With an undergraduate degree within the fields of International Relations I think it is very interesting to look at both power relations and structure when communication is thrown into the global picture. What are the affects and just because something happened in one way before, does that mean it will happen again somewhere else.
This week we will turn to Koichi Iwabuchi and his article “Taking ‘Japanization’ seriously: cultural globalization reconsidered” and also to Jade Miller and the article "Ugly Betty Goes Global: global networks of localized content in telenovela industry". Both of these article touch upon what we have talked about before, the flow of information and its affect on the world.
Iwabuchi is focusing on the possibility for a potential “Japanization” and if that could be compared to the “Americanization” of the world. He argues that many of the products that Japan produce are “odorless” which means that they do not scream Japanese culture and that is why they are more appealing to many countries, such as the US.
Miller are also highlighting the fact that a lot of production actually goes South – North and raises the example of the telenovela industry with a case study of Ugly Betty that has been a success worldwide. This success have a few different ingredients, first that it has a Cinderella Story, second, that many people could feel a connection to the character/characters struggle/success/joy/sadness, third, the combination of the local and global and of course that it is easy to distribute and to consume (of often airs numerous times in one week).
So, what can we make out of these two articles? First I would say that this shows that things have changed, as mentioned in previous posts, the US might still be the major exporter of movies, music, sitcom/pop culture, although we have influence from many parts of the world. Japanese companies have bought some major studios in Hollywood and the US has bought a lot of telenovela from South America. Does this mean that these countries are taking over and changing the industry, well in one way it does, but I would say that it is changing to a more global/neutral production of these goods, something that could be digested all over the world.
This takes us back to the power relations; we can clearly see that this is not ruled by nation-states, they players here are the companies and also the consumers. As much as I hate to say it but the companies are there to make a profit and the profit will increase if the have more consumers, that is basic math. Again, globalization, technology and communication has a lot to do with this, we are no longer passive consumers, instead we are creating out own story, our own reality. To go back to the discussion we had in class, this is the new way of storytelling that has existed for centuries and now we are taking back that power.
Before I end this we should take a closer look at the international arena. Well, it is time to let the nation-states come into the discussion again, even though their role has changed it does not mean that they are not an important player. They are doing everything they can to keep their power and by doing so they are looking for threats for any other state. (This is especially in relations to the dominant players). Lets take a look at China and the US; the US view China as a threat not just because of their growing economy but because their growing economy does not come from “odorless” products. This is a big factor to take into consideration, China is different from the US and sometimes different is attractive and that is what the US is afraid of. Japan is also different from the US but different in a good way (according to the US) and Japan are not in the position to jeopardize the American hegemony, at least not yet. If that would be the case we would definitely have a different story.
In light of your comment that things have changed regarding globalization and American power, I too was interested in this approach by Iwubachi in his article on Japanization. I think that it's interesting how he formulated his argument that Japan, while it has a huge impact worldwide, is odorless, lacking of the same cultural ideological influences that American products have, and therefore a global economic power.
ReplyDeleteJapan has not seriously challenged the West because, some may even argue, Japan could simply be an extreme materialistic version of the United States products.
I do, however, think that Japan's large global role is a great thing. I think it's great how other countries with very different world views have been able to enter the global market, regardless of the relationship the West plays in that progression. I think that the decentralization of the global market is important to add diversity to the world and to increase the voices of other perspectives (although on the global market these are often less localized).
I also think it's really interesting to compare Japan's role with the West and within Asia. The fact that Japan may not be as culturally odorless in other Asian countries has other added implications in reviewing this situation.