Appadurai chap 2

8/13/2019 Appadurai chap 2

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/appadurai-chap-2 1/11

2

Disjuncture and Difference n the

Global Cultural Economy

It t a k e ~ only the m e r e ~ acquilintance w1th the bets of the modem world

to note that It I > now an • n t e r ; ~ c t i v e 5ystem in a sense that is st:·lking:y new.

Histonam and ~ o c i n l o g i s r s , especially :hose concemed with l 'dn ; u ld i

processes (Hodgson :974) and che 'orld Y ~ t c m s associated w1th capital.

ism :Abu Lughod 1989; lhauJel 1981-84, Curtin l ::iB4; Wallnc.trin 1974

i>iolf 1982), have long bee11 awan: that the world has heen a congcrie< of

large-scale i : - ~ t e r a c t i o n s fur many enturies Yet t o d a y ~ worlclmvoivf'c. 1'1-

terKtions of a n ~ ; ; : w order and mtcnsity. Cultural tr,;nc.artion' betwel"n c.n-

Cial groups in the p;;st have geneT ally been restricted. s o m c t i ~ e c . hy t 1'c

facts of geography and ecology, and at other t1mes by active ~ c < ; i < ; t a n l < : :v

i n t e r a c t i o n ~ with the Other (as in Chi11a lor much of 1ts h 1 ~ t o r y a ~ d)apan before the Meiii Restoration)_ \)?hen: there have been o:ustarneJ cul

tural t r a n s a c t 1 0 n ~ acroc;s l ~ r g e parts of the globe. they have mually 111-

volved the l o n g - d i s t ~ n c e journey of c o m m o d i t i t : ~ (and of the m e r c h m ~ smost concerned with them:' and of travelers and explorers of every l}'?t

(Helms 1988, Schafer 1963). The two main forces for sustained c-ultud

rnteraction before this century have been warlare ( and the argc-<;calc po·

litical systems sometnnes ge:nerated by it) and rel1g1ons of co1wcrs1or,which have sometimes, i 5 in the case of Islam, taken wariare om: oi tht:

legitimate instn1ments of their expansion Thus, belwttn Lrave:le1s and



rortrc:ha'lts, rilgl"irn> dnd conquerors, the world h a ~ ~ f f l l 1\luLh l o n g - d i < ; t a n c ~tand l o ~ g - t c r m ) c u l t u r a l t r a f ~ c This muLh o;cems self-evident.

But few w:ll rl<>ny tha: gwen the problems of trme. distance. and lrm

itl'cf techr•ologii'."S for :he commond o r c s o u r r : l ' ~ arross vast ~ p a c e s , cul

tural deairng<; between :,ocrally and Sl)dlrally separated group> have, until

thf past few Lenturies, been hrrdged at great cost and susta1ned over time

n:1ly WIth grc•u effo1·t. The fnrc:es of cultural gravity seemed ai-ways to pullaway (rom the fonnat10n oF large-scale ecumenes, whether rclrgrous.

commerdJ , 01· p o l i t i c - ~ . towJrd :,mallf'r-sc;le accret1ons of :ntimacy and

inrere'>t

Sorm:trme in the past lew c c n t u r i e ~ , the nature of this grav"rtal1unallidd

seems to have ch<lllged. Partly because of thf spirit of the expan<;ron of

\ii'co:terr: maritime interests ofter 1500, and partly because of the relatively

autonomous d e v e l o p m e n t ~ of large arHl aggressive social f o r m a t r o n ~ in the

Americas (such a> the Aztecs and the Incas), in Eurasia :such as the ,\1on

p-o\<; .1rd then descendants, the . ~ 1 u g h a i s ~ n d O t t o m a n ~ ) , in i ~ l a n d South

ea-;t Asra (such as the Ruginese), dnd m the bngdonr> of precolonial Africa

(such as Dahomey), an overlapprng set of ecur:-rene<; hegan to emerge. m

which longerirs of money. commerce, conquest, and migration began to

c r t ; > ~ t e dur-abic cross-societal bonds_ This proces> ~ > . a accelerated by the

techr10logy transfers and innovations of the late e1ghteenth and mne

teenth cenruries (e.g., Bcyly 1Yi 9) whrch created complex colomal orders

cenltred on European c a p i t a l ~ and spread throughout the non-European

world. Thi> intricate and overlapping set of Eurocolonial worlds (first

Span1<;h and Portuguese, later princrpally F.nglish, french, and Outch; set

the h ~ ~ i s for a pennaneot traffic m rdeas 0f peoplehood and selfhood,

whrch created the rmagined cormnunltle<; (Anderson 1983) of recent na

tionalisms throughout the world

\Vith what Benedict Ander>on has called '"pnnt capitalism," a new

power w a ~ un:easht:d rn the world, t h ~ : power of mass litera(.y and its at

tendant large-scale pruduct1on of project> ot ethnic affinity thal were re

nlarkably free of the need for facr-to- f ; ; ~ c e communication or even ot rndi

rect communication between rersons and groups The JCt of rcadmg

thnrgs together set the stage for movements based on a paradox-the

paradox of construued pr1mor dial •sm. There i<:, of course, a grcac deal else

thM is :nvolved rn the story of c o l o n r a l ~ < : m .'lnd its dialeLtrcally generated

n i l t i o n a l r s 1 1 1 ~ (Chatterjee I 986 , but the ~ ~ ~ r r e of construued ethnici ties is

surely a CI1H .1al >trand rn th1s tale.But the revolut1un of rmnt capitali.,rn and the nd rural affmi tics and d ia

lugues unleashed by rt were nnly modest p r e c u r ~ o r ; to the world we live in

D i ] _. ,, C l l l ,, 1 D ·If• ,.,,c'

now FOI t1'.e pd\l century, th:re h J ~ been o tcchn:>lng1ul nplo '""'

l ~ r g e : y in the de>nlarn of t r ~ n s p o r · : a t r o n dlld rnfonnatron, t ; ' ~ t r m k e ~ the 111-

tcracrrons prmt-Jommared world seem hard-'>':(w Jnd t',,,·ly

c r a ~ e r l as the p11·rt revo1ucron nnde t"ar ie·- fcnrno ol c:uiC11nlrrafhc c p ~ • e d lFor wrth the advent of the steam>hip, the autornohrle. the ;;rrpiLIW th(

camera. the computer, and tht' trlc;1hnne. "''e have ente•·r:1 111t0 ~ l c c _r:?;t"ther new conditrun of 1 1 e 1 g h h o r l i n c ~ < : . even woth tho:.e most r l r ~ t a : r t fromourse:ves. M J r s h ~ l l Mcluhan. ar:-Jong others. s o u g h ~ to thr Wzt a ~ o u t t h i ,world a "p-bhal v i l l ~ g e . " but theo1·ies ~ u L h as . ' v k l . u h ~ n ' s uppeJr to h ~ v ~OVf'l"f'S111 hHeci the C O f f i f f i U n i t ~ n a n imp(rCJtiOilS ur the llCW meC:iJ c1dc··

(,'vlcluh:tn ilrd Powers 1989)_ W e are now a w ~ r e thdc wrth medrJ c ~ c ht1me we are templed to < r e - a ~ of the globe village, we n·ust be lt:IJt·nCcd

that medra u tate communities w"rth "no ~ e r s c of place" Uv1eyr.ow• l.: 1 5 ).

The world we lrvc rn ~ : o w >eems rhizo1liiL (Dcleuze :tnd C J a t t ~ n 1987 .

even sdJIZophrenrc:. calling For t h e t J f " e ~ ot rootlessness, J l 1 1 : : n ~ L r o r · . and

psychoiogKal d r s t a n c ~ between mdrvJduals and g r o u p ~ on tire Ollt hand

ar1d farlla>ics (or nightmares) of <:k:Ltrontc prnpinqurty 011 the other Here,

wt arc clnse to the central p ~ o h l e m . ' l t i c - of culturJi vroLesse<: r'1 tndays

worlci_

Thu<', the curiosity that reccntlv drove p,co lyer co A ~ r a t 1 9 ~ H )some ways the pioJuc:t of a confusion between mme rneffable J\.',c

Dnnaldization of the world and the much subtler play o 1 onlligenous t r ~ )eC"tories of desire dnd fear with globul f l o w ~ of pcoplf and things_ Indeed.

lyer's own irnprc<;sionc; are t e s t i n ~ o ; r y to the fact rf-.at, 1( gio )dl u ~ l t u r a ls y s t m ~ ~ emergmg, i• is Ailed with lronre<: and r e s i s t ~ n c : e s , sometimes cam·

ouflageJ pas;;1vity ilnd a bottomlc>'i apretlf<"' rn the :\sia-l world for

things Western

lyen own : : ~ r r o u n t o; the ur·lanny Phi"ippme alAn ty 'ur f\.mcrrcan

popular m u s K ~ ~ rrch t e ~ t i m o n y tht: global culture of 1:1e hvperreal fo·

<;OMehow Phrlippiue rendrtiom o .1\n·er•c:an popular W f ~ arc- both n1o•·e

W l d e < > r r e ~ c f m ~ h e l'h.J1pp1ncs, a r c l n 1 0 1 ~ drsturbrng\' i ~ _ i r h f u l to rhe1rong

rna <;, t h ~ n t1ey are in dre Unrtecl S t a t < : : ~ today_ An e-ntire na:rnn ~ < ' < " " T I S ro

have learned to llllllliL Kenny Rogers dnd che Lennnn si<:rcr·s, l i k e - ~ vast

Asran Moto.,.,n choru> But ArllmCt111iZ<Jiio'l IS c:cnamly a pii'l1d :crM to ii.pplv

en suc:-r a situallon for not only are there more Fliip1nos qngr1g- :-eriect

r e n d i t i o n ~ of some American songs (uiren irom the> Amerrcdn r ~ s t ' thJr1

nere are Arnencans dorng- '0. there is ~ l s 0 . oilOUrsc. the> fJct thJt rhe .-est

of their 11\'e:.10

not rn complete~ y m : h r o n y

wrth the referential wnrlrlt h ~ t

~ n t gave :,in'-1 to c h t : ~ e oongs.

