Legrain/Spiderman

I really liked Legrain’s article. I thought it was interesting how he said that America was forcing its culture on everyone else. I also liked how he showed how certain countries dominated certain areas of entertainment. I thought it was interesting how the United Kingdom’s box office hits were mostly American. On the other hand, America is not always the leader, especially in sports. Football does not appear to be as interesting to other countries as soccer. Adesnik’s article was also quite interesting where he compared Peter Parker with Pavitr Prabhakar. I thought the difference between Pavitr Prabhakar from Peter Parker was a good advertising technique to tailor to the Indian readers; however it appears man die hard Spiderman fans do not agree. The image of Pavitr Prabhakar was quite different than the Spiderman us Americans know. Who’s to say it is a bad thing though? I think Spiderman has globalized himself through Pavitr Prabhakar just like companies expand across the world. Even at Mc Donald’s the same burger we get in America is quite different in England and China.

Defending Globalization

I thought Phillipe Legrain's article, In Defense of Globalization was very interesting and persuasive. Legrain's arguments about globalization "free[ing] people from the tyranny of geography" while "cultural pessimists want to freeze things as they were," make very powerful ideas. I think Legrain's article really brought to light some thoughts about globalization that most people may overlook. Instead of making the issue of globalization such a black and white topic, Legrain points out that just because an individual explores other cultures, it does not take away from their cultural roots. There is a lot of convincing evidence and arguments for globalization and the ways that it has influenced many different cultures.

Spider-who?

I thought the Image of Spider-Man from India was interesting. What am I saying.. It's crazy! Clothing is very much associated with culture so I guess it is only appropriate to change the image of Spider-man for various cultures. Although this article was short it had a powerful message. It shows the large impact that various cultures have on each other. It's a mutual sharing of cultures. The Indian culture did not completely create a whole new spider-man, instead they merged the American spider-man with their own culture. A FUSION of cultures!

Ps the image looks totally hilarious.

Learning From One Another reading passage

Poytner describes an inspiring story of how the Ladakhi culture has deteriorized and has emerged because of globalization. He emphasizes that "we humans need cultural diversity as a storehouse of human resources, just as the Earth needs species diversity as a bank of genetic material we can draw on to meet new challenges." This quote really caught my eye because it's true. Globalization is all about cultural diversity and without it, no culture can form its own name without others to distinguish it. Other cultures give us "ways to live together in a world where religion, suburbanization, and social mobility are tearing us apart" and distinguish us for who we are. This was among my favorite reading for this week because I found it truly inspiring. 

post

Legrain's article was interesting. I've never had any thoughts that America is taking over the world and enforcing its culture on everyone. But that is probably just because I am in America and whatever. Poynter's article about Ladakh I did not find very super. Poynter kept repeating something about everbody caring if traditional cultures survive...I sure don't! It really doesn't make a difference to me what happens in Ladakh...or pretty much most places other than where I am. Jenkin's thing about cultural music and whatever didn't do much for me. Pavitr Prabhakar is spiderman?!?! Freakin sweet!

In Defense of Globalization

I really enjoyed Philippe Legrain's piece "In Defense of Globalization." I think that it was really effective in getting the point across. The last paragraph in particular was so persuasive: "The truth is that we increasingly define ourselves rather than let others define us..." Globalization does not have the power to change or determine who we are. Our choices are transcendent.

At the start of this class I wasn't really sure if I was for or against globalization. They both have their pros and their cons. I partly still feel that way today, even after reading so many passages giving both sides of the argument on globalization. But after reading this weeks readings, I can definately say that I am for globalization. It may sound trivial, but I guess it really hit me when I read Jenkins article, talking about how through globalization we are able to experience different cultures music, movies, food, etc. It seems like such an obvious statement, and it is. Yet, the impact of how other cultures have shaped me never hit me until another person said it. And that's when I realized that globalization is a wonderful thing. But other articles such as Poynter's remind me that the power of globalization cannot be taken lightly. It's a careful balance. To tie in another article, "With great power (globalization), comes great responsibility". Poytner's article reinforces my belief that globalization can help all those devloping countries struggling to survive. But it also reminds me that globalization can easily overwhelm a culture and soon bury it in the new techonology and foreign habits and cultures that globalization may bring, only to be lost forever. So it is important, nay essential, for us to preserve cultures yet bring the benefits of globalization. When you think about it, if we don't preserve our indiviual cultures, then once globalization has reached it's peak, what else is there to share and spread because we'll all be exactly alike.