The Global Influence on the Form: Creativity and the Function of Art in Society - Essay Example

 Friedman in his book, The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century, (2005) is capitalizing on a concept that is quite familiar. As technology improves the world has become, certainly a smaller place, cutting time and distance down. While some feel that this may impinge upon the economic resources of smaller countries some trend seem to dictate otherwise. Freidman feels that now that with the dawn of the internet and a global economy that is only know becoming fully understood, that the playing field in economic and intellectual realms is now level. The same technology that has improved communication and transportation has now made it possible for all cultures and countries to participate and interact as equipollent partners in all respects. Friedman’s reference to the flat earth is an allegory for a level playing field for all countries to participate in and develop to their full global potential. However, just because the world is getting flatter does not necessarily mean that it is a good thing. In order to understand this concept a look into the historical context that Friedman is dealing with. The time frame of the book is in parcelled out into three eras by the author, some a bit whimsically, but not without merit. In support of his theory about the flat earth he begins his first Era, which he terms Globalization 1.0, with the advent of Columbus’ trip around the world in 1492, proving it was round and not flat. This opened the literal and symbolic concept of a much larger world, but one that was certainly accessible using ships on the oceans to get to the different locales. The next Era was Globalization 2.0 which ran from about 1800 to 2000 and marked the beginning of multi-national corporations, improving means of transportation, by air and train, and improving types of communication, the telegraph, telephone, transatlantic cable and eventually computer and the internet. There is an increasing momentum at the end of this period, which brings about the dawn of the next era on Friedman’s timeline. Globalization 3.0 is the dawning of a paradigm shift in both business and personal life. This is the present beginning with 2001. This era, with its technological intricacies, allows individual collaboration and competition around the globe. It crosses geopolitical boundaries as well as taking advantage of the different time zones. Friedman gives an example of an executive whose assistant is outsourced on the other side of the globe. He assigns her a task at night from his office in New York and it is in his e-mail inbox the next morning. To make the concepts of the different era’s clearer; Friedman also gives current example of the differences between buying an airline ticket in the distinct eras. In Globalization 1.0 you are dealing with a ticket agent who assists you to complete the transaction and does the lion’s share of the work. In Globalization 2.0 you are using an e-ticket machine, a direct single function unit that process the request. Then finally in Globalization 3.0 you become the ticket agent yourself using the Internet to arrange your flight personally, but not only that, in 3.0 the diversification of the equipment is a main leveller of the playing field. In 2.0 you need specific tools and technology to complete a process, in 3.0 you can no use one technology, computers, to complete and almost infinite variety of processes. Much of the sociological common knowledge about the current era can be summed up in the claim that globalisation represents the master process and direction of social change. There is a certain kernel of troth to this claim. Since the 1960s, and especially over the last decade, there has arguably been a trend toward an increased sway of global-scale markets in many commodities, including not only goods but also ‘intellectual property,’ money capital, financial services, and other ‘financial instruments.’ Over the past few decades there has been enormous ‘time-space compression’ due to astounding changes in the technologies of transportation and communication. (Buttel 95) There are also ten contributing events that have led us to this new flat earth society. Beginning in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin wall, there was also an opening in consciousness, and trade agreements that began the current globalization process. In 1995 with the dawn of Netscape, computers and communication began to expand their horizons. Open sourcing of programs and data was the next breakthrough. Outsourcing jobs that were traditional in-house was the next step and then off shoring those Jobs took it to the next global level. The complete exploitation of supply chains management, AKA Wal-Mart economics was the next phase. Then insourcing, which is what the author refers to as overnight courier services like UPS and FedX made paperwork almost immediately available globally. Then in-forming, search engine that organized the internet, like Google and Yahoo gave everyone the opportunity for everyone to ‘surf the web.’ Finally there is what Freidman calls the Steroids. This is the digital, virtual, personal office and individual who is beginning to become one with the technology. Texting, blogging and so on as a way of life and a living has become a standard for this generation. While all three globalization version are existing simultaneously right now, a condition the author terms ‘triple convergence, eventually the older techniques will drift by the wayside. The last flat earth phase will be the great sorting out. There is now and will be a tremendous paradigm shift in the reshaping of individuals and governments along these new flat earth lines creating the completion of the cycle. Globalization was a term probably coined in the 1960’s by sociologists, but came into its current economic use in the 1980’s and 1990’s. While many view this economy as taking place as early as the 1500’s (Thompson 2004) this book is concerned with more recent history. The first time that the globally economy really struck home was the first oil crisis in the 1970’s. Gas lines and price gouging were rampant and the US citizen realized that they were not alone and that the economy of the world was having a direct effect upon them. The WTO, NAFTA, many other organizations and treaties have played a large part in this as well. (Buttel 2003; Showalter 2004). In specific regards to particular country, Russia’s current trade policy, through its possible WTO membership allow sit a finer focus on creating that level playing field across regional and cross-regional trading models (Lissovolik & Lissovolik 2006: 2). Importantly, some of the effects of WTO membership may not be explicitly embedded in the lower tariff levels but concern intangibles (such as access to the dispute settlement body of the WTO) that are important for establishing a level playing field with WTO members. ..Another counterargument is that the possible short-term losses from import competition may be manageable in light of longer-term efficiency gains. The latter would likewise result from the level playing field facilitated by appropriate pro-market structural reforms and by constraints on vested interests. (Lissovolik & Lissovolik 2006: 8-9) The book also revolves around the new communication and information networks that make the world accessible in many more ways and from virtually any location as long as you have power, a computer terminal and a connection to the web. This has created a world out outsourcing undreamed of twenty years ago. A world where someone taking your order at the Burger King drive through in Vermont is actually physical located in their living room in Iowa., not to mention the outsourcing of technical support providers for large entities such as Microsoft to India and other countries. (Schultz 2007: 232) The privatization of INTELSAT has been said to threaten universal global connectivity, the continuation of international telecommunications service to developing countries, or both. Are the legal safeguards instituted during the privatization (which include the maintenance of a residual treaty organization) sufficient to dispel such economic and political threats? Economically, the privatized satellite system is now legally obligated to serve developing countries at rates no higher than those charged prior to privatization. (Katkin 2005: 1323) Other authors have taken up the term ‘Flat Earth Economics’ as well. Robert E. Scott in his article ‘Flat Earth Economics: Is There a New International Trade Paradigm?,’ also verifies this trend towards the level playing field. He states that, ‘… neoclassical trade theory require[s] that we maintain a level playing field through multilateral negotiations that involve the rules that govern marketplace behaviour.’ (Scott 1993: 34). By the late 1990s, even East Asia, a region previously characterized by a near absence of formal free trade agreements (FTAs) and regional institutions, was engaged in a remarkable number of negotiations toward inter-state cooperation in the areas of finance and trade. (Solis & Katada 2007: 231)The development of Fair Trade Agreements (FTAs) has certainly helped to level the playing field. (Lissovolik & Lissovolik 2006: 1) East Asia, however, stands apart in this cross-regional world in one important way. Whereas European and North American countries pursued extra-regional partnerships after consolidating their regional blocs, (4) East Asian countries embarked on cross-regionalism much sooner, when they were just beginning to launch their FTA initiatives. (Solis, and Katada, 2007, p. 234) According to certain Scholars as well as Economist’s, Globalization truly began with the interconnection of the central Eurasian continental land mass that occurred during the period of the Mongol conquests which took place in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. This aroused the separate nations of brewing European civilization to unify and protect themselves against theses foreign invaders. Furthermore, among many other things it also brought about an increased awareness of the many civilizations of Eastern Asia. This cultivated the further desire to somehow reach these new untapped resources by circumventing the Islamic world that had blocked the way for so long. That, in turn, brought forth the efforts to improve naval technology, which enabled the European voyages of discovery of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. So, instead of being the first, this can rightfully be called the second (and decisive) state on the way to a global consciousness (and, indeed, globalization) -- first Eurasia, then the world. (Gray 2005: 89) By conquering the seas and going around any obstacles in their way, the Europeans began their ‘conquest’ of global civilization. This, of course, eventually led to America and without realizing it they created their biggest competitors