In a further globJI'zmg twrs: nn what rredrrc )clTT'I;';I)n ha> I C ~ ~ n t l v

: J , , I f l ' ' , , , , ; } rr ..



ca:led "nostalgia for the present" ( 1989), Lheoe h h p i n o ~ h.•ok b ; ~ c k to

world they have never lmt. Thi-; I one of the central iron1es of tht: pohtic.s

of global cultural flows, especially in the arena of enkrtainment and

ldsure It plays havoc With the hegemony of EuroLhrunulugy American

nostalgia feeds on Filipino de,lre represented as a hypercompdent repro

duction Here, we have nostalgia without memory. The par.:tdox, of

coune, has its expl.:tnations. and they are histoncal; unpacked, they layb.:tre the stmy of the American m i s ~ i o n i z a t i U P . anJ pol1lical rape of the

Philippines, one restdt of which has been the creation of a n ~ t i o n of make

believe Americans, who tolerated for so long a lcadmg lady who played

the piano while the slums of Man ila expanded and decayed. P c r h a p ~ the

most radical p ostmodernists wnuld argue that tht i hardly ~ u r p r i c ; i n g he

c;;use in the peculiar chmn1cities nf fate capitali<;m, r a ~ t l c h e and nostalgia

are central modes of image pmductinn and reception Americans them

selves ;;re hardly in the present anymore as they stumble into thf" mf"ga

technologies of the twenty-first century garbed in the film-nnir cenarin

of sixt1es' chills, fift1es· diners, fort1e5' clothing. thirties' houses twenties'

dances, and so on ad mfinitum.

As far a:; the United States is concerned, one might suggest thilt the

sue no longer one uf n o ~ l a l g i a but of a SOCial ,:ma_ /nMirc built largely

around reruns Jameson was bold to lmk the poltt1cs of n o ~ t a l g 1 a lu the

rnscmodern commodity scns1bil1ty, and surely he was righ t ( 1983). The

dn1g waro; in Colomh1a recapitulate the tmp1cal ~ w e a t of Vietnam, with

Ollie '>Jorth and his succession of masks-Jimmy Stewart concealing John

W ~ y n e concealing Spiro Agnew and all nf them transmngrifymg into

Sylvester Stallone, who wins in A f g h : m i ~ t a n - t h u ~ < ; i m u l u n e o u ~ l y fulfHI

ing the secret American envy of Soviet imperialism and the renm ( t h 1 ~time with a happy ending) of the Vietnam ~ ' a r The Rolling Stones, ap

p r o < ~ c h i n g their fifties, gyrate before eighteen.year-olds who do not ap

pear to need the machinery of nostalgia to be sold on their parents' heroes

Paul McC;;rtney is selling the Beatles to a new audience hy hitching hie;

obliqm•• nostalgi;; to their desire fnr the new that smackc; of the nld Drag11tt

is back in nineties' drag, and so is Adllm 1 1 nat to speak nf a t m a ~ and M -liDI1 In1Possible all dressed up technologically but remarkably faithhtl to the

atmosphem;s uf thc1r onginals.

The past 1s now not a land to rdum tom a 51mple p u h t J ( , ; ~ uf memory.

It h a ~ hecome a synchromc warchous(; uf (.;Uitural ~ c e n a n u ~ kmd of tem

poral central castmg. to which recourse can be taken ao apprupnate. derendmg on the movie to be made, the Kcnc to be cna(.;tcd, the h u ~ t a . g e ~ to

be ~ e s c u c c i . All t h i ~ is par for the ( . U U ~ e , d yuu follow Jean Baudnllard or

' - ' ' 1CI r ' nHd o j] reorrp

Jean-Fran<;:ois Lyotard mtu a world ol sig11s ' ~ h o l l y unmoored frr:n' rhe1r

social signifiers (all rhe worlrl's l D 1 ~ n c y l d n d l . But I would l1ke to suggest

that the apparent r n c r e a ~ i n g substitutability of whole periods ;;nC: postures

for one another. in the" cultural styles of ddvanced C i p i t ~ l i ~ m . is ti<"d tn

larger global forces, which have done much to show Americ.:tn5 chat the

past •s uc;ually another count1y. If your present 1s the1r 1.Jturc [;,<:in trurh

modernization theory and in nuny self.,at:sfied tounst fanta<. C<:). andthe1r future is vour pao;t (as 1n the case of the F1lipino Vlrt"JO'-OS of Americafl

popula1· music], then your own past can be 111ade to appear <ts sirrvly a I OI·

malized modcthty nf your pre,ent. T h u ~ . although some anthropolog,sls

may continue tn relegate the1r Others to tempor<tl s p ; ; ~ c e s that they do net

themselves occupy (Fabian 1 ' : J H ~ ) , p o ~ t 1 n d u s m a l culturdl pruducliull'> ·dve

entered a postnostalgic p h a ~ e -The c n 1 c i ~ l point, hnwever. that the U11tcd S t a t ~ s . nc longer che

puppeteer of a world system of imilge" hut i<: only one nod<:: of d complex

transnJtional constnlction of iiT'<tgina-y landscapes. The wur J we IJVe i1·

today is c h ~ r J c t e r i z e d by a new role fnr the imagmation 1n ' o u a l l , ~ e 1 : ~grasp t h 1 ~ n<::w role. we need to bring together the old i c l t > ~ of 1mage<;, e<

pec ally mco;;hanically prc.,Jucec. 1mages (in the F ~ a n F I I r r School ~ U l ' i C ithe 1 d c ~ ot thl' r m ~ g m e U c.umrnufllty (in Anderson's sense). and ·he Frrnch

idea of the Imaginary (111wgmaircl a t : u r , ~ l r u c t e d land>e<:pe of collect,ve

aspiratiom, which i<; nn more and no l c ~ s real than the collective r e : : > r e ~ e rtations of Emile D11rkhfim, now ~ c d 1 a t e d through the c u m ~ l e x p1ism of

modern media.

The 1mage. the 1magined. thf' i m a g m ~ r y - t h e < e arc all term:. that J,.

r e c ~ us to something crirical and new in glnhal cultural processe,. rhc ~ ~ ' ' ' J -imltio11 as u s o c i o - ~ p r , ; ~ c l i c e No longf'r mer<"' fantac;y (opium :or the m ~ ~ < ; e swhose reJI work is elsewhere), no longer simp't' f ~ c a n e (from a wuciJ de

lined principJlly by more concrete purpo.;;es and <;tructurc<'. no lun01er

elite pJstime :rhus not r e 1 e v < ~ n t to the l1ves of mdinary peop;e·l. < : ~ n c 1 1 e ~longer mere contemplation (irrelevant for new fmm< nf dcs:re and .;;ub,ec

tlvity). the imagination has b e c o m ~ ar organizrcl field of ~ o l i a l pnct,ces

a form of work (in the ~ e n < e of both bbor and culmrally 1 g < : ~ n 1 z c d prac

tice), ~ n d a form of negotiatinn between sites of < ~ g e n c y (ind,viduJ:s) < ~ n Cglobally defined fields of possibility. This unleashing of the u n ~ g m a t i o nlmks the play of pastiche (in some settings) to the terr0r anJ lOCtCOI' o;

states and their (.;Oir.petitors. The ·magi nation is now cenc1alt1 J al: l o ' l ' ~

of agency,IS 1 l ~ < : : l f

a SOCiill fact, andi>

the keyc n m p o n ~ n l

o: the newglobal order. But tu milke this clom· 11eaningful, wf mu<t dtkrc>> <.omt:

other ~ ~ ~ u t : ~ .



Homogru:zr7t1o1r md Hrterogrttrzr7tirm

The central problem of today<; glohalmtcractron'> is t:1e tension between

cu tural homogenization and culturd1 heterogenizattoo A vase array ol

empit·icJI facts could be brought to bear on the side of the homogcmza-

tion argument, and much of it has come from the left c:-td of the spectrum

t med1a ~ t u J 1 e ~ (Harnelink 1983; Mattelarl 1983; Schiller 1976;, ~ n d>omc trom o t ~ c r pcrspecttve> (Gans 1985; 1;-er 1938) Most often, the ho

m o g e r i z ~ t i o n ~ r g u m e n t subspeciates into either <In ~ r g u m c m ahem Amer·

tcanrzallun ur an argument about commoditiz<ltion. and very ofcen the

two crgu1m:nts are c lose ly link\"d \};:'hat thesf' argument<; fail to constder

:hat least as rap1dly as forces fmm v ~ r i o u s metropoltses are brought into

·1ew societies they tend to hccomc rndigeniztd in one or <Jnotherway· this

1s rnte of music ; ~ n d housing styles as mut:h as il i3 true of science and ter

ronsm, s p e c t ~ c l e s and constitutions The dynamics of such indigenization

h a ~ e J U ~ t begun to be explored systemically (B:?.rber 191l7, Feld 1988; Han-

nerz 1987, 1989, Ivy 19881 Ntcoll 1989, Yoshimoto 1989), ; ~ n d much more

needs to be done_ Rut it is worth not1cing that for the people of Irian Jaya,

lndonesianization may be more wornsomc than Amtncanization, as

} i p i l n i z < ~ t i o n mily be for K o r e ~ n s . lndianizat1on for Sn Lankam, Viet

namtzatton lor the Cambodians. and Russiamzation for the people of So

viet Armenta and the BaltiC r e p u b l t ( . ~ . Such a list of alternative fe3rs to

