The happy-go-luck belief of globalization needs a reality check. As mentioned in "Towards a Critique of Globalcentrism: Speculations on Capitalism's Nature, Coronil states that corporates' "image of globalization offers the promise of unified humanity no longer divided…as if they were underwritten by the desire to erase the scars of congenital past or to bring to harmonious end, these discourses set in motion the belief that the separate histories, geographies, and cultures that have divided humanity are now being brought together…"(Coronil 2). What then happens to those who have not forgotten about the factors that do not separate us, but rather, make us unique?
Gikandi questions the intentions of globalization and postcoloniality, "Do the key terms in both categories describe a general state of cultural transformation in a world where the authority of the nation-state has collapsed or are they codes for explaining a new set of amorphous images and a conflicting set of social conditions?" Gikandi argues that one can no longer assume that one's location and cultural practices have any sort of connection. Just because one lives in America does not mean he or she upholds American traditions and values.
When speaking of globalization, it is important not to forget its influence on language. The study of English literature is caught between nationalism and globalization. The English language has quickly become the "global" language and English Studies has become privileged in globalization. English Studies, and the writers taught within the department, are predominantly from England and America. What of English writers that are not British or American? What of Fernando Pessoa? What of Henry Louis Vivian Derozio? English departments are just as biased and unwilling to "globalize" and should not be praised. As Gikandi reminds us, "it was not until the 1960s that major English departments in the United States began to allow Jews, women, and blacks into their faculty" (Gikandi 648).
Works Cited
Coronil, Fernado. "Towards a Critique of Globalcentrism: Speculations of Capitalism's Nature.
Gikandi, Simon. "Globalization and the Claims of Postcoloniality."
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Globalization with a Side of Lies
Roza Gabrielyan
Professor Wexler
Eng 495ESM
17 May 2010
Globalization with a Side of Lies
Given the triumph of technological advancement, it is impossible to deny globalization and the effects of its transnational presence. David Held, author of Globalization/Anti-Globalization: Beyond the Great Divide, states that "the concept of globalization describes a structural shift underway in the organization of human affairs; from a world of discrete but independent national states to the world as a shared social space" (Held 52). Citizens of the world must ask themselves whether or not they want an "interconnectedness" of values and traditions. Do we want to blur the boundaries of culture? Are we willing to victimize ourselves for an opportunity to compete in the world market? How far are hyperglobalists willing to go in order to shove this "world-wide expansion" down our throats? Far enough for Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy to create Slumdog Millionaire in 2008, a film which makes globalization simple; if you want freedom and success, then you must embrace westernization. In Slumdog Millionaire, the show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" is meant to represent the Indian desire for democracy, capitalism, and the benefits it produces, but in truth, it promotes the belief, or better yet myth that with westernization comes opportunity and eventually, wealth and success.
The television game show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" first originated in United Kingdom. The show has slithered across UK boundaries and found itself in India where it has immersed itself into Indian culture. What better example of globalization than a television show reaching every corner of the globe? After all, "technology has now created the possibility and even the likelihood of global culture. The Internet, fax machines, satellites, and cable TV are sweeping away cultural boundaries. Global entertainment companies shape the perceptions and dreams of ordinary citizens, wherever they live" (Thorup 2). Almost every single person in India watches the show, which is meant to signify the Indian desire for democracy and capitalism. The show's intent is to allow anyone, rich or poor, the chance to achieve the "American Dream." In "Slumdog Millionaire" that anyone is Jamal Malik. Jamal, the perfect of example of your regular Joe Shmoe, is a lucky chai deliverer for Excel Five Communications who, by a precise calculation from the technical department, becomes a contestant of the game show in hopes of finding his true love. The premise of the movie is that even a regular Joe has a chance to attain the "dream" as long as he embraces western customs and ideals. Near the end of the movie Jamal asks Latika why people watch "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" and Latika responds, "Because it is a chance to escape. Walk into another life." Latika's response suggests that if you want freedom and success, you must embrace globalization.
Literature, money, religion, and technology are some of the many means through which cultures globalize and embrace western customs and ideals. Coincidently, the questions asked in the game show during the movie are all about French literature, American money, Hindu religion, and American technology (revolver), suggesting that to achieve success you must embrace globalization. Jamal answers all of these questions correctly, but "happens" to not know the answer to the one question pertaining to his own country and cultural identity, "What is the phrase written underneath the lions on India's National Emblem?" When Jamal answers this question incorrectly, the viewer asks him or herself if the truth alone does triumph. Jamal's inability to remember his cultural phrase "Truth Alone Triumphs" makes him an example for all viewers; dismiss your eastern culture and embrace those that are western if you wish to succeed. Jamal is the prototype of globalization creating the perfect "western" male. He dresses in western fashion, works at an American company, challenges his "Eastern" brother Salim and is familiar with western literature, technology, and capitalistic ideals.
Although Jamal is the prototype of the "globalized" male, a careful viewer can see his dismissal of western values and globalization. During the movie, the Millionaire producer/commentator provides Jamal with an answer to a question. The producer is his show which is a symbol for transnationalism. However, Jamal does not trust the producer and by default of my argument, globalization, because he chooses D:Jack Hobbs when the producer had suggested b:Ricky Ponting. Jamal did not give in to globalization which is, in essence, a lie. A viewer cannot ignore the fact that the characters in the film that are viewed as corrupt: Salim, Maman, and Jarah Khan, are the ones who have accepted globalization which includes capitalism (cheap labor for maximum profit), technology, and multiculturalism. Maman exploits children for money, but pretends to be a kind savior, Jarah Khan is a gangster who is turning the slums into skyscrapers, and Salim sells out his own brother for a few measly dollars. Just like globalization, the antagonists in the film disguise their true motives under a veil of social and financial progress. Greed, pride, and gluttony become the main motivator when globalization comes into play. What happens to these three characters at the end of the movie? They die. If anything, the film should be a warning to all viewers about the effects of globalization.
Slumdog Millionaire attempts to endow viewers with a love for western identity and a dismissal of the cruel practices and beliefs of eastern cultures through the use of the game show "Who Wants to be a Millionaire", but instead, inadvertently warns viewers of the consequences of globalization.
Works Cited
Held, David. McGrew, Anthony. Globalization/Anti-Globalization: Beyond the Great Divide.
Second Edition. Polity Press, United Kingdom. 2007.
Thorup, Mikkel. Sȋ Resen, Mads P. "Inescapably Side by Side". Polity: Feb 2004. 14 May 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)