TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
Multi-Sited
Ethnography Project:
It's a
Small World After All
By Robbieana Leung
Introduction
My
head tilted backward as my eyes scanned the tall red structure that
stood
majestically before me in Agra,
India.
The dark
pillars of Fort
Agra,
erected during the construction of
the Taj Mahal during the 14th century, were an interesting
paradox:
they were delicate due to their age, yet incredibly firm. In fact, many
tourists were climbing the walls that were carved with painstaking
detail and
precision. Among the sea of blonde and brown - tourists from Europe and
the United States of America
- was a distinct group of Indian high school children. The group of
forty
students and chaperones were sprawled throughout the courtyard, posing
for
picture opportunities, just like Semester at Sea students.
Taken
aback at the unexpected sight of Indian tourists behaving just as we
were, I
found my eyes naturally followed them with greater interest than I had
in the
historical fort. With their bulky black film cameras, I watched the
Indian
students eagerly take pictures of their peers who posed with arms
draped over
each others’ shoulders. The atmosphere was noisy with rapid exchanges
of
dialogue between the students, who spoke in sentences that were
mixtures of Hindi and English. For every couple of Hindi words, I was
able to recognize an English word, such as “photo” or “pillar”.
Close
by, two Indian girls dressed in jeans and t-shirts stood within the
fort
structure, smiling at the camera. Looking closely at one of the girl’s
shirts,
I saw that it said “Roxy.” As I read her shirt, one of the Indian
students noticed the name on my shirt, which duplicated the lettering
on the girl’s shirt. He
stood in
front of me and read the brand name aloud, with a sense of recognition
in his
voice. Initially, I was surprised at his recognition, because I
did not
expect an American brand to be popular in India. The irony of my
surprise is
that my own Roxy shirt was produced in the “east”, meaning that in some
ways it
actually originated in the east. Thus, it would be natural for these
students to know the brands that I call "Western".
The
boy who read my shirt out loud soon departed with a smile, and headed
towards the Indian
school
group standing by the pillars. Separated from the teenagers by a single
pillar,
there was an older lady dressed in a bright green and yellow sari. The
symbolism
of the
pillar drew its meaning more from the present than from the past -- it
represented the generation gap that takes the form of a culture gap
between the
girls and the woman. Their clothes alone demonstrated the Indian youth
having
some things more in common with youth around the world than in their
nation’s
local heritage. The culture gap between the two generations was also
manifested
in the new hybrid language of Hindi and English that I had heard
earlier.
This
paper utilizes observations in India,
Turkey and Croatia
to draw conclusions about
the impact of globalization on culture. Scholars have debated whether
or not
globalization will eventually destroy the diversity of cultures, in
creating a
Westernized monoculture. While the answer is uncertain, my observations
from
these three countries reveal that as globalization draws the world
closer
together, two kinds of subcultures are being created. The first
subculture is
an increasingly homogenous youth culture that reflects American ideas
and
ideals and the second subculture is the integration of two different
cultures
into a third, hybrid culture.
Read these three projects before
you move on to my analysis below:
Analysis
Will globalization eventually
destroy the diverse cultures and replace them with a Westernized
monoculture?
This is the hot debate topic of today, in which I believe the answer
could be both
yes and no. India was an important
country that
provided much support for this conclusion. My observations made at Fort Agra
and the Indian-American wedding helped me to instead realize that two
sub
cultures are formed as a result of globalization: a fusion of two
cultures into
a hybrid one, and a homogenous youth culture.
Based on the way that the Indian
students were talking, their dress and general decorum that highly
contrasted
with that of their elders, I determined that globalization may be
creating a
westernized monoculture among the youth. This theme was also evident in
at Club
Fuego in Croatia,
where the locals and Semester at Sea Filipino and Latino crew
members
wore clothes and danced in ways that mimicked American culture.
Furthermore,
the overwhelming majority of the music played was from America,
which
reflected the influx of American music into a European country.
While these observations show me
that youth around the world are becoming more familiarized with the
American
culture, at the same time I also do not believe that globalization will
completely wipe out their ethnic or mother culture, simply because this
is such
an integral and engrained part of their identity. In George E. Marcus’
article Ethnography
in/of the world system: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography,
“in
conducting multi-sited research, one finds oneself with all sorts of
cross
cutting and contradictory personal commitments…” which is then resolved
“in
being a sort of ethnographer-activist, renegotiating identities in
different
sites as one learns more about a slice of the world system” (113). He
gives the
example of Emily Martin’s Flexible Bodies
book, where she finds herself “an AIDS volunteer at one site, a medical
student
at another, and a corporate trainee at a third [field site]” (113). In
some
sense, the multi identities experienced by anthropologists in their
field sites
reflect to a certain degree the individuals who are experiencing
globalization.