Americamzation (ould he greatly expandeJ, but 1l IS not a shapeless m

ventoty. for polities of small\"r sca le. there,, alway<: a tear ot cultural ab

sor·,:.tion by polities of larger s c < ~ l e , espenallv those that arc nearby. One

man'o unagined community is another man's pol meal pri;;on

Thts scalar dynamic, which h;;ts widespread global mantfestations, i'i

ako :ted :o the relattonsh1p between natiom and st<Jtes, to which 1 shal re:urn later Fm the moment: let us note that the ~ t m p l 1 i t c a t t o o of these many

forces :anci fears;· of homogentzactoo can abo be exp'.oited by nation

st;:tes in rel3tion ro their own minortttcs, by p o ~ m g global comnooditiza

lion ·:or capitalism, or some nther such external e n e m y ~ as more teJI than

the threat of 1ts own hegemonic strategies

The new global cultural economy h ; ~ s robe c;een a< a complex, ov(:rlap

ping, disjunctive order that cannot any longer be understood in terms of

ex1sting center· periphery models (even thost that might account for mul

t ~ p l e centers ; ; ~ n d peripheries) Nor t suscepttblc to oimple models of

push and pull (m tem1s of mtgration theory), or of surpluses and deficits ·:as

m tradtttonalmudels of b a l ; ; ~ n c e of trade), or of c o n c ; u m e r ~ and p r o d u c e r ~(as tn m o ~ l neu-Marxist theories of dev\"lopmenti Even [he most complex

D 1 < 1 . c I 1 r "rr d 1 j < < (

and Aexible t h e o r i e ~ d g ; o h ~ l rkvelopmert that h J ~ e come out tl1c

,\1a.rxm tradition :A'llin 1980, Mardel 1978. \ V i l l l e r ~ t e t ' l 1 ~ ? 7 4 , \X/ulr

1982) arc ma.dcquately (']lllrky r ~ ' l d h ~ v e i ~ i e d to come to terms . , ~ i t h wha:

Scott Lash and John Uny have ca11.-rl ciimrganized C 2 ~ H t a l • s m 11937) The

complexity of r ~ e current global economy has to do Wtth certa111 fwldJ

mental d t ~ j u n c t u r c > hctwccn economy culture. o.nJ poli Kt; that we h ~ v cody begun to thconze 1

I r o p o ~ c that ar elementary irilmewm k lor explonng t ; ~ K h dtt;JuncrurEs

is to look at the relatio1lship ilmong ~ v e dimensions ol globJ.' cult;jr21ilow>

thilt ciln be termed (J'I rt :•nosw/m. (b: r • r t d i a s r a , ~ r s . (ci trriJ""""Pe>, fJ 1 )i

ll(l KCSC<lt'r>. and (e) i d e ~ m ; ; p r ; • The sufA( - s n r ~ r allows us to poin: tu ._I.e

~ u i d , trregular s h < ~ p e s of these ] ; ; ~ n d s c a p e s , s h ; ; ~ p e s thdt (.haralltnzc mtfr·

national capital as deeply as they do mlerrational dothmg : , t y l e ~ . These

t e r m ~ with the common suffix -scrjPe alse· mdlCate that t h e ~ c ~ r c nul ob):::c.

tively given relations that look 'he 'amc frum every angle of Vl'iton but,

rather th;;tt they ;;tre dteply penpe<:.:tival construll'i, mAcctcd by the hts

toric<JI, lingUistic, and poltla;al >ttuatcd:-,c:,s of dillcrcnt sort< of actor<: na

l t o n - o t a t e ~ , multmatmnals, dtasponc rommunitif'S, ~ ~ w e l l s u b n ~ r i o n J lgrouping<> and m o v e m e n t ~ (whether l " f ' l i g i n u ~ . p o l i t i c ~ : . or ~ c o n o m t c l . and

even mtimate face-to-face groups, such as villages, neighborhooc:s. and

famtlie;;_ lncieed, the mdividual actor is the last locus of this perspectival

set of landscapes, for these landscapes are evenluaily n ~ v r g a t e J by <>gerl:,

who both experience and constitute lat·ger ( u r m a t t u n ~ . :n part from thctr

own sense of what these l a n d : , c a p e ~ ofier.

These landscapes thus arc the bu:lcimg blocks of what (extending

Benedict Anderson) I wo·.dd like lo (.dll rrna_g· d worlds. thac ts, the mu r1plc

worlds that ~ r e comtituu: d by the h i ~ l u n c . a l l y oltuatcd tmagmatton< of per

sons and g10ups :,preaJ around the globe ichap 1 , An Important fact ofthe world we :1ve 1n today to that many pc·;;ons on the glohe ltve rn ~ u c himagined wo1 lds (and not j u ~ t m tmagmcd communllie<:) and thu< are able

to contest and s o m e t i m e ~ even subvert ihc tmagined w o r l d ~ of the ofhlla'

mind and of the entrepreneurial mentJi lly that c;urrounci them

Ry rtlmMc.Jpe 1mean the l<indscJpe of pcrsom who con<;tttute the ~ l · . 1 f t i n gwor d in whrch we l1ve: tourists, i m m i g r ~ n t s . ~ c f u g c c s . exiles gue>t w 0 1 k e 1 ~ .and other moving groups and t n d t v r d u a l ~ constitute an e<<;cnlldl feaCure ol

the world and appear to affect ,:,c politiC<; of ( ~ n d hftw.-en' nation:, to a

lmher<o unpn:cedcntcd degree. Tht<; ts :-tot: to <;av rhar there d ~ c rtu rela

ti tly >table t:ommumttcs and network> of kin<;h1r. fnend<;l,lp, work and

l e 1 ~ u r e , as well as of b1rth rc;;idencc, and other l i l 1 ~ l form<_ But 1t 10 to ' i \ '

t h ~ t the warp of these stabilities is cvcryNhcrc shot rhrough \ ~ l t h the \ ~ o n f



,-,f .:•urn an motinn as more per<;on<; and groups deal v.1'th che r e a l r t 1 e ~ uf h a ~ ng to move or the fantas1es of wanting to move_ \Xt'hat i more, bOLh these

r < > r t h t w ~ rtnd f r t n t a ~ r e ~ now funct10n on larger ~ l a l e ~ , as men and women

from viliage' in lndra think not just of movrng to Poona vr M a d r a ~ but of

movrng to Dubai and Houston, and refugees from Sn Lanka ~ n d themselves

ir. South lnd1a as well as in Switzerland,. Jw,t as the Hmong are driven to

Londnn as wt>ll ;,s tn Philadelphia. And as internat ional cap1till ~ h i f t ~ its

needs, il5 production and technology generate different needs, as nation·

states shift their policies on refugee populat1ons, these movmg groups can

never d fvrd told the1r i m < ~ g m a t i o n s r e ~ t too long, even if they w1sh to

Ry rclmo<capr 1 mean the global<.:onf,guraliOil, <Jlso ever fluid, of technol

ogy Jnd the fact that terhrology, both hrgh and low, both mechanical and

1 1 1 f o n n a t i o n a ~ , now moves at high c;peeds across v a r r o u ~ k i n d ~ ol pr-eviously

impervious boundaries. Ma ny countncs now are the roots of multinational

enterprise: a huge steel complex in Lrhva may mvulve rnlerests from India,

Chin< , Russia, and 'apan, providing d1fferer.t c o m p o n e n t ~ of new techno

logical conAgurations The odd d i ~ t r i b u t i n ' 1 of t e c h n o l o g - 1 t : ~ , and thus the

pet:uharities of these cechnosc<Jpes, are increasingly dnven n o ~ hy any obvi

ous e c o n o m n ~ ~ uf s c < ~ l e , of political control, or of market rationalrty but by

me rea singly complex relanonships among money Aows, po\ttl lal poSSlbih

tles, and the ; ~ v a t l a b r l i t y of both un- and highly skilled labor So, wh1k lndra

exports walter:, and -.hauffeurs to Dubai and Sharjah 1t also e x p o r t ~ soft

ware engineers tu the United States-indentured brieAy to T a t a - R u r r o u g h ~or the World Bank, then laundered through the State Department to be

come wealrhy resident al1enc;, who arc m turn obJedo vf e d u c t i v e m e ~ s a g e sto invest their money and know-how rn federal and slate projects ill India_

The global ecoMmy can _<;till be descnbcd in tenm of traditional irldi

cators (as the \Vorld Bankc o n t i n u e ~

to do) and stud1ed int e r m ~

of tradlt i o n ~ l c o m p a r i ~ n n ~ in Project Link at the Umvcrsrty of P e n n ~ y l v a n i a ; ,but the complicated tcchno5eapes :and the shifting ethnoscapes) that un

d<"rlie these rnd1camrs and <.:Umpdrisons are further out of th " reach of the

queen of ~ o c i a l sc1ences than ever before. 1--low is one to make a meaning

ful comparison of wages in Japan and the United States or of r e ~ l - e s t a t ecosts in .'lew Ynrk and Tokyo. without takmg s o p h i s t i c ~ ted account of the

very complex Ascal and i n v e ~ t m e n t Aows that lmk the two economies

through a global grid of currency s p e c u l ~ t i o n and capitol tram+er?

h u ~ it useful to speak as wf'll of i 1 1 t H i c e s c a ~ e s , as the drsposttlon of

glob.d cap1t.:tl is now a more m v ~ t e r i n u ~ . rrtpld, and drf-R<.:ult l a n d ~ < . : a p e to

follow than \"Ver before, currency m a r k e t ~ . nJtrOnal stock exchanges,

3nd commociity speculations move megamonits through national turn-

lJ '1 tr t I ' ", D t_(_( r , , ,

s t 1 l e ~ at blinding speed, W th v a ~ l . absolute ir'1['>1ications for >mclll d Her

ences in percentage po1nls a11d Lime un'ts But th<' cr1tH..dl point is that the

g l o b ~ I relationship among e t h n o s c ~ p e s , techno><.:dpes, <Jnci Fin<rnccscape'

is deeply drsjunctrve and profoundly unpredictable b e c a u ~ e rarh of the-<;e

landscapes rs ~ u h j e d to its own conscrrtrnts ami ince1ltives I ome pohtical

some rnfnrmat1onal, and some technoenv1ronmenrail at the :,arr.c trme a;;

each act<; a conotra1nt and a paramete1 for movements rn c:1e others

Thus, even an elementary model ol global politiCal emnomy m:r;;: takf'

roto at.<.:OU:lt the deeply drsmn<.:t1ve r e l a t m m h 1 p ~ among h l 1 n ~ a n m o ~ · ement, technologiral flow, and fmannal :ransfers.

