lcc liberal arts studies / 2010 volume iii - LCC International University

LCC INTERNATIONAL 

UNIVERSITY 

LCC LIBERAL ARTS STUDIES / 2010 

VOLUME III: 

RESPONSES TO CULTURAL HOMOGENY: 

ENGAGEMENT, RESISTANCE, OR PASSIVITY

LCC Liberal Arts Studies, Volume III, 2010 

The journal invites academic community to open dialog on social, cultural and philosophical topics in contemporary 

world based on liberal arts principles. 

Publications are based on presentations given in Third International Academic Conference “Responses to Cultural 

Homogeny: Engagement, Resistance, or Passivity”, April 9-10, 2010, LCC INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY 

Publications on line http://www.lcc.lt/academic-conference/working_papers.php 

PAPERS REVIEWED BY PEER REVIEWERS. 

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE: 

Giedrë Gadeikytë 

Robin Gingerich 

Geri Henderson 

Jerry Holsopple 

Andrew Kaethler 

Scott Neumann 

Lorna Qesteri 

Arnoldas Remeika 

Eglë Songailienë 

Radvyda Vaiðvilaitë 

Eglë Zalatoriûtë 

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD: 

Dariusz Bryãko, PhD, Assistant Professor, LCC International University (Lithuania) 

Eric Hinderliter, PhD, Associate Professor, LCC International University (Lithuania) 

David McCabe, PhD, Associate Professor, Bethel College, Indiana (USA) 

Jim Mininger, PhD, Distinguished Professor emeritus, LCC International University (Lithuania) 

J.D. Mininger, PhD, Associate Professor, Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania) 

Roland Paulauskas, PhD, Associate Professor, Ðiauliø University (Lithuania) 

Ainë Ramonaitë, PhD, Associate Professor, Institute of International Relations and Political Science, Vilnius 

University (Lithuania) 

Lineta Ramonienë, PhD, Assistant Professor, LCC International University (Lithuania) 

David Skeen, PhD, Professor, LCC International University (Lithuania) 

Roma Ðimulionienë, PhD, Associate Professor, Klaipëda University (Lithuania) 

Marlene Wall, PhD, Professor, LCC International University (Lithuania) 

EDITORIAL STAFF: 

Geri Henderson, University of Balamand, Lebanon 

Eglë Zalatoriûtë, LCC International University, Lithuania 

Vilma Songailaitë, design 

ISSN 2029-1485 

Copyright: LCC INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY 

Kretingos g. 36 

LT-92307 

Klaipëda 

Lietuva I Lithuania 

Tel. (+370 46) 31 07 45

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

RAJA S. TANAS 7 

RESPONSES TO CULTURAL HOMOGENY: THE CASE OF PALESTINE 

PRABHU GUPTARA 17 

THE BUSINESS CONSEQUENCES OF GLOBALIZATION AND HOMOGENEITY FOR 

SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES 

MICHELE HERSHBERGER 25 

A NEED FOR ORDER AND DIVERSITY: HOMOGENEITY AND PARTICULARITY IN 

THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVE 

GERI HENDERSON 37 

PRAXIS IN PRESERVING NATIONAL IDENTITIES IN LITERATURE 

ZITA DARGUÞYTË 47 

JEWISH ROOTS TOURISM AND THE (RE)CREATION OF LITVAK IDENTITY 

ALEKSANDRA ÐVEC, MARGARITA PAVLOVIÈ 55 

LIFELONG LEARNING – UNMASKING NEW CHALLENGES IN GLOBALIZATION 

AND HYPER COMPETITION 

HENRIKAS ÞUKAUSKAS 67 

SEARCHING FOR THEOLOGY OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS: FROM SERVILITY 

TOWARDS CREATIVITY 

URSULA GLIENECKE 77 

REACTIONS ON CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS PLURALISM 

RITA VAIÈEKAUSKAITË 87 

NEGALËS KULTÛRA KAIP IÐÐÛKIS KULTÛROS HOMOGENIÐKUMUI

F ORWARD 

LCC / LIBERAL ARTS STUDIES / 2010

FORWARD 

Living in the world of jeans, pop music, Latin dances, celebrities and movie stars, 

Internet revolutions, Coca-Cola, Starbucks, Versace, D&G, Esprit makes people 

feel comfortable in Japan, France, Chile, Turkey, Australia, US, Lithuania, 

Kazakhstan, Ukraine and so on. Cultural homogeny gives us possibilities and 

facilitates communication, understanding of each other and sharing common 

experiences. At the same time, this sense of oneness emphasizes cultural 

differences experienced in languages, customs and traditions, ways of behavior, or 

religious practices. The ordinary life of the contemporary world is a constant 

balance between being the same or different, acting individually or within 

community, choosing national or global priorities. 

In April of 2010 LCC International University celebrated its third 

international academic conference, “Responses to Cultural Homogeny: 

Engagement, Resistance, or Passivity.” Organized to coincide with the United 

Nations Year of The Rapprochement of Cultures 2010, the conference posed 

concrete and precise questions about the relationship of individual national 

identities and globalization, about reactions to cultural homogeny reflected in 

political tendencies of the world, the development of languages, entertainment, 

global business, learning environment, tourism, religious practices and national 

literature. This conference intended to break stereotypes and to question the 

essence of homogeny and diversity. The presenters of the conference from 

Lithuania, Switzerland, USA, UK presented a broad range and understanding of the 

problems and suggested innovative and positive approaches to the topic of the 

conference. 

It is a great pleasure to introduce the third volume of LCC Liberal Arts 

Studies where submitted papers are published within the academic quality and 

peer review process. 

Radvyda Vaiðvilaitë, 2010 Conference Chair 

LCC / LIBERAL ARTS STUDIES / 2010 

5

O RIGINAL RESEARCH 


RESPONSES TO CULTURAL HOMOGENY: THE CASE OF PALESTINE 

Raja S. Tanas 

Professor and Chair of the Department of Sociology, 

Whitworth University, Spokane, Washington, U.S.A. 

