Globalization and cultures
This entry was written in preparation for the third in a series of three videoconference meetings among Khabarovsk State Academy of Economics and Law in the Russian Far East and Stanford students enrolled in the PWR 2 class "(R)evolutions in Environmental Rhetoric". The focus of this videoconference is "Globalization: Opportunities and Challenges”.
Tasya Lopatina: Culture and Subculture: Influence on Language
“Culture” is a complicated notion. More than 50 definitions of culture exist and all of them add to each other.
In my understanding, culture is a system of values, views on the world and society, degree of moral and intellectual education; culture can be material and spiritual. Spiritual culture includes ideas, apprentiships, views, language, while material culture represents material things made by men, in order to transfer to next generations ideas, thoughts and minds of their creators (e.g. canvases, cinema, music….). For example, we have an academic discipline, called “Culturology”, which reveals art as well as style of life of different centuries and nations to us.
“Subculture” is a more specific notion, although not easily defined, as well. I can say that some of my groupmates brightly represent anime-subculture. They use special vocabulary in their speech, they wear clothes and accessorizes, which make them look like characters of anime-films. Also, they have some peculiar philosophic views – something like “Peace and entertaining forever!”.
As for me, I personally don’t belong to any subculture, although there are a lot of them (mostly borrowed from the West). But my attitude to all of them is loyal and I can socialize and communicate with many of such “informal representatives” easily.
What concerns me most of all, is the way people operate with the language, as a part of spiritual culture, each nation holds.
In my mind, the problem of speech culture is one of the most important for any nation in the world. And it does have a lot to do with keeping spiritual culture of a nation.
Regrettably, one of the recent tendencies is that people pay less attention to the way the express themselves. Language in general tends to be oversimplified and people often corrupt it. Even on the radio and on TV we can hear prominent people and politicians misusing and mispronouncing words, and even using slang. What is the reason of such carelessness to language, thus to spiritual culture of a nation?
There might be a lot of reasons, and it has to be researched seriously.
I think that one of the reasons might be that people have stopped reading classical literature and writing regular letters to each other. Instead, they endlessly watch TV, surf the Internet and communicate with SMS, briefly and symbolically. As a result, people are getting used to operating with a limited number of words to describe the world around them and they seem to be satisfied with what they hear from each other. For example, the most popular words to express positive attitudes to something or somebody, among the youth, have become such words as “kruto” and “klassno” (something like “cool” and “neat” in English). You can hear them all the time, and everywhere.
Another aspect of the problem is using “rude” vocabulary. It has always been popular for some people in some circles of our society to use dirty words when speaking, but nowadays even kids and schoolchildren can hear and pick dirty language when they watch films on TV.
I personally am trying to use appropriate language and to encourage my groupmates to do the same, but the environment is very appealing to the opposite – to simplify and to misuse the language.
I am interested if you consider this as an emerging problem in your society and what ways you consider as effective to keep the language clean and culturally appropriate?
Nadya Ignatkina: Is fast food destroying our food culture?
Globalization of the food process depends on "eternal search" for new sensations and international trading system. Research, which was made by ecologist Yana Vamosy for the University of Calgary, demonstrates a superiority of humankind all over the world in the terms of food diversity. Our food contains products related to the large number of species. Also scientists analyzed food ingredients. Most conventional food is made up from more than 20 ingredients. The conclusion they made is that the hamburger is a symptom of globalization.
During the centuries in Russia food was known as homemade food, no more. Only the 20th century has changed everything: fast food became the industry. In Russia the empire of fast-food has won hearts and stomachs of growing generation and adults, who do not make a cult of meal. The process took only 15 years! Russian children get used to eat such food as crisps, rusks, noodle of fast cooking, fruit-drops. That is why the government of our country has forbidden selling crisps, candies and fizzy drinks at schools. The tradition of having meal at home is very strong, especially here in the Far East. However, we live faster and faster and as a result, homemade food is being gradually superseded by prepared food. Having a lunch at home in the middle of a working day becomes a luxury.
I am studying and working at the Far-Eastern State University of Humanities. That is why I can see everyday life of our university. Unfortunately, our students eat many hamburgers, drink a lot of soda and so on. However, at the same time, students today more often buy salads, drink fruit juice. As for me, I have to stay at the university all day long. That is why I try to take homemade lunch with me to the university. Certainly, I buy some chocolate, but I need it because I spend many calories. I think that I have a healthy lifestyle as far as it is possible!
Do your families have any traditions of having meal at home, for example, as Sunday lunch?
Nastya Sapronova: Music in the era of Globalization
Some people accept the process of globalization more positively, others don’t. Apparently, it has a lot to do with interconnectedness between the world cultures and I personally think, that there is at least one reason to appreciate globalization for – it gives me an indisputable reason for being proud of my country’s contribution to the creation of world music.
