On culture in the post-Covid-19 era
How to reimagine culture
As we try to make sense of life and continue to seek a new normal in the post-Covid-19 era, it seems we are at a turning point in history. The question of the hour is this: Will we become more insular or will we become even more globalised, diverse and cosmopolitan?
It has been described how “the Covid-19 shock has raised globalisation angst to a new pitch” (Tooze, 2020). Some have declared that globalisation is dead and in its place will be a new multipolar world order (O’Sullivan, 2019). Others are however hopeful for a shift from deglobalisation to re-globalisation — that is, globalisation is here to stay and it is merely evolving (Monteiro, 2020).
Co-author of Terra Incognita — 100 Maps to Survive the Next 100 years, Goldin (2020) posits that the pandemic-induced digitalisation of society will accelerate the ongoing trend in rapid information and financial flows across the world. For Goldin, the flow of ideas is “the most influential dimension of globalisation”.
Researchers often point to how our cities and communities have become increasingly novel, diverse and hybrid, at a pace and to an extent that is unprecedented. Within intercultural studies, which is a new, growing and evolving field of research, it is often said that our social realities are increasingly complex and uncertain, as well as interconnected.
It was anthropologist Vertovec who first proposed the emergence of “super-diversity” and his concept of the “diversification of diversity” has taken the academic world by storm (2007). In a similar fashion, communications theorist Kramer describes how “globalisation is globalising” (2020, p. 3).
Emphasising the change in globalisation due to increased connectivity and information flow, Kramer (2020) points out how:
Globally, everyone is directly or indirectly affected by the massive and diversely churning flows of information. During this process the traditional pace and form of change is itself changing. The meaning of culture is changing. (p. 2)
Culture is an incredibly complex concept. It is a problematic word. Researchers have found that culture not only has numerous different meanings, it is also used in different ways (Piller, 2011, 15).
Culture is everywhere — it exists in all social groups, including families, peer groups, organisations, online communities, cities, nations and regions. Culture is expressed in all forms of human activity and in various parts of daily life.
Perhaps due to its ubiquitous nature, culture as a term is often misused. We often unwittingly perform culturespeak, which is “the use of the concept of culture in a systematic and uncritical way” (Dervin 2011, p. 43).
Culture as a process
It has been established that culture is a verb and not a noun; it is a process and not a product (Street 1998).
The liquid approach to culture is by far the most promising in our impossible endeavour to understand it. Author of Culture in a Liquid Modern World, Bauman (2007) portrays contemporary postmodernity as liquid, and our social reality as “a kaleidoscope of constant change” (p. 122).
Calling for a paradigm shift within communication studies, Kramer conceptualises both individuals and societies as dynamic and mutable information systems (2020, p. 4). That is, individuals and their surrounding cultures are constantly interacting with and changing each other, in a state of flux.
Kramer (2020) elaborates further on how culture is a performance:
Culture is… constantly negotiated and performed. Stresses are endemic to fluxing processes. One does not conform to culture so much as participate in its performance (p. 7).
So how does one manage constant change and uncertainty? Let’s consider the adage, “it’s about the journey, not the destination". There is no end goal or final destination. More diverse does not equate better and no one is more diverse than another (Dervin 2016, 26–30).
Like Sisyphus, we are to keep rolling our rock up the mountain, only to come down the other side of it to repeat the process all over again. Camus (1942/2005) postulates how in the midst of his epic struggle, Sisyphus claims his victory when he bravely concludes: “All is well.” The Myth of Sisyphus, as a philosophical treatise on the absurd hero, offers us this advice: Be stronger than your rock (Camus 1942/2005, 118).
The process of culture as fusion
Combining hermeneutic theory, communications theory, Gestalt theory and evolution theory, Kramer (2020) puts forward the cultural fusion theory (CFT) and describes cultural fusion as:
“a process of mixing and accrual, the process of a person and society gaining in complexity by adding new repertoires of arts, styles and practices accumulated via exposure to others.” (p. 18).
Considering the interdependent, fluid and hybrid nature of both individuals and culture, cultural fusion is a process of learning, growth and evolution. It is an opportunity for co-creation. Both the individual and society may transform new and different ideas encountered in their interactions, for their own purposes (for better or worse).
But how does one go about fusing cultures? In a way, cultural fusion is like alchemy. Like how base metals are turned into gold, fusion is “the blending of differences that leads to outcomes that are different from composite ingredients” (Kramer 2020, p. 14). To the alchemist, differences are tools, they are base elements for making gold.
Before I dived into the rabbit hole of cultural studies, I had an inkling of how the concept of culture is contentious and how many issues related to culture are complex and multi-dimensional. What I did not however foresee was how my journey as a novice researcher would involve frequent wrestling sessions with countless slippery intellectual tentacles. Culture is one of these slippery tentacles. But perhaps instead of seeing culture as a monster and its tentacles as slippery, I could begin to see culture as My Octopus Teacher instead?
References:
Bauman, Z. (2007). Liquid Arts. Theory, Culture & Society, 24(1), 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276407071579
Camus, A. (2005). The Myth of Sisyphus. (J. O’Brien, Trans.). Penguin Books. (Original work published 1942).
Dervin, F. (2011). A plea for change in research on intercultural discourses: A “liquid” approach to the study of the acculturation of Chinese students. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 6(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2010.532218
Dervin, F. (2016). Interculturality in education: A theoretical and methodological toolbox. London: Macmillan Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54544-2.
Goldin, I. (2020, Aug 26). Covid-19 proves globalisation is not dead. The Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/d99fa0e9-2046-4587-b886-7d42252b6fc9
Kramer, E. (2020). Cultural Fusion Theory. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia, Communication. Oxford University Press USA. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.679
Monteiro, F. (2020, Mar 16). The Changing Tides of the Global Economy. INSEAD Blog. https://knowledge.insead.edu/blog/insead-blog/the-changing-tides-of-the-global-economy-13551
O’Sullivan, M. (2019, Jun 28). Globalisation is dead and we need to invent a new world order. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/open-future/2019/06/28/globalisation-is-dead-and-we-need-to-invent-a-new-world-order
Piller, I. (2011). Intercultural Communication: A Critical Introduction. Edinburg: Edinburg University Press.
Street, B. (1993). Culture is a verb. In D. Graddo l, L. Thompson and M. Byram (Eds.), Language and Culture (p. 23–43). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Tooze, A. (2020, Jun 2). The death of globalisation has been announced many times. But this is a perfect storm. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/02/end-globalisation-covid-19-made-it-real
Vertovec, S. (2007). Super-diversity and its implications, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(6), 1024–1054, https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870701599465