Introduction 

For close to 62 years now, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been much in the 

public consciousness and in the news. Since the creation of the state of Israel in 

Palestine in 1948 the relationship between the Palestinians and the Israelis can be 

best described as a boxing match. No winner is declared until and unless the 

opponent is defeated, killed, and eventually thrown out of the boxing ring. 

In the past two decades, public opinion and interest in this conflict were 

heightened, especially since the first Intifada of December 1987. Newspaper 

readers and TV viewers received more than enough images of carnage and words 

of desperation from both sides. The most recent images of carnage came from 

Gaza just over a year ago. Rumors of future conflicts and perhaps regional wars are 

still looming in the horizon at this very moment. 

To many people, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict appears to be nothing more 

than senseless violence over the quest for homogeny of culture, homogeny of 

ideology, or homogeny of religion. While the native Palestinians want the Land of 

Palestine only for Palestinians, the Israeli Jews want the Land of Palestine only for 

Jews. 

Paradigms attempting to explain the Palestinian-Israeli conflict are 

plentiful. They compete among themselves and with each other. The abundance of 

paradigms has contributed much to the misunderstanding surrounding the conflict 

and, subsequently, to the proposition and implementation of a comprehensive 

solution. 

Since the tragic events of 9/11, the media in western countries appear to 

have suddenly become fascinated with words like Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, 

Christian, Jew, Israeli, terrorist, suicide bomber, jihad and jihadists, paradise and 


7

8 

RAJA S. TANAS / RESPONSES TO CULTURAL HOMOGENY: THE CASE OF PALESTINE 

virgins, and even Armageddon. Such terms have captured the imagination and the 

mindset of many people. At least in the American paradigm, the Palestinian 

resistance to the Israeli occupation was redefined as terror and was included in the 

war on terror declared by western countries especially by the U.S. Bush 

administration. 

This afternoon, I am presenting the conflict in its historical context as a 

direct consequence of the demise of the Ottoman Empire in 1918. I am presenting it 

as a conflict between two competing nationalist movements rather than the quest 

for homogeny of culture, ideology, or religion. I trust that this approach will help 

explain the two major competing narratives of the Palestinians and of the Israelis. 

More fundamentally a just, comprehensive, and successful solution to this conflict 

has to take into account (yes, it has to take into account) the historical context within 

which the conflict came about in the first place. 

To understand what appears to be nothing more than senseless violence, a 

macro look at the modern Middle East region is warranted. In doing so, I would like 

to highlight a few of the defining moments and historical forces that brought about 

this conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis. 

Defining Moments in the History of the Middle East Region 

It is important to note that the Middle East today is a geographical rather than a 

political entity. It encompasses 22 countries. Today, these countries have different 

political systems. Their citizens carry different passports representing the different 

nationalities. Passports are required for travel between any of the 22 countries. The 

countries have different currencies. Their inhabitants belong to numerous tribes, 

ethnicities, races, religions and sects reflecting a wide diversity of cultural values, 

beliefs, and practices. Even their economic infrastructures vary. For example, they 

use different electrical power systems (i.e., 110 and 220 volt-systems). The 

demarcation of their borders with each other is in dispute to this very moment. 

For much of the twentieth century and until now, relations between these 

countries have been less than friendly. They waged wars and continue to wage 

wars against each other. Contemporary Middle Eastern societies remain, for the 

most part, tribal. While, on one hand, the Arab masses still think of themselves as 

one nation (in Arabic Al-Qawm), they come from more than 1,000 tribes, familial, 

ethnic, or racial groups. These diverse tribal groups have been confined to 22 

politically independent and sovereign countries since the end of WWI. 



It is pivotal to note that none of these 22 countries comprising the Middle 

East region today existed prior to WWI. Their territories had always been parts of 

larger empires the last of which was the Ottoman Empire that ended in 1918. 

Historians associate the rise of the modern Middle East with the beginning of Islam 

th 

in the 7 century A.D. The birth of Islam in 622 A.D. became the foundation of a 

rising powerful empire that was Arab and Muslim. By 750 A.D., the Arab-Muslim 

Empire was finally established. Its borders extended from the Atlantic Ocean to the 

Arabian Sea. 

A non-Arab Muslim Empire known as the Ottoman Empire gradually 

th 

replaced much of the Arab-Muslim Empire by the beginning of the 16 century A.D. 

Except for almost one hundred years under the rule of the Crusaders (1099-1187 

A.D.), Palestine was a province of these two respective empires for close to 1,400 

years. Since the inhabitants of both the Arab-Muslim or the non-Arab Muslim 

empires were multi-tribal, multi-cultural, multi-racial, multi-ethnic, and multireligious, 

one dominant cultural homogeny was not viable. Nonetheless, both 

empires succeeded in managing and ruling vast areas of land inhabited by diverse 

populations. How could they do this? 

As the Arab-Muslim Empire pushed into North Africa, Europe, 

Mesopotamia, Central Asia, and reached into India and China, it needed 

mechanisms to manage diverse populations and cultures. Arabism and the 

Ummah were the two fundamental mechanisms that the Arab Caliphs of this earlier 

empire implemented. 

First, Arabism. Homogeny of the Arab-Muslim Empire's culture was 

based in part on speaking Arabic. Arabic became the language of Islam. It became 

the official language of government, of trade, and of everyday dealings. Therefore, 

Arabs are the people who spoke Arabic. Middle Eastern Muslims, Christians, 

Jews, and other groups became Arab for their mother tongue became Arabic. The 

national homogeny was the homogeny of the Arabic language. Nonetheless, the 

Arab-Muslim Empire allowed minority groups to speak their ethnic languages at 

home or in their houses of worship if they desired to do so. 

Second, the Ummah: Using Arabic alone to create homogeny of 

language in the Arab-Muslim Empire was not enough to sustain an empire. The 

Arab Empire also introduced the Ummah, a term that meant a community of 

believers or a nation. This community transcended regions, races, tribes, 

ethnicities, customs, or regional origins. 


