Man and Culture* - Srce

ManandCulture*

Original Paper UDC 130.2ReceivedSeptember25th,2007

Zagorka GolubovićMilošaJunakovića12/I,SRB-11000Beograd

[email protected]

The role of Culture in the post-Modern world

Its Impact on the Development of Human potentialities

AbstractAnanthropologicalapproachtotheplaceofcultureintheprocessofman’shumanizationwillbediscussed:whatarethebenefitsofthemodernagedevelopmentandwhichproblemsariseinpostindustrialandstilltechnologicalcivilization?Whathasbeenchangedasfarasthefundamentalroleofcultureinthehumanworldisconcerned:a)whenculturehasbecomeanindustrialproductintermof“massculture”;andb)undertheinfluenceofapostmodernrelativism(marginalizinguniversalvaluesandmorality,andinsteadfocusingon“preferences”andnarativediscourse)?Theconsequencesofthesechangesaretobeanalyzedfromthepointofviewofsubstantialhumanpotentialitiesascreativityandimagi-nation,framesofreferencesregardingmeaningoflife,multidimensionalnatureofhumancharacterstructure,freedomofpersonalityvs.vulgarizedindividualism,etc.Theconclud-ingquestionstates:whetherculturehasbecomesubmittedtotheeconomismortopolitics,insteadofbeingtheirfundation?

Key wordsCulture,humanization,development,humanpotentialities,post-modernworld

preface

An anthropological approach to culture and its impact on the process of hu-manisationwillbediscussed:whatarethebenefitsofthemodernagedeve-lopmentandwhichproblemsariseinthepost-modernbutstilltechnologicalcivilisation. What has been changed during the past century as far as the role ofcultureinthehumanworldisconcerned:a/whenculturebecameanin-dustrialproductintermsof“massculture”;andb/whataretheconsequencesofapost-modernrelativisminregardstothemarginalisationoftheuniversal

*Three articles in this thematic unit are adapted versions of papers delivered at the symposi-umwiththeabovetitle.The symposium “Man and Culture” (in the frameworkofthe16th Days of Frane Petrić)

wasorganisedbyCroatianPhilosophicalSo-ciety,attheislandofCres,from23rdto26thofSeptember,2007.

SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA 45(1/2008)pp.(3–15)

Z. Golubović, The Role of Culture in thePost-ModernWorld4

valuesandmorality,aswellaswhenhavingthefocuson“preferences”andnarrativediscourse, and thedevastationof theconceptofhumanity.Thesechangesaretobeanalyzedfromthepointofviewofsubstantialhumanpo-tentialities,suchascreativityandimagination,contributionstothequalityoflifeanditsmeaning,aswellasamultidimensionalnatureofhumancharacterstructure and freedom of personality vs. the vulgarised industrialised “cultural productions”.Theprincipalquestionstates:whetherculturehasbeensubmit-tedtoeconomicsorpolitics,insteadofbeingtheirfoundation?

1.

In ordertoanalysetheroleofcultureundertheinfluenceofthenewpost-moderndevelopmentofsocietiesandcivilisations,Ishouldpayattentionoftheaudiencetoalong-lastingdebateinanthropologyaboutthedefinitionofculture.1IamnotgoingtofollowindetailsclassificationsoftheconceptsofculturesuggestedbyKroeberandKluckhohn,2butIwanttoemphasizethecrucial points that characterise culture as a distinctive human space. Perhaps thesentencesayingthat“cultureis tosocietywhatpersonalityis toorgan-ism” (Katz & Schanck)3 implies the very essence of the meaning of culture that humanises bothman and society,when transforming in a long-run ofhistorical development hominids into HomoSapiens,aswellasanindividualas a biological organism into a conscious human being. Which suggests that the main distinction of culture from the natural environment is that culture is“man-madepartoftheenvironment”(M.Herskovits4),inwhichthenewabilitiesofhumanbeingshavebeengenerated:abilitytoapermanentlearn-ingandtotransmitbylanguagenewexperienceswithintheinterpersonalandgenerationalcommunications;thatspeaksaboutanotherfeatureofculture,i.e.its cumulative effects in a diachronic perspective.However,whatistobeclearedupisthatculturecannotbeunderstoodascol-lectionof“facts”or“objects”,butcontrarytothepositivistwayofthinking,itis“awayofanalysingfacts”(Fortes5)bythenewabilitytousesymbols(meaning that culture is a “symbolic universe”). The contents of culture thus areselectiveandlearned,notbiologicallyinherited.Inotherwords,culture,asafoundationofhumansociety,isdistinctiveof“animalsocieties”whicharebaseduponspecies-kindofinstincts.Therefore,symbolisationofeventsisaspecifichumanphenomenon,whichmakesthebasicmaterialofculture.6 Whenfollowingthiswayofthinking,thefundamentaltraitsofculturemaybesummarisedasitfollows:cultureissocial,shared by human beings in a given community (as “a grammar of social life”); it is conceptualisationand verbalisation of ideas, norms and patterns of behaviour; it isdynamic and changeable in the life-span and historical times; thus it ispluralistic; it is also interactive(whichmanifestsinthediffusionofculturalelements);itistransmittedthrougheducation (in a permanent process of learning). That is to say:itis“aprocessofman’sdevelopmentandorganisationofhissubstantialpotentialities” (D. Bidney7). As such cultureisapeculiarwayofhumanexist-ence,fostering the process of becoming human.Butcultureisnotonlyatransmittedlearnedexperienceasaninstruction/di-rection for life; it is also a projection and justification (as making sense) of lifedirectionby indicatingwhat individualsandsocietiesmightandoughttodowiththeirlives,asamotivatedandgoal-directedpraxis,thatsatisfieshumanneeds ina reflexiveway.Amodernanthropologist,ClifordGeertz,warnsusthatcultureisnoteverythingwhichhasbeencreatedduringman’shistory,butthemeaningsattributed to those creations that may be internalised in personality and social structures.8That is to say, that culture represents



the“meaningfulschemes”fortheselectionofhumanwaysoflifeasequiva-lencefor the instincts.Culture, therefore,shouldbe interpreted in termsofthe transbiologicalspaceinwhichhumanlivesanddevelopmentsoccur;or tosayitinotherwords,itisasensibleconstructionofhumanrealitybythereflexiveinterpretation.

