Globalisation and Culture.hochschild

8/13/2019 Globalisation and Culture.hochschild

1/5

Globalisation and CultureAuthor(s): Adam HochschildSource: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 33, No. 21 (May 23-29, 1998), pp. 1235-1238Published by: Economic and Political WeeklyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4406800

Accessed: 26/03/2010 22:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epw.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Economic and Political Weeklyis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Economic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4406800?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epwhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epwhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4406800?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/5

PERSPECTIVESGlobalisationand CultureAdam HochschildIn some ways the effects of free trade in iages and information aremore far-reaching than those of trade in tangible objects, for here weare talking about forces that mould mlinds, tastes and values. Facedwith the inevitability of a high degree of globalisation, it is necessarynot to lose sight of the ideal of a better kind of globalisation, anexchange among equals in which cultures borrow from each otherjudiciously and selectively, and where what crosses borders mosteasily are not brand names but good ideas.A CURIOUSpersonalexperiencemade mereaiise for the first time what a powerfulforce globalisation is.As anAmericanournalist,Iwas workingin 1991 in what was then still the SovietUnion.I spentseveraldays in a town calledOmsukchan, n the far north-eastcornerofSiberia.This was only a few monthsafterthe Soviets had removed the last rulesrestrictingwhere foreigners could travel,andwhenIgototf theairplane tOmsukchan,people told me that I was the first foreignjournalist who had ever been there.It is always a rare and heady experienceto be the firstmemberof yourtribe to visitaparticular lace.Fora brief momentat eastyou feel like the explorersof old. The dayafter my arrival n Omsukchan I woke upin thedingy little hotelwhereI was staying,whose hot watersystemwas shutdown forrepairs, ndnoticed hatmyroomhadasmalltelevision set. What did they have on TVuphere at thetopof the world?Iwondered.Reindeermeatrecipes?The snowfallreport?Adocumentary boutpermafrost? switchedthe TV on.There on the screen was the face of awoman I had sat next to at a dinner partyin Los Angeles a few years before, FrancesLear,ex-wife of the hugely successful USTV producerNormanLear.She was tellingan interviewer in English, with a Russianvoice - overadded)about the magazineshehadrecently tarted, alled,modestly,Lear's."It'seasy, Bob",she was saying, "Ifyou'vegot a good idea, andyou've got some goodpeople to work with you, and you've gotfaitl in youridea,thenanybodycan do it..."She turnedout to be one of a series ofAmericanmulti-millionaires elling CableNews Network CNN) howthey made theirmulti-millions.CNNitself was notyetbroad-casting in Russia,but it was clearly selling- or perhapsgiving, so that viewers woulddevelopataste-excerptsfrom tsprogramm-ing to a Russiannetwork, one of the onlytwo channels available in Omsukchan.

I have often thoughtback over this littleepisode,which eftmyexplorer'spridemuchdiminished.Thereare, tseemstome,severalsignificant points about it.*Television'spenetrations instant. tmovesmiuchmorequickly thanpeople or materialgoods.In hiscase,CNNprogramming,illedwith images of the American elite, hadreached Omsukchan before any liveAmerican had done so.* The programmeI was watchingon that'TV set was not indigenously produced.Itwas, like so many productsof multinationalcorporations,produced halfway round theworld - yet it was available for a fractionof what it would have cost to producesomething similar locally.* The particulardream Frances Lear waspromotingwas virtually naccessible to anySiberianviewer. For thatmatter, he dreamof striking trichby startinga newmagazinewas inaccessible to almostany Americanasw,ell unless he or she hadasstart-up apitalthe equivalentof FrancesLear's rumoured$30 to $40 million divorce settlement.*As thisparticulardollopofAmerican alueswas exportedto Siberia,what was flowingsoquicklyandeasilyacross nationalborderswas not the best of what American ife hasto offer - its democraticspirit, ts tolerancetor eccentricity and diversity, its can-dopragmatism,ts rambunctious isrespect orthepowerful.Instead, t wasone of the moredubious aspects of our culture,the illusionthat anyone can become a millionaire.What do we mean when we talk aboutglobalisation?Mostcommonlyit meanstheremoval of national boundaries asimpediments o the free flow of capital,ofgoods, of services. The entire system iscrafted,ofcourse,mostly byand orthegreatmultinational corporations, who areincreasingly nthebusinessof raisingcapitalin one part of the world, investing it inanother,to producesomething that can besold in a third.Any great imperialsystemis always accompanied by declarations of

