The Sociology Book

169

capturing state power or a piece of
it.” Examples include ideas about
a state built through concepts such
as “national heritage,” countered
by social and political movements
that promote the rights of minority
groups and freedom of speech.

Sameness and difference
The different “scapes” identified
by Appadurai may be, and often
are, incongruous and disjointed.
For example, social actors in one
place may be positively disposed
toward economic developments
brought about by globalization
(that is, they see a positive
finanscape), while simultaneously
regarding immigration as a threat
to national identity and culture
(a negative ethnoscape).
By conceptualizing globalization
in terms of the five scapes,
Appadurai is able to undermine the
view of globalization as a uniform
and internally coherent process;
instead, globalization is understood
as a multilayered, fluid, and
irregular process—and one that is
characterized by ongoing change.

The different scapes are capable

of moving together or of following

different trajectories, in turn

serving either to reinforce or

destabilize one another.

Appadurai states that

the scapes are constructs of

perspective because they are

determined by the relation of the

viewer to the viewed. If this relation

changes, so in turn does the view.

In sum, the world view constructed

by any social actor is exactly that: it

is a view dependent upon the social,

cultural, and historical positioning

of the actor; and for this reason,

who and where we are determines

what scapes we see and how we

interpret them. There are multiple

ways of imagining the world.

The impact of Appadurai’s

contribution to globalization

theory is a significant one,

primarily because it does not try

to provide an integrated theory

of globalization in the orthodox

manner of social thinkers such as

Immanuel Wallerstein from the US

and Spain’s Manuel Castells. Quite

the opposite; it is Appadurai’s

LIVING IN A GLOBAL WORLD

intention to critically deconstruct

what he considers the naive

view that something as complex

and multifaceted as globalization

can be explained through one

master theory. That said,

Appadurai’s work has been

criticized by the likes of Dutch

social thinker Gijsbert Oonk,

who questions whether or not his

concept of global landscapes can

be meaningfully applied when

conducting empirical research. ■

The new global order

cultural economy has

to be understood as a

complex, overlapping,

disjunctive order.

Arjun Appadurai

The perspective of
social actors—who may
be individuals or
groups—is shaped by the
position they occupy in
relation to the wider
culture, society and
particular moment
in historical time. From
within this milieu, they
construct a world view.

Ethnoscapes Ideoscapes

Positive ethnoscape

world view

Positive finanscapes

world view

Mediascapes Technoscapes Finanscapes

It’s great to be based

in a vibrant, multicultural

city, but the effect of the

global economy on house

prices is a concern.

It’s great that the

strong world economy

is bolstering our nation,

but levels of immigration

are a concern.