2.

BeforeIpasstoanotherquestion,i.e.howfarthequoteddefinitionsofculturecorrespondtotheunderstandingofcultureinthepost-modernworld,itisne-cessarytoclearuptheexistingconfusionbetweentwoterms:cultureand civi-lisation,becausetheydonotrepresentthesynonymousconcepts.Moreover,their developments may not correspond to one another. What the descriptive definitionofcultureimplies, thatit includeseverythingwhathumanityhascreated,belongstotheconceptofcivilisationwhichdealswiththeproductsandartefacts,orasitissaid,withmeans(e.g.forsatisfyinghumanneeds),whileculturespeaksabouttheends.AccordingtoAlfredWeber’sdistinction,civilisation is a sphere of the necessary and useful things (as they are techno-logicalandmaterialmeansofsurvival),whileculturerepresentsthespiritualsphereasa“worldofsymbols”,asanewlycreatedspirituallytransformedma-terial reality.9 But Kroeber suggests a different concept of civilisation treating it as a given great totality of cultural creations (like Chinese and other great civilisations),10inwhichsensewespeakalsoabouttheWesterncivilisation,or “technological/informatic” civilisation.Due to the fact that a necessarydistinctionisignored,cultureis,inparticularinthemodernWesternsocieties,identifiedwiththeelementsofcivilisationandreducedtomaterialmeansasamainaspectofsocialadvancement,whilethedomainofvaluesandmoralprinciples,aswellasvarietyofartisticcreations,havebecomerelativeandculturemarginalised,whendifferentspiritualcontentsaresubduedtotechni-cal and industrial production.

1

Forthedefinitionsofculturesee:A.L.Kroe-ber & Clyde Kluckhohn (eds.), Culture: ACriticalReviewofConceptsandDefinitions,VintageBooks,NewYork1963.

2

Theyofferedthefollowingclassification:de-scriptive definitions (“the things that people have,thethingstheydoandwhattheythink”);historical definitions (“the socially inherited assemblage of practices and beliefs that de-terminethetextureofourlives”, i.e. theto-tal social heredity or the forms of traditional behaviours); normative definitions (“the mode oflifefollowedbythecommunity”,or“thosehistorically created designs for living”); psy-chological definitions (“the sum of mass ad-justmentstothelifeconditions”),A.L.Kroe-ber&C.Kluckhohn,Culture,pp.84–106.

3

In the above mentioned collection Culture:ACriticalReviewofConceptsandDefinitions,p.117.

4

Ibid.,p.128.

5

Ibid.,p.263.

6

See:ZygmuntBauman,Kulturaispoleczen-stvo, 1966 (quoted from Serbian translationKultura i društvo, Prosveta, Beograd 1984,p.63).

7

Culture:ACriticalReviewofConcepts andDefinitions,p.174.

8

Clifford Geertz, Interpretations of Culture:Selected Essays, Basic Books, New York 1973,p.68.

9

AlfredWeber,PrinzipienderGeschichteundKultursoziologie,München1951,pp.90–91;Herbert Marcuse makes a similar distinction in the book KulturundGesellschaft,vol. II,Suhrkamp,Frankfurt/M.1966,p.149.

10

A. L. Kroeber, An Anthropologist looks atHistory,UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Ber-keleyandLosAngeles1963,pp.68–69.



InthefurtherconsiderationofthetopicIshalltrytoindicateinwhatsensetheessentialmeaningsofculture,asthekeyconceptofthehumanworld,arelost,whenitsmultidimensionalinterventionintothegivenenvironment,andthein-cessantinnovationsregardingthequalityoflife,havebeeninterpretedinone-sidedandpragmaticterms,whoseusefulnessismeasuredbythedailyeffectsto the material standard of living and the modern technological products.

3.