Funhcr rcfra(.lmg these d1sjunc:ures (whrch hard'y form;; ~ · m p l e . me

chanical global 1 n l r a ~ l r u c t u r e in Jny c ~ s e ) arc what I oil '"edr.rswpes ~ r 1 < li J w > ~ ~ ~ ~ . which arc c l o ~ e l y rela;ed la<1dscapes of rmage>. A 1 e a r , , l u , ~ r l ref< c

both to the dismbutron of the elecrronic c a ~ a b 1 i l t 1 t > lu p--od;Jce and rh

seminate rnfnrmat•on (newspaper;, m a g a z r n ~ < ; , t c l c v r ~ i o n stations, and

F.lm produetinn stildros), which are now av:l.ilahle to a . ; ' T V W 1 ~ 1 g number of

private and publrc i n t e ~ c s l : > throughout the world, and to tht i m < ~ g e s of t :re

wurld created by these media h e ~ e r:nages involve marrv complicated in

f-lc<.:trun5, depending on therr mode r:Jor.:umentary or enterarrrr.enl\ :heir

hardware ';electronic or preelec:rO'llc), their ~ u d i e n c e s (local. natrondl, or

transnaliOnai), and the intere<;;;; of those who own and control them.

What rs mo:,l important 3bout theK m e d r a ~ c a p e s IS that thrv p r o v r d ~ :t'>

pecialty rn thetr television, Alm, and c a s s e t t ~ forms'r large ~ n t 1 corr.plcx

reperto1re;; ot images, narriltives and ethnmcapc:, to v1ewers throughout

the world, in wh1ch the world of commoditie<; and the wuriJ of news and

politiCS are profoundly mixed. \X1har this means is that 111dllY audience<

around the world expcnem.e the med1a themsl"lve;; as a -.ump rcated and

mterconnected rf'pertolre of prrnt, celluloiC:, elertronrc st:reerh,~ n d

bilLboards The lines between the realistic end rhe Artiof1allanJocapes they

see are blurred, so that the farther away the;;e aud1eoc:e:, are fro T' the Crreu

experiences ot m e t r o p o l i t < ~ . n life, the more lrkcly they are tn conslru-.t

imaf ined worlds that are chimerical, aeHhetic, even fantastrc n':Jjccts, pM

ticularly r a ~ s e s s c d by the errteria of some other p e r ~ p e c t 1 v e . sorrt' other

1magincd world.

M e d i a ~ ; a p e s , whether produced by nrivate o r scate i n t e r f < ; c ~ . tend to be

image-centered, narrative-based accounts o; ~ t r 1 p s of r e ~ l l t y , ~ n d what

they offer to those who expenence and t r a n ~ f o r m them is a <;ffle<; of cle

ments ~ u c h as c h a r d C . t e r ~ plots. and textual forms) out of whiCh < c r r p ( ~can ::.c fonned ot Imagined l i v r ~ . their own as well 1hose others l·v1ng

in mhcr places. These ~ c r i p t < ; can and do gel Li1saggregarerl rn:u cororplex

J ) , , l < ' ' ' ,,,.,j [ •ff,,,,,,,



sets o f m c t o p h c . J r ~ l y whrch peuple live ( l _ ~ k o f f and Johnson 198C) as they

hdr to lllmlrlute n a r r J t r v e ~ of the Other Jnd protonarratives of possib:e

lives, fantasies thJt could become prolegomena to the deme for acqutsr

tion Jnd rnovemerlt

ldw wpc Jre ulso conco:;tenations of images but they are often drrertly

politiCJI and frequently have to do wrth the rdf'ologrcs of states and the

counterrdeologres of movements f'x['llicitly orrented to capturing state

power or a piece of it. These ideoscapes are c o m p o ~ e d of elements ot the

Enlrghtenment worldvkw, whiCh conmt> of a chain of ideas. terms, and

•magee;, includingjrudom, weljcm nghis. s c l . l ~ r 6 ~ • r . r y r r ~ r e s r n t a t i o 1 1 , and the mac;

tcr teml democrm:y The master narrative of the Enlightenment (and rb

many variant-;; m Hritain, France. and the United States) was eonsrnJCted

with a rrrtarn rnternal logrc anJ p r e s u ~ ~ p o s e d a certain rdationshir he

tween readmg, representatron. dnd the public sphere_ (Fo r the dynamics nf

t ~ i s p r o c e ~ s in the early history of tht: United States, see 'V:'arner 1990_:•

l3ut the diaspora of c h e ~ e tcnns and rmcgeo across the world. especially

since the nineteenth century, has loosened the mtemal coherence that

held chem together in a Euro-.American ma<:tcr narrative and prov1ded m

~ t t : a d d loosely structured synopticon of rolitics, rn which drfter<:nl nation

stJtes, as part of their evolution, have organtzed lherr polrticul cultures

dround different keywords e g., Williams 1Y76).

<1 re>ult of the differential d1aspora )f the<:e k e ~ r , v o r d s , the polit1cal

n a r r a t r v e ~ that govern communication betv.:een elite<: and follnwers rn dif

leem part<; ot the world mvolve problems of both <r s e m ~ n t i c and prag

matic nature: semantic to the extent that words (and their lexTCal e f j u i v ~ lents) reoqurre careful tl<lmlaliorr from context to context rn the1r g l o b : ~ .movement<:, and p ~ g m t r c to the extent thilt the use of these words by

polttrcal actors ~ n d their audrences may be ~ u b j e c t to very different sets ofcontexrual conventions that mcdrate the1r translatio'1 into public polrtrcs.

Such convent ron> dre not only matters of the '1ature nf pnlitrcal rhctone:

for example, what does the aging C h i n e ~ e leader<:htp mean when rt r e l t : r ~ to

the dangers of h o o ~ i g a . n i s m ~ W h ~ t dMc; the South Korean l e a d e r ~ l 1 i p meon

when rt >pecikS of d·scipline as the ke-y to democratic mdu>tnal growth7

These con,errlions ~ l s o involve the far more suht c qucstron of what

sets of communrcauve ~ - : e n res are vJiued rn what wdy (new<;papcr<: v c r ~ u scinema, for example) and what sorb of p r < ~ g m ~ t i c genre c o n v e n t i o n ~ gov

ern the collectrve readings of drfferenl kmds of text So. while an Indian

~ u d i e n c e may be attentive to the r e ~ o n a n c e s of a polit1cal speech in terms

of ~ o r n e keywords and p h r a ~ e s reminiscent of Hindi cinema, a Korean au

dtence may r e ~ p Q n d to the subtle codings of B u r l d h i ~ t m neo-Confucian

J ,<JU I r l • • ' ' ,.,.J D f}rcrn<<

rhetoric encoded rn cl political docww:m The very r o b11n'1<;h p P 1eaclmg

to he;,rrng and <.cemg may vary rn 1mpurlJnt a y ~ chc;t dc:ermrne the mor

phology or these drfferent ideOSUpCS they ~ h ~ p f ti1C'ffiSCIVt:< I l l d·fiere1t

national and t r ~ n s n a t i o n a l contexts This glohally v a r r a b ~ < : s y n u ~ : h e s r ahas hardly even been noted, hut 1t Je:-nands urgent ~ n a ly<is_ ;·;,_us drmouacy

has d t : ~ r l y become a r r . ~ s t e r term, "''lth flOwcrful e d m e ~ from Halt ami

Poland to the fanner Snvret Uri on ;md Ch11a, but 1t o l> at the rrntcr of a

variety of 1deoscapes, compmecl of distinc:rve pragmattL copfiguratron<; ot

rough translation<: ot other cenml terms from the vocabulan' of ti'.e [n

lrghtenmf'nt This creates ever nf'w tennmological k a l t > i d o s c o p c ~ . d> <;tates

(and the groups tha; seek to caCJtur·e them; o;eck m pcicrly p o p u l a t i o n ~whose own ethno>capes are in motmn and whose media<>capcs may ueatc

severt" rrohlcm> for the i d e o s c a r e ~ wtth whKf-. they are prc<cmed The

fluidity of idcmLapes rs complicated m particular by rhr growmg d r a s p o r - a ~(both voluntary and involunta1y) of rntellt:lluals who contrnuomly rrrJect

new m e a n i n g - ~ t r c a m o 11:to the discnur-;;e o' denwccacy i 1 clilfcrcn: pdT\5 of

the world_

Tlus extended terTrHnologrc.:;l discussion of the five te-·ms lluve corned

~ e t s the basis for J tentative lorm·Jlation Jbout the conJ,t,ons unrler whrcll

u.:rrent global Aow<: occur. they occrr in and through the gmwirg drs

junctures among e t L , n o < ; c a p c ~ . lechnose<rpes. financcocapes, r 1 e d ~ ~ c a [ J c < ,and ideo>(.apes This formula non. the core of my model of global crltural

tlow, need> ~ o r n e explan.'ltron. Ftr><. people, I T - ~ c h i n e r y , rnc•ney. imagro;,

and rdea<; now follow <ncredsingly nonrsurnorphrc o a t h ~ . of course. at Jll

periods i1 human h1otory, there h : ~ . v e been SOITlt disj·Jncture<; 10 the 'lows

of :hese thin J:S but tire sheer sreed, <;cale, "and volumf' of nch ul t'1ese

tlows Jre now _<;o great that the di<:juncture., ~ l i l V t becor1r central to the

politics of glClhal culture. The l a p a n e ~ e arc no\orrously ho.;r;t;;bk lo idea;and are sterrmypcd ao inclmed :o export {alii and impmt , · s a m ~ ) goods.

b'.Jt they a r ~ d'.so notoriouc;',y closed to i m m r g r ~ t i o n , lrke 1. : ' . ( s l ~ - . the

S w e d e ~ . clrld the Saud1s. Yet 1:hc Swro> and the ;;mdis acc..ept populatrons o'

g u e ~ t workers, t h u ~ crcatrng ldbor JrasporJs nf Turko. ltai:Jn<, and other

crrcurn Medrrerranean groups. Some such g u c s t · w o r ~ e r g r o u r ~ r1ar'ltan>

c..ontinuous c o r t ~ c t wrth their ·nome nations, like the u r k ~ . but nrhcrl>11ke

hrgh-leve] South i\sran m i g r a n t ~ . te:1d to des:re lrves 111 therr new home>.

r a i ~ i n g anew tht: problem of rcproduclron in a dctemto··ialized cnmext.