noblepurpose.19thcenturycolonialismwasjustified as the white man's burden; theSoviet gripon easternEuropewasjustifiedas upholding the proletariat against thebourgeoisie; the rule of the multinationals,the new imperialistsof our age, is justifiedas levelling the internationalplaying fieldand allowing fair competition.I leave it toothers opointoutthepotentialresults of globalisation in terms-of capital,services, and materialgoods, particularly sthis affects poorercountries. Herein India,thoughtful people seem well aware of thedangers,havingalreadybeenthroughpainfuleventslike thecontroversyoverpatent ightsto theproductsof the neemtree,which nowseems to be replaying itself in connectionwith basmatirice. Indeed,one of the thingsthat strikesan Americanvisitor here is howmuch more news and commentary here isaboutthis issue thanone sees in the US. Forexample, the international agreement onliberalisation of tradein financial servicessigned severalmonthsago, whichpaves theway for American andEuropeanbanksandinsurance ompanies oexpanddramaticallythroughoutthe world, was deservedly thesubject of much worried comment in theIndian press. I suspect 99 per cent ofAmericans were completely unawareof it.I find myself, however, more interestedin another kind of globalisation:free tradenot in materialproductsor services, but inimages and information.In some ways theeffects are more far-reaching hanthose ofthe trade n tangibleobjects, forhere we aretalking about the forces that mold minds,tastes, values. And, like many trends thathave immense, complex and sometimesharmful ffects, the whole systemsounds asif it is directedtowardsworthyends. Afterall, who could be opposed to free trade ininformationandideas? When we hearsuchwords, we imagine people reading booksandpamphletsaboutconceptslike freedom,democracy, human rights, social justice.Surely, good ideas like these have beencrossing nationalboundariesfor centuries.The dreamof humanrightsembodied n theFrench Revolution has shaped historythroughout he world in the two centuriessince then. The socialist dream of thefollowing century,despite its perversion nthe easternbloc, was,andto someextent stillremains, a contagious and powerful force.Some of thegreatreligions- Buddhism, orexample- havespreadby the force of ideasand not because of the gun and the sword.Gandhi drew inspirationfrom Christianityand westerndemocracy,andusedthoseverytraditions o fuel the resistanceagainst theundemocraticempire of ChristianBritain.Nehruspeaks in his autobiographyof how

Economic and Political Weekly May 23, 1998 1235


3/5

inspired he was by the IrishpatriotRogerCasement. In turn, Martin LutherKing Jrdrew inspirationfrom Gandhiand Nehru.The resistancemovementsamongblacks inthe American south and in South Africainfluenced each other. The list could go on.But increasingly, the free flow ofinformation oday does not concern nobleideas. Indeed, some of the countries nowprofitingmightilyfrom the globalisationoftrade- Singaporeand China, for instance- practiseharshpress censorship. Instead,the free tlow of information hat concernscontemporarytrade negotiators refers toinformation scommodity, nformation hatcan be bought and sold: the printedwordand, above all, the moving image.As with other ypesof trade iberalisation,wealthy countries have a huge head-startover poorones. Even before the new traderules, the prevalence of English as aninternational anguage and the strengthofthe majorcorporationsalreadyestablishedhadgiven British andAmericanpublishersa commandingposition in the world bookmarket,as a visit to any bookstorein Indiawill confirm.When t comestoAfrica,wherebetween SouthAfricaandthe Sahara hereis virtuallyno indigenous book publishingwhatever, t is BritishandFrenchpublishers.The African school text book market isdominated by the British publisherHeinemannand the Frenchfirm Gallimard.Justas it was in the old days, whatAfricanschool childrenread s still mostlyedited inLondon and Paris.Inthe fieldsof film andtelevision,westernpresence worldwide is also immense.American ilm studioshave ensofthousandsof old moviesintheirarchives:TV networkshave literally hundreds of thousands ofepisodes of old TV shows. The sheer sizeof these arsenalsoverwhelms those of mostothercountries,especially thepoorones. Asdoes the fact that any additional overseassaleof this kindof commoditymeans,unlikesales of other products, no additionalmanufacturing ost to the seller. The film,the TV show, is alreadymade.There s similardominancewhenit comesto television news. TV news production sexpensive:to producea streamof news thatflows seamlessly from studio anchor o on-the-scene reportto talking-headspanel tomini-documentaryyou must have widelyscatteredeamsof reporters ndof soundandcameraoperators,video editing equipment,satellite inks, studiosin differentcities. Allthis is more expensive still when viewerswantthatstream o flow day andnight.TheBBC, RupertMurdoch,CNN andthe othermajorAmericannetworkscan producethisunending flow of TV news; few otherorganisationsare wealthy enough to do so.CNN or the BBC,e B o be sure, give theviewer some sense of what is happening n

