RSS

# 4 Oct 7 - Translation and Globalization

張貼者： NTNU GITI BLOG on 2010年9月17日 星期五
標籤：
#4 Film screening, “The World Is Flat”

2 意見:

Unknown 提到...

The two movies that we watched this week — “Outsourced” and “Life and Debt” — were both focused quite heavily upon the more negative aspects of globalization. The more Hollywood-styled “Outsourced”, however, did end with everyone happy and getting along. I enjoyed the humour brought about through the film’s caricature-style portrayal of ‘the foreigner’s’ experience of India. The foreign experience in Taiwan, too, provides an abundance of fodder for comic relief. I have often thought about trying, in some way, to represent the stark contrast that exists between the ‘Taiwanese’ experience of Taiwan and the ‘foreign’ one. Perhaps it has already been done. Anyone?
The second movie — “Life and Debt” — offered a much more serious look at the devastation that can arise in the wake of globalization. I really felt that the film’s director did a great job of juxtaposing the sincerity of the former Prime Minister of Jamaica with the boldfaced deceit of the IMF representative. It was interesting to watch him — the IMF representative — squirm as he tried with all his might to cast in a positive light the underhanded and self-interested activities of the IMF.
The story of Jamaica told in this film is pretty much identical to stories of economic collapse that I learned of firsthand during my stays in both Guatemala and Mexico. Of course, the cynic in me wants to chalk it all up to corporate, or political, greed and corruption on the part of the IMF, the World Bank, and the Interamerican Development Bank. Due to my sheer ignorance of anything political or economic, however, I would like to first understand the following two points. First, why would an organization, supposedly sufficiently versed in the ways of global politics and economics, such as the IMF make a loan to a country — Jamaica — when they, more than likely, knew full well that the loan would never be repaid and that the repercussions of such an agreement would eventually doom this small developing country to economic collapse and devastation? Again, the cynic, and perhaps the Buddhist, in me want to blame it all on greed and corruption. There must, however, be something more to it. Right?
The second point that I hope 李老師 or, perhaps, my fellow classmates might be able to clear up for me is that of why Jamaica, and other countries in similar situations, would agree to the terms of such a loan in the first place. Listening to the former Prime Minister speak it is quite obvious that the Jamaicans were not naïve enough to believe that the terms of the loan were fair. They also seemed quite aware of the seemingly insurmountable difficulties that lay ahead of them if they did take the loan. Did they really not have any other option? I apologize for the banality of these questions. I have never had much interest in learning about the ways of politics or economics.

2010年10月6日 上午11:56
Craig 提到...

Since the film “Outsourced” was primarily targeted at the American market, it seems useful to discuss it from the perspective of the American narratives it hooks into. A clearly important one is the rising tension between workers/the unemployed and greedy business owners who increasing rely on outsourcing to increase profits. While “Outsourced” did a fine job in its caricaturization of David (the greedy corporate flunky and Mr Toad's boss), its solution to exploitation—that it is better to exploit than to be exploited, seen when Mr Toad outsources his own job to Puro—offers mostly a cry for Marxist revival. The movie was a perfect reflection of the confusion the majority of people feel in the face capitalism: it is the American way, yet we all convulse hopelessly, and smilingly, under its yoke. Another belief Americans hold is that people (even minorities and women!) are more productive when they are empowered, which was portrayed when Mr Toad let it be know that “Asha can do anything.” More feelgood along these same lines: Mr Toad allows the call center workers to wear what they please and decorate their desks as they choose, because self expression makes workers feel more comfortable and able to perform better. Also seen in the movie: perhaps because they lack a traditional culture of their own, North Americans, full of wishful thinking, might take another look at customs such as arranged marriage. This is especially so since the institution of marriage in the West, as configured prior to the 1960s, has long been terminally ill and incapable of serving its social function. (I can't help but digress here and point out the absurdity of the LGBT community fighting for the “privilege” of marriage in anyway other than symbolic terms. They should be fighting for the reinvention of the institution of marriage, or perhaps even the privilege of arranged marriage.) Luckily, even though the call enter workers were used and then discarded, they didn't seem to care much at the end of the movie, so American businessmen were granted yet another reprieve and a good night's sleep.

2010年10月13日 下午5:16

張貼留言