The Extent to Which the Globalization of Consumer Culture Engenders a Cosmopolitan Culture - Literature review Example

The Extent to Which the Globalisation of Consumer Culture Engenders a Cosmopolitan Culture In the current contemporary world, people get exposed to many influences that would change their behaviours at the end of the day. Perhaps these influences could be because of openness in borders from nation to nation. Tomlinson (269) termed the openness of boarders between nations as globalization. He also found that most of the consumers in their various cultural spheres are delightful of the positivity impacts of globalization and that is why there is formation of internationalized culture (cosmopolitan culture). Nevertheless, globalisation has been associated with demolition of cultural identities therefore a lot of interpretations by anti-globalization activists shows that this aspect in one way or another has created imperial culture. There is a substantial mutual relationship between globalization and culture. Tomlinson (272) stated that a single protocol of contemporary cultural experience is difficult to unlock globalisation internal dynamics. Therefore, talking of transformations brought about by politics and world economy perhaps defines only the fabrics of cultural experience. This enlightens regional consumer segments in terms of maturity and elements of ecological concern. As a result, greater market segmentation has become a vital factor of influencing the attitude and behaviours of various specific segments within the national boarders (Ritzer, 13). Nava (89) found that every phenomenon has an invented story. The modern history of cosmopolitan culture is defined by various consciousnesses, which include people’s physical movements, encountering with strangers and interchange of shared values. This configured people to become part of making senses in engendering a platform of the modern culture. It is important to note that producing a cosmopolitan culture through globalization of consumer culture needs a comprehensive framework structure of changing people’s attitude in order to enhance a divergent culture with limited conflicts. In focusing on how globalisation of consumer culture produces a cosmopolitan culture, there are major domain questions to conceder: Is globalisation a process or a condition? Most theories refer it as a process of transformation while ‘globality’ as a condition (Nava, 94). How do post-modernity relate to globalisation? What is the connection between a nation and globalisation? If there is a clear definition of this relationship, then does it undermine the nation? Alternatively, if the nation-state being transformed? Does globalisation entail internationalization whereby there is a raising intensity value exchange among different nations? To what extent is the process of globalisation defining the association between social structural values and territoriality? Is this relationship leading to deterritorialization of social interactions? In addition, what is the association that exist between global scenario and local scenario? The ground of these domain questions are in a wider theoretical traditions like functionalism, feminist, critical and postmodernism theories (Nava, 95). Therefore, rather focusing on classification of globalisation theories in discussing the impact of global consumer culture, a range of theoretical dissertations that typically serve as heuristic tools is noticeable from the discussion. The controversies perhaps may exist especially when theorizing cosmopolitanism since political and cultural belief supports the platform of cosmopolitan strands (Nava, 95). These beliefs existed in the English society in the first decades of the 20th century and have extended its spheres to business and social aspects like entertainments. This means that these explicit values not only define cosmopolitan culture but also a divergent cultural experience. Cosmopolitanism Hannerz (249) urged that in the contemporary world, consumer culture would comprise of its total separate parts. He used cosmopolitanism on the context of political community and geography and found that individuals put themselves as citizens of the states rather than of a specific locality. More so, they see themselves as the citizens of the world rather than of state. Therefore, this theory actively seeks to identify and abandon cultural biases more likely to be experienced in the process of cosmopolitanism. Hannerz (239) stated that cosmopolitanism is an orientation towards diversity that leads to cultural experience for several different social groups. During this process of experiencing different cultures, cosmopolitanism focuses on dissimilarities not homogeneity. For instance, as a result of increasing process of cultural globalisation, traditional practices in the world disappears and new ‘fishing techniques’ are adopted from diverse grounds. In the shadow of the above statement, a community like Afro-Germans (Latinos) have emerged. Ecuadorians women share the same flats with German a homosexual man, which was not to exist all through their origin. Apparently, this clear distinctive entity has subjected diverse communities