the world - something that, sadly, cannotbe said for TV news in the manycountrieswhere it is little more than politicalpropaganda. specially nmomentsofcrisis,we have all experienced the way CNN orthe BBC can be prime, vital sources ofinformation.Governmental ecisions okeepsuch channelsoutof one countryor anotherhave usually been motivatedby a desire tocensorandcontrol he news.Yet,at thesametime, the proliferationof first world newsanddocumentary utletsputsa verywesterntwist on what the world sees. How manyhoursof the Discovery Channel must youwatch before learning thatpeople, and notjustwild animals, ive in Africa?Howmanyhours about Bill Clinton and MonicaLewinskyhave CNN's viewers around heglobe seen forevery minuteabout GAT'seffect on the poor?How manyhours aboutDiana's death have BBC viewers seen forevery minute about women in Africa andAsia'?Whateffect, in turn,does thiscornucopiaof images have on the minds of people inthe world's south?Ina thousandsubtleandolten unconscious ways, I think, it buildsand reinforces a sense of being on theperiphery.That feeling was often there tobegin with as a legacy of colonialism,butit has surely been increasedby the impactof western ilms andtelevision, whose reachinto most people's daily lives is far morepervasive han hatof sun-helmeted olonialofficers ever was. Throughoutwest Africatoday,forexample.one sees advertisementsfor skin-lighteningcreams. Indianfeelingsabout skin colour have their origins evenbefore the colonial era, but I am sure theyhave only been magnified by the implicitmessage of western media on this score.Look at the number of matrimonialadvertisements in any Indian Sundaynewspaper hatmention 'fair'or 'wheatish'complexions. And when, in an ad in a slickIndianmagazine,haveyoueverseen a dark-skinnedmodel?Indeed, he featuresof manymodels nsuchadsareethnicallyambiguous- hair darkenough to be Indian,skin lightenough to be European.In the realmof filmed entertainment, hedomination f Europeand he USis, inmuchof the world, more pervasive than it is innews. Thereare, orexample,approximately4,000 feature films shown on Braziliantelevision each year. Ninety nine per centof them areproduced n the US or Europe.'Unfortunately his wave is overwhelmingacountrywit lalively,distinctive,multi-ethniccultureof its own- and withsome fine film-makers.In most of Africa, the situationiseven worse: many countries are virtuallybankrupt and can afford no televisionproduction of their own except forprogrammes lorifyingwhatever trongmanis in power.Almost the entireentertainment

