Globalisation and Culture Author(s): Adam Hochschild Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 33, No.

21 (May 23-29, 1998), pp. 1235-1238 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4406800 Accessed: 26/03/2010 22:27
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epw. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

PERSPECTIVES

Globalisation and Culture

Adam Hochschild In some ways the effects of free trade in iages and information are more far-reaching than those of trade in tangible objects, for here we are talking about forces that mould mlinds, tastes and values. Faced with the inevitability of a high degree of globalisation, it is necessary not to lose sight of the ideal of a better kind of globalisation, an exchange among equals in which cultures borrow from each other judiciously and selectively, and where what crosses borders most easily are not brand names but good ideas.
A CURIOUSpersonalexperience made me reaiise for the first time what a powerful force globalisation is. As an American journalist,I was working in 1991 in what was then still the Soviet Union. I spent several days in a town called Omsukchan,in the far north-eastcorner of Siberia. This was only a few months after the Soviets had removed the last rules restricting where foreigners could travel, atOmsukchan, andwhenIgot otf theairplane people told me that I was the first foreign journalist who had ever been there. It is always a rare and heady experience to be the first memberof your tribe to visit a particular place.Fora briefmomentat least you feel like the explorers of old. The day after my arrivalin Omsukchan I woke up in the dingy little hotel where I was staying, whose hot water system was shut down for andnoticedthatmy roomhadasmall repairs, television set. What did they have on TV up here at the top of the world? I wondered. Reindeermeatrecipes?The snowfall report? I switched A documentary aboutpermafrost? the TV on. There on the screen was the face of a woman I had sat next to at a dinner party in Los Angeles a few years before, Frances Lear, ex-wife of the hugely successful US TV producerNormanLear. She was telling an interviewer(in English, with a Russian voice - over added)aboutthe magazineshe hadrecentlystarted, called,modestly,Lear's. "It'seasy, Bob",she was saying, "If you've got a good idea, and you've got some good people to work with you, and you've got faitl in your idea, thenanybodycan do it..." She turned out to be one of a series of American multi-millionairestelling Cable News Network(CNN) how they made their CNN itself was notyet broadmulti-millions. casting in Russia, but it was clearly selling - or perhapsgiving, so that viewers would developa taste-excerpts fromits programming to a Russian network, one of the only two channels available in Omsukchan. I have often thoughtback over this little episode,whichleft myexplorer'spridemuch Thereare,it seems to me, several diminished. significant points about it. * Television's penetration is instant.Itmoves miuchmore quickly than people or material filled goods. Inthiscase, CNN programming, with images of the American elite, had reached Omsukchan before any live American had done so. * The programmeI was watching on that' TV set was not indigenously produced. It was, like so many productsof multinational corporations,produced halfway round the world - yet it was available for a fraction of what it would have cost to produce something similar locally. * The particulardream Frances Lear was promotingwas virtuallyinaccessible to any Siberianviewer. For that matter,the dream of strikingit richby startinga new magazine was inaccessibleto almost any Americanas capital w,ell- unlesshe or she hadas start-up the equivalent of FrancesLear's rumoured $30 to $40 million divorce settlement. * As thisparticulardollopof American values was exportedto Siberia, what was flowing so quicklyandeasily acrossnationalborders was not the best of what Americanlife has to offer - its democraticspirit, its tolerance tor eccentricity and diversity, its can-do its rambunctious pragmatism, disrespectfor the powerful.Instead,it was one of the more dubious aspects of our culture, the illusion that anyone can become a millionaire. What do we mean when we talk about globalisation?Most commonly it means the removal of national boundaries as impedimentsto the free flow of capital, of goods, of services. The entire system is crafted,of course,mostlyby andforthe great multinational corporations, who are increasinglyin thebusinessof raisingcapital in one part of the world, investing it in another,to produce something that can be sold in a third. Any great imperial system is always accompanied by declarations of

