WHAT A DIFFERENCE A REGION MAKES: Cultural Studies/Cultural Industries in East Asia
A 2-day Symposium organized by the Programme in Japanese Cultural Studies (Birkbeck College) and the Pacific and Asian Cultural Studies Forum (Goldsmiths)
17 - 18 March 2006
What a difference a region makes! The popular culture and consumer product industries of East Asia are moving beyond national boundaries and enjoying regional and global success as never before. But are flows of Korean TV dramas and mobile phones, Japanese anime and cosmetics, Taiwanese computers, Chinese films, and Hong Kong pop music producing transnational regional culture, nationalistic backlash, or both? And do they result from reduced trade barriers and a lessening of nation-state power, or are they driven by national policy? What difference does a region make? This symposium embraces both Cultural Studies and Cultural Industries approaches to the issue.
Recent years have seen regional cultural phenomena ranging from regional stars—such as Taiwanese-Japanese actor Takeshi Kaneshiro, Korean pop singer Rain, and Chinese global icon Zhang Ziyi—to subcultural formations—such as queer Asian cinema and manga cults—to pan-Asian advertising campaigns and products. However, the rise of this transnational culture is also inspiring nationalistic backlashes such as the Japanese KenKanryu (Hate Korean Wave) and last year’s anti-Japanese demonstrations in the People’s Republic of China. Most recently, Hollywood’s employment of Chinese actors in Memories of a Geisha has stoked indignation in both Japan and China.
The burgeoning flows of cultural products that inspire such different responses within and outside the region are being stimulated both by the forces of globalization and nationalism. On one hand, lowered trade barriers following both membership of organizations like the WTO and also the People’s Republic of China’s “open door” policy have stimulated all manner of regional investment and trade flows. On the other hand, state policies promoting internationalization and globalization such as the Chinese “open door” policy itself and Korea’s globalization policy that started with President Kim Young-sam in the 1990s are often by the rhetoric of national interest.
Running parallel with these phenomena has been the rise of Cultural Studies and Cultural Industries research and approaches in East Asian academic culture. As well as deploying these approaches to analyze the regional, we also ask what difference it makes to use them in an East Asian context. What does it mean to do Cultural Studies in East Asia? Is Cultural Industries the same thing in East Asian contexts as it is understood to be in Europe or North America?