In 1999, Sting's song "Desert Rose" hit the airwaves, and a lot of people were puzzled; there was a voice other than Sting's on the track, but who was it?. Well, that voice was Cheb Mami, the Algerian-born, Paris-based singer. As part of the Algerian diaspora community in France, Mami found his style of music -- a blend of traditional raï with other styles of "Western" music, such as blues and funk. Some of his songs have French titles, like "Le Raï C'est Chic" from 2001, and have a British back up singer (Sting) while the lyrics are sung in Arabic. Arguably, this blending of cultural influences into a production of both media and culture is a quintessential example of globalization in action.
Regarding these two songs, there would be some that would argue that Mami has fallen victim to the "Americanization of the world and the disappearance of cultural diversity", that his being a part of Sting's song is just a continuation a Western-dominated media that in colonialist fashion pays homage to the high art of the "native", and that his own cultural roots have been soiled with Western styles (Silvio Waisbord, "Media and the Reinvention of the Nation, SAGE Handbook of Media Studies, 379). And still there would be others that would celebrate these two musicians, declaring these songs as proof that globalization has "[eliminated] old barriers" and "[contributed] to cultural diversity" in the age of vast media networks (Waisbord, 379).
While I have a tendency to agree with the cultural diversity theory in this particular case, it has often bothered me that globalization theory seems polarized. It is either good or bad, a celebration of diversity or a creation of monoculture. Does this dichotomy accurately cover the effects of globalization, particularly in the music industry? Is the access to different styles of music creating one type of song, or is reshaping the songs we thought were static representations of cultural identity?
John Sinclair offers Golding's theory of "syndicalization of experience" as an alternative to the dichotomy of globalization ("Globalization, Supranational Institutions, and Media", SAGE Handbook of Media Studies, 73). In essence, Golding argues that a global culture based on the shared experience of consumerism is being created, and that it is not acting as a "force of homogenization". While this view does break away from the idea of "omnipotence of external powers" that pervades cultural imperialist theory, it does not, however account for cultural plurality. Looking at cultural media as an economic product is valid; it is produced, marketed, and traded like any commodity. But just because you have access to the product doesn't mean you will buy into even part of it. So how can those in international communication hope to look at the complex blending of musical styles without leaving out some aspect of its formation and popular distribution?
Enter Karim H. Karim's use of Falk's idea of "globalization from below" to describe the use of media by diaspora ("Reviewing the 'National' in 'International Communication', International Communication Reader, 403). As Karim argues it, diaspora are using forms of media outside mainstream communication to reform their identity apart from a physical locale and outside a cultural majority. He further states that these people are creating a "coexistence of cultural frameworks that are supported by artistic production"(403). The "artistic expression" part is important to me, because the language puts things like music, studio art, and stories outside of mainstream communication forms. I believe that is a misconception held by a world obsessed with technology; music in particular is one of the oldest universal expressions of human emotion and thought. Despite this, artistic production has been pushed aside for TV and film, and is now seen as an alternative method to creating cross-cultural identities.
Could music be used in the same way to form a global identity? Further research is needed to find out. But a good place to start is by NOT thinking of globalization in antithetical terms and as created from supranational forces that trickle down to the masses. Instead look at "globalization from above and below". Not only does it include the economic and political institutions that shape our culture, but it also includes the movements of people, like artists. Globalization cannot be talked of in terms of black and white; there are no clear-cut effects and no absolute boundaries that continue to exist between cultures. And it is artists from below who have the power to bring together what is seemingly disparate -- such as Akon and Bollywood -- and make sense of cultural identity in world that is continually fragmenting and putting itself back together under the pressure of globalization from above.
Playback Singers: Akon and Hamsika Iyer
No comments:
Post a Comment