Deterrrtonalrzation, tn general is one of the cc'ltrcllorces o; the mod·

ern world h c c a u ~ e it brings lahonng ;JOpulatrons 1110 lhe l o w e r · - c l a ~ ; <>ec-

tor<: and >paLeS of relatively wealthy soc-et,es, whrle somel1mf'c; creatirg

exaggeraleJ 3nd i,ten<;if\ed senoes of cririci<rr. or atld<.:.hr'lenr ro politics 111

Dis 1 ' 1 r r ,, r J) J. : r , r



the home state. Dctcrntorralizatron, wheth;:r of Hmdm, Sikhs, Palestini·

am, or U k r a m r a n ~ . i> now at the core of a van<:ty of global fundamen

talisms. including Islamic and Hindu fundamentalism ln the Hindu case,

tor example, it IS dear that th<; overseao movement of Indians has been ex·

plorted by a variety of interests both within and outside India to create a

complicated network of finances and religious identifications, by which

lh<: problem of cultural n::productton for Hmdus abroad hLts become tied

lu the polittcs of Hrndu funda mentalism at home.

At the same time. deterritorialization creates nt:w markets for film com

panies, art impresarios, and tr:< vel agencies, which thrive on the need of

the deterritorialiurl porulatton for contact with ito homeland. Naturally,

these invented homelands, which constitute the mcdiao;capes of delernto

rialtzeci group>, can often become sufficrently fanta<;tic and one-sided that

they provu.le the material for new 1deoscapes in which ethnrc conflicts can

begin to erupt. The creation of Khalistan, an invented homeland of the dc

termonalizcd Srkh population of England, Gnada, and the United States,

is one example of the bloody potential in such mediascapes as they inter

act with the internal colonial1sms uf the nation-state :e.g., Hechter 1975).The West Rank, Namibia, and Entre a are other theaters for the enactment

of ~ h e blnody negotiation between cxi>tmg nnliO l-states <tnd various de

temtanalized grouprngs.

It is in the fertile ground of deterrironalizatron. m whiCh money. < ;Urn-

modities. <tnd persons are involved in c e a s e l e ~ s [ y chasmg ea<:h ulher

around the world. that the mediascapes and ideoscapes of the modern

world find thei1· f r < ~ c t u r e d and fragmented counterrart For the rdeas and

i m n ~ t : s produced by mass media often are only ranial g u i d e ~ to the goods

and experiences that deterritorialized p o p u l a t i o n ~ transfer to one another.

In .'vka Nair"> l.mll,arrt film [ , J i ~ · Cubmt. we see the multiple loors of th1s

1-racwred deternturidllzation as young women, barely competent in Bom

bay's metrupul1ldn glit:.::. come to seek their fortunes caharet d a n c e r ~ and

ormtrtuk> 111 Bombay, entertaining men in c l u h ~ with dance formats de

nved whully from the prurient dance sequences of Hmdt films. These

s r e n e ~ 111 turn cater lo ideas <tbout Western <1nd foreign women and their

looseness. wh1le they provide t<twdry career alibis for these women. Some

of these women come from Kerala, where cabaret dubs and the porno

graphic film industry have blossomed, partly in n:sponse to the purses and

t a ~ k > of Keral1tes returned from the Middle East. where therr diasporic

l i v ~ > away from women distort their very sense of what the relations be

\w;:en nren and women might be T h e ~ e tragedies of dioplacement could

c ~ r t a i n l y be repliiyed in a more detailed analysiS of the rddlruns between

D r < J W > ~ C r ~ r r t Di}J rt••c•

tht- japanese and German >ex t o u · ~ to Thailard and th< trJgcdies o; tht>

sex trade 111 Bangkok, and in othersimiliir loops that l1c together f a n t ~ s i e sabour the OtheT, the conveniences and ~ e d u c t i o n s of t r < ~ v e l , :he ~ c o n o m -ics of global trade, < ~ n d the bn-ltal mohil1ty f a n t a w : ~ t h e ~ ' dooll'na:l' gende r

politics in many parts of Asia and the wor:d a; large.

Whr1c far more could e sard ahuu\ the c u l t u r ~ l po:itics oi deremtona l

ization and the larg-er sociology of displaLEI1lent thLtt it e x p 1 e s s t > ~ . it IS ap

propnate at this junlture to bring in the role of the lliltion state in the dio-

junltive global economy t culture today The relatronshrp h c : l w ~ e n states

and n < ~ . t r o n s is everywhere an embattled one. It is poss1ble to oay that in

m ~ n y s o c i : : t i e ~ the nat10n and the state have become um: dllUther"s p-o

jects. T h ~ t is. while natmns ( o ~ more properly g r o u p ~ w1th r d r a ~ abou:

nationhood) seek to capture or co-opl states and state power states s:mul

taneously seek to cdpture and monopohze ideas aboll nationhood i8aruah

1986, Chatterjee 1986, ~ a n d y 19a9a:•. In general, s e p a " ~ t i c ; t transnat1unal

movements, nduding those that have included terror in their methods,

exemplify natiorlS in search of st:atcs. Srkhs. Tamil Sri l.anka:-rs, Ba>4ues,

\ . i o r o ~ . Q u e b e < : o r ~ - - - e a c h of these r e r r e ~ c n t s 1magined communitie<; thatseek to create staks of their own m carve pie<..e> ou: of existing "rates.

States. on the ut}rer ~ > < ~ n d . are everywhere > e e : ~ i n g to monopolize :he

1:wra resourcrs n community, eit11er by Aatlv claimmg p ~ r f e c t coevality

between na:ron ~ n d ~ t a t e , or by ~ y s c e l l i l t i c a [ l y muo;eu"TJIZing and repre

>f ltmg al: the g r o u r ~ w1thm them in il vanety of herrtal'e politiCs thiit

seem> remarkably uniform throughout the world IH;mdlrr 191Hi, Hnzreld

1982; 1\.kQueen i98R)

Here, national and international r r . e J i a s c ~ p e s are exploited by ndl1on

s t a t ~ ~ to pacrfy separatist<> or even the putential fissip:uou<>ne<;s ol ~ I I rdeas

of difference. TypiCally. contemporary nation-states do thio; hy cxtr<..ismg

taxonomK. o;.ontrol over drfierence, by c.reatmg vanou< bnds ol lr·ter"a

tiona ~ p e c t a d e to domec;ticate d r f f c r e n c ~ , and by seducing- smdll groups

wrth the fantasy oi ~ e l i - d s p l a y un some sort of glohal or cu;mopolitar.

>\age. One important new feature of global cultural pnlitle>. tied to thr

d 1 ~ j u n c t i v e rebtionsh1ps among the vanous l a n d s c a p e ~ dr<>eus;ed ear·lier.

that state and natron are at eac.h other's throats, and the hyphen that links

t h e m ~ ~ now less an icon of conjuncture than an 111dex of d S)U 'lc.lure. This

disjunctiVe rclatlunship between n;mon and ~ t a t e has two lcve':s at L::e

level of any gtven nation -state, it means that there is a hattie of the tmagi

nation, with st:ate and nation see.{lng to canmbalrze one another. H t r ~ rs

the seedhed of brutal s e p a r a t i s m s ~ m a j o r i t a r i a m ~ m s t h ~ t c;rem w h a ~ T ap

p e ~ r e d from nowh<:re and microidentities that have become political pru-

o., , , , , , , . l """. J) , j je - · ' '



JN'ts wi:hn the n a t i o n - S l c i . ~ . At another level. t h i ~ d i ~ J i m c t i v e 1-eiJtion>hip

<;deeply entangled w1th the global d i < ; J u n c t u r e ~ discussec' throughout thi>

chapter: 1derts of nationhood appeal- to be steadily mcreasrng ll scale and

regularly nossrng existing stale boundanes, s o m e t i m e ~ a<; "''ith the Kurds,

b ~ l a u s c previous i der.ti ties st1·etched aLro>s vast natTOnal sp aces or, as with

the Tamils Sri l.anka. the dormant tllreads of a transnatiOnal diaspora

hove been ; ~ . c t i v a t e d to rgnite the milropoiJtiCS of a n a t i n r H I ~ t eIn diSCIJSSPng rre cultural politiCS that have ;;uhvertf'd the hyphen that

links the nation to the ~ l a t e , 1t c<;pecial:y important not to forgd the

moOTmg ol >Ul.:h polmcs in the Irregularities that now chilTKteJPzt J,,orga·

mzed cJ.pital (Kothari t989l; Lash and Uny t9H7) R < " ' c ; ~ u s e labor. finance,

and technology an: now m wtdcly <;eparated. the volatilrt1es that under he

movements for nationhood (a;; large as transnational Islam on the one hand,

or as small as the movemcm of the Gurkhas for a s e p ~ r a t e s t ~ t e m N o r t h < : a ~ tJndra) gnnd against the \ ~ l l n e r a b i l l t i e s that c:haractenze lh<: rdationships

he tween < ; t a t e ~ States ~ n d themselves pl-essed to stay o p ~ n by the forces of

media. technology, ~ n d travel that hJ.ve fueled comumt:nsm throughout

the world ~ n d have increaseci the craving, ~ v c n m the non-\i/e;;tern world,

for new commodities and s p e c t a c l e ~ . On the other hand. t h e ~ e very crav

ings can become caught up in new dhnmcapes. m e d i a ~ c : a p e s , and, eventu

ally, ideoscapes, such as democracy m C:hma, t h ~ r the state c ~ n n o t tolerJ.te

as threats to its own control over 1deas of nationhood and peoplehood.

