Week 8 Analysis

I really enjoyed reading this book, Inventing Popular Culture. I thought it was very insightful and eye opening. In the chapter 6, Storey explains the shift away from Identity as a fixed idea of the self to something that is constantly becoming, never complete. As we begin to look at ourselves in this new light, it is vital that we acknowledge the role that structures and powers play.

"Although we may be inventors of ourselves, identities are made in conditions and circumstances which are rarely of our own making. Therefore, although identities are a sign of agency, identities are always made within structures and discourses, which both enable and constrain the making of identity". (80)

Knowing our identities are not fixed and are in constant need of reinvention and interpretation, it becomes necessary for our sanity to accept this fluid motion of the growing Self. If the various structures have similarities to this Self, which I think they do, it is wise to begin to think of powers as everchanging and in need of constant reinterpretation. The most important question we can then begin to ask is how we begin and then continue this process. What does reinterpretation look like? Well, if we are going to keep with this spirit of reinterpretation then what it might look like will inevitably change as well. A good start for Westerner's is understanding our dominance and need for power. We all know and hear that U.S. exports are hurting the rest of the world because They are becoming Us. We are pushing our Western values and lifestyle on others who dont need them. However what this view entails is still a view of dominance because we believe other cultures are not smart enough to make these things there own. We believe that they are easily influenced by our ways and that they themselves cannot make It their own. As we read in Globalization and Culture, the world is changing through global eyes and we ourselves are influenced by these other countries even in the exports that we send out. If you think about it we do not always send overseas or across borders that which is strictly American. It is American with Puerto Rican/Irish/Hispanic/etc. connotations. To say this is not letting the Power hungry corporations off the hook, but it is looking at it with different eyes. In the last chapter on these very ideas titled Global Culture, the author Storey makes some important insights.

"It may be the case that certain commodities are used, made meaningful, and valued in ways which promote capitalism as a way of life, but this is not something which can be established by simply assuming that market penetration is the same as ideological penetration. Such a claim depends on an argument which maintains that commodities have inherent values and meanings which are imposed on the passive consumers."

That commodities have inherent values is not the case. It is a very arrogant stance to assume that just because they drink Coke and wear Jeans that they will inevitably become Americanized. We drive Japanese cars and eat Mexican food and yet do not become them, do we? This is not denying the Powers involved in globalization, but it is reimagining them. What we fail to realize is the impact of the micro-levels of culture, the local culture. The macro-levels are the ones we see from the outside, but where people are really influenced is the local. I dont know if I agree with the conclusion that the author brings to the table, it seems a bit utopian. But what I do see is in my analysis of War/Militarism/Terrorism is a way to see the Powers and a need to constantly re-evaluate our responses and approach to Pacifism/Just Peace in an ever changing world. If we are looking for definite answers we are looking for the wrong answer. As we have seen in our study of War, an absolute is near impossible. I think?