Themainquestionregarding the interpretationof theconceptofculture inthepost-modernworldmaythusreadasfollows:doesculturestillprovidesa“sensibleconstructionofrealityasareflexiveworld”inpost-industrialandconsumersociety,whichhavebeenenforcingprimarilyeconomicandutili-tarianprinciplesascriteriaofsocial/individualprosperity(intermsofanewqualityoflife)?Andadominanttrendtowardsunificationof“technologicalcivilisation”shouldbetakenintoaccountvs.creativediversitiesofcultures,thatimplypluralityofpossibilitiesandthechoiceofalternatives,whichtheimposed“standardisation”denies.Anotherquestion,derivedfromtheformer,asksforaseriousreconsiderationoftheproblem:whetherfreedomofchoice,asasubstantialcharacteristicofculture,hasbeenthreatenedinthepost-in-dustrial/cyberneticcivilisation,whichjustifiestheplainvictoryof“techno-logicalcivilisation”overthemultidimensionalcontentofculture,thatissup-posedtosearchfornewideasandvisionswhichmaycontributetothe“betterfuture” of humanity. According to the generally accepted anthropological un-derstandingofcultureasa“specificwayoflife”,thatis,asa“secondhumannature”,thismaybemorepreciselyexpressedintermsofan“incessantproc-essofdefininghumanlives,ofcalmingthestruggleofexistence,ofstabilis-ingtheproductiveorganisationofsociety,inordertofosterman’sintellectualcapacities, to reduce and sublimate aggression, violence and poverty” (H.Marcuse11). And David Bidney makes an emphasis on the ability of culture todignifypotentialitiesofhumannature,12whichbecomesproblematicinthepost-modernworldproducingculturalcrisis.Letusanalyzemanifestationsofmodern cultural crisis as a product of the almost complete marginalisation of theauthenticconceptofculture:• peoplearetodayvalue-disorientedandtheleastmotivatedbymoralprin-ciplesintheirbehaviourandactions,reducingtheconceptof“life”tothematerial means for the consumption of commodities;

• peoples’community feelingsandsolidarity towards their fellow-menareabandoned for the sake of a “possessive individualism” and selfishness;

• having (in termsof accumulationofmoney,profits andcommodities) isbecoming more important than being(asbecomingafreepersonalitywithdevelopedhumanpowers);

• individual and social (human) interactions and communications are aban-doned for the sake of the capacity tomanipulatewithmodern technicalmeans,thatalmostcompletelyoccupypeoples’interest;

• technocratic principles are thus imposed as undisputable imperatives;• “economicrationality”becomestheonlyone,absolutekindofrationality,

very often contrary to “social rationality” that relies on the principle of so-cialjustice(asKarlPolanyiandPierreBourdueuhavewritten);

• imitation,reproductionandconformismreplaceindividualandgroupcrea-tivity,andan“averageperson”becomestheyardstickof“normality”;



• eurocentrismaswell asethnocentrismprevailover theproductive (crea-tive) cultural diversity;

• critical/reflexivethinkinghasgotanegativeconnotationinfrontoftheex-pansionofpopulismwhosemainsloganis“goodiswhatiseffectiveandacceptedbythemasses”,regardlessthevaluesandmorality;

• thegreatideasofEnlightenmentaredenied,togetherwiththehumanisticapproach to theproblemsof themodernworld, andexchanged for “dis-course”andnarratives,whichareacceptedastheonlylegitimatepointsofviews(despising“greatphilosophy”ofthepast);

• culturalachievementsaremostlytreatedascommodities,whichshouldbesubmittedtothemarketprinciples,dependingonthepossessionofmoney,regardless of their comprehension and devotion;

• much greater offer of information does not primarily function so as to pro-videamorerationalperceptionofreality,butproduceanillusionthatweare all the time “in”whatever is happening in theworld,without beingcapableofunderstandingwhatisreallygoingon,norfeelingempathywiththeeverydaytragediesthattakeplaceallovertheworld;

• and, lastbutnot least,despite thepotentiallygreaterandmoreadvancedmeansonpeoples’disposal,peoplefeelmorehelplessinfindingsolutionsforthegreaterproblemsinagrowingglobalchaos,inwhichtheycannotseehowtheythemselvescancontributetopreventthepossibleapocalypse.

Thatisthereasonwhyonemayconcludethattheculturalchallengeofthe20thcentury,despiteitsenormoustechnologicaladvancement,hasnotbeenproperlymetas faras the substantial spheresofhumanexistencearecon-cerned,becausethereducedconceptofculturefailedintermsofthegrowthofhumancapacities;thiscanbedemonstratedwiththecounter-effectivere-sults:peoples’inabilitytounderstandamorecomplicatedpost-modernworld,in particular under the impact of the process of globalisation; they lose hopes regarding a possible struggle against dehumanisation of both individuals and societies,duetothegrowingrepressioneveninthemostdevelopeddemo-cratic societies (whenglobal terrorism is used as a pretext); the educationwhichisstilltraditionalbothinitsmethodsandkindofknowledgeittrans-mits,preservestheauthoritariantypeofsocialisationandprepersindividualsprimarilytoadjustthemselvestothegivenconditionsandtheexistingstruc-tureofpower,whilevariouskindsofrevoltsarestilltreatedassubversiveactsthatarerigorouslypunished(theappearanceofnew“concentrationcamps”for theso-called terroristsare legalizedby theUSA); insteadofcreatingabettermentalunderstandingamongstdifferentpeoples,xenophobiahasbeenrevived,andhundredsoftheso-calledsmallwarsarespreadingalloverthemodernworld.Thereby,whenlivinginaconfusedrealitywhichpeoplenei-therunderstandnorcanactupon,theycreateavirtualrealityas an illusory escape,whilethecircleisthusclosed,andtheycannotfindthewayoutofthecrisis.Andso,insteadofbeingengagedintheproductive/creativeactivitiesinordertostrengthentheirpowers,individualsdealwith“simulacrums”,thatcannotgetthemanywherebuttonihilism.The results of the above described reductionism of the content of culture con-sistininabilityofculturetofulfilitsbasicfunctionsinteachingpeopleabout:

11

Herbert Marcuse, “Bemerkungen zu einerNeubestimmung der Kultur”, inKultur undGesellschaft,p.148.