to individual experience. However, Hannerz (241) said that being on the move perhaps may not turn an individual or group to a cosmopolitan culture. Tourism sector claims to be a factor that leads to cosmopolitan culture, but it just but not participant who can lead to the development of the culture. Those in exile as well as labour cannot be cosmopolitans either. The point here is as far as there is much significance of transnational cultures that offers new cultural experience to individuals, the mediating possibilities that leads to unitary of values remains an anticipated consideration. For example, cosmopolitans spend much of the time at home but those in exile through foreign films, books or even articles describing their personal experience can share the openness. Going through these articles (books and films) is a unique experience that does not entail face-to-face encounter. Indigenization Appadurai (57) featured the contemporary global culture to be the politics of mutual efforts of similarity and proclaimed that the triumphantly of ideas is earned through resilience (inclusion and openness) and in particular. The theory finds that globalization of the consumer culture perhaps may not be the same as its homogenization. Nevertheless, globalization uses a range of homogenization instruments, for instance, language, clothing style and promotion techniques, which the global cultural economies as well as the local political institutions readily absorb. Therefore, it implies that the relationship between the global culture and nation-states give a set of global disjuncture whereby the universal values of global cultural politics are holistically set just within the internationalized culture (Appadurai, 59). This outsource wide transformative processes for instance, various types of FTZ (Free Trade Zones) has developed to models for diverse production particularly on the ultra-modern products. This has masked not only social relationship but also increase the relationship of nation-states in the zone area. Therefore, the commodity flow in the global society transforms a consumer whereby the commodity is a real social agent of diverse society. Tomlinson (270) and Appadurai (59) had similar thoughts on the fact that globalization and culture is the concepts of simplification whereby they are intrinsic values are mutual to each other. At this point, culture is a constitutive to multifaceted global groups and therefore globalization of human culture is a body in which cultural relations well relates to the economic and political aspects in the society. The Culture Industry Technological rationale in the culture industry is the foundation of domination itself (Adorno and Horkheimer, 205). The coercive nature of the culture industry for instance defined by automobile and movies has made the industry go not beyond achievement of standardization that the mass have in common. The experience of individuals in the culture industry has lead to individual consciousness therefore endorsement of whatever product in the policy needs universality since the culture is for all. For instance, the leaders in western culture industry have the subjective purpose whereby there is incarnation of societal tendency. Therefore, divergent cultural experience in the industry engenders a way of production. World-system theory World-system analysis is distinctive sociological concept that came prior to the use of globalisation as a signifier of to cosmopolitan culture (Robinson, 270). A key structure in this theory divides the world into three distinct great regions: The Western Europe (later included North America and Japan). Second is the regions of subordinated to the core through colonialism (Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia. Third is the region is the semi-peripheral (the states that were in the core and are moving down the hierarchy, or those states that are moving up the hierarchy. Singapore is a small cosmopolitan society belonging to the group in the region that is moving up the hierarchy in the world-system theory. With anticipation, in the 21st century according to Yeoh (2010), there will be liveliness in culture through artistic creativity and social innovation that has been strengthened by the tourism sector in the country. At some point therefore, there is internalization of values whereby individuals explicitly present their native cultural values in order to harmonize with those from the west. Singapore becomes a cosmopolitan city by welcoming talents natured from business, performing arts and academia. Therefore, this transition defined by entire capitalist in the world-system would transform the culture into a new thing. New elements that define internationalized culture in the world-system theory thrown into the crucible enhance a new version of openness and creativity. The state as well develops a neo-liberal globalised project that is diverse. According to Yeoh (92), a cosmopolitan culture is very essential when it comes to gathering global talents and utilizing it to benefit a number of consumers. The point is that Singapore cosmopolitanism widens upwards in the world-system hierarchy but not sideways. The Network Society and