Question

Many ways the same in India as in South Africa, along with the legacy of the

Commonwealth (King, 1991).
Robertson makes reference to the deep history of globality, particularly in
relation to the spread of world religions, but reserves the notion of
globalization for later periods, starting in the 1500s, considering that what
changes over time is 'the scope and depth of consciousness of the world as a
single place'. In his view 'contemporary globalization' also refers to 'cultural
and subjective matters' and involves awareness of the global human
condition, a global consciousness that carries reflexive connotations (1992:
183). No doubt this reflexivity is significant, also because it signals the
potential capability of humanity to act upon the global human condition. On
the other hand, there is no reason why such reflexivity should halt at the
gates of the West and not also arise from and be cognizant of the deep history
of intercivilizational connections including, for instance, the influence of the
world religions.
Global mélange: windows for research on globalization
How do we come to terms with phenomena such as Thai boxing by
Moroccan girls in Amsterdam, Asian rap in London, Irish bagels, Chinese
tacos and Mardi Gras Indians in the United States, or 'Mexican schoolgirls
dressed in Greek togas dancing in the style of Isidora Duncan' (Rowe and
Schelling, 1991: 161)? How do we interpret Peter Brook directing the
Mahabharata, or Ariane Manouchkine staging a Shakespeare play in
Japanese Kabuki style for a Paris audience in the Théâtre Soleil? Cultural
experiences, past or present, have not been simply moving in the direction of
cultural uniformity and standardization. This is not to say that the notion of
global cultural synchronization (Hamelink, 1983; Schiller, 1989) is irrel-
evant-on the contrary-but it is fundamentally incomplete. It overlooks the
countercurrents-the impact non-Western cultures have been making on the
West. It downplays the ambivalence of the globalizing momentum and
ignores the role of local reception of Western culture - for example the
indigenization of Western elements. It fails to see the influence non-Western
cultures have been exercising on one another. It has no room for crossover
culture - as in the development of 'third cultures' such as world music. It
overrates the homogeneity of Western culture and overlooks the fact that
many of the standards exported by the West and its cultural industries
themselves turn out to be of culturally mixed character if we examine their
cultural lineages. Centuries of South-North cultural osmosis have resulted
in an intercontinental crossover culture. European and Western culture are
part of this global mélange. This is an obvious case if we reckon that Europe
until the fourteenth century was invariably the recipient of cultural
influences from the Orient'. The hegemony of the West dates only from
very recent times, from around 1800, and, arguably, from industrialization.
One of the terms offered to describe this interplay is the creolization of
global culture (Friedman, 1990; Hannerz, 1987). This approach is derived

Answer 1

from anthropology and refers to the mixing and amalgamation of different cultures to create new, hybrid forms. Creolization challenges the idea of cultural purity and instead celebrates the fluid, dynamic nature of cultural identities in a globalized world.

The phenomenon of globalization has resulted in an increasingly interconnected world where cultures are not isolated entities but part of a complex web of influences, exchanges, and transformations. The examples you provided—Thai boxing by Moroccan girls in Amsterdam, Asian rap in London, and so on—showcase how global and local elements can coexist and interact in complex ways. This goes beyond mere "Westernization" to include various forms of "glocalization," where global and local cultural aspects merge.

This view opposes the idea that globalization leads to a homogenization of culture, making everything standardized or Westernized. Instead, it emphasizes the resilience and adaptability of local cultures in the face of global influences.

In short, understanding globalization's cultural dimensions requires a nuanced approach that accounts for the interplay between the local and the global, the old and the new, the East and the West. This opens new windows for research, as it helps scholars and observers understand the dynamics of cultural exchange and transformation in a global context. It also challenges simplistic narratives of Western cultural domination, revealing a world that is interconnected yet diverse, with a complex tapestry of influences shaping our global human condition.

Thus, while globalization has often been criticized for its potential to "flatten" cultural diversity, the reality is more intricate. Non-Western cultures are not merely passive recipients of Western influence but active participants in shaping the global cultural landscape. The creolization of global culture is a testament to this dynamic interplay, a compelling lens through which we can explore the multifaceted impacts of globalization.