9

10 


Upon adopting Islam, a person received membership in the Ummah 

automatically. On the other hand, non-Muslims were not considered part of the 

Muslim Ummah but were allowed to practice their religions freely within the 

confines of the Empire. This phenomenon applied especially to Arab Christians and 

Arab Jews. They were called Ahl Al-Kitab (People of the Book) and enjoyed semiautonomy 

in their social and religious institutions, educational systems, medical 

facilities, and cultural practices that flourished without much interference from the 

Caliph. Furthermore, Arab Christians and Arab Jews held prominent positions in 

government and in business. They performed administrative tasks and worked as 

merchants throughout the empire. 

The Millet System. When the Ottoman Empire gradually replaced what 

th 

used to be the Arab Empire by the beginning of the 16 century A.D., it faced the 

same daunting task of managing and controlling vast areas inhabited by diverse 

populations and cultures. While the Ottoman Empire shared the Muslim religion 

with the former Arab Empire, it did not share the Arabic language. Therefore, while 

the Ottoman Empire kept the notion of the Ummah, it added the Millet System. The 

Millet System emphasized religious identity rather than Arabism. 

Essentially, the Millet was a religious system that defined the identity of the 

Ottoman inhabitants. For example, Arab Christians in Iraq, Algeria or Palestine 

identified themselves only as Christians rather than Iraqi, Algerian or Palestinian. 

The same depiction applied to Arab Muslims or Arab Jews throughout the empire. 

While the heads of all Millets were ultimately responsible to the Caliph, they 

managed their day-to-day affairs without much directive from him. 

Similar to their status under the Arab-Muslim Empire, the minority 

populations enjoyed semi-autonomy in the organization and administration of their 

social and religious institutions, educational systems, medical facilities, and 

cultural practices. The Millet System created a sense of loyalty to one's religious 

group before it also created a sense of loyalty to the empire. 

By extension, loyalty to the immediate group, whether it was to the religious 

leader, to the extended family, to the tribe, to the village, or to the province became 

the norm. We witness this phenomenon to this very day in Iraq, for example. 

Nevertheless, the inhabitants of the Empire could freely travel from Algeria to 

Baghdad or from Mecca to Belgrade without needing a passport. 



Anti-Semitism in Europe 

During the lifespan of the Arab-Muslim and the non-Arab Muslim Empires, anti- 

Semitism in Europe was widespread. European Jews had no place in Christian 

Europe. European anti-Semitism reached a high point by the mid-1880s as 

epitomized in the Dreyfus Affair. Alfred Dreyfus, then a military officer in the French 

Army and a Jew, was accused of selling military secrets to Germany. The cry 

"Death to the Jews" resounded throughout Europe. That was the world into which 

Adolf Hitler was born. 

In 1897, an Austrian Jew by the name of Theodore Herzl envisioned the 

establishment of a separate safe haven for European Jews in Palestine, then a 

province of the Ottoman Empire. In Herzl, the Zionist movement was born. Its goal 

was to create a homeland for European Jews in Palestine. At its inception, Zionism 

faced horrendous difficulties. The Ottoman Caliph refused to allow European Jews 

to immigrate to Palestine. However, the golden opportunity for the success of 

Zionism materialized when the WWI commenced in 1914. On the eve of WWI, and 

in order to guarantee the success of the allies that comprised of Britain, France, and 

Russia against the Ottoman Empire, the British Government promised Sharif 

Hussein, then the leader of the Arabs, the entire Eastern Arab homeland (the 

Arabian Peninsula) for an independent Arab state if his militia forces joined the 

allies to fight against the Ottomans. It was a sealed deal for Sharif Hussein. 

In November 1917, the British Government made another deal with Jewish 

Zionist leaders in Europe, promising them Palestine for a homeland once the 

Ottoman Empire was defeated if they were to support the war effort with finances 

and fighters. This was another sealed deal made by the British Government, known 

as the Balfour Declaration. In the Balfour Declaration, the British Government 

made it clear to the Zionist leaders that by creating a home for European Jews in 

Palestine “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights 

of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.” The existing non-Jewish 

communities referred herein are the native Palestinian Christians and Palestinian 

Muslims. 

When the WWI was over, the victorious allies namely, France and Britain, 

split up the northern region of the Arabian Peninsula into independent nation states. 

In the San Remo Agreement of 1920. Iraq, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon, and 

Palestine were created as politically independent entities for the first time ever. 

Other politically independent states were created when the British and the French 

military forces gradually left the Arabian Peninsula, resulting in the establishment of 


11

12 


13 states that once made up the eastern homeland of the Arabs. In 1920, the 

League of Nations assigned Palestine, Transjordan and Iraq to a British mandate, 

while France received Syria and Lebanon. The mandate power was to administer 

these newly created countries until they were strong enough to establish their own 

governments and infrastructures. All of these newly created Arab states received 

their independence between 1920 and 1971 as Britain and France had promised 

them. This was true except for Palestine. 

Upon the termination of the British mandate in 1948, more than threequarters 

(close to 78%) of Palestine was transformed from an Arab-Palestinian 

state into a European Jewish state that was named Israel. How did this come 

about? 

The British Mandate in Palestine 

The British mandate over Palestine began in 1920. The British government 

introduced a policy of allowing European Jews to immigrate to Palestine in keeping 

with the intent of the Balfour Declaration. Over a period of 28 years (1920-1948), 

the Jewish presence in Palestine increased from about 3 percent to 31 percent, 

while Jewish land ownership increased from less than 2 percent to approximately 7 

percent. 

The Palestinian Arab population became alarmed of the British policy 

regarding the influx of European Jewish immigrants into Palestine. Fierce fighting 

between the native Arab Palestinians and European Jews erupted as early as 1921 

and lasted through February 1949. Just a few months before the termination of the 

British mandate in Palestine, the newly formed United Nations recommended the 

partition of Palestine into two states; one state to remain Arab Palestinian and the 

other state to become Jewish. A civil war began immediately after the partition 

plan was announced on November 29, 1947. The result was the creation of yet 

another state in the Middle East, called Israel, on May 15, 1948. 

