|
These
discussion topics are designed to get you thinking about the readings on
contemporary global trends in Scupin in Chapter 17.
This subject is reflected in the reading for this week from Theorizing the City
is Chapter 8 on "The Modernist City and the Death of the Street," which shows how
new architectural patterns and urban planning result in a loss of
interaction on the street and in traditional public places. Another contemporary trend is reflected in the video for this week on "The
Killing Screens" that shows the growing popularity of violence in films
and in TV -- not just an American phenomenon but worldwide.
The topics for
this week highlight many issues that are currently in the news -- concerns
about global warming, air pollution, toxic wastes, the destruction of the
tropical rainforest, population growth, the growing power of
multinational or global corporations, and economic trends.
While Scupin offers a hopeful note on how anthropologists can
contribute, in fact, anthropologists generally do not contribute on these
higher levels within government or multinational corporations.
Rather, their involvement is typically in working with the groups that are
impoverished or marginalized by these global trends.
In turn, while
the input of anthropologists might be helpful, their contribution may be considered suspect
or not relevant, in that government and corporate leaders are working from a
different paradigm and have different assumptions about what is the best
approach. For example, they have visions of progress and a sense
that their vision is the right one that can sometimes have good results,
but other times can lead to disaster. An example may be the case in Iraq,
where ideas about democratic progress, liberation, and a low cost
reconstruction paid by Iraqi oil have been met by unexpected resistance,
much higher than expected costs, cultural misunderstandings, and problems
of maintaining security and order, which are necessary to realizing these higher
ideals. (Though at this point, the outcome in Iraq is still
uncertain; the process of nation rebuilding there might still work, or
then again, it could end in civil war and an even more dangerous world
today. No one really knows). Perhaps anthropologists might have been helpful in
providing their perspective for better after war planning.
In any event,
the text provides a quick overview of the major global trends today, and I've selected a
few themes from the text and the readings and videos, which I thought
especially interesting and relevant in light of current developments.
Feel free to add additional topics in the "other" thread, and
again there is an extra section for the discussion of the videos for
students in Contra Costa, since videos will arrive there a week late.
You should be
starting on the readings for either Nickel and Dimed or Fast
Food Nation this week, and I've posted sections for comments on these,
though I expect much more extensive discussion next week, when you should
be finishing these. As you read them, you might think
of them in light of some recent trends in the news.
 |
If you are reading Nickel and Dimed, about a woman
working at a number of low level jobs and writing about the reality of the
low-income worker, you might think of this in the context of recent trends in
the jobs market. Among these trends are the outsourcing the jobs to other
countries and the growing divide between high-income knowledge,
managerial, and professional jobs and the low-income jobs, especially in
the service sector, many filled by new immigrants to the U.S.
|
|
If you are
reading Fast Food Nation, you might consider this in
relationship to the growing problem of obesity, the popularity of junk
food, the spread of chains, and the increased use of product placements in
films and TV that help provide role models in our celebrity culture.
A recent film called Supersize Me, about a filmmaker, who spends 30
days eating three supersized meals a day at McDonald's and suffers
serious consequences, might be of special interest.
|
Discussion
Topics from Chapter 17 in Scupin
|
In Chapter 17, Scupin talks about some recent
environmental trends, including the "Green Revolution," based on the
spread of mechanized agricultural and supported through biotechnology
research, and the dangers of air pollution and the greenhouse effect,
also known as global warming. Yet both developments are still
controversial. For example, while the Green Revolution may be
especially helpful in reducing famines in developing or peripheral
countries, it has been protested by groups in the U.S., Europe, and
other core countries. They have argued against using any
bioengineered foods, based on the dangers
of genetic engineering, and one African country even refused a shipment
of such, despite the death of many thousands of
starving people. Meanwhile, some scientists and
political leaders still question where there really is a global warming
occurring. So what are your thoughts on these issues, and
how do you think the anthropological perspective might help? |
|
Technological change has led to the fast-paced, globally
connected lifestyle we live today. Yet, Scupin points out,
this lifestyle has
some serious downsides, such as the high rate of energy consumption in
industrialized societies, and the drain on resources should the now
peripheral countries develop the same level of consumption.