noble purpose. 19thcenturycolonialismwas justified as the white man's burden; the Soviet grip on eastern Europewas justified as upholding the proletariat against the bourgeoisie; the rule of the multinationals, the new imperialistsof our age, is justified as levelling the internationalplaying field and allowing fair competition. I leave it to othersto pointout thepotential results of globalisation in terms-of capital, as services, and materialgoods, particularly this affects poorercountries. Here in India, thoughtful people seem well aware of the dangers,havingalreadybeenthrough painful events like the controversyover patentrights to the productsof the neem tree, which now seems to be replaying itself in connection with basmatirice. Indeed,one of the things thatstrikes an Americanvisitor here is how much more news and commentarythere is aboutthis issue thanone sees in the US. For example, the international agreement on liberalisationof trade in financial services signed several months ago, which paves the way for Americanand Europeanbanks and insurancecompaniesto expanddramatically throughoutthe world, was deservedly the subject of much worried comment in the Indian press. I suspect 99 per cent of Americans were completely unawareof it. I find myself, however, more interested in anotherkind of globalisation: free trade not in materialproductsor services, but in images and information.In some ways the effects are more far-reachingthan those of the tradein tangibleobjects, for here we are talking about the forces that mold minds, tastes, values. And, like many trends that have immense, complex and sometimes harmfuleffects, the whole system soundsas if it is directed towards worthy ends. After all, who could be opposed to free trade in informationand ideas? When we hear such words, we imagine people reading books and pamphletsaboutconcepts like freedom, democracy, human rights, social justice. Surely, good ideas like these have been crossing national boundariesfor centuries. The dreamof humanrightsembodied in the French Revolution has shaped history throughoutthe world in the two centuries since then. The socialist dream of the following century, despite its perversionin the easternbloc, was, andto some extentstill remains, a contagious and powerful force. Some of the great religions - Buddhism,for example - have spreadby the force of ideas and not because of the gun and the sword. Gandhi drew inspirationfrom Christianity andwesterndemocracy,andused those very traditionsto fuel the resistance against the undemocraticempire of Christian Britain. Nehru speaks in his autobiographyof how

Economic and Political Weekly

May 23, 1998

1235

inspired he was by the Irish patriotRoger Casement. In turn, MartinLuther King Jr drew inspirationfrom Gandhi and Nehru. The resistancemovementsamong blacks in the American south and in South Africa influencedeach other.The list could go on. But increasingly, the free flow of informationtoday does not concern noble ideas. Indeed, some of the countries now profitingmightily from the globalisationof trade - Singapore and China, for instance - practise harsh press censorship. Instead, the free tlow of informationthat concerns contemporary trade negotiators refers to as commodity,informationthat information can be bought and sold: the printed word and, above all, the moving image. As with othertypes of tradeliberalisation, wealthy countries have a huge head-start over poor ones. Even before the new trade rules, the prevalence of English as an internationallanguage and the strength of the major corporationsalready established had given British and American publishers a commanding position in the world book market,as a visit to any bookstore in India will confirm.Whenit comes to Africa,where between South Africa and the Saharathere is virtually no indigenous book publishing whatever,it is BritishandFrenchpublishers. The African school text book market is dominated by the British publisher Heinemannand the Frenchfirm Gallimard. Just as it was in the old days, what African school childrenreadis still mostly edited in London and Paris. Inthefields of film andtelevision, western presence worldwide is also immense. American film studioshavetensof thousands of old movies in theirarchives:TV networks have literally hundreds of thousands of episodes of old TV shows. The sheer size of these arsenalsoverwhelms those of most othercountries,especially the poorones. As does the fact that any additional overseas sale of this kindof commoditymeans,unlike sales of other products, no additional cost to the seller. The film, manufacturing the TV show, is already made. Thereis similardominancewhen it comes to television news. TV news productionis expensive: to producea streamof news that flows seamlessly from studio anchorto onthe-scene report to talking-heads panel to mini-documentaryyou must have widely teamsof reporters andof soundand scattered cameraoperators,video editing equipment, satellitelinks, studios in differentcities. All this is more expensive still when viewers want that streamto flow day and night. The BBC, RupertMurdoch,CNN and the other majorAmericannetworkscan producethis unending flow of TV news; few other organisationsare wealthy enough to do so. CNN or the te B BBC, o be sure, give the viewer some sense of what is happeningin