The June 1967 War 

On June 5, 1967, Israel waged a preemptive war against its Arab neighbors. The 

result was the occupation of the remainder of Palestine, the Syrian Golan Heights 

and Sinai. Israel returned Sinai to Egypt in 1979 as a result of the Camp David 

Accords, while it annexed the Syrian Golan Heights to itself in 1981. After the 1967 

war, Israel began to create settlements (in Arabic “Musta'marat” or colonies) for 

Jewish newcomers from all over the world on land confiscated from the native Arab 

Palestinians. 



Discouraged that no Arab regimes offered to help them liberate their 

homeland, the Palestinians launched the first Intifada in December 1987. It lasted 

until September 13, 1993, when the Oslo Accords were signed at the White House 

under the auspices of the U.S. Clinton Administration. Despite the ongoing peace 

process, Israel continued its policy of land confiscation, demolition of Palestinian 

homes, and the building of settlements. 

Just last month, for example, Israel announced the building of yet another 

settlement comprising of at least 1,600 residential units in Arab East Jerusalem on 

land confiscated from the native Arab Palestinians. You may remember that 

Israel's decision to build the new settlement coincided with the visit of Joe Biden, 

U.S. Vice President, to Jerusalem. Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State, 

described the decision as “insulting.” And on March 26, Ban Ki-Moon, the U.N. 

Secretary-General, reiterated that all Israeli “settlements are illegal under 

international law.” 

Meanwhile, Israel continued to offer immediate citizenship to any Jews 

who wanted to move in. This offer has been accepted by hundreds of thousands of 

Jews. For example, after the collapse of the former Soviet Union and during the 

decade of the 1990s, more than 1 million Russian Jews settled in Israel. In the 

aftermath of the tragic events of September 11, many voices, within and outside the 

United States, argued that the healing of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was central 

to winning the war on terror. Just last month, for example, and before the U.S. 

Committee on the Senate Armed Services, General David Petraeus, the 

commander of the U.S. Central Command, declared without hesitation that the 

Palestinian-Israeli conflict is “the root cause of instability” in the Middle East that 

played into the hands of terrorists including al-Qaeda. Yet in the months and years 

after 9/11, the U.S. Bush administration maintained its stance of diplomatic 

disengagement from the conflict. 

At the present time violence on both sides has grown to a level that was not 

seen previously in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The most recent Israeli incursion 

into Gaza claimed the lives of more than 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis. To the 

European and, now non-European Zionist Jews who continue to build their state in 

Palestine, Palestine is the Land of Biblical Israel. They believe that they have the 

right to ownership of every inch of the land. It is the land where their ancestors lived 

more than 3,000 years ago and is the very land that they believe God has promised 

to them as recorded in the pages of the Bible. Jews received sympathy from 

western countries for there was a great deal of shared guilt over the Holocaust. This 


13

14 


collective western guilt gave European Jews an opportunity to push for their 

anticipated homeland in Palestine. 

To the Palestinian Muslims and Christians, Palestine has been the home of 

their ancestors from time immemorial, and more specifically, before Joshua 

th 

entered the “Promised Land” in the 14 century B.C. Furthermore, Christian 

Palestinians trace their descent from the Jewish Disciples of Jesus Christ and the 

thousands of Jews who believed in Jesus when he was with them in the flesh. They 

make plain that they are the founders of the Church of Jesus Christ in Palestine and 

throughout the world including Klaipëda. Therefore, Palestine belongs to them 

before it belongs to European Jews or anyone else. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict may be seen to revolve around 

homogeny of culture, homogeny of language, homogeny of ethnicity, or homogeny 

of religion but, in reality, it is not! It is a conflict based on a political agendum 

representing two political nationalist movements. In order for any of the two 

movements to succeed, it has to destroy the other completely. To the Arab 

Palestinians, the issue is the continued loss of their homeland and mere existence. 

To the Jewish Israelis, the issue is terror that comes from the Palestinian 

resistance to the European Jewish occupation of Palestine as they continue to 

pursue the creation of a homogenous Jewish state. The final rounds of the boxing 

match are yet to be played out. If the boxers remain separate and homogenous 

opponents, their demise along with the destruction of their boxing ring and world 

peace altogether is probable. In the meantime, various proposals were submitted 

to resolve this conflict peacefully, once and for all. Unfortunately, none of these 

proposals has received serious consideration. 

The plan for a two-state solution that was the outcome of the Oslo Accords 

of 1993 appears now to be obsolete. The time has run out for such an option. 

Presently, there are voices emerging from inside and outside the Land of 

Palestine/Israel calling for one, bi-national, state. That state would be the shared 

homeland for Arab Palestinians and Jewish Israelis. This bi-national state will be a 

place where no group of a particular religion, ethnicity, or national origin dominates 

the political organization and administration of governance. 

Knitting the two flags of Palestine and Israel together would give rise to a 

third flag of a country that may be called Pal-Iz or any other name. The road to the 

one-state solution has to be based first and foremost on rectifying the injustices 



done to the native Arab Palestinians during the past 62 years via the restoration of 

their human and political rights that are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of 

Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and the numerous United Nations 

Resolutions particularly section 11 of UN resolution 194, dated December 11, 1948. 

This section, 

“Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at 

peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest 

practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of 

those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, 

under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by 

the governments or authorities responsible.” 

Without a doubt, the new state needs the utter support of the Family of Nations for 

the inception and the evolution of multilateral socio-economic and political 

institutions that could bring about an atmosphere congenial enough for the two 

parties in conflict to co-exist. 

Such a state would not be based on the homogeny of the Arab-Palestinian 

culture or the Israeli-Jewish culture but on relentless dialogue between the cultures 

via democratically established multilateral social institutions and laws. This 

platform demands the creation of core institutions shared by both the Palestinians 

and the Israelis; institutions that first demand loyalty to the state and, second, give 

the Palestinians and the Israelis the freedom to maintain their distinctive cultural 

values, beliefs, and practices. 

