The
popularity of Harry Potter among this young urban generation in China
is evidence of
the process of globalization. But what is globalization? One writer has
defined it generally as “the inexorable integration of markets,
nation-states, and technologies to a degree never witnessed before.”
This interconnectedness enables “individuals, corporations, and
nation-states to reach around the world farther, faster, deeper, cheaper
than ever before.” [1] Beyond this
core definition there are several ways to conceptualize the process of
globalization. One popular view is the "McWorld" thesis which
holds that global capitalism is pressing the
people of the world into “one commercially homogenous global network.” [2]
Advocates of the McWorld version of globalization hold that the diffusion of
western culture does not simply entail the ubiquity of certain brand names,
American fast food franchises, or other items of popular culture, but that these things become the vehicle for a
“significant freight of beliefs and practices.” [3]
A problem with this idea is that it assumes that human beings are merely passive receptacles of ideas and beliefs, a collective tabula rasa onto which unfamiliar beliefs are readily transcribed. Perhaps a better way to conceptualize globalization is the “Global Localism” model.[4] In this view global pop culture is “rife with regional alignments, adaptations, and appropriations” and its spread should be understood as a series of unique transactions across varied local contexts.[5] This model more realistically understands people as thinking individuals who orient themselves to new forms of culture in ways dependent upon their social and historical framework. Accordingly, reactions to Harry Potter can be seen broadly to "highlight the worldwide character of clashes between traditionalism and modernism" yet still take varied and idiosyncratic forms across the globe.[6]
For example, as Turkey strives to gain admittance into the European Union, much of the discussion of Harry Potter there revolves around the issue of Turkish national identity, over "whether Turkey is part of the West, the East or a bridge between the two." In France, critics have worried that the books indoctrinate "youngsters into the orthodoxy of unfettered market capitalism" while some Swedes have objected that they inculcate an Anglo-American take on gender and racial inequality. And as Russia obsesses over its international image, a newspaper in that country provoked a controversy when it claimed that the film portrayal of Dobby the house-elf was an intentional caricature of president Vladimir Putin. [7]
So what do contemporary Chinese youth see in these books? What is the meaning of Harry Potter in China?
Notes:
[1] Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding
Globalization, New York: Anchor Books, 2000, p. 9.
[2] Benjamin Barber, “Jihad
vs. McWorld,” The
[3] Patrick O’Meara, et al (eds.), Globalization
and the Challenges of a New Century,
[4] Arif Dirlik, “The Global in the Local,” Global/Local: Cultural
Production and the Transnational Imaginary, eds. Rob Wilson and Wimal
Dissanayake,
[5] John Erni, City University of Hong Kong, unpublished abstract entitled Harry
Potter and “Magical Capitalism” in Urban
China.
[6]
[7] These anecdotes come from Georgetown professor Daniel Nexon, author of
Harry Potter and International Relations. All cited in ibid.