Like an anthropologist who experiences different pieces of life as
he/she move
into and out of cultures and field sites, people all over the world
experience
an influx of ideas and commodities from a variety of cultures abroad.
It
is significant that these pieces of life incorporate themselves
into the
lives and culture of individuals who are exposed to them. It is also
significant that because the American culture is one of the most
dominant
cultures that spans the world, many countries are constantly being
exposed to
and changed by this specific culture. This theory is demonstrated by
the clubbers in Croatia.
Although they came from many different countries, spanning Asia,
Europe, America,
they
collective body dressed like Americans as they danced with American
styles to
American music. Marcus argued that anthropologists have multiple
identities,
which conform to the atmosphere that they are in. His example may
reveal that while
the
youth subculture is homogenizing, this does not necessarily prove
that globalization is the new Westernization or Americanization. Indeed
globalization certainly reveals that American culture does engulf some
local
cultures, yet this
is only
a facet of the prism. My observations about the Americanized youth
culture
merely scratches the surface of the force of globalization that is
changing the
world in multiple ways that are unseen and seen and for better or for
worse.
Another
aspect of the prism of globalization is the integration of two cultures
to form
one, versus the “swallowing up” of cultures by a dominant one. In my
piece Transnationalizing Marriage, I
express that the cross cultural wedding stimulated
thoughts
with a strong focus on the formation of a hybrid culture, which stems
from the
Indian and American culture combining (not consuming) each other. Such seemingly opposite cultures make me
suspect that there needs to be much compromise and integration of both
cultures
in order to overcome any culture clashes. The newlyweds' future child
will be
an Indian
American, whose identity will be rooted in both cultures. Because
he/she will
be raised in a culture that is a mixture of both Indian and American,
the
child will be a product of a hybrid culture.
The
concept of a
hybrid culture is evident in my own life as a third generation Chinese.
Being ethnically Chinese yet born in the USA, I grew up in two
different atmospheres. Living in the USA
and going
to International and American schools promoted my intake of American
culture,
while my parents nurtured my Chinese heritage. They did this by
engaging me in
the celebration of ethnic festivals, such as the Chinese Mid Autumn
Festival
and Chinese New Year, and teaching me to respect “Chinese values” of
discipline
and filial piety. Thus, I have grown up in a new culture, which is akin
to the
hybrid culture that I have observed in these countries and attempt
to
describe in this paper.
When
I am with my
family, it is obvious that I am not completely Chinese, yet not
completely
American. My father, who is a local Chinese and has lived
in Hong Kong for all his life, often
begins a sentence with
a couple Chinese phrases sprinkled with English words (aka "Chinglish),
which
accommodates my
American culture. While Chinese is my father’s first language, he
speaks mostly
English and Chinglish when he is at home. However, in the work
environment and in daily conversation in Hong Kong, he speaks mostly
Chinese. On the other hand, my mother,
who is
Chinese but grew up in the United States, does the
opposite. She speaks
English at work, as it is her first language, and sometimes when she
speaks to
my sister and I, she will address us in Chinese: “Mui mui”
(younger sister) or “Jie
jie” (older sister). My identity is heavily rooted in both
cultures, that
pull have an equal pull on my life. Neither culture dominates, but is
integrated within each other, causing me to be American Chinese or
Chinese
American.
Since
this hybrid culture phenomenon has obvious parallels in my life, I was
surprised that my initial reaction to the wedding was an automatic
assumption
that the Caucasian women wearing Indian saris were guests or even
tourists to India.
The
possibility of them being in-laws of the Indian family had not crossed
my mind.
I had reverted back to my Nacirema
mindset and had seen them as Naidnis,
not Indians. They were immediately “others”. This experience showed me
how the
forces of globalization challenges people to have open minds, since the
invisible
ties around the world draws together connections that are sometimes not
comprehendible or imaginable. Thinking about how quickly the world is
globalizing, this made me realize that in the future, the
world may be regarding people of dual citizenship or culture as a
common
phenomenon. Perhaps people of one citizenship will be the minority.
In a couple of decades, I may be more surprised by people who are only
one
culture and ethnicity than people who are a mixture of cultures and/or
ethnicities.
The
fusion of cultures is evident in my paper, Serendipity
in Istanbul.