In this democratic platform, every citizen (Palestinian or Israeli) is 

guaranteed full access to the political, economic, and social opportunities. The 

configuration of such a democratic state could be perhaps modeled after the 

Ummah and the Millet System that the Arab and the non-Arab Muslim Empires 

have employed for close to 1,400 years. 

In the meantime, the Quartet representing the European Union, the U.S., 

the U.N. and Russia ought to work tirelessly to bring the Palestinians and the 

Israelis to work and live together to discover, to enjoy, and to benefit from the 

richness of their diversity within unity. 

About the Author 

Raja S. Tanas is Professor and Chair of the Sociology Department at Whitworth University in Spokane, 

Washington, USA. Bachelor and Master of Arts degrees in sociology he received from the American 

University of Beirut, Lebanon, after which he earned his Ph.D. degree in sociology from Michigan State 

University. He has carried out extensive research in the area of Middle Eastern and Islamic studies. 


15

THE BUSINESS CONSEQUENCES OF GLOBALIZATION AND 

HOMOGENEITY FOR SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES 

Prabhu Guptara 

Distinguished Professor, 

William Carey University, India 

Before I get to my main remarks, may I recommend to you two key books: first, Dr 

Vishal Mangalwadi's Truth and Transformation, which was published last year by 

YWAM in the USA; and, second, a rather older book, Dr Michael Schluter's The "R" 

Factor. You may also find of interest the papers and other materials on Dr 

Schluter's website (www.relationshipsglobal.net), on Dr Mangalwadi's website 

(www.vishalmangalwadi.com) and on my own website (www.prabhu.guptara.net; 

Blog: www.prabhuguptara.blogspot.com). 

I should also say that I will spend what may seem to you an inordinately 

long time on the theme of globalisation before I get to what some of you may regard 

as the meat for which you are really here: my comments on small- and mediumsized 

businesses. However, my comments on SMEs cannot be understood 

without comprehending the wider context, so I beg your patience. 

Standard academic analyses of global or national situations usually look at 

the political, economic, social and technological driving forces, though the Bible 

urges us to look also (or, rather, first) at values and at relationships—because those 

are what give rise to everything else: the relationship with God, with other humans 

and with the whole environment, including animals and plants. 

The most important difference is between societies based on values such 

as righteousness and justice, versus societies based on the potentially- or reallyarbitrary 

decisions of an individual or elite – though of course, philosophically 

speaking, those decisions also, when deconstructed, reveal values (of power, 

wealth-accumulation and self-interest on the part of the ruler or ruling elite). 

I turn now to my main comments in relation to globalisation. It is worth 

keeping in mind that globalisation began with God. He created the world, He 

created human beings with all their abilities and talents, He gave to Abraham 


17

18 

PRABHU GUPTARA / THE BUSINESS CONSEQUENCES OF GLOBALIZATION AND HOMOGENEITY 

the possibility of knowing Him, and He gave Moses, the prophets, and us the 

possibility of knowing His character and His values. 

Human corruption always seeks to twist God's initiatives in globalisation to 

selfish purposes through misuse of power. And the struggle against that, and 

towards the right kind of globalisation, has also been initiated by God through the 

Good News of Jesus the Lord, in spite of the fact that Christians have usually 

betrayed God and the Gospel, and non-Christians (such as myself) have at least 

sometimes contributed to moving things in the right direction. 

This puts me in mind of the Emperor Nebuchadnezzar to whom, you 

recollect, God gave a terrifying dream of a huge statue with a head of gold, 

shoulders and midriff of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron and feet as well 

as toes of iron mixed with clay. He turned to his magicians who were supposed to 

have access to supernatural knowledge to interpret the meaning of his dream, but 

the Emperor refused to tell them the dream! If they really had access to 

supernatural knowledge, went the reasoning of the Emperor, they should be able to 

tell him not only the interpretation but also the dream itself. In danger of losing their 

heads, the magicians and their dependents or allies launched a desperate search 

for anyone who might be able to help, and they "luckily" located Daniel, languishing 

in a prison, to whom God revealed both the vision and its interpretation –which 

was, that the "golden" global empire of Nebuchadnezzar would be replaced by a 

less splendid "global empire", that in turn would be replaced by a still less 

prosperous "global empire", till the time came when a little stone not cut by human 

hands would grow so great as to replace the greatest of global empires. 

Traditionally, that stone not cut by human hands is understood to mean the coming 

of Jesus the Lord, some 700 years after the vision of Nebuchadnezzar, as he was 

born of a virgin in an unknown corner of an unknown land, and His power and 

influence now exceeds that of every known empire, and continues to grow around 

the world—even though most people in the West would prefer to be ignorant of that 

fact. 

In other words, we are in the middle not of one kind of globalisation (that of 

the modern world with its combination of technology, wealth-creation and 

democracy, which is seen by the ordinary Western scholar) but in the middle also of 

a second kind of globalisation of spirituality and values (which is obvious to those 

who want to see or are open to seeing). 

Moreover, even the first kind of globalisation started, in its essence, as a 

direct result of the spiritual—by which I mean the Protestant Reformation. What 



was so great about the Protestant Reformation, in spite of all its limitations? To put 

it simply, every society in the world before the Protestant Reformation had been 

marked by a concentration, in the elite, of power, knowledge and wealth. The 

Reformation broke that by insisting that everyone should be able to read for 

themselves and think for themselves—in other words, the knowledge revolution, as 

a direct result of which you and I from around the world are gathered here today. 