12

David Bidney, “The Concept of CulturalCrisis”, American Anthropologist, vol. 48(1946),p.535.



whata“better society”meansandhow to realise it;what is“normal”andwhat should be treated as “deviant” and immoral (in human relations andcommunications);whichsystemsofvaluesshouldbesupportedinordertoimprovehumandevelopment (asagainsta total relativism);whichcultural(symbolic) forms are to be given priority in a modern (democratic) society; howtocomprehendtheconceptofpersonalandgroups’libertyandmakeuseofthem(inparticularinpoliticalterms),i.e.isitallowedtoimperilfreedom of others.13Inotherwords,oneshouldaskwhetherthepost-moderncultureteachushowtocomprehendtheglobalworldofourepoch,andaccordingly,howtomakeourlivingwellsoastoreconcilemuchgreatersocialpotenti-alitieswithmultidimensionalneedsofmodernmanandbecomecapableofmakingsenseofourlivesatthedawnofthenewmillennium?Manyotheressentialquestionsoneshouldanswerinordertodealwithcoun-tereffectsofpost-modernconceptionofculturethathasceasedtobereflex-ivelyselectiveandcritical,duetowhichitisbecomingunabletohelppeopleinregenerating theirpersonalpowersandactivating theirenergies inordertoreaffirmthefundamentalroleofcultureasahumanworld.Someof thenecessaryreassessmentconcernsthefollowingquestions:doesthepost-mod-ern culture provide channels for a better intergenerational communications through a continual development of a “communal ethos”; and does it sup-plybothindividualsandsocialstrata,aswellasdifferentsocieties,withthenecessarymeansforthesolutionsoftheacutecontemporaryproblems?Theanswerslieintheveryfactthatthegapisgrowingbetweenthosewhostillcannotsolvetheproblemofmeresurvivalandtheotherswhoarebecomingenormouslyrich,becausethepostindustrial/postmodernsocietiesdonotcareforthatwhentheyhaverejectedthe“welfarestate”.Thatistosay,themainshortcomingofthepost-modernculture(primarilyintheWesternworld)isthatitdoesnotopennewperspectivesofthefuturede-velopment,whichwouldtakeintoaccountthegreatachievementsofthepastcenturyasthenecessarypreconditionsofthemoreadvanced“betterworld”;theconsequenceofwhichispeoples’escapefromtheexistingrealitiesintoavirtualone.Therefore,insteadoftakingtheseriouseffortsinordertochangetheformer,peopledealwiththesimulacrums,and fall even more deeply into the feeling of helplessness.

4.

Letusconsideranotherquestion:whythepost-modernculturehasbeensomarginalizedintheworldwhichseemstobethemostadvancedwhencom-paredwiththepreviousepochs?Theanswerliesinthenatureofadominantpoliticswhichfavours“economicrationality”anditstechnocraticallyorientedconceptsofsocialdevelopment.Therepresentativeofwhichistheneoliberaldoctrineas a model that tends to dominate in construction and direction of an alsoprevailingneoimperialpoliticswithintheexistingconceptofglobalisa-tion.Forsuchastatementthefollowingargumentsmaybesuggested:a/theprevalence of technocratically articulated principles in terms of efficiency of the production of “commodities” (the term applied to all the products of hu-mancreativity)whoseweightismeasuredbythequantityofmoneynecessarytobuythem;b/andthelatterisalogicalconsequenceofthetwomaincharac-teristicsofpostindustrial/postmodernsocietiesbeinginterpretedintermsof“self-regulatingmarket”whichdetermines thevaluesof theproducts/crea-tions,andalsowhocangetthem,aswellasanirrationalopssessionwiththe



incessantaccumulationofthe“commodities”;c/thepost-modernconceptofhappiness,whichisdefinedintermsofone’sprestigewithinthe“consumersociety”(asZygmuntBaumanwrites:“happinessmeanstofollowraceafterconsumption”);andd/theothersideofthecoinisrevitalisationofanimperialpoliticsofthe“greatpowers”(andparticularthesuper-power),whicharelev-ellingdownstandardsofsocieties’developments(intermsofGleichschaltung ofprinciples),regardlessthedifferencesofvariouscivilisations,whentrying toimposeasinglemodelthatisusuallynamedas“eurocentrism”,or“West-ernisation”(butperhapsamoreadequatetermwouldbe“Americanisation”).Thustwopost-modernideologies(consumerismandneoliberalism)coincideandproducedubiouseffectsonthegloballevel,whendisregardingculturalandcivilisationaldiversities andgenerating the followingphenomena:dif-ferent kinds of fundamentalism(religious,ethnocentricandnationalisticoneetc.)asarevoltagainsttheimposedunification;andtheothereventwhichexpendstheclashofcivilisationsthatannihilatesthebestqualitiesofhistori-callegacyofdifferentculturalcreations,whichcouldcomeintobeingonlythroughintercultural/intercivilisationalcommunication.However,beingthatpoliticsstillconditionsbotheconomicprojectsandtheirscopes,aswellasthemeaningofculture,andthedominant(neoliberal)poli-ticsrulesovertheentirelivesofpeoplesandsocieties,soasthatcultureispushed aside into an inferior position and becomes the servant of a politics ofextremeeconomism,insteadofbeingtheveryfoundationofthetotalityofhumanwaysoflife.ToquoteJürgenHabermas’sayingregardingthefactthateconomiclawshavepenetratedalltheporesofculturalsubjectsandthemes,duetowhichculturecannolongerfulfilitsfundamentalfunctionofeman-cipation;andtheauthorexplainsthatwithouttheadequateinformationthepublic opinion becomes unable to revolt against the populist tendencies and demandsoftheexistingpoliticalprogrammes,relyinguponthemarketprin-ciples and mechanisms.14 A significant field of research should be dedicated tothecountriesintransition,whereinallthementionedmanifestationsoftheimpoverishmentandmarginalisationofpost-moderncultureareevenmoreemphasised,thuscallingfortheappropriatesolutions.