But despite such warnings, today's global culture provides images which
encourage consumption, and it has been difficult to hold back
consumption among consumers in the industrialized countries.
Meanwhile, a loss of biodiversity has accompanied this high rate of
consumption as habitats are destroyed. But while doomsday
thinkers may feel these problems are spiraling out of control, optimists
think the solutions will come from technology. And still others
support a sustainability model. So what are your thoughts
about these developments, and what do you think we should do as a
society? |
|
What do you think about the growing role of the
multinational or global corporations? Do you think they are
replacing the modern state, and is that a good thing and why?
Alternatively, what do you think are the dangers of increased corporate
control compared to the power of the state? Or are the high
levels of power in government and the corporate boardroom becoming so
intertwined that these two institutions are creating a kind of corporate
government (perhaps akin to the close links between government and
religion, from the priest-kings in the ancient empires to the
theocracies in some Middle Eastern countries today). |
|
Scupin gives some examples of cultures that have
been transformed in recent years, such as the transformation in the
socialist countries to a more free market economy and the break-up of
the Soviet Union (which I found particularly interesting, since I
visited the former U.S.S.R. in the late 1980s just before the collapse.
I also saw the growing openness described as "glasnost", which helped to
contribute to the collapse that came with "perestroika.")
Meanwhile, Japan and the newly industrialized countries (NICs) of Asia
have become increasingly powerful economically. While Scupin points
out that the U.S. as still the strongest of the core countries,
it was less dominant at the beginning of the 21st century -- and it
has one of the largest trade deficits and foreign debts of any nation,
even before the war in Iraq. So in light of these
transformations that are occurring, what do you think might be the
future of the U.S. in the world? For example, is it dangerously
overextended now? Could the U.S. be at the beginning of a major
decline in power and influence? Will other countries or
coalitions emerge to take over the mantle of leadership, and if so which
ones be most poised to do so? And what, if
anything, might anthropologists do to help shape this global future?
|
Discussion Topics from the Video: "The Killing
Screens" (1994)
|
In "The Killing Screens: The Media and the Culture of
Violence," the video focuses on the pervasiveness of violence in the
media, the reasons for this pervasiveness, and the effects of so much
violence. For example, Dr. George Gerber, the featured expert,
points out that the more TV you watch, the more you see the real world
like TV. Do you think that's true? To what extent do you think
you or others you know are influenced by watching shows like CSI, Law and
Order, Cold Case, Without a Trace, and the many other cop and criminal
justice shows focused around solving murder and other crimes?
|
|
Some of the reasons mentioned in the "Killing Screens" for
the pervasiveness of violence are the power of a small group of global
conglomerates to shape the programs on the air, the overrepresentation of
white males, and the disconnect between violence and serious consequences,
making violence seem entertaining and thrilling, what Dr. Gerber calls
"happy violence." A basic assumption is that seeing so much violence
is bad and has bad consequences for society. What's your
opinion? Is there too much violence and is it having a
negative effect on society. Or does all this violence simply reflect
the high level of violence in our society? And are there other
reasons for this high level of violence today -- not only reflected in
violent crime stats, but in the younger age of violent criminals, and the
spread of violent responses in everyday life (such as in road rage, unruly
passengers on airplanes, fights over parking spaces in a parking lot, and
the like).
|
Discussion Topics from "The Modernist City and the
Death of the Street" in
Theorizing the City
|
In "The Modernist City and the Death of the Street,"
James Holston describes how the broad avenues and architectural style of
housing and retail malls has undermined the interaction typical of
sidewalks and street corners. He uses the example from Brasilia, but
there are many other examples of this modernist style of city planning and
architecture in the U.S. and around the world. For example,
Century City in L.A. is typified by tall, massive buildings, large
boulevards, and vast shopping malls. Can you think of other
examples? Also, consider if this destruction of the street is
necessarily bad, since the social interaction on street corners might move
elsewhere, such as to the shopping mall or to a private home (though
Holsten suggests that people in Brasilia don't feel comfortable
entertaining informally in their homes, in other cultures, home
entertaining may be liberating). Or might there be some
street corners, which community members view as a negative blight on the
neighborhood, though these hang outs might be eliminated by building broad
boulevards to chase out the dealers and prostitutes, who ply their trade
there.
|
|