That knowledge revolution led directly to the birth of the scientific method and of 

modern science – and so to everything that we see in the material world which is not 

of nature. As the Protestant Reformation led also to the first modern societies 

marked by the rule of law, that led directly to the accumulation of wealth by ordinary 

people, and therefore to the rise of the middle class. And those factors together, 

when combined, with the teaching of Jesus that we should love our enemies (not 

always practiced by the churches!) is what led to what we call liberal democracies 

today—previous societies, and other societies even today, are marked by the 

struggle to disempower and preferably eliminate political opponents. As a result of 

the Reformation, northern Europe moved from being the poorest part of the world in 

the sixteenth century to being as prosperous by the eighteenth century as the 

historically most prosperous parts of the world (Japan, China, India, and the Middle 

East), and to becoming the richest parts of the world by the nineteenth century—a 

position that Reformed and even Post-Reformed societies hold to this day. 

These blessings of the Reformation were exported around the world, and 

imported around the world—not always for the best of reasons, but with usually less 

bad results than would otherwise have been. 

That is what the secular world understands by globalisation (let us call it 

Globalisation One). However, as Globalisation One is the result of a deeper 

Globalisation of values and ethics (let us call it Globalisation VE), the impact of 

Globalisation One on those societies which have not been through Globalisation 

VE is a conflict between traditional ways of doing things and modern ways of doing 

things. That conflict often leads to a conservative reaction—as can be seen in the 

energy (not always constructive) of new Buddhist, Christian, Confucian, Hindu and 

Muslim political parties. 

Globalisation One is also leading to a struggle between those who want to 

use the new possibilities of globalisation one to simply accumulate wealth and 

power for themselves as part of the new global elite, and those who would like to 

use of new possibilities of globalisation to work for justice, humaneness and 

environmental responsibility. 


19

20 


As long as we have inappropriate, or inadequate, global rules in place, 

Globalisation One will inevitably lead to: 

�greater volatility in politics, economics, society and even technology 

�greater environmental irresponsibility and human injustice—a combination 

that could lead potentially to human disaster on an unprecedented scale 

�a greater gap between the rich and the poor 

�a winner-oriented international system in which the global losers are 

marginalised, leading to suicide or crime on a scale never before seen in 

history 

�the elimination of the middle class from global society, and 

�the elimination of the middle-sized company from the global economy. 

These should not be surprising assertions, since it is well established that 

capitalism leads inevitably to greater and greater concentration of wealth and 

power, ending up in oligopoly, duopoly or even monopoly—which is why we have 

what is called in the USA "Anti-Trust" legislation and bodies entrusted with 

implementing "anti-trust" legislation, or what are called "Monopolies and Merger 

Commissions" in other countries, which are intended to use legislative force to 

break up too much concentration of power and wealth. 

The most recent evidence of the concentration of power is seen in the 

development over the last couple of weeks, where one or two extremely powerful 

companies have been able to dictate a move from annual price changes in the 

world iron market, to now quarterly changes—in spite of the fact that everyone else 

in the world, from governments to consumers were against that change as well as 

the second change that was wrought by these few companies, from the price being 

quoted "all-in" to the price being quoted at the point of origination. In other words, 

instead of being told what it would cost to buy iron here in Lithuania, the new 

contract specifies the price at the place where it is produced, in Brazil or wherever, 

so that the risk relating to the enormous variation in the cost of transport can be 

passed to you and me (the customers) instead of being borne by the companies. 

This is of course from the viewpoint of the companies a perfectly legitimate and 

logical thing to do, but it is part of a trend by which the power-concentration of 

companies is being used to offload risk to the end-consumer, whether it is in 

purchasing iron or in providing pensions. 

I would like to make a few comments now on the topic of homogeneity and 

homogenisation—and, in terms of globalisation, I would define homogenisation as 



"a continuous process by which the blandness of homogeneity (the inevitable result 

of the wrong kind of globalisation) is sought to be countered or enriched by the 

search for novelty". I would like you to visualise globalisation, in terms of 

homogenisation, as one of those Indian goddesses, only with three arms. The first 

arm constantly beats everything together to homogenise everything, the second 

arm seeks to constantly push the homogenised result into newer and newer parts of 

the world, while the third arm constantly scours the world like an elephant's trunk to 

find new and interesting fruit and detach it from the branches and roots to put the 

fruit into the mix that is being homogenised. The result is that the fruit loses its 

particular function in its own context but provides colour and texture to the 

homogenised mix. You see this in culture where "exotic" types of music, dance and 

images are divorced from their original context and function, and you see this in 

business where the big companies buy up the best companies and the best 

products. The reason I wanted to make these points about homogenisation is to 

draw to your attention the importance of scale and scope, and therefore the 

importance of brands. 

The comments above lay a minimal foundation on the basis of which I hope 

my comments regarding the future for small and medium-sized businesses will 

make some sense. 

It should be clear by now that, as far as I can see medium-sized business 

face a highly uncertain future, given that they are squeezed by all the sorts of legal 

issues faced by large companies and given that they have a relatively high cost 

base compared to large companies. 

However, small companies (particularly individuals trading as companies, 

and companies composed of less than about eight people) cannot only survive, 

they can flourish, because they can maintain the lowest possible costs and the 

highest possible speed of response to changing market conditions. 

Whether small companies do in fact flourish depends on the following 

factors: The first is innovation. You can see immediately the problem with most of 

the small companies we have. Certainly in ex-Soviet countries such as Lithuania, 

we have to fully take in how totally opposed the mind-set is that produces creativity 

and innovation versus the mind-set that was necessary to survive in the Soviet 

system. You may say that this is obvious. But it is not at all obvious to me that the 

consequences of accepting that as true have been followed through. For example, 

one consequence at the top of your society, so to speak, would be that government 

policies would nurture enterprise much more substantially. Another would be, at the 


21

22 


bottom of society, so to speak, that the whole education system would change to 

encourage creativity and innovation. There is a huge amount to discuss here, and I 

will be happy to take these matters further during our time for discussion. 

The second is professional skills, specifically in marketing and logistics. 

Why marketing? Because the whole of the world economy is now producing too 

much, whether it is wine or beer, potato chips or computer chips, steel or cars. 

