This text is aimed at students who are
interested in social sciences, especially anthropology. If you do Social and
Cultural Anthropology on a higher level and enjoy it, then, congratulations,
you have come to the right place. At the end of this article, there is a guide
with many examples of to how you can use this information to write a good paper
three, but you can of course use my tips for any paper.
Globalization is
commonly described as a process that makes the world smaller. In other words,
we become more and more similar. The belief that globalization is a
homogenizing process , i.e., we become more and more alike, is not necessarily
true, though. Many anthropologists argue that the accelerating process of
cultural exchange creates new challenges and cultures. Firstly, why do we use
the word accelerating? Globalization has been the case for thousands of years. Secondly,
when considering globalization, one of the most important things to remember is
to consider having a diachronic theoretical perspective.
This basically implies
that history and development over time is crucial when looking at the situation
as it is today. For example, Levis Sharp’s paper
on the paleolithic Yir Yoront, that
is, stone age people, people in North-East
Australia in the 1930s suggests that the only way of which one could understand
their current change is by taking into account their perception of own history
as well as colonization. [Text box: The term “paleolithic” refers to the
prehistoric period where people lived as hunters and gatherers, developing the
more primitive tools, typically made of stone. It derives from the Greek words palaios and lithos, with the literal overall meaning “old age of the stone”.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic] Examples of changes were gender roles,
kinship systems and belief in the present being a replication of a “glorious
past”. In this mythical history, heroes possessed various objects, or totems, e.g. stone axes, which in the present,
i.e., the 1930s, symbolized the different clans among the population. Since
they believed this past replicated itself over and over through generations, the
incorporation of new totems, objects such as steel axes, boats and guns,
created confusion and distress as their history had to be “rewritten” by making
up new myths. The most important that you need to note, is that this was
crucial in order for their perception of the world to make sense: without
consistency in life, the future would seem uncertain and meaningless. This
phenomenon of upholding an initial view of life can be compared to the common
existential “overthinking”. We often
interpret it as a sign of depression in e.g. Norway, as many anthropologists
see as a result of modernization.
The Yir Yoront did in
fact turn to apathy, became depressed and confused. So how could we explain
this without considering history, their mythical “glorious past” and by not
seeing that their exposure to western artifacts as a result of colonization
from as early as the 14th century? Is it even possible to explain
the change if having a synchronic theoretical perspective, i.e., only
considering the present? At least, long-term change would be very hard to
predict, as we would not be able to see a development over time. [Textbox: However,
if you take a postmodernist point of view, phenomena can be explained, although
you do not take into consideration history. If you are up against the theme of
the synchronic perspective and you have to argue for this approach,
postmodernism is the way to go. Bear in mind that the synchronic perspective is
defined as “the occurrence of events at the same time, seeking to uncover the
relationships between society and culture in the present or at a specific point
in time”. Postmodernism argues that researcher cannot be objective.
Furthermore, if you discuss from the point of view of radical empiricism: which
would use own experiences as primary data, focus on interaction, and argue that
it is no authority or theoretical conventions. You can dismiss grand theories,
as laws cannot be made in the social sciences, according to the view of
postmodernism. An example of an anthropologist which is good to use here is
Clifford Geerz, who emphasizes the importance of “thick description”, i.e.,
using extensive empirical facts as the key to understanding. Also remember that
the emic level important, that is, the view of the “insiders”, the group one is
researching, or, in some cases, the indigenous people.]
Does the world become
more similar with time?
Anyways, this was in
the 1930s, we know that globalization increased drastically by the invention of
the Internet, and that there are various theories about how the world changes
with time. For instance, two very interesting oppositional theories is that 1)
the world becomes more and more similar with time, meaning that globalization
is a homogenizing process, vs. that 2) globalization is not a homogenizing
process, but recreates new cultures. Consider Jim Igoes paper “seeing
conservation through the global lens” from 2004, where he presents his research
on how “westernization” or “modernization” influences the Masai’s resource
availability and economical system [see paper]. He generally argues that in
Tanzania and Kenya where the Masai live, disjunctive flows of information, people
and so on coming from “the west” in what is famously characterized by
Apparundai as e.g. the mediascape and
ethnoscape, respectively. These flows
of tourists, external investments in national parks etc. are dominating their
culture. Consequently, such as the western ideas that humans and animals should
live separately, results in the establishment of western conservationist
national parks and the narrowing down of land for the Masai. But is this really
an effective way of conserving nature and animal species? [see the paper for an
extensive discussion of this] One could hence argue that the application of
western ways of “conserving” nature makes the Masai culture to vanish because
their people is gradually being forced to move to cities like Arusha and even the capital Dar Es Salaam, leaving their original
culture and lifestyle. But does this mean that they all become “western”? In a
sense yes, most Masai will end up living a modern lifestyle.