fare is imported.In Senegal, ironicallythehome of Africa's most distinguishedfilm-maker, Ousmane Sembene, I've seenvillagers n amud-walled ourtyardwatchingFrenchsoap operas.The problemof beingoverwhelmed by cultural imports is notrestricted o poorcountries. InCanada,oneof the wealthiest, more than 97 per cent offilms shown in theatersare foreign, mostlyAmerican.This flow of cultureacrossborderswouldbesomething ocelebrate, ather hanmourn,if ideas and magesflowed bothways, nsteadof almost entirely from the US andEuropeto the rest of the world. It would also besomething to celebrate if what crossednationalboundariesmosteasily wasthebestof each culture and not the worst. One ofthethingsIcherishabout heUS,forexample,is the culture of its educationalsystem: theassumptionsthatstudents shouldthink,notregurgitate acts;that earningevolves fromdebateanddiscussion,not fromtakingnoteson what the professor says; that vigorousdisagreement s the hallmarkof good teach-ing, notasignof discourtesy.Yet,everytimeI walk intoa school oruniversityclassroomin most otherplaces in the world- even ifit is filled with studentshoping to come toAmerica ostudy I am struckwithhow littleAmerican educationalculture has spread.In other realms of culture, there areAmericanandEuropean ilmlshat aregreatworks of art,and American and EuropeanTV documentaries hat deal seriously withvitalpoliticaland social issues.But theseare*seldomwhatgets sent abroaid.nstead, ilmand TV exports are those that will appealto the largest possible audience, and thatusually means what is most violent. Forinternational entertainmententrepreneurs,violence hasthegreatadvantageof crossingthelanguageand iteracybarriers. trequiresno subtitlesor dubbing,each of which, thelatter especially, costs a film distributorconsiderable money. An audience whichspeaks only Telegu or Malay or Zulu willstill pay to watch HarrisonFordblastspacealiens with his lasergun. Look at the localnewspaper's list of English languagefilmsshowing in any city in India. The greatmajorityof them will be Hollywoodthrillersof this sort.Economic and Political Weekly

available from:Churchgate Book Stall

Churchgate StationOpp Indian Merchant ChambersChurchgateMumbai - 400 020

1236 Economic and Political Weekly May 23, 1998


4/5

The appeal of that western massentertainmentotbasedon violence susuallybased on consumption. (Sometimes, aswith James Bond andhis hi-tech gadgetry,the appeal rests on both.) Television pro-gramming'svery origin was as somethingthat could be interspersed with adver-tisements. The content of the shows -'Dallas', 'Dynasty', 'Lifestyles of the RichandFamous',and so on - usuallyreinforcesthe consumption ethic. The 'shoppingchannels' on television are the ultimateexpressionof this. Infilms,theconsumptionconnection s less blatant,but t is still there.Increasingly manufacturers pay hefty'placement' ees tofilm-makers oguaranteethat their brandof automobile, soft drink,computer rwhatever s shownon thescreen.The makers of Ray-Ban sunglasses spent$3.5 milliononcombinedpromotion f theirnew 'Predator ' product ine and the film'Men in Black', whose heroes wear theseglasses to protect hemselvesagainstdeadlyrays.2When westernpoliticians talk loftilyabout great ideas crossing nationalboundaries, onsumption s usually neffectthe great idea involved. Notice how oftenthesedaysWashingtonpeaksofencouragingcountries o become 'marketdemocracies'.The multinational orporations odayspendon advertisingalone, by one estimate, welloverhalf of what all the nationsof the worldcombined spend on education.3In the US today, surely foreshadowingwhat will happenin the rest of the world,the line between advertisingand educationis fastdissolving. Cash-starvedpublic (i e,government)choolsareaccepting n ncreas-ing amountof money and equipmentfromthe multinationals, n returnfor allowingcorporateadvertising in school hallways,lavatories, buses and stadiums, and on aspecialyouth-rargeting Vnewsprogrammethat s now seen in classroomsdaily inabout40 percent of the country's high schools.4Sometimeswhat hecorporation etsinreturnis an exclusive contract to sell its productsat the school. "You wantto get them startedyoung and hopefully keep them for life -that's whatbrand oyalty is all about",saysyouthmarketing pecialist IraMayer.5TheColoradoSprings.Coloradoschool district,forexample,will receive$8 million overthenext 10yearsfromthe Coca-Cola Co - aiidstillmore fdistrict tudentsbuyfromschoolvending machines more than 70,000 casesof Cokeproducts year.Nikedistributeskitstoschools hat how howa Nikerunning hoeismade.Computerompaniesdonate ompu-ters- with advertisementson their 'screensaver'programmes. ometimes hecorpora-tionwill also exact in return or itsdonationan agreement hat school faculty memberswill not speak critically of its products.Justas the line between the consumptionethic andeducation s dissolving, so is that