There are too many banks, there are too many universities, and the list would be 

pretty exhaustive if we were to really go through it; are only a few niche areas where 

there is less production than demand. And why logistics? Because business 

around the world is being reconfigured and, if you are trained and gifted in logistics, 

you won't be out of a job for the rest of your life. I say that slightly tongue in cheek, 

because one matter to keep in mind, in connection with professional skills of any 

sort, is how rapidly knowledge becomes obsolete. I am told that roughly half of what 

engineering students learn at college is already outdated before they graduate. 

Fifteen years ago, I had a neighbour in the IT world, who did not go on holiday even 

for a week because he was so scared of being left behind by the rapid pace of 

change in his industry with newer and newer products, services, companies, 

mergers, acquisitions, scientific and technical developments, the reconfiguration of 

the industry through changes in customer preferences, and so on. So if you are 

making a living today selling your time and labour, do not assume that your labour 

will still be in demand in ten years or even in two years. Make sure that you are 

keeping yourself professionally up to date. In fact, it is much better if you try and 

avoid selling your time and skills and try instead to add value by developing 

something new. That is what really produces wealth, whereas selling your time and 

labour produces at best, a wage. 

That brings me to the third factor on which companies, whether large or 

small, depend and thrive: money. No doubt some of you are laughing. You can 

imagine Lithuania producing creativity and innovation, and even producing 

professional skills in marketing and logistics. But money? For that you think 

perhaps of Germany or the USA or even China and India. However, you need to 

take very seriously this dimension or factor of money. If you don't know how to 

accumulate wealth as an individual or as the director of a company, I would 

recommend to you any of the numerous books that now exist on the subject of how 

to go grow rich. The secret of doing so is however basically fourfold: (a) spend less 

than you earn, (b) investing what you save on the basis of portfolio theory, that is, by 

distributing your risks as widely as possible, (c) do not borrow, except to invest, and, 



even then, it is better for you to find co-investors than to borrow money, because as 

the Bible puts it, "He who borrows is slave to him who lends", and (d) buy cheap, sell 

high. Again the last point sounds obvious but it requires a clear eye and nerves of 

steel to buy cheap. Why? Because you wonder if the deal is good and whether it 

may not be even cheaper tomorrow! Similarly, it requires a clear eye and nerves of 

steel to sell high. Why? Because everyone thinks, in boom times, that it is going to 

go even higher tomorrow! So target a reasonable profit and move on to a different 

deal once you have made your margin, in the words of the Bible, "those who are too 

oriented to making a quick buck will come to ruin, whereas those who farm their 

lands faithfully will prosper; slow and steady profit is the route to growth that is 

sustainable". By the way, this is true not only for individuals and families, it is as true 

for companies as it is for countries. 

I conclude that those who want to flourish in today's intensely competitive 

world, whether individuals, small companies or big companies, need to focus their 

attention and energy on the determining factors of money, marketing, logistics, 

innovation and creativity. 


Prabhu Guptara is the William Carey University Distinguished Professor of Global Business, 

Management and Public Policy (India) and a recognised authority on long-range global trends. Widely 

known as a speaker and broadcaster, he is or has been Chairman, CEO or Board Member of several 

companies and organisations. As Executive Director, Organisation Development, at one of the largest 

banks in the world), he has the unique job of working with people throughout the world to identify new 

ideas that may bring value to the bank. This includes running Think Tanks on a wide variety of market 

and global issues, and managing the Distinguished Speaker Series. He was born and educated in India, 

is a British citizen, and works worldwide, having been based in Switzerland for the last fourteen years. A 

member of the Jury of numerous literary, business and management competitions in the UK and the 

Commonwealth, and a guest contributor to all the principal newspapers and radio and TV channels in 

the UK as well as numerous such media in other parts of the world, he continues to supervise PhD 

research and lecture to MBA classes, and is included in Debrett's People of Today. 

www.prabhu.guptara.net 

www.prabhuguptara.blogspot.com 


23

A NEED FOR ORDER AND DIVERSITY: HOMOGENEITY AND 

PARTICULARITY IN THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVE 

Michele Hershberger 

Hesston College, Hesston, Kansas, U.S.A. 

Abstract 

The following is an 'open letter' for all those who are interested in the stories of the 

Bible and how they may provide a direction to the dilemma of two competing 

needs—the need/desire for order and the need/desire for diversity. This is a 

reflection or musing on several Bible stories that will highlight this tension. The 

stories will show God calling a people to speak and live in such a way that other 

people will join God's people. The stories will also illustrate the potential dangers 

when new people accept that invitation and become a part of God's people. 

Related questions include, “How should God's people relate to the surrounding 

cultures? How does one avoid syncretism without withdrawing from the world? 

How can God's people both encourage the individual voice and particular cultures 

and yet live with a compelling vision of unity?” 

These musings have relevance today as many who call themselves 

Christians struggle to understand how to live with the twin needs for uniformity/order 

and diversity/particularity. In the past, those associated with Christianity have made 

grave errors on both sides. Will God's people today find a better way? 

Introduction 

Is the church a safe place for individual voices and particular cultures? On the other 

hand, does the church have something to offer as a guide in the midst of competing 

truth systems? Looking at biblical stories that speak to a need for order and for 

particularity, one can find somewhat competing perspectives and perhaps a call to 

something that provides the best of both ways, a community that has a 'center' but 

also invites diversity. 

On some level, every society struggles to find the balance of unity and 

diversity. Every society seeks to have a unity that helps define its people, a unity 

that motivates the group to work for the good of the society. A related struggle is 


25

26 

MICHELE HERSHBERGER / A NEED FOR ORDER AND DIVERSITY: HOMOGENEITY AND PARTICULARITY 

how to create and even enforce this unity. How does a group of people ensure 

order? How much cultural homogeneity should a group have and how should that 

homogeneity come about? It is possible for those in power, in their desire for 

uniformity, to snuff out the individual voice, even the individual voice that is truth. In 

some societies, this action is justified when that truth contradicts the status quo, 

when that truth threatens those in power—when that particular truth proposes a 

new “story.” But should it be justified? What “gifts” are lost when order comes at the 

price of the individual voice? 