5.

Howtheconceptofcultureisinterpretedineverydaylife,takingasarefer-encethepracticesofsocietiesintransition,andmoreparticularlyinpresent-daySerbia?Theevidenceshowsthatineverydaylifeofpost-modernmen/womencultureissomethingofasecondaryimportance,ashungeringonthemarketplace,andbeingtreatedasifonecanmakelifewithoutit(whenkeepinginmindtheusualanswersuchas:Ihaveneithertimeforculturaleventsnormoneytobuy“culturalcommodities”).Anditisunderstandablethatthosewhostruggleformere survival cannot think about “culture” because they cannot “buy” it (their budgetisshortforbooks,thicketsfortheatresorconcerts,andoftenevenforthesatisfactionofelementaryneeds).Whilethebetter-offcitizensuseculture

13

Kant’s “Categoric Imperative” seems to beabandoned,aswellasacrucialliberalideaofJohnStuartMill,whowroteaboutthelibertythat jeopardizes freedom of other as being selfishandexcentric.

14

Jürgen Habermas, in Süddeutsche Zeitung,June16th,2007.



primarilyasameansofentertainmentandrelaxationfromahardbusiness,whosefunctionisverywellmetby“massculture”basedonaneasilytrans-mittedthelatestfashionsandmassexpressions/communications.Culture is no longer understood for the majority of the population as a field of anoutmostimportanceintheprocessofcivilisationofhumanbeings,butinaverynarrowsenseonthepragmaticandutilitarianlevel,havingthusastrongimpact upon the qualityoflifewhosenotionisliberatedfromtheideasand“visions”forthefuture,becausethemotivationdoesnotrelyonindividualand social liberation.Popularcultureisusedasameansofhavingfuninfree-time,orasanillu-soryparticipationin“realityshow”thatlastforonedayalonewithoutleavinganydeepertraceinone’slife.Preferencesareinuseinsteadofprinciplesandvalue-ladenchoiceswhen is tobedecidedwhat to“pickup” fromculture.However,whatunderliepreferencesandstylesarestereotypes,whicharenotsubmittedtothereflexiveselection;andwhatgoeswithit,thereisaninclina-tiontowardsimplificationofthegivenevents.Asamatteroffact,themostpartofpopularculturetodayisexpressedas“happenings”inwhichimprovi-sationiswhatmostlymattersandnotacreativeimagination.Ontheotherside,areproductivecultureprevails,whoserightexpressionisa“newcomposedculture”(turbo-folkculture).ItisabadimitationoftheoriginalFolk-cultures,whichareadjustedtothemasshappenings,thatopenthespaceoftheescapefromadifficultreality;thereby,the“soap-opera”seriesarethemostpopularinventionofthepost-modernmassculture,becausetheyawakenostalgiaofa“better times of the past” and help people forgetting the “dark reality”.Accordingtotheanalysesoftheneo-populisttrendofcultureintoday’sSer-bia,15 one may conclude that the proper meaning of culture is comprehended byaverysmallproportionofthepopulation,ifkeepinginminditssubstantialrole, in termsof educationwhich teachpeoplehow tocreate adecent lifecircumstancesandhumanisetheirpotentials(needs,aspirations,values/mo-rality), andqualitatively improve their tastes.But themost spread culturalformsstimulateirrationalimpulsesandaverylowtaste,aswellasapopulistrhetoricwhichimpoverishlanguageandcommunication.Onemaynoticeaswell,thatthepopularcultureinpost-modernepochretreatstoneo-tradition-alism,notonlyasregarding“neo-folks”butalsoasturningbacktoreligious,mythological,magicandastrologicalwayofthinking,throughwhichagrow-ing number of individuals look at the given reality.So,whatonemaysayaboutthecharacteristic“spiritofourtime”whentheprevailingstateofpre-modernconceptofcultureistakingplaceinthepost-modernera?Withthepauperisationofcultureinthe20thcentury,thesubstan-tialtraitsofculture,like:creativity,imagination,libertyofopinionsandac-tionsforthesakeofman’shumanisation,arelosingtheirattributeswhichtheauthenticconceptofcultureassumes.Therefore,ourepochhasbeenmarkedby the absence of new-great ideas (R.Dahrendorf); furthermore, the post-modernrelativismthatignoresthedifferencebetween“better”and“worse”choices,deprivepeoplefromorientationsandalternatives;thusadecreasinglevel of thepopular culturehas sharpened thegapbetween “high culture”anditsmassindustrialproduction;andalsoproducesalowlevelofpoliticalcultureanddevastationoflanguage,notonlyineverydayuse,butinliteraturetoo. The “virtual reality” has come to replace the real one as a method of es-cape from the heavy burden of freedom and responsibility.Thesocialdescriptionoftheprevailingpost-modernspiritmaystateasthefollowing:thehabitusofmajorityofcitizensdeteriorates,unablingthemto



understandandtakeanactivepartintheirrealities,soastomaketheircontri-butionstotheimprovementofthemultiplicityofhumanpotentialities,whichtheepochoffers.Thatisthereasonwhy,peopleabstainfromdiscoveringnewperspectives,whichtheyhavebeendeprivedofwhenbeingmanipulatedbyneo-traditionalideologies(suchas:nationalism,neorasism,andvariouskindsoffundamentalism), thatorient themtowardsthepasthistory,almostcom-pletely disregarding the visions of the future.16