States throughout the world are under siege, especially where contests ov<:r

the ideoscapes of d e m o c r ~ c y ; ~ r e fierce and fundamentol, and where there

are radi\..al disjunctures hetween ideoscapes and technoscapeo (a> m the

case of vt;:ry small c o u n t r i e ~ t h ~ t lack contemporary technv oglt:> of pro·

duc:tion and mformat10n),- or between ideoscapes and f m a n L e ~ c . a p c s (as m

countnes such Mexico or Brazil, where international lcndmg m f l u e n c e ~nat1onal p o l i t i C ~ to very large degree)_, or between rdeoscape<; and

ethnoscapes ~ a s m Aein1t where diasporic, local, am.l tran>local filiations arc

suicidally at battle), or hetween ideoscapes and 1 1 1 e d 1 a s c a p e ~ (as many

countnes m the Middle E a ~ t and Asia) where the lifestyles r e p , - e s e n t ~ : J on

both national and International V cinema completely overwhelm and

undermme the rhetrmc of national politics In the lnd1an case, the n:ylh of

the law-breaking hero ~ a s emerged to mediate this naked struggle between

the pieties and realities of Indian pu[JliD, whJCh h a ~ grown mcreasingly

brut;;dized and corTupt (Vad1dm 1989).

The transnat'1onal movt:rnent ot the martial a r t ~ . part1cu':arly through

A ~ i J , as mediated by the Hollywood and Hong Kong ~ l m industnes

(Z.;rlli t995) IS a rkh illustr·ation olthe ways 111 wh1ch l o n g - ~ t a n d i n g m J r -

rJ, ')"' ' · ' '" '" ' .1 .. Diff• ' ' ' '

nal a r t ~ t r ~ d r t r o n s , reiorn1ulated to meet tl1c :antam'<; ol cnntemrwca•;.•

(sometimes lumpen) yrmth popul.;t10il5, create 1 1 ~ v · cultu:·es nf l l l d ~ ' - u l 1 n i t vand v1olence whrch ;:,re ·11 turn ·.he fr el f01 :ncreased vrolcnce M t 1 n n ~ land internatinnal politrcs Such violence is in tum the >pc;r wan m c r c - a ~ ingly rap1d and amoral . n m ~ lraJc that penetrates :he ent1re work T t

worldwicle spread o the AK-47 Jnd the LJz,, ·.n films, in curporatc <Jnd

st<Jte ;;ecurity, in terror and in police ar:d milr:ary aet v·ty, 15 J ,-ermndn

:hat apparent y s1mple technicaiL.-11ilorrrities often conceal an mcreasmglv

complex set olloop>, l:nk1ng 1m age< of v J u l e : - ~ e e to a s p 1 r ~ r i 0 n s 'orcommu

nirv in some imJgined world.

Ret•.Jrning then ro the ethnoscapes with which I hegan, thf' antrel

paradox of ethnic polr\lc:, m today'' world i<; :hat n n m n r d i ~ ·:whether of

language or sk1r1 color or :-:e1ghborhcod or k i n ~ h q " J ) haw· nr-mm:- global

ized That is, sent:mene>, "'hose greatest fnrrf i<: in their <.bi'ity o ignite

intllnacy mto a puhtJCal state and tL:rn l n c : ~ l i t y rnto a stag;ng gmund for

identity, have belome spreaci over v ~ < ; t and irregula- spaces as g1-oups

mov<: )'et stay linked to nnr ~ n o t h e r through soph,sticated med1a c a p ~ _ , , ' .mes. Thr;; io; not to dery that such Drin10rd1a are oltt:n the product olin

vented traditiom (Hobsbawm and Ra11ge1- 1983;- 01 rt:lro>peltJve a f ~ l r a non<:, but to emph:;s,ze that bec:aust: uf the disJunctive and : m > t ~ b l einterplay of commerce, med1a, natiOnal nolicJe<;, and consumer hnras1es

e t h n i c i t ~ y . once J genie lontaincd in the hodr of some sort of locality

(however large), ha, now become a global force. forever slippir'·8 1n auJ

through the crack<; hetween states <1nd borders.

But the relat1omh1p bet veen r .e cultural and econOI'lic levels of tim

new set of global disluncture<: i;; nm ~ s i m p l e one-way street v.:hich t h ~term> of global cultural politics are set wholly by o·· c o n ~ n e d whully

wid110, the V I C I S < ; i t u d e ~ of 1 n t e r n ~ r l o n a l Rows of t e c h n o l o g ~ . Iaber, and linance, dcmandmg only a modeo:t m o d i ~ c a t ; o n of exJStmg neo-/VL::rxrst

m o d e ~ s ul unt:ve'l developmem and stdte formation. There IS J deeper

change, itself drwt:'r. y the d·sp..1nctures amo11g all the landscapes I h w ~drscussed and constitult:d by thc1r c:on:Jnuously Rurd a ~ 1 d uncertai; inrer

p'ay, that concerns the 1elatiun>h1p Jctwr-en p ~ o d u c t r o n and consumption

in today's g l o b ; ; ~ : economy. Here I brgm with Marx's f a m o u ~ (and often

mi1led v1<:w u 1 the fct1sh1s:n of thr coiT'mod1ty and sugge>t that tim

l t : t l ~ ; , l > m his been replaced in t ie world Jt Jrge I now >eemg the world as

ont: l ; ~ r g e , mtera((JVe svstem composed of many .:omplex ~ u b y s t e m s : by

two mutually ;;upnmtive descendants. the Arst of wh1ch i l ~ l l productr<Jil

fetishism and rhe ~ e c o n c l , the fetishism of the consumeT

By p r o d ~ c t O l jetrsh1sm I m e ~ n an illusion created by contempo1·a·-y tram-

O i s J f l H r t , , ,J fir •rtllcr



nat1onal production loci that masks t : - ~ n s [ o c a l capital. t r a m n a t i o n a ~ earn

ing Mow'>, global management, and often faraway w o r k e r ~ (engaged in var

iou> kinds of high-tech putt1ng-out operations) m the idwm a r ~ d specucle

of Ion (sometimes even wurke1) control. natiOnal productivity and tern

toriai sovereignty. To the extent that various kmds of free-trade zones

have become the models for product1on at large, especially of high-tech

commoditit"S, productiOnh a ~

itself become af < : [ l ~ h .

obscuring not~ o o a l

relations as such but the relations of productiOn, whKh are increasingly

t r a n ~ n a c m n a l The l o c < ~ l i t y (both in the scme of the local factory or Site of

production and in the 1."Xtended sense olthe n a t i o n - ~ t a t e ) becomes < fetish

that diSguises the globally di<;peneJ forces that actually dnve the produc

tion process. Tfm generates alienation m Marx's sense) twice intensified,

for it<; social ~ e n o e is now compounded by a compiJc;l.ted spat1al dynJmic

that 1s mcreasmgly global_

As for the { e J l ~ i 5 r n the w r ~ s u r n a , I mean to i n d i c a t ~ here that the con

sumer h a ~ been transfoi-rned through commod1cy flows (and the medli

s c ~ p e s , espec1ally of advertising, that accompany them) into a c;ign, both

m Baudrillard's senc;e of a s i m u l < ~ c r u m that only asymptotically approaches

the fonn of a real _<;oCJal agent, and n the s e n ~ e of a m ~ ~ k for the r e < ~ l <;eat

of agency, which is not the consumer but the produLer <lnd th many

forces that constitute production Global ~ d v e r t i s i n g is the key technol

ogy for the worldwide dissemination of a plethora of creative and cultur

ally well-chosen ideas of consumer agency. These image<; of agency are in

creasmgly distortions of a world ot merchandising so suhtle that the

consumer iO <..:onsistently he-lped to believe that he or she an a< :\ or, where

in fact he ur she is at best a chooser.

The globalization of 01lture is nut lhe same as its homogemzal on, but

glnbalization 1nvolves the use of a vancty of mst1uments of homogenization

·:armamcms, advertising techniques, language hegemonie<;, and duthmg

<;tyles) that ilre absorbed intn local polltlo..;a] and cultural e c o n o m 1 e ~ . only to

be rcpatnoted as heterogeneous d1alogues of national ~ o v e r e • g n t y . free en

terpri<:e, anJ f u n d J m e n t a l i ~ m in whid1 the St3te play;; an m c r e ~ m g l y dell

nte role. too much o p e n n e < ; ~ to global flows, and the n a t 1 0 n - ~ t a t e 1s threat

ened by revolt. as in tlle China syndrome, too little. and the statt: exits the

mternational <;\age, as Burma, Alba111a, anJ North Korea in variow. ways

have done_ In general, the state has becnme the arb1trageur of this r patrUJtlcm

oJ d i f f ~ ' 1 " 0 (in che form of goods. s1gns, slogans, and styles)_ But t h i ~ repatn

ation or export of the d e ~ 1 g n s and c o m m n d i t l e ~ ol Jiffei·ence commuously

e x ~ c e r b a t ~ s the mtemal politics of m a j o r i t a n a n ~ s m and homogenization,

whicC, mmt frequently played out in debates over hentage.