that between it and religion. Consumptionis, infact,the newreligionof ourtime. Oftenit even takes on the magical elements oftraditional eligions.In he atestJamesBondmovie,for nstance, TomorrowNeverDies',Bondbraves,unscathed, ome of theclassicelements thatimpedemortalbeings:air(heflies a fighter plane and does free-fallparachuting),water(herehe has the helpofScuba-diving equipment) and fire (whichconsumes the villain's lair but leaves Bondmiraculously nharmed shedashes hroughtheflames).Thechariotof thisparticulargodis a remote-controlled BMW, whoseelectrically-charged door-handles, secretcompartmentsandotherweaponrymake itimperviousto harm.An arrayof additionalgadgets thingsthat ook like wrist-watchesor cell phonesbut have manyotherpowersas well - serve the role of amulets, withsupernatural estructiveforce as strong asthatof a thunderbolt romShiva orJehovah.When blasting space raiderswith a lasergun becomes the norm of entertainmentworldwide,and when everyone's attentionspan is shortenedby television, and whenTV and movies are increasingly seen asvehiclesto sellproducts, raditional rt ormseverywherearethreatened.And sometimesartformsthatarenot traditionalbut simplyaspireto do somethinghigher:speakingatthe Kochi PressClubinMarch, outh Indianfilm-makers Balu Mahendraand BharathiRajablamedthe crisis in their ndustry,andthe lack of new quality films, on the waypopular astes have been changedby MTVand its imitators.6It is extremely hard to combat the sea-change of taste brought about by theglobalisationof culture.Even if you and Iagree thata Satyajit Ray movie is superiorto a James Bond movie, or that a Kathakaliperformance s superior to an episode of'Dynasty', or thata documentaryon globalhunger s preferable o one on Bill Clintonand MonicaLewinsky,do we havetherightto impose our cultural preferences oneveryone else - most of whom, probably,prefer the opposite'?Of course we don't;history has grim lessons of what happensw,hen overnments ssume heright o decidewhat s culturallypermissibleandwhat sn't.Andeven if we did have the rightto decidethis,andhadabsolutepower,what couldwedo'? f we bannedJamesBondor 'Dynasty'ormorenewsoftheWhiteHousesexscandal,we would then immediatelyturn whateverwe censored into a forbidden fruit thateveryone would be ravenousto consume.The Soviet Union long banned almost allcultural mportsfrom the west; as a resultany Americanor western Europeanbook,newspaper,or magazine was passed fromhand-to-hand, eadeagerlyfor months untilit was in tatters,andinvariablyregardedasthe gospel truth.

Nonetheless,thereare hingsgovernmentscando. Andthe mainoneis simplytoensure,by means of subsidies andregulations, hatpeople will continue to have a choice incultural are-between thatwhich s importedand that which is indigenous, and betweenthat which is designed as sales vehicles forcorporateproductsandthatwhichis of moresubstance.Inthe crucialrealmof televisionbroadcasting, for example, corporateadvertisers will always supportthe action/adventure hows, but it maytakepublictaxmoney (as with the BBC) to supportprogrammingof more depth.Furthermore,the airwaves are public property, and inreturn or using them, broadcasters an berequired as in the US) to producea certainminimumnumberof hours of educationalor children's or local-origin programming.Curiously, the most intense battle nowunder way over the issue of culturalglobalisation is among nations of the firstworld.ThecountrywhichhasbeenthemostoutspokensFrance although, aradoxically,it remains the leading neo-imperialpower,economically and culturally, in Africa).France has used two majorweapons in theculture wars. First, more than any othercountry,it has long lavishly subsidisedthearts, including the superb French filmindustry. Second, it has been the mostvociferous backer of the EuropeanCommunityguideline thatsays that at leasthalfof what is shownon EuropeanTV mustbe produced n Europe.Whatthe Frenchand,to someextentotherEuropeans worryabout is that between 1986 and 1996,European films lost half their market toHollywood. With the rise of CNN andMurdoch and the growing knowledge ofEnglish, the same trend is under way intelevision.France'sarge ubsidies or tsfilm ndustrycome from a tax onmovie theatre ickets andvideo rentals. Since many viewers arewatchingAmerican ilmsandvideos, the USis claiming, under the level-playing-fieldtrade doctrine, that the system is unfair.France's film-makers are up in arms,frightened hat heirsubsidiesmaydisappearor may have to be shared with Hollywood.Theyhavestrongsupport rom hecountry'swriters,composers and ministerof culture.Two other nations that share the Frenchposition are Canada,whose National FilmBoardhas ong been knownfortheexcellentdocumentaries t subsidises, and Australia,wheregenerousfinancialsupport rombothnational and state governmentshas helpednurture livelyfilm ndustry.These countrieshave-taken he positionthat there should bea 'culturalexception' to trade ruleswhen itcomes to matters such as books, films, andTV. It is not at all clear,however, thattheywill prevail nthenegotiationsabout histhatare going on right now under the auspices