in the process of globalization with the formation of the United States One of the more interesting points as the evidence in global history seems to demonstrates is the fact that while modern economics has unfolded into a massive global system, the centre and beginning of this process had really emerged in Asia and had only moved to Europe after the late 1800’s. Furthermore, there has always existed a controversy over whether or not capitalism truly had its origins in Europe and further that the early world economy was based solely on capitalism is also a point of contention (Frank 1994: 261). In fact it must be remembered that the rise of the West had only come about after the fall of the East. Imperialism was alive and well and a functioning international if not global economy existed as far back as the 1500’s in that respect. The east and the west were and are part of single world economic system that has always been in a state of growth and change over these many centuries. ‘The historian Leopold von Ranke is known for having pleaded for writing history ‘as it really was,’ but he also wrote that there is no history but world history. (Frank 1994: 266) In 1971, eighty-five nations (including the United States) formed the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT), a public intergovernmental treaty organization. INTELSAT was charged with operating the world's first global telecommunications satellite system, to guarantee the interconnectedness of the world's communications systems and the availability of international telecommunications service to every nation on earth. (Katkin 2005) One of the most distinctive features of late-twentieth century globalisation is that many of its predominant features--especially the reinforcement of trade liberalisation institutions and the growing ability of national-states and corporate capital to exercise off-shore veto of domestic social and environmental legislation--are challenged directly and aggressively by a global-scale social movement, the anti-globalisation movement. (Buttel 2003: 95) Currently the processes of economic and technological modernization as well as social and cultural changes throughout the world are now separating hitherto individualistic societies from their longstanding local identities. This is all part of the process as globalization continues to create something of a world culture that we are all becoming subcultures of. This process has also had the effect of weakening the nation and the state and the country as a source of identity. Religion has certainly moved in to fill the void. While Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Islam as well as others have all become a part of this change, the ‘fundamentalism’ found in Western Christianity has been one of the greatest global drivers both political and economically. This is in fact a general phenomenon, which seems to be have been affecting almost all societies and cultures at the end of the twentieth century (Schmidt & Hersh 2000: 204). ‘American nationalism developed its own religious characteristics. Not only were the early founders Deists but also over time the ideals of secular nationalism and the symbols of Christianity were blended into what has been called a ‘civil religion.’’ (Juergensmeyer 2000: 214) This civil religion has found its way into almost every facet of government from swearing on the bible in court to almost all inauguration speeches with very little upheaval form the separation of church and state proponents. In fact as an example, Bill Clinton’s 1993 inaugural address contained ‘29 direct or indirect references to the Bible, and his acceptance speech in the Democrat Party’s convention the year before was organized around the biblical theme of the new covenant (Juergensmeyer 2000: 215). In a sense, Christianity has played a major part in co-opting the spirit of nationalism and has given it a religious legitimacy. It has surreptitiously found its way into to the state and government by implicitly needling becoming a part of the legislative frameworks of many governments around the globe. Historically the past few centuries societal leaders have almost all had one primal characteristic quality, that of being a charismatic leader that was able to incorporate the feeling of the people into his or her persona. However, this was also influenced to a certain extent by the Western attitude and demeanour that was embodied forever the in quintessential character of ‘The Prince,’ created by Machiavelli dilemma of absolute power and ethical quandaries of the same ilk. The upheaval of the world in the latter centuries of the past millennia saw the creation, destruction, and recreation of many different states and regimes. Each had an associated personality that became almost synonymous with their names: Think of Ataturk, Lenin, Nasser, Sukarno, Kenyatta, Senghor, Nkrumah, Mao, U Nu, Ho Chi Minh, Tito, Kim II Sung, Castro, to mention only some of the more prominent figures. In the case of India, the name of course is Gandhi. With the exception of Gandhi, all of these figures match pretty well with Machiavelli's model, set out in The Prince, of political brilliance and political ruthlessness. (Lummis 2006: 314) Liberalism, as hard as it may seem to believe, was one of the prime factors influencing economic structures and thoughts that had come from the Western mind. Economist around the world began to realize that the current global polices that were falling into place from