Institutional Modernity (McDonalisation of Society) The Rise of the Network Society, Castell’s (135) theory, illustrates an advanced approach to globalisation. Network society does not base on the logic of capitalist development but rather depends on technological change that is a casual determinant of the process of globalisation. Insufficient understanding would lead to conclusion that globalisation of consumer culture destroys cultural identity. However, according to Tomlinson (274) creates identity and the elements needs a clear elaboration in order to reduce misinterpretation. The growth of McDonaldization Restaurant through the three regions of the world-system influences many cultures of the world. The definition of its success is from identity and divergent customer experience. Looking on the performance in terms of efficiency, McDonaldization Restaurant offered an inclusive method of getting individuals from serenity to sexual gratification (Tomlinson, 275). In terms of predictability, it offers few surprises to since individual likes a world with few surprises. Generally, the products offered by the restaurant honours an extensive number of people in the world. What is the relationship between postmodernism and globalisation then? Postmodern world is informational (knowledge-based), universal (defined by global scale production) and networked (productivity is based on global network interaction). Extension of franchises by McDonald is a vanguard form of social organization that figure out a global identity. Without that cosmopolitan culture then, the success of the company would be in a disjointed situation. The foreign influx of capitalism brought by network system reconfigures the state of shared values within a nation and builds a universal cultural experience of people (Yeoh, 95). The considerations would still be on the fact that the inhabitants can declare their differences and negotiate them in an affirmative and prolific way. Ritzer (20) examines the positive changes of modernized culture that relates to the implication Network Society and Institutional Modernization theory of globalisation. These includes: Products availability depends on time and geographical placement. People can do the interaction through texts massages, e-mails or even online dates that was quite impossible a while ago. In the contemporary world, an individual can access whatever he/she wants nearly instantaneous without any doubt whatsoever. A modernized culture has enables individuals to have wide options as well as alternatives to either high prices or poor quality of goods and services. Therefore, individuals can afford quality products easily. For instance, an individual can access to tickets for virtual vacations through internet without merely travelling for tickets for actual vacations. Culture developed in the postmodern system has comfort where the environment is safe, stable and seemingly no hostility. In addition, the organizational and advanced technological innovations would diffuse more easily considering the fact that network identical operators are readily available. McDonald Restaurant is the equivalent of modernity (Ritzer, 23). Mode of housing and customer service in the restaurant are more of contemporary world elements. Social processes that are involved in the restaurant forms the contemporary process of societal transformation. These contemporary processes incorporate both the local enterprises as well as global society. In conclusion, much contemplation on the monumental changes brought by globalization conceivably engenders potential contributions to the cosmopolitan culture. Globalisation does well when it comes to changes in social action and power. Increasing social polarization make an imperative movement towards divergent cultural experience. World system theory remarks on increased diverse innovations on the contemporary society, which is definitely right. These deliberate remarks congers with cosmopolitanism on the basis that an innovative global society perhaps may not necessarily need homogeneity of ideas, but rather individual experience. Work Cited Adorno, Theodor W., and J. M. Bernstein. The culture industry: selected essays on mass culture. London: Routledge, 2001. Print, 202-230. Appadurai, Arjun. The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective. England: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Print, pp. 55-59. Castells, Manuel. The rise of the network society. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 1996. Print, pp. 132-140. Hannerz, Ulf. Cosmopolitans and locals in world culture, in Mike Featherstone: Global culture, globalisation and modernity. London: sage, pp. 230-250.Top of Form Nava, Mica. (1996). Modernity’s disavowal: Women, the city and the department store. London: Routledge, pp. 85-96. Ritzer, George. The Blackwell companion to globalization. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006. Print, pp. 8-23. Tomlinson, John. Globalization and culture. Cambridge: Polity, 2003. Print, pp. 269-276. Yeoh, Brenda S. A., and Katie Willis. State/nation: perspectives on transnationalism in the Asia-Pacific. London: Routledge, 2004. Print, pp. 83-95. Bottom of Form Read More