Foreword

Goonasekera, Anura; Kuo, Eddie C. Y.

doi:10.1080/01292989209359556

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this sense, geocultural theories would be “conceptually impossible” unless they remain the way they are—loosely regarded as thoughts, ideas, and wisdoms from the past. As Goonasekera and Kuo () put it, “[t]o be Asian it has to be particularistic; to be theoretical it has to be universalistic. Herein lies the paradox,…” (Goonasekera & Kuo, , p. xii).…”

Section: Geocultural Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Culture, Paradigm, and Communication Theory: A Matter of Boundary or Commensurability?

Wang

2014

Commun Theor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The discussion on geocultural theory has underscored the urgency for us to re-examine the way cultural differences are handled in academic discourse. Boundaries need to be drawn, because European universality neglects cultural and also paradigm differences. This article argues that as locking universality and particularity in a dualist paradigm is part of the problem, drawing boundaries to concepts and theories will lead to further problems. Borrowing from the Chinese yin/yang dynamic worldview and the Kuhnian notion of incommensurability, the author proposes a methodological framework in which commensurability, rather than universality, is the major concern. The commensurability model and the universality model are compared with examples to illustrate how the former may help advance theory development from a local perspective.

show abstract

Section: Geocultural Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Goonasekera and Kuo () put it, “[t]o be Asian it has to be particularistic; to be theoretical it has to be universalistic. Herein lies the paradox,…” (Goonasekera & Kuo, , p. xii).…”

Section: Geocultural Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture, Paradigm, and Communication Theory: A Matter of Boundary or Commensurability?

Wang

2014

Commun Theor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is because Asiatic communication traditions and cultural models are quite different and independent of the dominant discourse or paradigm of Western communication traditions. Whereas the early epistemological foundations for de-Westernizing media research stemmed from the works of Said (1979) and Alatas (2006), later research by Dissanayake (1988), Goonasekera and Kuo (2000), Miike (2003, 2007), Kim (2007), Chen (2006), and Goody (2006) have addressed the discontent with communication theories that were ‘western-centric’ and were, according to Downing (1996), ‘conceptually impoverishing’. While Eurocentrism is dissected and critiqued based on the theoretical frameworks of Orientalism by Said (1979), European universality by Wallerstein (2006), and historicism by Chakrabarty (2000), there were attempts to look into the epistemological, ontological, and methodological differences between different cultural and intellectual traditions in terms of communication between East and West (Kim 2002; Miike 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indian Cinema as a Model for De-Westernizing Media Studies

Murthy¹

2012

Asia Pacific Media Educator

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need to de-Westernize or decolonize media studies and research has been echoed recurrently in Asian media studies circles for over two decades, from the pioneering works of Chu and Cheng (1978), Chu (1988), Dissanayake (1988) through James Curran and Myung-Jin Park’s seminal work, De-Westernizing Media Studies (2000) to the recent volume edited by Georgette Wang, De-Westernizing Communication Research: Altering Questions and Changing Frameworks (2011). Communication media theories and models from the West are deemed to have overlooked the rich cultural and communication traditions in Asia—for instance, from India, China and Japan. This paper examines the communication models and theories that existed in ancient Indian literature (epics and fables; classical dance, Natyashastra, music, Carnatic and Hindustani traditions; folk dance and music) and painting, art and sculpture, which predate the epistemological, axiological, and metaphysical bases of communication and cultural models developed in the West. Discussion defers to contemporary Indian cinema to sieve the philosophical, axiological, epistemological and metaphysical elements that have governed knowledge and power relations in Indian society over many centuries. Finally, these elements are used to propose a localized media studies curriculum relevant to the Indian socio-cultural and political milieu.

show abstract

Foreword

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Culture, Paradigm, and Communication Theory: A Matter of Boundary or Commensurability?

Culture, Paradigm, and Communication Theory: A Matter of Boundary or Commensurability?

Indian Cinema as a Model for De-Westernizing Media Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About