Can you identify with any of the stories, songs, interviews, and experiences of the transnational that are depicted on this website? Feel free to use the social forum below to post your own experience and connect with others that share your multicultural identity.

As global powers, unions, and corporations continue to expand in power during the era of globalization, it is worthwhile to reflect on the current significance of the nation-state.

In Modernity at Large, anthropologist Arjun Appadurai posits that nation-states are not likely to be the most valuable players in a world of transnational flows, media, and transactions in the modern world (Appadurai 1996: 19). Other theorists claim that nation-states, despite facing the threat of having their boundaries dissolved by multinational corporations still represent major forces of domination and control, with key legislative, military, and law enforcement powers under their domain. (Lionnet and Shih 2005: 9). Further, due to specific instances in which national leaders continue to privilege (or debase) women as uncontaminated upholders of traditional national culture, literary scholar Sangeeta Ray suggests that the discourse of the nation continues to supersede ideas of internationalism, transnationalism, or multiculturalism (Ray 2000: 12)

With these ideas in mind, to what extent do you think the nation-state is losing and/or retaining power in the globalized world? Is it possible to think of people as “world” citizens, or do you think most people will continue to identify with nations for centuries to come?

When we think of literary studies today, there is a lot that might come to mind. Some scholars of literature study British romanticism, while others study Francophone African postcolonialism. Some focus on narrative epics, and others look more closely at poems. Although the discipline of literary studies is more often associated with English departments, people in many other fields—from anthropology to modern languages—are thinking about the social and cultural implications of literature. Also, it’s important to note that people outside the world of university life see value in reading and analyzing literature, too!

According to English professor Paul Jay, literary studies in America have become “transnationalized” as a result of widespread changes dating back to the late 1960s, which of course led to a number of nationwide social reforms. In educational settings, some of the changes were the opening up of the literary canon—we’re now seeing more and more modern and contemporary writers from Nigeria and Mexico on class syllabi! But, more broadly, large-scale movements involving anti-war, civil rights, and feminist protests initiated crucial societal conversations that we’re still having to this day (Jay 2010: Kindle loc. 367).

Based on your own experiences with reading literature, whether inside or outside of class, do you think literature is becoming worldlier in nature? What are some positive and/or negative implications of creating a literary canon that includes novels from all different countries and time periods? What are some ways in which you could use the books you’re reading as tools for engaging with ongoing social and cultural issues developing outside of the classroom?

When people imagine transnational communication, some think of how the Internet has allowed for the incredible creations and extensions of global networks. According to Arjun Appadurai, the Internet promotes the development of “mediascapes,” which enable people to rapidly produce and share information in all kinds of private and public spaces around the world (Appadurai 1996: 35). Perhaps building on this concept, Indian graduate student Noopur Raval describes how she participated in a Wikipedia rapid editing session centered on increasing and editing content related to the 2012 gang rape incident in New Delhi (Raval 2014).

However, some do not see the advent of the Internet as necessarily indicative of the creation of worldwide, heterogeneous social forums. According to performance artist Guillermo Gomez-Peña, the idea that the world is now at our fingertips is only a possible reality “so long as we are members of that elite micro-minority which stands on the benign side of globalization…only the digitally fit will survive” (Gomez-Peña 2001: 10). As he goes on to say, although more people are encouraged to participate in democratic processes online and in the community, what often results is not a variety of pathways for effective social change, but rather “the construction and staging of spectacle” (Gomez-Peña 2001: 15)

How do you use the Internet in your daily life? Do you feel that online news media and forums allow more people to express themselves and generate new ideas? Alternatively, is the Internet as a place where old hierarchies and stale thoughts are repackaged as viral, new ideas? Who do you think can benefit from the World Wide Web?