6.Ontheotherside,itisimportanttoanalysewhattraceofpost-modernculturecanbefollowedintermsofthesignificantdiscoveriesofthepastcenturies;i.e.whatonecanlearnhowthepotentialcontributionsoftherecenthistoricalde-velopmentmaybeusedfortheadvancementofthenewqualityoflife.Inordertoavoidapost-moderntrendtowardstheinstrumentalisationofbothpoliticsandlinguistics,oneshouldkeepinmindPeterBerger’sstatementthat“huma-nity”belongstosocio-culturalcategory,becausecultureisatransformedna-turedonebyhumanbeings,andwhenhavingchangedthegeneticandmentalstructure,generatingnewcapacities,humanbeingscreatedneworganizationsandenteredintoahumanenvironment(whichiscalledculture).17 Thus human beingshavebecomecapableofcreatingpluralversionsoftheirlifestyles,be-ingnolongertiedtoasoleformofexistencebelongingtotheirbiologicalspe-cies.Withinthiscontextonecanjudgeabouttheeffectsoftheadvancementofpost-modernculture,whenanalysingwhetherpluralityofculturalcreationsandvaluesareincorporatedintodifferentcivilisations,thatarerespectedandcomprehended as conditiosinequanonof a continuous development of hu-manpotentialitiesallovertheworld.Duetothepossibilityofhumanbeingstocreatedifferentiatedformsofcultureastheirspecificambiencewithinhumanexistence, agreatdealofnewcapacitieshavebeenopened, asmuchasanintercultural communications have been practiced. And one cannot deny the factofinterconnectionsofcultureswhichhasbeentakingplaceinourepoch,eventhoughculturalexchangehasappearedprimarilyinformsofdiffusionofculturalelementsinthedomainoftechnicalproductionsormaterialgoods,aswellasconcerningnewstylesofmusic,etc.However,themostimportant“ele-ment”ofculture,valuesystems,whichgivesensetotheentireculturalcrea-tions,havebeenleastexchangeablebetweencultures/civilisations.Therefore,one may say that the very substance of cultural differentiation remains closed within theparticular societies/civilisations,without enablingaprofound in-tercultural communication.18Therefore,onemaycometotheconclusionthatthegreatpotentialitiesforboththeadvancementofpost-moderncultureanda

15

See:MilenaDragićević-Šešić,Neofolkkultu-ra.Publikainjenezvezde(Neo-folkCulture:Public and Its Stars), Izdavačka knjižarnicaZoranaStojanovića,SremskiKarlovci1994.

16

Unlike the totalitarian practice in “real social-ism”, which declared a “glory future” as amasktohidetheawkwardreality,thepredomi-nant trend of postmodern popular politics is a manipulationwithhistoricalmythologiesthatservethesamefunction,i.e.toturnpeople’sthoughts from the unpleasant reality.

17

PeterBerger&ThomasLuckmann,TheSo-cialConstructionofReality,Doubleday,NewYork1967,p.49.

18

Imakedifferencebetweentheterm“intercul-turality”, which implies penetration of cul-turalcontentsofdifferentcultures,whiletheterm “multiculturality” suggests the paralel coexistence of different cultures, either in alocallevel,ortheglobalone,withoutthemu-tual influence to one another.



productiveexchangeofthecreationsofdifferentcultures,whichpost-modernworldhasoffered,havenotbeenutilisedsofartoitsfullextent.Itistruethatmuchgreateropportunitiesforinnovationsiswhatmarksourepoch,becauseithasneverhappenedinthepasthistorythatsuchgrandioseproducts have come into being in a relatively short time; still they mostly belongtothedomainoftechnologyandtechnicalmeansofcommunication,19 thatofcourseshouldnotbeunderestimated.Atthesametime,onemaybedisappointedwhentheotherfieldsofculturearetakenintoaccount,likethearticulationofnew(political)ideas,becausepoliticaltheoriesofthepasthavebeen renewed instead; the samemay be noticedwhen speaking about thevariousformsofarts,themostvisibleinarchitectureandbeletristics,whereinit is hardly possible to see the great figures like those creators from the past centuries,becausethemodernformsareimitationswhicharediffusedallovertheworld(inarchitecturetheskyscrapers,inbellartmanipulationwithmereformsregardlessthecontent,etc.).Themostdisturbingiswhathappenedwiththesubstantialvaluesandbeliefsin thepost-modernworld.The legacyofmoderndevelopment in termsoftheestablishingsecularprinciplesasthefoundationofthemodernstates,hasbeendevastatedandthepluralityofopinionsasthealternativeview-points,havebeenreduced;instead,humanityisturnedagainstphilosophyandsci-entific theories for the sakeof religiousbeliefs andmysticismwhichhavebecomepopulareveninthemostdevelopedsocieties,thatseemsparadoxicalinthe21stcentury,whenoneshouldexpectthegreatersupporttotherationalwayofthinking.Ontheotherside,economicvaluesbecameuniversallyac-ceptedas themostsignificantcriteriaofhumandevelopment,which is themainreasonwhyculturelostitsimportantroleintheconceptualisationofthefuture development of humanity.Thefactthatsuchamainstreamorientationexists,notonlyintheUSA,butbeingspreadoverEuropeaswell(withtherecentvictoriesoftheconserva-tivepoliticalpartiesinEuropeancountries)leadtotheconfusionwhenonespeaksabout the“modernEuropeanstandards”.Therefore, it is reasonabletodiscusssuchatopic,consideringfirstofall,thequestionwhetherthede-clared democratic values/standards correspond to the normswhich are fa-voured in politics of European andWorld community.When one followsthe resultsofpost-modernpolitics/conceptionsabout the “betterworld”, itispossibletoconcludethattheyarenotincorrespondencewiththeprinci-plesofdemocracy:e.g.declaredfreedomandrightofchoice ispracticallydeniedwhen the imposedstandardsof thegreat forcesare treatedas“uni-versal ones” (that slogan “take it or leave it” symbolises); human rights and libertiesare relativistically interpretedwhen incorporatedwithinneoliberalconceptionofdemocracy,producinga“possessiveindividualism”asagainstsolidarity,excludingsocial justiceastheimportantprincipleofdemocracy,whichcouldhaveguranteedthat“allcitizensareequalbeforethelaw”.Evenonthelevelofpersonalvirtues,post-modernityhasfailedtoprovidegroundsfortherealdemocracy,because:honesty,personalintegrity,honorableactivi-ties,responsibility,etc.,thatshouldbethecontentofpersonalitystructure,donotcountanylonger,becauseanpossessiveraceinapermanentcompetioninthemarketplacedemandsquitethedifferentvaluesystemand“morality”(disregardofafaireplayanddecentrelationshipswithfellow-men,deceptionasanacceptednormofbehaviour,aswellasinconsistencyofcharacterforthepragmaticreason)soas toaccumulateasquicklyaspossible thebetterpositionineconomicorpoliticalfield.Theunderlyingvalueslike:efficency byallmeans,competitionwhichmaybebasedevenontheimmoralgrounds,



