Today, increasing number of people live in diaspora. As globalization has progressed with the advance of the technical means to extend communication and interaction over long distances, more and more social, cultural and political practices and interaction, which once embedded in local or national contexts, have been moved toward new contexts institutionalized by mediated communication. Thus, the classical definition of diaspora, the reference to the conceptual homeland, has become more attenuated and has created new populations of diasporas. Considering that the diaspora experience that is constructed "by the recognition of a necessary heterogeneity and diversity; by a conception of ‘identity’ which lives with and through, not despite, difference; by hybridity” (Hall, 1990; p. 401-402), and identities constantly produce and reproduce themselves through "the continuous 'play' of history, culture and power” (Hall, 1990; p. 394), the current media landscape extends the dynamics of the process of diasporic identity construction. This brings questions about roots and social and historical boundaries: "what does it mean to be indigenous, and is indigeneity about place or space?” (Diaz & Kauanui, 2001; p. 332). “The endless desire to return to lost origins,” which lies at the heart of the diasporic experience, has been fulfilled by mediated narratives about “desire, memory, myth, search, discovery” (Hall, 1990; p. 402).
I think the concept of cultural identity and diaspora seem relevant to my research that examines the development of online community: how members of online community build a shared sense of community and how unique cultural practices, such as particular linguistic categories or inside jokes, create a sense of native authenticity.
Questions: How would you define the boundary between activism vs. research? Is it possible to engage in activism and still be considered doing scholarly work?
How does cultural studies move beyond close readings and resist conclusions?
No comments:
Post a Comment