in Saudi Arabia until he went to College in Rennes France, where I met him. He had an afro, wore a denim jacket with “Peace and Love” on the back, played harmonica and the guitar, and assured everyone on his stance of free love. He identified himself with the peace and love generation, “I’m all about Rock and Roll, baby.” The first thing he would do in the states, he said, was hitchhike route 66. Then, he would bring his little brother and get him into the NBA. His brother was a devout NBA fan, who thought of himself as a “baller.”
At first, I though his style was a feeble attempt to pick up les filles Americaine. But the more we spoke the more I realized that Eko honestly considered himself to be the last remaining vestige of a generation he was neither chronologically or geographically a part of. How did this happen, I wondered? As Eko explained, the culture of Saudi Arabia is based mostly on Wahhabism, which discouraged most art forms such as music and dance as distractions from religious principles. Saudi Arabia had a limited entertainment, media or culture sector, which is largly responsible for the cultivation of a collective identity. The country has been exposed to a wide range of American movies and television. When I told him I was from Ohio, he said, “Ohio… Cleveland.. LeBron!!” He knew more about the NBA than I did. He was put off by my astonishment whenever he mentioned U.S. TV shows. He also ate pancakes at restaurants and his mom was learning how to make them at home. How did the American culture manifest itself so strongly in him?
 |
| Ekbar's Facebook Profile Picture |
I only once picked up on a sense of nationalism or pride in Saudi Arabia from him. When he drives from the airport to his home, he passes three oil refineries: “Yeah,” he exclaimed, “all the world is going crazy and fighting over oil and that’s my country! Its all right here, everyone fighting over us.” Well, so much for peace and love. My interpretation of Eko, is that in the void of a real sense of national or cultural identity, he assumed one when he left Saudi Arabia, and one which he believed fit him best. I don’t think he donned this personality with conscious intention, but rather began acting the way he always thought was cool and befitting of his high self-image. In the case of Eko, I would say that in the absence of a strong national or cultural identify, the power of globalization does impede on cultural sovereignty (or lack there of).
As a nonsequitur, but relevant to the study of communication, here is an article on the power of text messaging from worldlingo.com.
Sudan
In September 2003, the Middle East Media Research Institute reported a hysteria in Khartoum, capital of Sudan.[6]
Sudanese victims were made to believe by force of suggestion that their penises would melt away after they shook hands, shared a comb, or received a verbal curse. The so-called "penis-melting" has been blamed on Zionists trying to wipe out the Sudanese people by making their men unable to reproduce.
The hysterical reports were spread throughout Sudan by means of cell phone text-messaging.
Sudanese police investigated the claims and have found no evidence of anything supernatural, and that it is likely a hoax which victims believed through the power of suggestion. Mr. Abul-Gasim Mohamed Ibrahim, Sudan's Minister of Health, issued official statements to calm the public's fears.
Local media also contributed to the idea's spread. The Sudanese columnist Ja'far Abbas (a satirical writer) has warned visitors to avoid shaking hands with "a dark-skinned man". In reference to the electronic comb which was supposed to have caused one man's penis to disappear, Abbas writes, "No doubt, this comb was a laser-controlled surgical cyborg that penetrates the skull, [passes] to the lower body and emasculates a man!!"
The phrase "Penis-melting Zionist cyborg combs" has been coined to describe this humorous story. It was originally incorrectly attributed to Wall Street Journal's James Taranto writing in his "Best of the Web Today".[7] However, the article in question has no such phrase, nor anything similar beyond the aforementioned quote.
No comments:
Post a Comment