prestige on the hierarchical ladder,money preferance, arewhatmatters ininterpersonal behaviour.Anotherproblemwhichshouldbereassessedconcernsthecontroversialcon-cept of globalisationwhichfavoursasinglemodelof“wildcapitalism”astheonlyappropriatepatternforallsocieties,regardlessthedifferencesofsocial, politicalandculturaltraditions,whichimplydistinctiveneedsandinterests,whiletheformerarebeingopposedtoaproclaimedpluralityofalternatives.However,thechoiceofthealternativewaysoflivesandbehaviourwouldbemadepossibleontheconditionsthat“Western-centrism”becometranscendedinordertoopenthedoortointer-civilisationalcommunicationandgiveop-portunities to all cultures to make impacts to one another and learn the lesson oftoleranceinregardstodiversities,bywhichpluralityofculturalcreationswill be affirmedas real groundsofdemocracy.Suchamessage shouldbebuilt-intheproperconceptionofpost-modernity,asagaintbothaninadequatemodelofglobalisationandthenation-states’isolation(thelatterbeingbasedupon the nationalist concept of sovereignty).The finalmessagemay read: it isnot thepoliticsand their representativesalone,butcitizensaswellwhohavetodoagreatefforttomakeuseofthepotentialitiesthatpost-modernworldhasoffered,howeverbeingignoredandmisusedbythemeainstreamideologieswhichhaveusurpedtherighttopro-claimtheirownvaluesasthe“universal”patterns.Itisnecessarytorevitalisetheoriginalconceptofcultureasafoundationofhumanexistence,asopposedto the practice of its submission either to politics or economism. Which is the only possibility for escape from the threatening appocalypse that may be pro-ducedbythecontaminationofboththeenvironmentandculture,andresultinthe termination of humanity.

Literature

BaumanZ.1966.Kulturaidruštvo(CultureandSociety),Beograd:Prosveta.

BaumanZ.1997.PostmodernityanditsDiscontent,Cambridge:PolityPress.

BrownS.(ed.),1996.GlobalisationandTransnationalCivilSociety,NewYork:HamptonPress.

CastoriadisC.1997.Domainesdel’homme(parts:“QuelleEurope?Quellemenaces?Qu-elledéfence?”,and“Réflexionsurledéveleppementetla‘rationalité’”),Paris:Editionsdu Seuil.

Dragićević-ŠešićM.1994.Neofolkkultura.Publikainjenezvezde(Neo-folkCulture:Pu-blicandItsStars),SremskiKarlovci:IzdavačkaknjižarnicaZoranaStojanovića.

FeathersonM. (ed.), 1990.Global Culture, Nationalism, Globalisation and Modernity,London:Sage.

GolubovićZ.1997.Antropologija u personalističkom ključu, part:“Kulturakao‘grama-tikadruštvenogživota’” (Anthropology inaPersonalisticPerspective),Valjevo:Guten-bergova galaksija.

GolubovićZ.2003.Izazovidemokratijeusavremenomsvetu,part:“Globalizacijasveta–Kontroverze,dilemeiiskušenjaglobalizacije”(ChallengesofDemocracyintheCon-temporaryWorld),Požarevac:Braničevo.

19

However, even that is relative, because theunderdeveloped societies are not yet in the possession, not only of the new technologybutalsooftheelementaryexistentialmeans,

and for that reason are even not interested in newcreations,duetheirconstantproblemofmere survival.



GolubovićZ.2004.“Kulturauprocesudemokratsketranzicije”,inKulturairazvoj(Cul-tureandDevelopment),Beograd:IDN.

GolubovićZ.2006.Poukeidilememinulogveka,ch.VII:“Mestokulturedanas–Dalisa-vremenacivilizacijapostajecivilizovanija?”(LessonsandDilemmasofthePastCentury),Beograd:FilipVišnjić.