the world - something that, sadly, cannot be said for TV news in the many countries where it is little more than political propaganda. Especiallyin momentsof crisis, we have all experienced the way CNN or the BBC can be prime, vital sources of Governmental decisionsto keep information. such channelsout of one countryor another have usually been motivatedby a desire to censorandcontrolthe news. Yet, at the same time, the proliferationof first world news anddocumentary outletsputsa very western twist on what the world sees. How many hours of the Discovery Channel must you watch before learning that people, and not just wild animals,live in Africa?How many hours about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky have CNN's viewers aroundthe globe seen forevery minuteabout GAT's effect on the poor? How many hours about Diana's death have BBC viewers seen for every minute about women in Africa and Asia'? Whateffect, in turn,does this cornucopia of images have on the minds of people in the world's south? In a thousandsubtle and olten unconscious ways, I think, it builds and reinforces a sense of being on the periphery.That feeling was often there to begin with as a legacy of colonialism, but it has surely been increased by the impact of westernfilms andtelevision, whose reach into most people's daily lives is far more pervasivethanthatof sun-helmetedcolonial officers ever was. Throughoutwest Africa today, for example.one sees advertisements for skin-lighteningcreams. Indian feelings about skin colour have their origins even before the colonial era, but I am sure they have only been magnified by the implicit message of western media on this score. Look at the number of matrimonial advertisements in any Indian Sunday newspaperthatmention 'fair' or 'wheatish' complexions. And when, in an ad in a slick Indianmagazine,have you ever seen a darkskinnedmodel?Indeed,the featuresof many models in such ads areethnicallyambiguous - hair dark enough to be Indian,skin light enough to be European. the In the realm of filmed entertainment, dominationof Europeandthe US is, in much of the world, more pervasive than it is in news.Thereare,forexample,approximately 4,000 feature films shown on Brazilian television each year. Ninety nine per cent of them are producedin the US or Europe.' this wave is overwhelminga Unfortunately wit!la lively,distinctive,multi-ethnic country cultureof its own - andwith some fine filmmakers. In most of Africa, the situation is even worse: many countries are virtually bankrupt and can afford no television production of their own except for programmes glorifyingwhateverstrongman is in power. Almost the entireentertainment

fare is imported. In Senegal, ironically the home of Africa's most distinguished filmmaker, Ousmane Sembene, I've seen villagersin a mud-walledcourtyard watching French soap operas. The problem of being overwhelmed by cultural imports is not restrictedto poor countries. In Canada,one of the wealthiest, more than 97 per cent of films shown in theatersare foreign, mostly American. This flow of cultureacross borderswould be somethingto celebrate,rather thanmourn, if ideasandimagesflowed bothways, instead of almost entirely from the US and Europe to the rest of the world. It would also be something to celebrate if what crossed nationalboundariesmost easily was the best of each culture and not the worst. One of thethingsI cherishabouttheUS, forexample, is the culture of its educationalsystem: the assumptionsthat students should think, not regurgitatefacts; thatlearningevolves from debateanddiscussion, not fromtakingnotes on what the professor says; that vigorous disagreementis the hallmarkof good teaching, nota sign of discourtesy.Yet, everytime I walk into a school or universityclassroom in most other places in the world - even if it is filled with students hoping to come to Americato study- I amstruckwithhow little American educational culture has spread. In other realms of culture, there are Americanand EuropeanIilmlsthat are great works of art, and American and European TV documentariesthat deal seriously with vital political andsocial issues. But these are *seldomwhat gets sent abroaid. Instead,film and TV exports are those that will appeal to the largest possible audience, and that usually means what is most violent. For international entertainment entrepreneurs, violence has the greatadvantageof crossing It requires the languageandliteracybarriers. no subtitles or dubbing, each of which, the latter especially, costs a film distributor considerable money. An audience which speaks only Telegu or Malay or Zulu will still pay to watch HarrisonFord blast space aliens with his laser gun. Look at the local newspaper's list of English language films showing in any city in India. The great majorityof themwill be Hollywood thrillers of this sort.

Economic and Political Weekly available from: Churchgate Book Stall Churchgate Station Opp Indian Merchant Chambers Churchgate Mumbai - 400 020

