Custom writings on The Effect of Globalization on Contemporary Art
it is possible to refer to Arjun Appadurais whose conceptual research “Disjuncture and the difference in the global cultural economy” provides important information about the development of the contemporary culture. It should be pointed out that the central concept of the contemporary culture, according to Arjun Appadurais is the concept of the imaginary. He argues that the contemporary society develops cultural activities as social imaginary. In other words as activities which actually do not obligatory have the link with some elements of the surrounding reality. Instead, the imaginary plays increasing more important role to the extent that it is even possible to speak about the imagined communities.
Basically, the author states that the concept of the imaginary is dominant because he views imagination as a social practice. To put it more precisely, he argues that “the imagination has become an organized field of social practices, a form of work… and a form of negotiation between sites of agency… and globally defined fields of possibilities” (During 2005, p.31). As a result, he points out that the imaginary has penetrated practically all spheres of human activities and become an essential part of the contemporary culture, its major characteristic.
On the basis of his concept of the imaginary Arjun Appadurais distinguishes five dimensions of the global cultural flow, which actually constitute the imaginary. The first dimension is ethnoscapes, which is represented by different ethnic groups that have a common socio-cultural background and they form their own social practices, their own imaginary as a part of their particular culture. In such a way, it is possible to speak about ethnic cultural division of the contemporary global culture that means that the researcher still distinguishes the existence of ethnic cultures in the context of the broader global culture. The second dimension is mediascapes. This dimension is formed by the contemporary media which actually produce a profound impact on the formation of an individual, his/her identity and, therefore, his/her cultural views. The third dimension is technoscapes which is formed under the impact of the development of new technologies and which actually contributes to the dramatic changes in the contemporary culture caused by the wide use of new technologies that open new opportunities for interpersonal communication and eliminates physical boundaries between people representing different socio-cultural groups. The fourth dimension is finanscapes, which are basically related to the field of economy but, the researcher points out that the impact of economy, especially economic globalization, on the contemporary culture is enormous because global economy stimulates cooperation and interaction between different cultures.
Finally, Arjun Appadurais distinguishes another dimension, ideoscapes, which refer to the existence of the ideological unity of people and basically this dimension is able to unite people with the help of some prominent idea. For instance, in the contemporary society democratic ideas are widely spread and they affect dramatically the contemporary culture forcing many socio-cultural groups change their traditional views.
The views of Stuart Hall are, to a significant extent, similar to the view of Arjun Appadurais. To put it more precisely, Stuart Hall also underlines that the contemporary culture is dramatically influenced by the global process of economic integration and he points out that the growing interaction and cooperation between different countries and, thus, different culture, is accompanied and stimulated not only by economic but also political integration of countries. At the same time, Stuart Hall’s work helps better understand the mechanism of the interaction between people in the context of the contemporary cultural integration and growing impact of globalization trends in economic and political spheres of the life of society.
It should be said that Stuart Hall presents all people as producers and consumers of culture at the same time. This means that people are not only consumers of culture but they also able to produce and, therefore, change the contemporary culture. At this point it is possible to return to the concept of imaginary of Arjun Appadurais who insisted that the imagination plays practically the dominant role as a social practice. In this respect, it should be said that Stuart Hall attempts to look a bit further understand how the interaction between people, producers and consumers of culture occurs, and, apparently he also pays a lot of attention to the imagination power of humans. To put it more precisely, he argues that in the process of communication, which actually leads to the cultural interchange and simply constitute a part of the contemporary culture, people cannot send and receive an absolutely identical message because the original message created by the sender is perceived in a different way by the receiver of the message because the latter is influenced by a particular socio-cultural background. In such a way, Stuart Hall explains how people perceive in a different way one and the same message.
In this respect, the researcher refers to media discourse to develop his ideas. On analyzing his model of encoding and decoding of media discourses, it is possible to estimate that the meaning of a text, or discourse lies somewhere between the producer and the reader or consumer. In order to explain the difference in the perception of the text by the reader and the producer, Stuart Hall develops the concept of the margin of understanding, which implies that the while the meaning of the text is between the producer and the consumer both of them interpret it in different ways being influenced by their own culture and background.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.