Cultural+Imperialism


 * =Title= || Globalization and Cultural Analysis ||
 * =Author= || John Tomlinson ||
 * =Date= || 1999 (-well, when you [|google the name of the book], you find that it was published in 1999. Then again he talks about 9/11, so I believe the text we have is a later edition) ||
 * =Summary By= || Efe ||
 * =Summary= || Now, the chapter we read is a very interesting outlook (though intuitive I would say) on the study of globalization from a cultural analysis perspective. I will just list down the author's main points, as he summarizes in the conclusion part. And then I will include the definitions for some of the concepts he uses.

In his own words, he is trying to sketch out an agenda for interpretation of globalization: 1) Cultural analysis has a specificity that cannot be subsumed within that of any other approach. 2) Globalization reveals the possibility of relative independence of culture from place. 3) Globalization demands analysis at the level of everyday life. 4) Cultural identity should not be necessarily interpreted as expressing subjectivity - it should be regarded as one of the institutions of global modernity. 5) Cosmopolitanism cannot be limited to economic processes.

//-Faux ami:// Cultural globalization and cultural imperialism are not the same concepts. -Globalization has its sources and its sphere of operation within culture. (Everything is related to the culture to start with) -Yet, culture is not linked with a locality. 'Non-places' (A term by Auge) can be used to define this transformation of places. -Telemediatization: developments in communication technologies, supporting mobility. -Globalatinization: (comes from Derida) is used to describe ethnocentric views on globalization. - Cosmopolitanism can be seen as an identity position. || = = = = = = = = = = = =
 * =Discussion points= || * With globalization, are we moving towards a new 'map of world cultures'? Do I share the 'same culture' with American university students (rather than with Turkish society)?
 * Also, one question I always have in my mind when I read any reference to information and communication technologies (ICTs) - which came first? Was there a demand for global connectedness that paved the way to more advanced technologies? Or did we just realize that we share certain things with people across the world thanks to the new technologies (which came as a result of regular scientific progress)? Chicken? Egg? ||

= = = = = = = =

= =