Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Amresh Sinha
Globalization:
Making Geography Irrelevant
182
A. Sinha
183
take away the current notion of marginality, which implicitly valorizes the
center. It is, for the critic, a necessarily self-appointed position, which is
basically an accusing position. It seems to me that I would like to reinvent this kind of marginality which I now find: exclusion from various
turfs. I would like to re-invent it as simply a critical moment rather than
a de-centered moment. . . . I think of the marginas not simply opposed
to the center but as an accomplice of the centerbecause I find it very
troubling that I should be defined as a marginal. . . . The authenticity of
the margins, the defining of me as the spokesperson for the third world,
is undermined by the fact that my own class in India does not particularly
like what I am doing. The concept-metaphor of margins should be thought
more and more in terms of the history of margins: the place for the argument, the place for the critical moment, the place of interest for assertions rather than a shifting of the center.4
184
A. Sinha
Appadurai finds in it a kind of an enculturation process (reminiscent of the old anthropology) that is brought to bear upon the
dynamism of the forces of rapid circulations from the metropolises to new emerging and developing societies that do not simply capitulate to the symbolic authority of cultural imperialism.
In fact, there are numerous examples both from the third world
and the diasporic communities that exemplify a process of
indegenizationmuch like what Jameson has formulated in
his theory of postmodernism as pastiche and parody elsewhere,9 whereby a disavowal of cultural signs of the exchange
economy of goods is effectuated through the intervention as well
as agency of translation or transformation, or mimicry, in Homi
Bhabhas sense, as a sign of resistance, the liminality between
the symbolic and the imaginaryof the global cultural commodities within a subversive context of the local cultural practices.
Thus you have a fabulous Elvis Presley imitation in The Brighter
Summer Day, a Tiawanese film by Edward Yang, whose nostalgia can only be attributed to its lack of memory associated with
the song, since Elvis remains a distant figure, despite his widespread global manifestations in the popular culture of many
postcolonial nations.
Appadurai maintains that the rapid changes that are taking
place in the global cultural economy cannot be properly addressed
in terms of existing center-periphery models, nor can they be
measured by the push and pull theory advocated by migration theory, nor, for that matter, the neo-Marxist theory of production and consumption, for that, too, fails to do justice to the
complexity of current global economy, which, for Appadurai, has
to do with certain fundamental disjunctures between economy,
culture and politics.10 Appadurai acknowledges the premise of
the break, but in the sense of a rupture that takes media and
migration as its two major interconnected concepts and explores
its relation to the work of the imagination as a constitutive feature of modern subjectivity.
Instability is at the heart of the production of modern
subjectivities. Movements, motion, mass migration in juxtaposition with the rapid flow of mass mediated imageries connect the
deterritorialized viewers to their host and home countries.
Unlike critical theory that insists on an intersubjective participation between the individual and the nation-state, the
articulators of the diasporic public sphere assume a discontinuity from the nation-state. In other words, the diasporic public
sphere is not limited to the concept of the nation-state. The mobile and unforeseeable relationship between mass mediated
185
events and migratory audiences define the core of the link between globalization and the modern.
Of course, there are many other important considerations, such
as the issues of institutional and governmental control, ownership, private/public, censorship, and power politics, which I am
unable to address in a proper and legitimate fashion at this stage.
But, nevertheless, they remain very much a concern of mine,
albeit in absentia at the moment.
Let me provide a brief analysis of the history of the binary
division of the local and the global. If we pursue the paternity of
globalization, we will find two streams of thought preceding it.
The concept of globalization, which first took a firm hold in
McLuhans philosophy and later in the 1970s manifested again
in the diasporic politics of cultural studies of the Birmingham
School, has received widespread critical attention, particularly
from two schools of thought: international relations and worldsystem theory (Wallerstein). International relations as an academic discipline focused upon the theory of the development of
the nation-state system, analyzing its origin particularly in Europe and its subsequent unfolding in the international scenario.
With the growth of international capital, the sovereign states,
which first emerged as separate entities with more or less welldefined boundaries, found themselves increasingly forced into
relationships of mutual interdependence with each other as the
European economy grew larger and became more complex. In
the process, the individual nations did find themselves to be less
sovereign in terms of control over their affairs, but, at the same
time, they also truly found themselves belonging to a global
nation-state system.
The theoretical limitations of international relations are not
due to some failure to conceptualize what globalization as such
meant; instead, its reluctance to examine the social factors of
the internal nature of the nations made it not only overlook the
preceding stages of the premodern states as a historical reference point, but also to establish globalization as a phenomenon
that has to be treated in and only in an international context.
The specificity of the locality has to give way to the relations
amongst the nations on an international scale.
The other model is presented by Immanuel Wallersteins worldsystem theory, which follows the Marxian paradigm in a fundamentally consistent manner. For Wallerstein, the emphasis was
always already global, on world economiesnetworks of economic connections of a geographically extensive sorts. The residue of a Marxian approach is fairly evident in Wallersteins treat-
186
A. Sinha
187
188
A. Sinha
189
190
A. Sinha
191
munion of collectively rooting for someone to win a million dollars and feel blessed (for what other ceremonies are observed in
their entirety aside from the midnight mass on New Years Eve
and the sporting eventsboth involving ritualistic global audiences) and, of course, simultaneously entertained, with a happy
afterthought that we were together at that epochal moment when
somebody won that million buckswhich was never meant for
us anyway, but still what a spectacle!
Notes
1. David Morley, Where the Global Meets the Local: Notes from the Sitting
Room, The Media Studies Reader, ed. OSullivan, Tim and Yvonne Jewkess.
(London: Arnold, 1997), 374.
2. Marshall McLuhan and Quentin Fiore, The Medium is the Message: An Inventory of Effects. (New York: Bantam Books, 1967), 63.
3. James Carey, Culture as Communication. (London: Unwin Hyman, 1989), 2
3.
4. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies,
Dialogues, ed. Sarah Harasym. (New York: Routledge, 1990), 156.
5. Stuart Hall, What is Black in Black Popular Culture, Stuart Hall: Critical
Dialogues in Cultural, ed. Morley, David and Kuan-Hsing Chen. (London:
Routledge, 1996), 467.
6. Hall, 466.
7. Hall, 466.
8. Arjun Appadurai, Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Culture
Economy, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996), 32.
9. Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism and Consumer Society, The Anti-Aesthetic:
Essays on Postmodern Culture, ed. Hal Foster. (Seattle, Washington: Bay
Press, 1983), 111125.
10. Appadurai, 32.
11. Immanuel Wallerstein, The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and
the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. (New
York: Academic Press, 1976), 229233.
12. Gilles Deleuze, and Felix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus, trans. Brain
Massumi. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987).
13. Ernst Renan, What is a Nation?, Nation and Narration, ed. Homi K. Bhabha.
(London: Routledge, 1990), 18.
14. Heather Cameron, Alphabet City, 6 (1998): 100.
15. Anthony Giddens, The Consequence of Modernity. (Stanford, California:
Stanford University Press, 1990), 64.
16. Cited in Morley, 375.
17. J. Meyrowitz, No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social
Behavior. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).