03/04 Reading Thoughts/Questions

Why Take a Behavioral Approach to Folk Objects?
Michael Owen Jones

I think a better question would be: Why NOT take a behavioral approach to Folk Objects, or any object for that matter.

After reading this, it seems to me silly why people would not think a behavioral approach to analyzing/understanding objects as beneficial or mandatory. The example of the chairs and their evolution would not seem quite as interesting or fully developed if Jones had not studied the maker. It just seems like common sense.

Unfortunately, this approach would not be available for use on every object. A lot of provenance would have to be known, and then a lot of research on the specific maker/user. It does create a greater narrative and fuller understanding of an object, though. Man, I wish I had a time machine...

(Re) Asserting National Television and National Identity Against the Global, Regional, and Local Levels of World Television
Joseph Straubhaar

By using television as an example, Straubhaar argues that globalization does NOT create a homogenized, one-society world, but that if you look from the "bottom-up" (local ->regional->national-> global) it is apparent that national identity reasserts itself against globalization: "Glocalization"

Example: What is available/seen on televisions is controlled by national/local forces still, and is also limited to language.

Straubhaar stresses that the discussion of globalization are becoming more complex, historical, transformative, and opposing. The homogenous world belief is diminishing...