0 1 ' ) ' 1 ~ , , ' ' 3 IJ•f f<' ' ' '

rhus the cencral feature ol glu JJ] cul:-ure r o d < ~ . y i<; the politiCS ot .ht·

mutual effort of sameness and d i f f e r ~ n c e ·,o CJilnibalize on<' ~ n r _ . r · ~ r r ~ n dthereby procl;um thc1r s u c c e ~ s f u l h1_iJcking of the twm Cn,igPtcnlllent

·deas of thf triumphantly L<niversal Jnd the resJITently pJ·ticl,lar -1 h 1 ~mutual cannibalization s h o w ~ il> ugly face Tn POt<;, refugee r,QW i, <,t<ile

sponsored torture, anci e•,hnocide iwith or Without state sup;.Jorti \t ;;

br1ghter srde i<: in the exponomn of many mJ1V1dual hori7on<; of hope and

f a n t ; ; ~ . s y in the global <;pread uf o rehvdralmn therapy and other low

tech mstruments of well-being m the susceptibility ever. of So:1th Afr-ca

to tht Ioree of global opm1nn. in the l l;;J.bility of thr Polish 5(ale to reprcs;;

1\s own working cla<;c;e<;, and m the growth of a widr range of progre>STvc

transnation<ll alliances_ E x a m r l r ~ of txJth ourts could be multirlit'd Th,.

cntkal point is that b o t ~ side'> nf chc com ul global cultural pmc:e-<<; toGav

are pruducts of the infinir1." y varied ~ u t u a l (..On lest of sJmeness ~ n d dTHer

encc on a >\age characterized by radical disJunctures betw-een differen:

<;orts of g[obol flows and the uncertain lands(;apeo created iCJ and rhmugh

these di<juncture>

The Work o} Reprcductro11 in m A_ ·e o Mechanicd Art

I have inverted the key terms nf the title uf \X1alteJ- len_lamin's f ~ m o u s e ' i s ~ y(1969) to return this rather high-Aving dis(..u>sion to a r _ , o ~ e m ~ n a g e a h l clevel. There is <l classic human proh1em that wdl not disappear howt'vrr

murh global cultural processes might change their dynarnKs, aild this is

che problem today typically discussed under the rubnc of reproducr,on

(and traditionally 1eferred to in t e n n ~ nf the :ransml>,ICJll oi culture; In ei

ther ca<e, the question is, how do small woups, eopeually fa:nilies. thr

c l a s ~ i c a l l o c i of ouLial,zation, dedi w1rh these new glubalJeJiities IS chty

<;f'ek to reproduce tl1tmselves and i l so rlnmg, hy acc1de11t 1eproduu cul

tural form> thtmselves:· In tradition.:JI anthropologKaltem,s, th1s c0uld be

phraoed as the problem nf enculturatinn in a periuJ of rJp1d culture

change. So the prob l"m i<; hardly novel Rut it docs takt un some novel di

mensions under the glohal cnndl lons d i < c u s ~ e d solar m th1s cbapter

hrst. t 1e sort of t r a n s g e n ~ r a t m n a l stahil1ty of knowledge that wos pre

supposed 111 most tl1eories of e:1CU.Illrdtlnn (or, 10 slightly broMkr t e n T ~ .of ~ o C i a l i z a t l O n ) can no longer be assume.- As famil1es move to new bca·

t i o n ~ , nr as children move before older genrrat·ons, o r ~ > grown s o n ~ and

daughters retur:"l from lime spent in ~ t r < ~ n g e r a r t ~ of the wo1id. bnily re-·a

tionships can hecome volatile 1 new comiT'oOity pattern> are n e g o t · ~ t e O .debts 3nd ohligations are recahbrJted, and nimors and t ~ n : ~ s i e s about t h ~

0iSJ I1cturr ,,.,1 .') 1,'}r•r>rC<'



new setting arc maneuvered into eXJ>llllg n·rertom:s of k n o w l c d g ~ : ;llld

pract1ce Often, global labor diaspora' mvoke immense strains on mur-

n a g c ~ in general and on women 111 particubr. as marriage<; bt:'-ome the

rnedlllg poim-; of h1storical patterns of socialization and new ideas of

proper behavior. Gennalions easily di'lide. as i c i e r t ~ about property, pro

p n c t ~ · . and collect1ve obligation w1ther under the siege of d 1 ~ t a . n c e and

t:m<:. Most important, the work of (;Ultural reproduction in new oett11lgs 15

profoundly complicated by the pol of representmg a famdy as normal

(particularly tor the young) to neighbor.:; and peers in the new locale All

this is, of course, not new tu dw cultural study of ,mmigrat1on.

W'hat 1s new I<; that this is a world in which both point<; of departure

and po1nts of arrival arc m cultural t-lu>., and thu<; the search for stead.y

points nf reference, as critl(;al life c h n ~ e e ~ are m ~ d e can be very d1 :ficult. It

is in this atmusphere that the invention uf tri dTt10n (and of ethntcll:y. km-

5hlp, and o t h ~ ; : r tdentity markers) can be(;Ome slippery, as the search for

certaintie<; IS regularly frustrated by the flu1dities of tranonational commu

lliCiltion A' group p3sts hccun1e increasmgly pans of museums, e x h i b i t ~ .and c o l l e c t i O n ~ . both in , . , ~ t i o n a and tran<;nalionwl spenaclt:s, culture he

comes less what P1e1re BourdiC'J would have called a hilhitm d tacit realm

uf 1eproduC1ble j)racticeo; and disposit11'ins) and more arena for con·

~ c m u s choice, _1uq1 (ication. and rtpresentat1on, the latter otten to multiple

and ~ p a t i a l l y dislo<.;ated a u d i e n c e ~ -The task of cultural reproduction, even its most intimate arenas, such

3S husband-wife and p<nent-child rdations. becomes both pol1t1'-ized and

exposed to the t r a u m a ~ of deterntonalization as family members pool and

negnt1ate their mutual u n d e r ; t a n d i n g ~ and asptratwns in s o m e t i m < : ~ frac

tured o ; p a t 1 ~ l arrangemems. At la-rger :evels, sue has community, nctghbor

hood. and temtory. this puliticizationI >

often the emotiOnal fuel for moteexplic1tly Violent rolittcs of identity, J U S t < ~ > these larg er politic<; >Omctimes

penetrate and ignil:e domestic politics \X'hen, for exJ.mple, two olfspring

in a household <;p[it w1th the-ir father on key matter of pnlltJ-.ol ldentih

catlOn I l l a transnational setting, preexisting lo,.;a\ized n n r m ~ cany little

force. TITus;; son who has JOined the Hezbollah group in Lebanon may no

longer get along with parents or ~ i b l i n g s who are affiliated with Ama1 or

some other branch of Shi'i ethnic p o h t ~ c a l identity 111 Lebanon ~ / o m e n in

particular hear the bnmt of this sort of friction, for they become pawns in

the heritage politics of the househnld and are often subject to the abuse

and violence of men who are themselves torn about the relation hetween

heritage aml opportumty in sh1fting spatii l anrl pol1tKal f o r m a t i o n ~The pa.ins of cultural reproduction a disjunctive global world are, of

C l r ; l u u c l ~ r l < f : •r) j<rc c '

course, nut eJ.sed by the effect' of 1llechar1iral 2r: (m my;<; m e r ~ 1 'm

these media afford powertul r ~ 1 0 u r c c s fo1· co;tntcrnudes of 1dentHV that

youlft Cilll project agatmt M e n : ~ l w 1 s ' r 1 e ~ or d e ~ ires. At larger L?vc[, '. Ul

ganlzatlOn. there can be many f o r m ~ oi cultural politico; within C1spla<..ed

populations : wllether of ~ d u g e e s or of voluntary tm:111grants·l. a1 nf wh;ch

~ r c mnecteci in important w ~ y s by media i a ; ~ d the meC a,Ldpes ~ n di d e o s c a p e ~ they offer) A centrJIIini: between the fragilitico cultUTal re

production and the role of the _nass m e d 1 ~ t l t o d ~ y s world is thr pol1lics

of ge:1der and v1olenLe. \s fant;w;:s of g e n d e r ~ d v10ience do·ni·Tate the R

grilde Film i n d u s t n e ~ that blanket the world, they bolli reneu cl'ld rdnt'

gendcn:U viOlence at home arJ ' the ~ t r c c t s , ~ ' you11g men (m part1ctilarl

are swayed by '.he macho p o l l l i c ~ of self-assertmn tr c o · J t c x l ~ w·here tht'y

3re frequently den1ed l-eal agency, and women are forced lO e:nk· the 13bm

force in new wcys on the one ~ a n d , ~ I d continuf the 'Tld;TlltloJ.IlCC - f ta.

milia[ hnitage on the other Thu t h ~ : honor of women b e l o m c ~ not 111q

J.n armature ot ~ t a b l e :if inhuman;. s y ~ · . e 1 1 1 5 of cultmal r ~ p r u J u c t i o n hut d

new a r e n ~ for the formation of ~ e x u a \ H.lentity an l far11iy poln1cs. as men

ar.d ·,,·omen fKe lew p1essures at work and new lanrasie<; ot l c t ~ l l l eHecause both work af'd l e 1 ~ ~ 1 r e h'lve lost none of the1r gcndered c.uJll

t1e> in t ".is nr-w global or JeT Lx t have acqum:d ever subtler fct1sh1;;ed rep

r c ~ e n t a t i o n s . the honor of won· en becomes \n(.T easi g l ~ · rl < ; u ~ r o g a t e ·cr the

