This essay examines the relationship between globalization and art, arguing that economic integration does not occur in a vacuum but inevitably reshapes cultural and artistic expression. Drawing on thinkers from Tolstoy to Plato, the paper traces how art evolves across time and cultures while retaining universal archetypal themes. It explores the movement from functional ancient art to the globalized art world of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, considers the role of myth, oral tradition, and folk art in expressing shared human concerns, and ultimately argues that art serves as a vital catalyst for cultural adaptation and the preservation of humanity in an increasingly interconnected world.
The world is a complex place, and the old, outmoded, Eurocentric way we look at politics, economics, and culture may not be the right way to conceive the new order. Globalization describes the increasing unification of the world through economic means — including the reduction of trade barriers, support of international trade, and mitigation of export and import quotas. The goal of globalization is to increase material wealth and the distribution of goods and services through a more international division of labor, and then, in turn, to initiate a process by which regional cultures integrate through communication, transportation, and trade. The overarching theory is that if countries are tied together cooperatively in economic terms, they will not need to become political enemies.
However, politics and economics do not exist in a vacuum, and art is part of culture and the historical paradigm of regions and countries.1 While globalization is primarily an economic determinant, nothing exists in isolation. Economics therefore drives technological, social, cultural, political, and even biological factors. With this exchange of paradigms comes the transnational circulation of ideas, languages, popular culture, and communication through acculturation. Typically, we see the movement of globalization flowing into the developing world as it struggles to become part of the developed world.2 (Croucher 2004, 10).
When we discuss globalization in terms of art and culture, we must ask ourselves some very basic questions about the nature of art. Art certainly evolves — not just the medium of expression or its pervasive ties to culture, but the way we perceive and even define it. For example, much of the ancient world's "art" was perceived in its own time as merely functional: pots, illuminations, and the like. Art is easier to describe than to define, most particularly after the Renaissance, when groupings of arts formed a nucleus of music, painting, sculpture, weaving, and other forms understood as creating a response in humans — whether individual or shared.
According to Leo Tolstoy, Russian writer and philosopher, art is not primarily about theory and aesthetics that tend to define it as something true, good, beautiful, or ugly — but rather something that creates a specific emotional link between artist and participant.3
If we think about art history, we are also thinking about history itself, and why it is important to engage with the past. What does studying the past tell us about ourselves or our future? One view holds that it is the self-questioning that looking at the past provokes that makes the future possible and that makes life worth living. As Plato is said to have observed, the arts reflect the reality of society and therefore allow multiple generations the opportunity to experience that society.
"Recurring archetypal themes across world cultures"
"Art's role in preserving humanity amid globalization"
You’re 46% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.