You know, I am fond of opera. And I’m really happy to know that great Russian conductors and opera singers get more and more chances to stage their operas overseas. And moreover, I am especially pleased to realize, that they stage the operas, written by Russian composers after the classic pieces of Russian writers. You have probably heard about such opera singers, as Dmitry Hvorostovsky and Anna Netrebko, as well as a famous conductor Valery Gergiev, who devoted a lot of his wonderful performances to people in Abhazia and South Osettia as well as to people in other “unsafe places” in the world, and he usually performs free in such places.
I’m sure you know the names of world famous composers Tchaikovsky, Mussorgsky, Rakhmaninov. Music travels across the borders. Moreover, talented people from different countries are getting the unique opportunity to work and create pieces of art together. And when they do, perfect masterpieces appear which people will never get tired of admiring.
But this is not the only reason, which makes me think, that globalization is good for creating new music. When the world is getting smaller, like one stage, art in general and music in particular oversteps the limits of one particular culture. Nowadays we can see the synthesis of world art, which gives birth to a new kind of art, including music, literature and architecture - and that is an international art. That is how jazz appeared in Russia, for instance. It emerged from the overseas and has been “planted” into the Russian land, but with certain modifications, which represent authenticity of my country.
One more thing I want to discuss with you is the influence of spiritual music on art. There is such an opinion, that Jewish prayers and folk music appear to be the first pieces of music in many countries. Do you think Jewish art influenced American culture? If yes, in what way? Where do you personally see this influence?
And one more question: it is about mutual influence between Russian and American music. What do you think these two cultures introduced to each other, in terms of music? And what is your personal attitude toward this influence and/or synthesis?
Comments
In terms of the globalization of our food culture I couldn't agree more. It is absolutely destructive. People are consuming one third more calories and sugar than 30 years ago, but even though wed eat more food it has less nutrition than before. Even our fruits, grains, and vegetables can have physically less nutrients in it that 30 years ago. Why? Because our governments are pushing the idea of quantity, not quality. And this is spreading across the world. Where ever food can be produced cheapest is the place that ships it around the world. Necessitating the creation of food that wont bruise, spoil or ripen easily, not very natural. They have been modify and homogenizing crops over the past thirty years to create crops that have less nutrients but can grow larger. All in the name of producing all lot of food for a little money. MY question would be this then: why do we as a culture spend so much money on everything else from computers to clothes to cars and yet are so hesitant to spend an adequate amount of money to nourish ourselves and our loved ones? When did food stop being a priority?
Posted by: Julia Sebastian | February 26, 2009 11:01 AM
I don't personally feel that language should be "regulated" or "monitored" for "cultural correctness." I know that in France they have a whole bureaucracy established for this purpose, which prevents people from publishing loan words like "le weekend" in print. Frankly, though, I think this is an ineffectual way of approaching the problem (if there is a problem at all). I think that forgetting old words and creating new words and forms of expression is an on-going process inherent in the development of any language, and that it is natural and does not reflect "cultural degradation" in any way. While I understand the importance of paying attention to the language we use in political speeches (ie avoiding idiosyncratic made-up words like "misunderestimate," which ex-president Bush used to say inadvertently), I think that in general creative or non-standardized language use is not inherently bad. For example, if a politician had deliberately created a new word or used slang for the purpose of expressing his/her ideas more clearly or flavorfully, I would not particularly find it disturbing.
In terms of using "dirty" language on a more regular basis, I feel like the more we use a dirty word, the less meaning it carries. I don't have a problem with people completely avoiding using swear words for religious or spiritual reasons, but I feel that this is a personal decision that should not be imposed on other people, as with any other religious or spiritual practice. (Of course, saying that swears should not be used in the workplace or in formal situations is a separate argument - I am simply referring to those that refuse to swear under any circumstances whatsoever, even in casual speech among friends). In my opinion, in some situations a well-placed swear word (or even repeated use of them) can make language way more fun and flavorful than it otherwise would be. I agree that, in English, anyway, rough language that was previously avoided is increasingly being embraced in everyday speech. The f-word I think is a primary example of that. People use the f-word so often nowadays that it is no longer nearly as taboo as it was in say the 1950s. However, at the same time that these generic swear words are losing their rough edge, people seem to have an increasingly heightened sensitivity towards ethnic slurs, etc., certainly much more so than they did 50 or even 25 years ago. I use the f-word everyday, without causing anyone offense, but (as a white American) I would never use the n-word, except very reluctantly during some esoteric discussion of language-use.
