Cultural Globalization Maggie Nelsen

Maggie Nelsen

2/29/12

Cultural Globalization

The two main articles for this week focused on Western perceptions of Muslim women and the Hijab, most commonly referred to by westerners as the ‘veil’. I think the more highly educated ranks of American society are aware that the hijab, and subsequently the rights of Muslim women is a predicament of cultural relativism. In the West’s defense, there is a growing number of people, typically college students and academics who recognize that values and customs differ between societies and cultures, and that foreigners need to respect that. Unfortunately however, among the west in general there is an impulse to apply deeply embedded western values onto others, without pausing to learn about and understand the social dynamics, circumstances, and customs embedded in another culture.

This is the disconnect that seems to have occurred about two decades ago with the famous National Geographic photograph of an Afghan girl (Gula), taken by Steve McCurry. The author poses a theory that there would not have been an extensive search to find the woman again years later, if it had not been for the events of 9/11 which allegedly spurred renewed interest. At face value, I didn’t find this whole story and the photograph itself to be so controversial. However, what did bother me is McCurry and other journalists and critics putting words into to the mouth of the young girl they photographed and never even spoke to. Through their interpretation of her facial expression, they assumed an entire narrative about her plight, of which they didn’t really know.  It is a very difficult situation to be politically critical of a photograph, because this image has purely artistic value and talent as a portrait as well. But, if one views it for its political message and cultural content then issues do begin to emerge. Another interesting part of this story is that the image of this woman was distributed globally and became quite well known to the general public, yet the young woman remained in her less than fortunate circumstances in Afghanistan all those years her portrait was becoming famous. This irony indeed highlights the capitalist framework which seems to control so many aspects of our world. I think the major problem with this case is National Geographic is considered to be such an authority on worldly cultures and is supposed to be introducing its readers to places and peoples we are not familiar with. Therefore, people will take this specific form of media much more seriously, which legitimizes the messages and images it releases in its publication.

What was even more problematic in my mind was the reebok advertisement, I found that whole image and concept very disturbing. Depicting a woman completely covered in the burqa, with the large caption, “Hidden Classic” is clearly using the burqa and perhaps Muslin women in general as a metaphor for something “hidden”. This image is making huge assumptions about the religion of Islam and Muslin women; it is really inappropriate to employ an important religious and cultural custom as a marketing tool—especially because it is so misused and misunderstood, thereby broadcasting an invalid and stereotypical message to thousands of Americans.

In my mind 9/11 is one of the worst events to ever happen to the Muslim community because millions of westerners have now developed negative connotations with the entire Islamic faith and Muslims in general. This sentiment no doubt plays itself out most prominently in airport security screenings. For the West, there is a huge gap in knowledge about Muslims and their religion; many have also pigeonholed Muslim women into the sole occupation of those oppressed, and confined to rigid disenfranchisement from society. While a lot of the laws and customs westerns abhor upon are true in certain Muslim communities, there is a lot more going on, a whole accompanying history that is left out of the picture. The photographs and their captions of Iran and Afghanistan from the 1960s and 1970s demonstrate how similar society was to the west at the time, and how vibrant and modern it actually was. 

The other article, Unveiling Imperialism, brought to light the way the Bush administration justified invading Afghanistan through the liberation of oppressed Muslim women. There are many problems with this philosophy and the rhetoric of that time. Firstly, the notion of Muslim women needing liberation negates their cultural identity entirely and immediately subordinates the faith of Islam under ‘Western-ism’/Christianity. Secondly, and none of the other articles mentioned this, is by running under a campaign that seeks equality for Muslim women, renders American women as equal, living in a post-feminist society—which of course is inaccurate, and not the reality that exists in the States.

The other articles about the Indian-Middle Eastern fusion music and video also presented a bit of a perplexing issue. While reading the articles, and the testimonials of Indian American youth who were simultaneously excited but also apprehensive about some version of India music becoming mainstream I began to ask myself  is some representation of another culture (in any form) better than none? I think that was the biggest question running through my mind. But after watching the video I was much more disappointed by any prospective hope. The video was not even at least trying to represent other cultures properly. The background beat did ‘sound Indian’ but the rapping and the attire of the featured male Black artist were clearly western representations plopped into a clear exaggeration and amplification of stereotypical Indian aesthetics and cultural exoticism. I think even the average westerner would recognize that.