1dent1ty of embrlttled comnwwties of ma\e<;, while the1r ·,vomen 1n reJiity

have lo negotiate mcreilsl'lgly hJ.rsh condit1om if wo-k hor-Tc and in

~ h e nondomestic workrlacc. ln ohort, detem:oroJllztd commun t1e<; a : - ~ Jdisplaced pupuli tions. hnwcvcr mud1 they may enJOY t - . ~ : httits oi new

k i n d ~ of canung J.nd new di<;pOsltlon, of C d p i t ~ l a1d t c d t • J o ~ o g y , h ~ v e w

pidy ouc the des1res and fama<1cs ol these new e t h n o < ; c ~ p e , , , ~ h i e stnving

to reproduce the emily as-microcosm ul culture As the shapes ofc u l t u r e ~

grow l e ~ < ; bounded and tacrt, more flmd and pol1ticized. t ' ~ ~ wor 1{ nf cL:l

tural reproduction bt>comes a d a d ~ haza1-d Far 'llOrc vuld. ~ " d shnuiJ be

<;aJd about tl->e work of rcproJuu1011 in ar agt' of m e c h i l l l i c ~ l Mt tht ~ r eced111g discussa1n 'S me am LO nH.lKate tlle contnur.. of tbe prohlc'Tl< thJt a

new, global\y• informed \heory of cultural reproduction will h a v ~ to bee

The dcltberatlons of the i l r g u m c n t ~ that 1have made ;o M const1.utt :he

bare bones ol- dll i pproach to a general theory of global cultura' p n A ~ o > e sF a c u ~ i n g on diSJUncture<;, 1 have employed a set d term<; ( r t b o ~ o l c -lom,ce>capr. kclol"cOCaJk med1asr.1p, and iJro;cnf>r) tc ;\Tess dih· .tnt qltillllS or

Di<i ' ' ' ' '' ,,,,,i D-_lir·,,



flows < ~ l o n g wh1(;h cultural material may be seen to he moving a e r o ~ >tionai boundar1es. I have also sought lo exemplify the way5 m whtch t h e ~ evanuus ~ o w ~ (or a n d s c ~ p e ~ . trom th stahihzmg p e r ~ p e d i v e s of any given

imdgined world) are in fundamental di<;Juncture with respect to one an

other. What further 'iteps can we take toward a g e n e r ~ l theory of global

lultural p r o c e s s e ~ b<tsed on these propoc;als?

The fir'it 1s to note th -t our very mndcls of cultural ~ h < t p e will 'nave to

alter, as configuratiOnS of people pluce, ~ n d heritage lose all semblanle of

i s o m o r p h 1 ~ m . Recent work in anthropology ha<; done much to f1ee us of

the <;halkles of highly localized, b o u n d ~ r y - o r i c n t c d , holistic, primordial1sl

image<; of cultural form dnd sub'itance (Hannerz 1989; Marlus and F1scher

\986, Thornton 1988; But not very much has heen put m their pl<tce, ex

cept o m e w h < ~ t larger 1f l e ~ s mechanica l versions of these images. as in Eric

Vi/olfs wmk on the relationship of Eurupe to the re:.t of the world 1981]

\\?hat l would hke to propose is that we begin to thmk of the contiguration

of c u l t u r ~ l forms in today's world a> funddmentally fractul, that i>, as pos

o : c s ~ i n g no Fuchdean boundanes, stmctures, or rq..,"llldl"ities Scc..onci, 1

wou1d :.uggest chat ,hese cultural forms, wh1Lh we shou'.d otrive tn repre

<;e r.t a:. rully fractal, are also o v e r l o ; ~ p p i n g in ways that have been d 1 ~ c u s : . ~ donly in pure m ~ t h e m a t i c s (in ~ e t theol)', for example) and in biology (m

the language of polychet.ic clas5ificanons) Thus we need to combine a

f1·actal metaphor for the shape of cultures (in the plural; with a polythetic

account of their overlaps and resemhlances. \'.:'ithout this latter step, we

:.hull remam mired in compdrutlve work t h < ~ t r e l i e ~ on the dear separation

of the entme:. Lobe compared before senous c o m p r i ~ o n can heglTI. How

are we to compare fractally shaped culturul f o r m ~ ~ ; : h a t ure al'io p o l ~ · t h e t i Lally overlapping in their c o v e r ~ g e of ter restrial space:?

r1nally in order for the theory of global cultura I n t e r a c t i o n ~ pre d1catedon disj1.mctivc flows to have any force g r e < ~ t e r than that of a mechanical

me\<tphor, t will have to move into something like a humJ.n v r r ~ i o n of the

t ~ e o r y that some s c i e n t i s t ~ are calling c..h<tos theory. That is, we wdl need

to ask not how these complex, overlappmg. fractal ~ h a p e s const1tute a sim

ple, s t ~ b ' 1 e ·:even if l a r g e - ~ c a l e ) ~ y s t e m , but to ask whut its dynamics are:

'IX'hy do ethn1c nots occur when ~ n d where they d o ~ Vi/hy do ~ T a t e s wither

at greater rJtes m some places < ~ n d t1mc'> than in otherlil W'hy do some

co\Jmrie; flout conventions of international debt repaymen1: with much

l e ~ ~ apparent worry than othcr:-71-low are intern ational arms Aows driving

rthmc b<tttles and g e n o C i d e ~ ; \Why are some :.tates exitmg the glohal stage

whde others 're clamoring to gel1n Why du key events occur at a certain

pomt in a certam place rather than in others;J These are, of cour.;e, the

r; . , l ; · ' ' ' ' ' ' ' d D•f ( ' ' ' ' '

greut traditronal q u e s t i o n ~ of c a u s ~ l i t y , contlr.gcnLy. itl1d pred1rt1nn Ill rhe

human sc1ences. but ·n a wmiJ of disjunctive gloha' flows, 1t" perhaps im

portant to start a ~ : . : 1 n g them in a way that r c l ~ t ~ un in;ages of flow and un

cel·tainty, hence ch11o1 rather than on older \ T n ~ g e s of o r d e ~ stab1i1ty, anci

'ystematicness Otherw·1se, we will havf gone far towarci a theory of glohal

c..dturJI sysrem<; hut d11own out rrocess in the bargain And that would

1 1 1 ~ k e these n o t e ~ part of o ; ~ j o u r n e y :uwo11d the kmd of dluown of order thJ:

we c ~ n no longer a1torcl to rmpose on a 'Or:d :hat :.o t r a n ~ p o ; ~ e n t l yvolatile

\X'hateveT the directinns in whic;.. we can pu>h these m ~ r r o m e t ~ p h n r <(fractals, polythetic cla>slh(;atJons, and cham) wr:: need :o ~ . s k one ot11fr

old-fash1m1ed question OlH of the . ~ 1 a 1 - x i s t paradigm i:. there son1e pre

g,ven order to the relativf cietcrmrning force of these glubdl ll'..J"'S Be

c a u ~ e I have _::Jostulated the d y n a m i l ~ of global cultural : . y ~ t e m ~ as driven

by the relatwn:.hips < ~ m o n g f l o w ~ t per:.ons, teciinologies, hnaPLe, Infor

mation, and ideology, can we speak of some s t r u c t t l r ~ 1 - c a u ~ a I n l ~ T h nking

these P.ow<; hy analogy to the role of the ~ c o nomic orclrr in one v ~ : ; , i o n of

the Marxist paradigm? C,n we s p e ~ k of <;orne of these f l o w s ~ ' bemg, for a

p110n stn1ctural or h1stonLal reosons. always pnur to and formatwe of

ULher· flows7 My own hypo\hesis. whic'l can only be tel'tative a: thio point

is that the relutionship of these vanou s flows to one a n o t h ~ 1 as tlley con

stellate mto particular e v e n t ~ and so(;ial forrns will be radKally context

dependent. Thus, while labor Aows and their loops Wl[h hna1Lial Aows

between Kerala and the Middle b>t may ac(;ount for the s h ~ r e of m ~ d J dflows and ideosl;apes in Keral<t. the revcne m ~ y be tn.1e of SiiJCon Valley ·n

California, w h e r ~ 111tense specalizat1on m <1 single technologiCa' .,ector

·:computer<;) and pal\\C'Jlar P.ows of capital m o ; ~ y well pro;oundlv d n ~ n m : cthe shape that e t h n o ~ c a p e s , ideosrapes. and med:<tscapes may toke

This d o e ~ not r.1ean that t ~ e c a u c ; ~ l - h t ~ t o r i c . a l relat1onsh1p among these

various f l o w s · ~ rilndon• or meaning]e<;<;ly c.:ontingent bur thM our cu1-rcnt

theoncs of l.ultural c h a o ~ are msu;fiClcnt\y developed to be even pars,mn.

niOU> models at th1s point. much l e ~ < ; to be p1eciictive theones, the golnen

A e e c e ~ of one kind of ~ o c 1 a l <;Citnc:e W'hatl have sought to prov1de rll th1s

c h a p t e r ~ ~ a r e < t ~ O n ~ b l y ecronom1c2l tcchna . al voc<tbulary ~ 1 d a 1Td1m<:n·

tary model of disJuncttve f l o w ~ . from wh1ch ~ o T l e t h i n g H e a decel't g l o b ~ \a n a l y s 1 ~ might emerge. W ~ : h o u t <;Gme sw.h analysis, it wdl he J,lllculc to

constr.JCt what John l-linkson c ~ i l ' a "soc,ultheol)' of r o < ; t m o c l ~ r n i t y t h ~ t1s ~ d e < J l ' a t e l y global (1990. 84j

r; . , , , , . , ,: , . ' ' ' d f.<ff,,, ,,

Appadurai chap 2

Documents

Transcript of Appadurai chap 2