GriswoldW.1994.CultureandSocietyinaChangingWorld,London:PineForgePress.

JeffreyA.&SeidmanS.(eds.),1998.CultureandSociety,ContemporaryDebates,Cam-bridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.

KroeberA.&KluckhohnC.1963.Culture:ACriticalReviewofConceptsandDefinitions,NewYork:VintageBooks.

Lošonc A. 1999. Multikulturalnost u evropskom zajedničkom prostoru (Multiculturality in theEuropeanCommunity),NoviSad:Habitus.

MillJ.S.1969.Onliberty,London:OxfordUniversityPress.

MorinE.1967.Duhvremena(L’éspritdetemps),Beograd:Kultura.

Polanyi K. 1999. Velika preobrazba. Politički i ekonomski izvori našeg vremena (The Gre-atTransformation),Zagreb:NakladaJesenski&Turk.

Sen A. 2002. Razvojkaosloboda(DevelopmentasFreedom),Beograd:FilipVišnjić.

SmithA.2000.“TowardstheGlobalCulture”,inHeldD.&McGrew(eds.),TheGlobalTransformation,London:PolityPress.

Taylor Ch. 1994. MulticulturalismandPoliticalRecognition,Princeton:PrincetonUni-versity Press.

Zagorka Golubović

Kultura u postmodernom dobu

Njezina uloga u razvoju ljudskih mogućnosti

SažetakPredmet rasprave bit će antropološki pristup mjestu kulture u procesu humanizacije čovjeka: kojesudobrobitirazvojamodernogadobaikojiseproblemijavljajuupostindustrijskojijošuvijektehnološkojcivilizaciji?Štosepromijenilosobziromnafundamentalnuulogukultureuljudskomsvijetu:a)kadjekulturapostalaindustrijskiproizvodusmislu»masovnekulture«,ib)podutjecajempostmodernogrelativizma(kojimarginalizirauniverzalnevrijednostiimoralnost,umjestodasefokusirana»preferencije«inarativnidiskurs)?Posljedicetihpromjenaanaliziratće se s gledišta supstancijalnih ljudskih mogućnosti kao što su kreativnost i imaginacija, osnove referenci koje se tiču smisla života, multidimenzionalna priroda strukture ljudskoga karaktera, sloboda ličnosti naspram vulgariziranog individualizma, itd. Postavlja se zaključno pitanje: je li kultura postala potčinjena ekonomizmu ili politici, umjesto da bude njihova osnova?

Ključne riječiKultura,humanizacija,razvoj,ljudskipotencijali,post-modernisvijet



Zagorka Golubović

Kultur im postmodernen Zeitalter

Ihre rolle bei der Entwicklung der menschlichen potenziale

ZusammenfassungDerArtikelerörtertdenanthropologischenAnsatzbeiderErforschungderRolle,diedieKulturimHumanisierungsprozessdesMenschenspielt:WassinddieVorteiledesmodernenZeitalters,undwelcheProblememelden sich inderpostindustriellenund immernoch technologischenZivilisation?WashatsichimHinblickaufdiefundamentaleRollederKulturinderWeltdesMenschenverändert,als:a)dieKulturzueinemIndustrieerzeugnisimSinnevon„Massenkul-tur”wurde;undb)sieunterdenEinflussdespostmodernenRelativismusfiel(deruniversaleWerteundMoralitätmarginalisiert,stattsichauf„Präferenzen”undeinennarrativenDiskurszufokussieren)?DieVerfasserinanalysiertdieFolgendieserWandelunterdemGesichtspunktsubstanzialermenschlicherPotenzialewieKreativiätundImagination,denlebenssinnbetref-fendeReferenzgrundlagen,multidimensionaleStrukturdesmenschlichenCharakters,FreiheitderPersönlichkeit imGegensatz zumvulgarisierten Individualismususw.DieabschließendeFragestellunglautet:IstdieKulturhinterdenÖkonomismusoderdiePolitikzurückgetreten,stattderenGrundlagezusein?

SchlüsselbegriffeKultur,Humanisierung,Entwicklung,menschlichePotenziale,postmoderneWelt

Zagorka Golubović

La culture dans le monde postmoderne

Son rôle dans le développement du potentiel humain

résuméladiscussionporterasurl’approcheanthropologiquedelaplacequelacultureoccupedansleprocessusd’humanisationdel’homme:quelssontlesbienfaitsdudéveloppementdumondemoderneetquelsproblèmesapparaissentauseindelacivilisationpostmoderne,toujourstech-nologique?Qu’a-t-ilchangéàl’égarddurôlefondamentaldelaculturedanslemondehu-main:a)lorsquelacultureestdevenueunproduitindustrielentermesde«culturedemasse»;b)sousl’influencedurelativismepostmoderne–quimarginaliselesvaleursuniversellesetlamoralitéaulieudeseconcentrersurles«préférences»etlediscoursnarratif?lesconséquen-cesdeceschangementsserontanalyséesdupointdevuedupotentielessentieldel’hommedontfontpartielacréativitéetl’imagination,lesréférencesconcernantlesensdelavie,lecaractèremultidimensionneldelastructuredelanaturehumaine,lalibertédelapersonnalitéparoppo-sitionàl’individualismebanaliséetc.Enconclusion,laquestionsuivanteestposée:lacultureest-elledésormaissoumiseàl’économismeetàlapolitiqueaulieud’êtreleurfondement?

Mots-clésCulture,humanisation,développement,potentielhumain,mondepost-moderne

Documents

Man and Culture* - Srce