Throughout my travels in Turkey, locals
addressed me with greetings from a variety of Asian cultures. Asian
tourists
coming
into Turkey
have influenced the locals' knowledge of Asian cultures, demonstrating
globalization's transportation of ideas from one part of the world to
another. The
calligrapher
who drew the beautiful fusion character “ai”, or love, with Arabic
artistry, had
met many Asian tourists, which sparked his curiosity in the culture and
language. Inga and I were able to show him our cultural knowledge
because both
the
Turkish calligrapher and us spoke English - the common, middle ground
language
that is a “global language”. Although neither the Turkish man nor we
were
ethnically American, and English was not our mother tongue, we spoke it
because
the forces of globalization came into our lives, proving the importance
and
dominance of American culture.
Meeting
the calligrapher was very symbolic of my two themes of globalization.
The distribution
of certain aspects of culture into different parts of the world is
causing
cultures to be transnationalized. People are becoming more aware of
each
other
around the world, and adopting some of the cultural norms of one
culture and
integrating it into their own. This was evident in the Turkish
calligrapher’s
knowledge of and interest in Chinese culture, and me traveling to Turkey
to learn
more about the calligrapher’s culture. This phenomenon is forming two
types of
subcultures that seem paradoxical yet coexist. While one subculture
demonstrates the formation of a homogenous youth culture that reflects
American
values due to a rather dominant and widespread American culture, the
other
subculture is a hybrid culture that does not conform to one culture but
integrates values from two cultures. The dominance of American culture
was
shown in my ability and the calligrapher’s ability to speak English as
a common
middle ground, while the hybrid of cultures was symbolically shown
through the
character ai that the calligrapher
drew.
In chapter two of Jenny B. White’s
book, Money Makes us Relatives, which is entitled “Bridge
Between Europe
and Asia,” she discusses the changing face of Turkey as a result of
globalization. White says that Turkey
has changed so much from influences from all over the world that
sometimes she
cannot recognize her homeland. The country has mosques and churches
proudly
towering in the city and buildings with various unique architectures -
showing
the old and new, saturated with multiple religious influences from
around the
world.
In
a sense, cosmopolitan Turkey is like the our multiple identities as
people
living in a global world - some of the influences that we take in are
more
strongly than
others, allowing them to dominate us and make us more similar to each
other
(ex: homogenous youth culture) while some influences we take add on to
what we
have already (ex: hybrid culture). In the end we are people, whose
identities are
cluttered with influences from different time periods and cultures,
just as Turkey is
cluttered with influences from the
Ottomon Empire, Rome, Europe, Asia,
Arab countries and Christian countries. Turkey truly is the Bridge
Between -
literally and metaphorically. While some parts are more European or
Asian than
others, in the end Turkey
is a hybrid city. Similarly, while globalization has shown a dominance
of
American culture among the youth, it has also shown hybrid cultures
forming.
There
are
downfalls to this hybrid culture, which are outlined in Takeyuki
Tsuda’s
article “No Place to Call Home” with regard to Japanese Brazilians
feeling like
foreigners in the country of their ancestors, Japan,
and their cultural home, Brazil.
They are not entirely Japanese or Brazilian, due to their lives being
influenced by both cultures, causing them to fall outside the comfort
zones of
either country. Neither country can really relate to them because they
are a
hybrid culture, yet the Japanese Brazilians can relate to both. This is
the
beauty of hybrid cultures - its people provide hope for the future,
because
they can
identify and understand multiple peoples. These inate gifts allow them
to have the skills to be peacemakers and
literally
the bridge between cultures.
In
the example
with Turkey, many
of the
locals who are cross cultural become important players in shaping
diplomacy in
the world, which is one of the prized benefits of Turkey
joining the European Union.
There is hope that these people will smoothen future
relationships
between the West and East. Either through homongenizing a culture or
integrating a culture into another, globalization is turning us into
individuals whose values and understandings of multiple cultures around
the
world are allowing us to have a key role in the world as mediators who
smoothen
the lines of segregation and misunderstanding. Countries do retain some
of their
unique
cultural identities yet the world seems to be smaller, and more
connected. It
is less apparent that we live in many different countries and instead
more apparent
that we live in one world. There is a very important opportunity given
to us
global citizens: We have the chance to create unity among peoples of
the world,
and in the process unify the human spirit.
Conclusion
Whether
or not the world will be completely become an Americanized product of
globalization, I cannot give a true
answer.
Whether or not globalization is a positive or negative force, I also do
not
know for certain. Time will tell. However, based on my observations in
India,
Croatia and Turkey, I predict that globalization has had very
positive
outcomes thus far: it is creating a world that is more closely and
strongly
connected than ever, producing people who are global citizens that are
more
understanding of cultures abroad. The gap between “them” and “us” is
decreasing. Our “others” are becoming more familiar and instead, more
closely
related to us in culture. We should celebrate this change. Perhaps it
is a step
towards a more united world that is not just connected by its ties
through the
flow of trade, commodities, or people, but also in spirit.
|