Beyond Borders: Understanding Globalization Through Culture --- Lim Yebin

1. Summary

According to Tomlinson, globalization cannot be reduced to economics or politics alone; it is fundamentally a cultural process. He emphasizes the idea of deterritorialization—that culture is no longer confined to geographical boundaries but circulates through migration, media, and technology. Importantly, globalization is not simply “Westernization.” Local societies adapt and transform outside influences, creating hybrid forms that are both global and local.

This connects with the broader academic debate. Pieterse (1993), for example, frames globalization as hybridization, where cultural flows do not erase difference but instead produce new cultural mixtures. This perspective highlights how globalization is not just convergence, but also creative recombination.

In lecture, the professor echoed these points: globalization should not be seen only as homogenization, but as a process that simultaneously generates similarities and differences. He also emphasized the challenge of measurement: while students suggested Netflix data as a way to quantify cultural flows, the professor noted that such data are usually inaccessible, reminding us that culture is harder to quantify than economics or trade. Instead, tools like the World Values Survey reveal how trust, democracy, or traditions vary across countries, showing that globalization reshapes values unevenly.

Together, Tomlinson, Pieterse, and the lecture suggest that globalization is best understood as an interactive exchange—cultures borrowing, reshaping, and negotiating with one another. This means globalization does not erase cultural identity but constantly redefines it.


2. Insights or Interesting Points

I understand globalization mainly through the lens of cultural exchange. To me, globalization is the extent to which societies adopt and adapt aspects of each other’s lifestyles and practices. It should not be framed only as “homogenization versus heterogenization,” but as a dual process where both convergence and divergence occur. For example, K-pop blends Western pop structures with Korean aesthetics and narratives, creating a hybrid form that resonates globally. Likewise, Korean food has spread worldwide, yet it adapts to local tastes—Korean fried chicken in the U.S. is often seasoned differently. These cases illustrate the professor’s point that globalization is not a one-way street but an ongoing negotiation between global and local.

At the same time, studying globalization makes me realize how limited my cultural perspective can be. I often feel like a frog in a well—not fully understanding either Korea or the world. While global media frames China as a country lacking freedom of expression, Chinese citizens may not perceive it that way. What seems like censorship to outsiders may be considered “normal” internally. This connects with the professor’s caution that our views are often ethnocentric unless grounded in data. Similarly, I question whether the Korean Wave (Hallyu) is truly as dominant abroad as it feels inside Korea. From the outside, its impact may be smaller than Koreans assume. These reflections show that globalization is not only about cultural flows but also about perceptions of culture.

3. Questions or Critiques

A major question I have is whether globalization will preserve or dilute traditional cultures. On one hand, globalization gives smaller cultures a chance to be recognized globally. On the other hand, they risk being absorbed by dominant global trends. This uncertainty is both unsettling and fascinating, echoing the professor’s point that globalization is measurable but never complete.

I also think cultural export does not automatically equal cultural openness. Japan is globally known for anime, yet outside this sphere, it tends to preserve tradition and limit external influence. By contrast, Korea appears more open to importing and adapting outside cultures despite political constraints. This suggests that globalization should also be measured by the willingness to embrace external cultures, not just by export volume.
Finally, I wonder whether we sometimes overestimate globalization’s depth. Watching a drama or trying foreign food does not guarantee a deep understanding of another culture’s values. As the professor noted, surface-level cultural flows are easier to measure, but deeper value shifts are harder to capture. Still, even surface interactions can spark curiosity and become an entry point for more meaningful cultural learning.

* References

Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and Culture. University of Chicago Press.
Pieterse, J. N. (1993). Globalization as hybridization. International Institute of Social Studies. ISS Working Paper No. 152.
Konieczny, P. (2025, September 22). Media Trends and Globalization [Lecture]. Hanyang University, ERICA Campus.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is globalization--Kim younggyun

 1) Summarize From what I understand, globalization is not merely an economic trend. It is a broad concept in which the world becomes increasingly interconnected on cultural, social, political, and even individual levels. Because globalization is such an all-encompassing idea, it is only natural that debates continue over its definition. This is exactly what made studying the concept of globalization difficult for me. That is why, like Robertson and White, I tried to understand globalization mainly through the two dimensions of increasing connectivity and growing consciousness. I find their approach persuasive. When internet, transportation, and trade expand, the connections between countries grow stronger, and naturally, people begin to perceive the world as a “single place.” 2) Interesting point What I found particularly interesting while studying globalization is that it does not simply lead to “one-sided homogenization.” I used to think of globalization only as the expansion of...
Read more

What is globalization? (TRAN THUY NGA/ 짠 튀 응아)

What is globalization? 1. Summary of the Reading Roland Robertson and Kathleen E. White’s chapter “What Is Globalization?” offers a careful, multi-layered attempt to describe a phenomenon that has become both a powerful reality and an intensely debated concept. They begin by acknowledging that  globalization is an essentially contested concept : scholars from different parts of the world and from different disciplines approach it with varying assumptions and no single agreed-upon definition. The authors trace the word’s rise in public discourse: although the processes we now associate with globalization long-distance trade, migration, cultural exchange stretch back centuries, the term itself only became widely used after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the partial collapse of communism. This historical moment gave globalization a new political and economic resonance, yet its roots are far older. Robertson and White emphasize that debates often split between those who see g...
Read more

What is globalization? | Yun Shinji

1.   Summary It is difficult to define the concept of ‘globalization’ with a single meaning, as the term is used in various contexts with different implications. Sociologist Roland Robertson describes globalization as “the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole". Robertson and White further elaborate it as two main trends “an increase in global interconnectedness” and "an increase in global consciousness". In this way, globalization is a complex phenomenon in which the world becomes closely connected across borders, and it is used in multiple ways in different contexts. Globalization can be broadly divided into three dimensions cultural, political, and economic. Among them, cultural globalization is the phenomenon we experience most directly in our daily lives. For example, a cultural content that becomes popular can spread worldwide and be shared globally. However, this phenomenon also raises concerns about cultural hom...
Read more