such minds as Margaret Thatcher, Helmut Kohl and the Reagan-Bush eras as well as the World Bank and the IMF, came from an even more historically distant source: The connections between post-1970s global economic ideologies extolling the global marketplace and the social and intellectual revolutions of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that ushered in a new political economy of bourgeois property rights, market power, and the rule of national states. This ‘classical liberalism’ they perceived, was often integral with, rather than antagonistic to, latter day conservatism, and neoliberalism deliberately harkened back to that classical tradition. (Smith 2005: 29) Thus the world economy was thoroughly influenced by liberal and elitist views of the some Imperial sources and not solely springing from a purely capitalist background as well. Culture and Art are closely related. Over time the mixture of cultures has also resulted in the mixture of Art and changed the way in which we view and appreciate the different forms of its expression. Representation in art is the key concept when trying to understand the global influence on the form, creativity and the function of art in society. Representation assumes several meanings in this context: It pertains, first, to the institutional visibility of the discourse around globalism, the degree to which museums, galleries, critics, artists, and cultural consumers feel the need to pay attention to the topic, and, second, to the diversity of artists, locations, and cultural perspectives increasingly included in the art world's discourse. (Lee 2003: 166) Here the level playing filed is a it more precarious. While many institutions have adapted tot he various forms of art around the world, each society still holds what it deems to be artistic. While this concept is certainly changing and the world view of art is certainly one of expanded consciousness, there is certainly quite a way to go. While I found Friedman’s work to be very insightful, informative, and convincing, it was not truly unique. While his perspective on the new level playing field is quite a human and cultural one, he seemed to be implying a great deal of economic equality and citing many instances globally of it, but did not offer any real opinion as to the future advantage of such. Some of my own research provided a great many sources that are certainly delving into this new global economy from that perspective. So while Friedman’s bias appears to be a human one, concentrating on cultures and people, he lacked some of the economic insight that would have truly rounded out his work on a more scholarly level. However, that being said, I have found the Author’s thesis to be quite convincing and certainly worthy of more in-depth research and detail. He cites many instances that prove his point and has the global resources of his own personal experience to draw from. There is a new global culture arising that we are eventually all going to be subcultures of, the sooner we understand that the easier and more productive we all can be. Therefore, if we are truly one world would we be less likely to go to war with ourselves and more likely to help each other succeed? The history of Human Nature may tend to contradict these initiatives for some time to come. List of References Buttel, Frederick H. 2003. ‘Some Observations on the Anti-Globalisation Movement.’ Australian Journal of Social Issues 38:95-111 Frank, Andre Gunder. 1994. ‘The World Economic System in Asia before European Hegemony.’ The Historian 56:259-281 Friedman, Thomas L. 2005. ‘The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century.’ Farrar, Straus and Giroux. New York, NY. Gray, Kenneth R. 2005. ‘The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century.’ International Journal on World Peace 22:81-101 Katkin, Kenneth. 2005. ‘Communication Breakdown?: The Future of Global Connectivity after the Privatization of INTELSAT.’ Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 38:1323-1341. Lee, Pamela M. 2003. ‘Boundary Issues: The Art World under the Sign of Globalism.’ Artforum International, November, pp. 164-177 Lissovolik, Bogdan, and Yaroslav Lissovolik. 2006. ‘Russia and the WTO: The ‘Gravity’ of Outsider Status.’ IMF Staff Papers 53:1-15 Lummis, C. Douglas. 2006. ‘The Smallest Army Imaginable.’ Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 31:313-329 Juergensmeyer, Mark. 2000. pp. 212-223 in Globalization and Social Change, edited by Schmidt, Johannes Dragsbaek and Jacques Hersh. London: Routledge Schmidt, Johannes Dragsbaek and Jacques Hersh, eds. 2000. Globalization and Social Change. London: Routledge. Schultz, Colleen Walsh. 2007. ‘To Offshore or Not to Offshore: Which Nations Will Win a Disproportionate Share of the Economic Value Generated from the Globalization of White-Collar Jobs?.’ Houston Journal of International Law 29:231-250 Scott, Robert E. 1993. ‘Flat Earth Economics: Is There a New International Trade Paradigm?.’ Challenge 36:32-48 Showalter, J. Michael. 2004. ‘A Cruel Trilemma: The Flawed Political Economy of Remedies to WTO Subsidies Disputes.’ Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 37:587-602 Smith, Neil. 2005. The Endgame of Globalization. New York: Routledge Solis, Mireya, and Saori N. Katada. 2007. ‘Understanding East Asian Cross-Regionalism: An Analytical Framework.’ Pacific Affairs 80.2 229-242. Thompson, W. R. 2000. ‘The Emergence of the Global Political Economy.’ London: Routledge. Read More