Economic and Political Weekly May 23, 1998 1237


5/5

of the Organisation for EconomicCooperationand Development.* * *

In maintaining distinct cultural dentity- or, perhapsmore correctly speaking, acollectionof cultural dentities of its own,India has fared much better than mostcountries of the south. Of great help herehavebeen the factthatsomeof its languageshavebeen writtenones for a millennium orlonger,and hatmanyof thelanguagegroupshave populations arge enough to supporthealthy-sizedbook publishing, newspaperand film industries. With domestically-produced ilms attractingmorethan90 percent of the country's film viewers, India isin far less dangerthan Europe and Africaof beingoverwhelmedby American are onits movie screens. Indeed, it is one of thefewcountries f the southwithafilm ndustrythat has considerable export earnings. Intelevision as well, indigenous culture hasprovedapowerful orce.Thefilming forTVof the Mhlahhbarcatand the Ramayanaatew yearsago is somethingwhose immensescale and popularity has been almostunparalleledanywhere on earth.However,just because a television showor film is produced n the third worlddoesnotmean t is freeof the firstworld'sreligionof consumption. I began with an exampleof anexperience n Siberia; et me end withone in India.Several monthsago I went tosee - withsome friendswho could translate- the big Hindi languagehit film fromlastyear, 'DilTo PagalHai'.Now here s a filmin whose production here seems no handofanymultinationalorporation:tsproducer,director.and actors were all Indian,and, sofarasIknow,its financialbackersalso. Andyet.consider hisfilmcarefully.Ifyoucouldturnoff the Hindi language of the soundtrack,and if you could forget for a momentthe faces of the actors, there is virtuallynothingabout hismovie thatwouldtell youit was set in India.The plot is borrowedfromn Americanfilm of some years ago. There are no streetscenes in India. There are, however, briefstreet scenes in the European Disneylandandin London,where one of the two mainmalecharacterss makinghis fortune.Whenhe thinkshe has won his woman he makesthevictoriousdownwarderkof theclenchedfistthatAmerican rofessionalathletesnmkewhen scoring a goal oi pooint.The film'sinterior hots takeplacein a modernairport.in a luxuriousprivate-roomhospital,and inultra-westernhomes. Shots of 747's andprivateplanestakingoff andlandingsignalthe movements of the characters.Almosteveryone wears westerndress, the womenmostly leotardsand mini-skirts.Thedancesare American disco, not Indian. Thecharacters use a conspicuously displayed

variety of cell phones, beepers and cars.Theyconsumemineralwater,Japanese ood,andhuge quantitiesof Pepsi - the companymusthave paidheavy 'productplacement'fees. The hero's imagineddream andscapeof rollinggreenpastures, hroughwhichtheheroineruns n a flowing whitedress,is notan Indianlandscape. And so, all told, wehave an Indianfilm without India in it.A sceptic might ask, what right do you,all American, someone coming from thecountry hatconsumesthe mostof all, haveto preach against consumption in othercountries?Do youpractisewhatyoupreach?Are you willing to abandonyour own car,your ax,yourcomputer? houldn'tAfricans,Indians,or anyoneelse have as much rightto lust after such things as do people in theUS and Europe?Of course they do. But we cannot talkofpeople's wishes to possess different typeso' goods as if those desires arise naturally,of their own accord. They are, instead, aproductof the complex processwhich IvanI lichcalls"the nventionof needs".Whethera personfeels morestronglythe need for aPepsi or for a high-proteinmeal, for a cellphone or for a well that will provide safedrinkingwater,for wrap-around unglassesor for a book for his or her child - all thesearenotnecessarily ational, ducated hoices.Instead, hey are profbundly nfluencedbyadvertising,and by the barrageof imagery