1236

Economic and Political Weekly

May 23, 1998

The appeal of that western mass notbasedon violenceis usually entertainment based on consumption. (Sometimes, as with James Bond and his hi-tech gadgetry, the appeal rests on both.) Television programming's very origin was as something that could be interspersed with advertisements. The content of the shows 'Dallas', 'Dynasty', 'Lifestyles of the Rich andFamous',and so on - usually reinforces the consumption ethic. The 'shopping channels' on television are the ultimate expressionof this. Infilms, the consumption connectionis less blatant,but it is still there. Increasingly manufacturers pay hefty to guarantee 'placement'fees to film-makers that their brandof automobile, soft drink, orwhatever is shownon thescreen. computer The makers of Ray-Ban sunglasses spent $3.5 millionon combinedpromotionof their new 'Predator2' productline and the film 'Men in Black', whose heroes wear these glasses to protectthemselves againstdeadly rays.2When western politicians talk loftily about great ideas crossing national boundaries, consumptionis usually in effect the great idea involved. Notice how often thesedaysWashington speaksof encouraging countriesto become 'marketdemocracies'. The multinational corporationstoday spend on advertisingalone, by one estimate, well over halfof whatall the nationsof the world combined spend on education.3 In the US today, surely foreshadowing what will happen in the rest of the world, the line between advertisingand education is fast dissolving. Cash-starvedpublic (i e, schoolsareacceptinganincreasgovernment) ing amountof money and equipmentfrom the multinationals,in return for allowing corporateadvertising in school hallways, lavatories, buses and stadiums, and on a TV news programme specialyouth-rargeting thatis now seen in classroomsdaily in about 40 per cent of the country's high schools.4 Sometimes whatthecorporation gets in return is an exclusive contractto sell its products at the school. "You want to get them started young and hopefully keep them for life that's what brandloyalty is all about",says youth marketingspecialist Ira Mayer.5The ColoradoSprings.Coloradoschool district, forexample,will receive $8 million over the next 10 years from the Coca-Cola Co - aiid still moreif districtstudentsbuy fromschool vending machines more than 70,000 cases of Cokeproducts a year.Nike distributes kits to schoolsthatshowhow a Nike runningshoe is made.Computer companiesdonatecomputers - with advertisementson their 'screen saver'programmes. Sometimesthe corporation will also exact in returnfor its donation an agreementthat school faculty members will not speak critically of its products. Just as the line between the consumption ethic and educationis dissolving, so is that

that between it and religion. Consumption is, in fact, the new religionof ourtime. Often it even takes on the magical elements of traditional religions.Inthe latestJamesBond NeverDies', movie,forinstance,'Tomorrow Bond braves,unscathed,some of the classic elements that impede mortalbeings: air (he flies a fighter plane and does free-fall water(here he has the help of parachuting), Scuba-diving equipment) and fire (which consumes the villain's lair but leaves Bond unharmed as he dashesthrough miraculously the flames).The chariotof this particulargod is a remote-controlled BMW, whose electrically-charged door-handles, secret compartmentsand other weaponrymake it imperviousto harm.An arrayof additional gadgets- thingsthatlook like wrist-watches or cell phones but have many other powers as well - serve the role of amulets, with destructive force as strong as supernatural thatof a thunderbolt fromShiva or Jehovah. When blasting space raiderswith a laser gun becomes the norm of entertainment worldwide, and when everyone's attention span is shortenedby television, and when TV and movies are increasingly seen as traditional artforms vehiclesto sell products, everywhereare threatened.And sometimes art forms that are not traditionalbut simply aspire to do something higher: speaking at the KochiPressClub in March,south Indian film-makers Balu Mahendraand Bharathi Rajablamedthe crisis in their industry,and the lack of new quality films, on the way populartastes have been changed by MTV and its imitators.6 It is extremely hard to combat the seachange of taste brought about by the globalisation of culture. Even if you and I agree that a SatyajitRay movie is superior to a James Bond movie, or that a Kathakali performanceis superior to an episode of 'Dynasty', or that a documentaryon global hungeris preferableto one on Bill Clinton and MonicaLewinsky,do we have the right to impose our cultural preferences on everyone else - most of whom, probably, prefer the opposite'?Of course we don't; history has grim lessons of what happens w,hen assumetherightto decide governments whatis culturallypermissibleandwhatisn't. And even if we did have the rightto decide this, and hadabsolutepower,whatcould we do'?If we bannedJames Bond or 'Dynasty' or morenewsof theWhiteHousesex scandal, we would then immediatelyturn whatever we censored into a forbidden fruit that everyone would be ravenous to consume. The Soviet Union long banned almost all culturalimports from the west; as a result any American or western Europeanbook, newspaper, or magazine was passed from readeagerly for monthsuntil hand-to-hand, it was in tatters,and invariablyregardedas the gospel truth.