Cultural barriers to
globalization
However, the world
does not necessarily become more similar with time. That the Masai culture is
threatened and could potentially vanish with time can result in the creation of
counteracting forces, or cultural barriers to the process of globalization.
Essentially, every culture have sets of shared norms, believes, costumes,
history and so on, creating a unique pattern of which external influence can be
“woven” into. In other words, western conservation is not acceptable among the Masai,
because to them, it does not at all conserve nature to create national parks
where tourists can go on safari or trophy hunting. It upsets the natural eco system.
This means that the
external influence will not simply be applied to their culture without forces
counteracting that effect. Cultural barriers will in a sense leave out the parts
that do not fit into their culture, configuring those who fit into the pattern,
or to totally oppose to some external influence. For instance, the Masai
established non-governmental organizations that fought against western
conservationists. Resultantly, the United Nations has taken measures to make
indigenous people’s opinions being heard. The Masai have for example gotten
education in the “modern” sense, and has used it in order to oppose western
ideas. In other words, many Masai did not simply agree to these ideas of
conservation, but acted as agents opposing the power from westerners. Hence, one
could also argue that homogenizing is not the case as cultures can adapt rather
than to totally change into another culture because of cultural flow.
One of my personal
thoughts that I find interesting is that from all the cultures of the world,
all human beings ultimately come from Africa. We went from probably being a
relatively similar people to develop into various unique cultures.
Globalization has always been the case, and in the recent years, it has
accelerated. If we look at the overall trend through the ages of human kind,
this could imply that more and more different cultures will emerge with time,
again counter-arguing the synchronic theoretical perspective. However, can a
general trend be made to predict the future in the social sciences, like we so
often do in math and the natural sciences?
How you can use this
information
All in all, the
discussion you have been provided with here can be used to argue both
for, but mostly against that the cultures of the world becomes more and more
similar with time. Remember to be aware that having a diachronic perspective
can be useful, because it helps you to understand processes of change. For
anthropology students, I think this can be a useful text that you can be
inspired by when writing papers, especially a paper three, as it can be an
example of how you could approach issues given on tests, mocks and the final
exam. If you are a standard level student, doing studiespesialisering or any other related subject, it may be a bit
more far-fetched, but nevertheless very helpful. I will now provide some short
tips about writing the paper three, and in what ways this essay could exemplify
my personal writing methods. Be aware that this is advise from me to other
students. I am not an expert, but, on the other hand, I have some pretty good
experience.
Firstly, in the
introduction you want to 1) rephrase the issue and say what you will emphasize,
e.g. the diachronic theoretical perspective. Then you 2) define relevant terms
and explain the relevance of i) theoretical perspectives, ii) theory and iii)
ethnographies. Link it up to the question at hand.
The main body of your
essay is all about 3) compare and contrast: i) identify the relevant
ethnography, e.g. as in my text: “ (…) Levis
Sharp’s paper on the paleolithic Yir
Yoront, that is, stone age people,
people in North-East Australia in the 1930s (…)”. ii) give details and
examples; link them up to the theory and perspectives you explained in the
introduction, e.g. “Tanzania and Kenya where the Masai live, disjunctive flows
of information, people and so on coming from “the west” in what is famously
characterized by Apparundai as e.g. the mediascape
and ethnoscape, respectively.”; and
always remember to include examples of change, whether it is in a society or of
anthropological approaches. E.g.: “Examples of changes were gender roles,
kinship systems and belief in the present being a replication of a “glorious
past”. (…) Since they believed this past replicated itself over and over
through generations, the incorporation of new totems, objects such as steel
axes, boats and guns, created confusion and distress as their history had to be
“rewritten” by making up new myths.” At last, but not least, in order to get
the higher grades, you have to iii) give a critique of theoretical perspectives
and/or methodology. In the text I have written, there could probably be a more
extensive critique of the diachronic perspective. Nevertheless, it is important
that if you want to tell about your own opinion, write “I think…”, while when
using examples of opinions of other individuals, write for example “his
perspective on the matter of … is...”.
Finally, conclude by summing
up and relating everything to the question so that you keep focused. Because it
is important to show what your own understanding is, this is a good point to
put the discussion into the context of your own understanding of theories,
perspectives and/or ideas. For example: “One of my personal thoughts that I
find interesting is that from all the cultures of the world, all human beings
ultimately come from Africa…”.
You might wonder if
this was one of my papers? No. And I did not write it with the intention of it
being the perfect paper three. However, since I have this “recipe” of mine,
that I so kindly have tried to explain, and I know so well, the structure and
remembering what to include is like second nature to me now. My tips to you are:
look at the criteria and make an outline of how you can cover every single criterion
the best way possible. That is what I have done, anyways. Feel free to be
inspired, use this guide as much as you want, it is one hundred percent free.
-The Editor, Anna Birk Hellenes