Of course, I am not saying that we should passively allow our children to swear, but if I started hearing my child use the f-word because of something he or she had been watching on television, I would be more concerned that the show was exposing my child to other adult themes and content than by the language itself. The most important thing to teach one's child is that swearing is only appropriate in a very specific context (if at all), and can be very damaging in other contexts. A swear word is like a knife or any other sharp tool - it can be useful in the kitchen, but frightening in a dark alleyway, and no matter where you are there's always a chance that someone will get cut. I think the main issue with letting children use swearwords is the same as with letting them use knives - children are clumsy and don't fully understand what they are doing yet. Other than that, however, I don't feel that a child that grows up to use swearwords in set contexts is maligning society in any way.
In terms of language "misuse," I feel like much of the time people are simply using language the way it is actually spoken around them. Perhaps originally somebody did not fully understand certain rules of language use surrounding a particular vocabulary item, and "misused" it, but once that new or altered usage made it into the popular vernacular, people were no longer just being "careless" or "ignorant" - they were simply repeating what they heard, and using it in exactly the same way that they had heard it. In this sense, I feel like language "misuse" is little different from "language change" and, again, I don't particularly have an issue with people changing around the way vocabulary or grammatical patterns are used in a language over time - this has been happening probably as long as language has existed, and should not be a cause for alarm.
Also, many times people act as though a word or grammatical form is "incorrect" in some way, when in fact it is just stigmatized. For example, I have repeatedly heard people say that "ain't" is not a word, or is somehow not grammatical. By any rational definition of the term "word," however, I think we all can agree that "ain't" most certainly IS a "word" and that it IS grammatical - it carries a specific meaning and is used in set grammatical contexts, it has existed in vernacular English speech since the time of Shakespeare, and it is understood by almost any native speaker of English. Nonetheless, those people that claim that "ain't" is not a word feel this is so, simply because "ain't" is stigmatized in certain parts of America and in certain contexts. Let's not confuse "stigmatized" with "incorrect" or "ungrammatical." A word is just a word - most often people assign a positive or negative valence to it simply based on their impression of "the type of people that use it," rather than how it is used or what it means.
Anyway, sorry this rant is so long - I'm really interested in linguistics and vernacular speech, and I would love to continue on this discussion with you all!
Posted by: Cybelle Smith | February 26, 2009 02:06 PM
In terms of the globalization of music, I agree with you that it is a very good conduit for cultural exchange and a good way to build bridges across different cultures. To answer your two specific questions:
I grew up on the east coast, in the state of Massachusetts, near Boston. My community had many Jewish people in it, and therefore there was obviously a substantial Jewish cultural influence. I wouldn't say that Jewish music dominated other types of music, but I was definitely exposed to a lot of Jewish music as I grew up. Jewish culture in my opinion is very uniform, in that it is well conserved throughout history. Growing up, I sometimes went to temple with my Jewish friends and learned a good number of Jewish songs and prayers. In the U.S., there are a lot of Jewish musicians and composers that spread their music and culture through their music. So I think that Jewish music has had a substantial impact on American culture, but not an overpowering one.
I grew up playing the violin, and so I've been exposed to many Russian composers, including Tchaikovsky and Rakhmaninov. I enjoy Russian music, I think it has a very unique sound that I enjoy playing and listening to. I don't know too much about how Russian and American music have influenced each other, but I can tell you that Russian classical music here is widely listened to and performed by American groups.
Personally, at Stanford, I wrote about it in our first blog that I am part of an a capella singing group on campus. We sing world music in general, and our mission is to share stories through song and facilitate cultural exchange. We sing songs from such places as South Africa, the American South, China, Bulgaria, Kenya, and other places. This year we sang a Russian song called Po Polyu, a wedding song! Being in Talisman, my group, has made me realize the power of music and the way that music can really connect disparate cultures, and peoples that may not even speak the same languages. Music is a spiritual connector, and can build bridges between many different peoples.
Posted by: Owen Liu | February 26, 2009 04:06 PM
Hi,
The economic and cultural dynamic of globalization is transforming the world at an unprecedented pace. But what exactly is it? What are its origins? What is its impact on our spiritual lives?" "This lucid introduction surveys the religious landscape, explaining in clear and nonjudgmental language the beliefs that motivate spiritual leaders, activists, theologians, academics, and others involved on all sides of the issue.
Posted by: spiritualtube | June 30, 2009 01:26 AM
I read various articles and are very interesting especially the one on calories in drinks
Thanks
Posted by: Andrew | October 25, 2009 05:27 AM
Very informative. Thanks for the great post.
Posted by: top healthy products | November 17, 2009 06:17 AM
Willingly I accept. In my opinion, it is actual, I will take part in discussion. Together we can come to a right answer. I am assured. Buy Xenical
Posted by: Soma USA | November 18, 2009 08:32 PM