that surrounds us, especially that whichreaches us throughthe all-powerful mediaof movie andtelevision screens. Itis. orthisreasonthat t is as important or any societyto thinkaboutpolicy questionsin the realmof cultureas in the realmof education.Eventhough, in tackling the former, there areenormousdifficulties: the cost of subsidies,the need to avoid censorship, and theinevitability f ahighdegreeofglobalisation.Faced with that inevitability, let us notlose sight of the ideal of a better kind ofglobalisation,anexchange amongequalsinwhich cultures borrow from,each otherjudiciously andselectively, andwherewhatcrosses borders most easily are not brandnames, but good ideas. In today's worldcreating this will not be easy.

NotesI Richard Barnet and John Cavanagh,'Homogenisationof Global Culture' in JerryMander and Edward Goldsmith (eds), TheCase againlst iheGlobalEconomy,SierraClub

Books, San Francisco, 1996, p 77.2 Business Line and The Hindu, October 30,1997.3 TonyClarke, Mechanismsof CorporateRule'in JerryManderandEdwardGoldsmith(eds),The Case against Global Economy, SierraClub Books, San Francisco. 1996, p 3()0.4 lWashingtonPost, March 9, 1998.5 New YorkTimoes,March 10, 1998.6 IblianllExpress,Thiruvananthapuramdition,March 3, 1998.

*THEADI-BUDDHA/KanaialHaza Rs.125 *DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR BUDDHIST* AMBEDKARENTENARYOCIALUSTICE REVOLUTIONCOUNTER-REVOLUTIONANDTHEUNDONE AST/JusticeVRKrishne INANCIENTNDIA/D.C. hir Rs.300lyer Rs.120* HERITAGEFBUDDHISM/D.C.Ahirs.195* BUDDHISM:ndia 0 YearsofIndependence: THELEGACY F DR. AMBEDKAR:harat1947-97-Status, Growth& Development Ratna/D.C.Ahir Rs.280(PB)80Vol.6/D.C.Ahir Rs.250* ROYALPATRONAGEOF BUDDHISM N* BUDDHISTHRINESNINDIA/DC Ahir ANCIENTNDIA/KanaialHazra Rs.275Rs.95* SPITI: A Buddhist Land in Western* CONSTITUTIONOF THE BUDDHIST Himalaya/V.Verma Rs.275SANGHA/KanaiLalHazra Rs.110* STUDIES IN PALI AND BUDDHISM:A* DAGGERBLESSING: he TibetanPhurpa Memorlal Volume in Honour of BhikkuCult: Reflections and Materials/ Thomas Jagdish Kashyap/AKNarain Rs.180Marcotty Rs.160* STUDIESON PALICOMMENTARIES/Kanai* DRAMBEDKARNDTHEDALIT UTURE,LalHazra Rs.320VR Krishnayer Rs.120" THETHEOGONY FTHEHINDOOSWITH* DR.AMBEDKARNDPUNJAB/DC Ahir THEIRYSTEMSOFPHILOSOPHY ANDRs.125 COSMOGONY: An Essay/ Count M* DR.AMBEDKAR'SISIONOFDHAMMA:n Bjomstjema Rs.80Assessment/ D.C.Ahir Rs.225* UDANVARGA:Collection of Verses from* DR.AMBEDKAR,UDDHISMNDSOCIAL the Buddhist Canon. Compiled byCHANGE/AKNarain&D CAhir FR.190 Dharmatrat W.WoodvileRockhill Rs.100BRPC (INDIA) LTD.4222/1, AnsariRoad, DaryaGanj,New Delhi-2.Phone:3259196, E-Mail:[email protected]

1238 Economic and Political Weekly May 23, 1998

Documents

Globalisation and Culture.hochschild