Nonetheless,therearethingsgovernments can do. And the mainone is simplyto ensure, by means of subsidies and regulations,that people will continue to have a choice in cultural fare-between thatwhichis imported and that which is indigenous, and between that which is designed as sales vehicles for corporateproductsandthatwhich is of more substance.In the crucialrealmof television broadcasting, for example, corporate advertiserswill always supportthe action/ adventureshows, but it may take public tax money (as with the BBC) to support programmingof more depth. Furthermore, the airwaves are public property, and in returnfor using them, broadcasterscan be required(as in the US) to producea certain minimum number of hours of educational or children's or local-origin programming. Curiously, the most intense battle now under way over the issue of cultural globalisation is among nations of the first world.The countrywhich has been the most is France(although, outspoken paradoxically, it remains the leading neo-imperialpower, economically and culturally, in Africa). France has used two major weapons in the culture wars. First, more than any other country, it has long lavishly subsidised the arts, including the superb French film industry. Second, it has been the most vociferous backer of the European Communityguideline that says that at least half of what is shown on European TV must be producedin Europe. What the French- worry and,to some extentotherEuropeans about is that between 1986 and 1996, European films lost half their market to Hollywood. With the rise of CNN and Murdoch and the growing knowledge of English, the same trend is under way in television. France'slargesubsidiesforitsfilmindustry come froma tax on movie theatreticketsand video rentals. Since many viewers are watchingAmericanfilms andvideos, the US is claiming, under the level-playing-field trade doctrine, that the system is unfair. France's film-makers are up in arms, frightenedthattheirsubsidiesmaydisappear or may have to be shared with Hollywood. They have strongsupportfromthe country's writers, composers and ministerof culture. Two other nations that share the French position are Canada, whose National Film Boardhas long been knownfor the excellent documentariesit subsidises, and Australia, where generous financialsupportfrom both national and state governmentshas helped nurture a lively film industry. Thesecountries have-takenthe position that there shouldbe a 'culturalexception' to traderules when it comes to matterssuch as books, films, and TV. It is not at all clear, however, thatthey will prevailin thenegotiationsaboutthisthat are going on right now under the auspices

Economic and Political Weekly

May 23, 1998

1237

variety of cell phones, beepers and cars. that surrounds us, especially that which Theyconsumemineralwater,Japanesefood, reaches us through the all-powerful media and huge quantitiesof Pepsi - the company of movie andtelevision screens. It is.for this * * * must have paid heavy 'productplacement' reasonthat it is as importantfor any society In maintaininga distinct culturalidentity fees. The hero's imagineddreamlandscape to think about policy questions in the realm - or, perhaps more correctly speaking, a of rolling green pastures,throughwhich the of cultureas in the realmof education.Even collectionof culturalidentities- of its own, heroinerunsin a flowing white dress, is not though, in tackling the former, there are India has fared much better than most an Indian landscape. And so, all told, we enormousdifficulties: the cost of subsidies, countriesof the south. Of great help here have an Indian film without India in it. the need to avoid censorship, and the havebeenthe fact thatsome of its languages A sceptic might ask, what right do you, inevitabilityof a highdegreeofglobalisation. have been writtenones for a millenniumor all American, someone coming from the Faced with that inevitability, let us not longer,andthatmanyof the languagegroups countrythatconsumes the most of all, have lose sight of the ideal of a better kind of have populationslarge enough to support to preach against consumption in other globalisation,an exchange among equals in healthy-sizedbook publishing, newspaper countries?Do you practisewhatyou preach? which cultures borrow from,each other and film industries. With domestically- Are you willing to abandonyour own car, judiciously and selectively, and where what Shouldn'tAfricans, crosses borders most easily are not brand producedfilms attractingmore than 90 per yourfax,yourcomputer? cent of the country's film viewers, India is Indians,or anyone else have as much right names, but good ideas. In today's world in far less danger than Europe and Africa to lust after such things as do people in the creating this will not be easy. of being overwhelmedby Americanfare on US and Europe? Notes its movie screens. Indeed, it is one of the Of course they do. But we cannot talk of few countries of thesouthwitha film industry people's wishes to possess different types I Richard Barnet and John Cavanagh, 'Homogenisation of Global Culture' in Jerry that has considerable export earnings. In o' goods as if those desires arise naturally, Mander and Edward Goldsmith (eds), The television as well, indigenous culture has of their own accord. They are, instead, a Case againlsttiheGlobal Economy,SierraClub proveda powerfulforce. The filming forTV productof the complex process which Ivan Books, San Francisco, 1996, p 77. of the Mhlahhbarcata and the Ramayana a I lichcalls "theinventionof needs".Whether 2 Business Line and The Hindu, October 30, tew years ago is somethingwhose immense a person feels more strongly the need for a 1997. scale and popularity has been almost Pepsi or for a high-proteinmeal, for a cell 3 Tony Clarke,'Mechanismsof Corporate Rule' in JerryManderand EdwardGoldsmith(eds), phone or for a well that will provide safe unparalleledanywhere on earth. The Case against Global Economy, Sierra However,just because a television show drinkingwater,for wrap-around sunglasses Club Books, San Francisco. 1996, p 3()0. or film is producedin the third world does or for a book for his or her child - all these 4 Post, March 9, 1998. lWashington not meanit is freeof the firstworld's religion arenotnecessarily educated choices. 5 New York Timoes, rational, March 10, 1998. of consumption. I began with an example Instead,they are profbundlyinfluenced by 6 IblianllExpress, Thiruvananthapuram edition, of an experience in Siberia;let me end with advertising,and by the barrageof imagery March 3, 1998. one in India. Several months ago I went to see - with some friendswho could translate - the big Hindi language hit film from last year, 'Dil To Pagal Hai'. Now here is a film in whose productionthere seems no hand its producer, of anymultinational corporation: director.and actors were all Indian,and, so faras I know, its financialbackersalso. And yet. considerthis film carefully. If you could LalHaza Rs.125 *DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR BUDDHIST turn off the Hindi language of the sound *THEADI-BUDDHA/Kanai & COUNTER-REVOLUTION CENTENARY SOCIAL JUSTICE REVOLUTION track,and if you could forget for a moment * AMBEDKAR Ahir Rs.300 INDIA/D.C. ANDTHE UNDONE VAST/Justice VRKrishne INANCIENT the faces of the actors, there is virtually OF BUDDHISM/D.C.Ahir Rs.195 Rs.120 * HERITAGE nothingaboutthis movie thatwould tell you * lyer * THELEGACY OF DR. AMBEDKAR: Bharat India50 Yearsof Independence: BUDDHISM: it was set in India. Rs.280(PB)80 1947-97-Status, Growth& Development Ratna/D.C.Ahir The plot is borrowedfrom an American OF BUDDHISM IN Rs.250 * ROYALPATRONAGE Vol.6/D.C.Ahir film of some years ago. There are no street * BUDDHIST ANCIENT LalHazra Rs.275 INDIA/Kanai ININDIA/D C Ahir SHRINES scenes in India. There are, however, brief Rs.95 * SPITI: A Buddhist Land in Western Rs.275 street scenes in the European Disneyland * CONSTITUTION OF THE BUDDHIST Himalaya/V.Verma Rs.110 * STUDIES IN PALI AND BUDDHISM:A SANGHA/KanaiLalHazra and in London, where one of the two main The Tibetan Phurpa Memorlal Volume in Honour of Bhikku BLESSING: is makinghis fortune.When * DAGGER malecharacters Rs.180 Cult: Reflections and Materials/ Thomas Jagdish Kashyap/AKNarain he thinks he has won his woman he makes ONPALI Rs.160 * STUDIES COMMENTARIES/Kanai Marcotty thevictoriousdownward jerkof theclenched * DRAMBEDKAR ANDTHEDALIT Rs.320 FUTURE , LalHazra fistthatAmerican WITH OF THEHINDOOS VR Krishna Rs.120 " THETHEOGONY professionalathletesnmke lyer The film's * DR.AMBEDKAR THEIR OF PHILOSOPHYAND SYSTEMS when scoring a goal oi pooint. ANDPUNJAB/DC Ahir Rs.125 COSMOGONY: An Essay/ Count M interiorshotstake place in a modernairport. Rs.80 An Bjomstjema VISION OFDHAMMA: in a luxuriousprivate-room hospital, and in * DR.AMBEDKAR'S A Collectionof Verses from Rs.225 * UDANVARGA: Assessment/ D.C.Ahir ultra-westernhomes. Shots of 747's and * DR.AMBEDKAR, AND SOCIAL the Buddhist Canon. Compiled by BUDDHISM privateplanestakingoff and landingsignal Rockhill Rs.100 KNarain Woodvile CHANGE/A &D C Ahir FR.190 Dharmatrat W. the movements of the characters.Almost everyone wears western dress, the women BRPC (INDIA) LTD. mostly leotardsand mini-skirts.The dances Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi-2. 4222/1, are American disco, not Indian. The E-Mail: brpcltd@del2.vsnl.net.in Phone:3259196, characters use a conspicuously displayed

of the Organisation for Economic Cooperationand Development.

1238

Economic and Political Weekly

May 23, 1998