One can also find instances in the Bible of this same struggle to find unity 

and order, the struggle to avoid syncretism. At places this struggle seems to be 

resolved by a cultural homogeneity and the narrative views this homogeneity 

positively. The danger of syncretism seems to threaten as much as the danger of 

squelching the individual voice. Is it possible to give too much attention to every 

individual voice and every piece of “truth” or opinion? Is this the foundation for 

chaos or syncretism? Can too much particularity threaten to dissolve the unity and 

cohesiveness of a group? 

I believe the biblical narrative proposes a way that enhances the gifts of 

both particularity and homogeneity, and leads us beyond the two dangers. It 

illustrates the creation of a people of God who are bonded together in unity by a 

common story. The cohesiveness of the group comes from gratitude for God who 

initiated deliverance, not from a squelching of the individual voice. It is a unique, 

paradoxical community in that it freely submits to the unifying story and yet also 

freely listens to the dissenting voice. I believe that when it is functioning at its best, it 

is a community who uses the power that Jesus used, the power of vulnerability. This 

creation of a people finds its climax in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. The 

narrative sometimes illustrates times when God's people didn't understand or live 

out this paradox well, and church history is replete with similar failures. Despite 

these failures, the paradox and how it plays out in the biblical narrative warrants our 

attention. 

The biblical narrative nurtures cultural diversity 

In the beginning God created a diverse physical world (Genesis 1 and 2). This 

included the diversity and unity of the two genders (Gen. 1:27 and Gen. 2:18-25). 

God also created a diverse People of God, the new creation of II Corinthians 5:17 

i 

and Ephesians 3:1-6. This new creation, as miraculous as the physical creation, 

consists of people from many people groups, even people groups with a history of 

ii 

hatred toward each other (Achtemeir, p. 369). 



The biblical narrative also nurtures cultural diversity from a theological 

standpoint. Genesis 12:3 states that Abram was chosen so that through his family, 

iii 

God could bless all the families on earth. This verse also states that God will bless 

those who bless you and curse those who curse you. While this phrase could imply 

an exclusive People of God, the standard for exclusivity is not stated. Here lies the 

tension. What constitutes the people of God? What is their identity? Ethnicity, 

cultural homogeneity or something else? 

Many facts point to a diverse People of God. Exodus 12:38 speaks of God 

rescuing a mixed crowd of slaves. After the Red Sea event and over the next 

several hundred years, other people groups who were not blood-kin continued to 

join: the Kenites (Ex. 18:1, I Sam. 15:5-6), Ruth the Moabitess, and Uriah the Hittite 

(II Samuel 11). In Exodus 19:5-6, God proclaimed that the Israelites were to be a 

kingdom of priests. In the ancient world priests were people who connected others 

to God (Fretheim, 1991, pp. 212-213). The post-exilic Isaiah understood correctly 

the mandate for Israel to function as a priestly connection, as he prophesied, “I will 

give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the 

iv 

earth” (Isaiah 49:6). 

Yet other stories support an understanding of a more ethnically exclusive 

people of God. The Israelites were warned of the dangers of foreigners, who could 

lead them astray (Ez. 44:7) and marrying wives from other people groups (Ezra 

10:11, Genesis 34, Numbers 25). I have argued that the ancients understood the 

role of a priest to be one who connects others to God. Yet the Israelite priesthood 

was itself highly exclusivist, barring from membership non Israelites, anyone who 

had physical defects and Israelite women. 

So the question was open: why did God choose them, beginning with 

Abram and Sarai? Were they to be exclusive, snuffing out diversity and if so, to what 

extent? Were they to be missional, that is, seeing their job as a people connecting 

other peoples to the Israelite God? And if so, how much diversity do they accept? 

Beginning with the monarchy, the Israelites began to create nation-state 

and geographical boundaries around who could become part of God's people. 

They were now exclusively citizens under a Davidic king or those who lived within 

the geographical bounds of Israel. Even the radically free God of the wilderness 

who directed a mixed group of slaves with a pillar of fire and cloud was 

domesticated in a Temple in Jerusalem (Brueggemann, 1978, pp. 37-39). Ezra 

came back from the Babylonian exile and denounced foreign marriages (Ezra 9). 

He was rightfully concerned about the threat of syncretism, but he failed to give 

these same wives a chance to commit themselves to Yahweh worship. 


27

28 


The book of Jonah provides an interesting take on the tension of 

homogeneity and particularity. Seen by some scholars as an allegorical sermon 

directed at the returnees from Babylon, (Limburg, 1988, pp. 138-151) Jonah could 

represent the majority of Jews who didn't want God to bless every family on earth 

through them. God sent Jonah to Nineveh to bring a message of judgment for their 

wickedness. As the capital of Assyria, Nineveh symbolized the worst enemy. Jonah 

instead fled to Tarshish via the sea, in an attempt to escape his calling. The pagan 

sailors showed more compassion than Jonah did for Nineveh, hesitating to sacrifice 

Jonah's life, even though their own lives were in peril. But eventually they did throw 

Jonah out of the boat, only to be swallowed by a big fish, a possible metaphor for the 

Babylonian exile. The fish spat him out at Nineveh with a second chance to do the 

mission he was called to do. Surprisingly, Nineveh repented, God granted them 

v 

mercy—and Jonah was upset. Unlike God, he didn't show chesed and for that God 

punished him. Jonah, like the returnees from Babylon, had a second chance to 

understand his chosen status in a different way and be a “priest” connecting others 

to God, but unfortunately, he failed. As the story ends, Jonah is more upset about a 

bush than about the potential death of a city and God has a revealing rhetorical 

question, “And should I not be concerned about Nineveh, that great city, in which 

there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand persons who do not know their 

right hand from their left and also many animals?” (Jonah 4:11, NRSV) 

But what if Ezra and Jonah were right? What if they had been chosen 

because they were God's favorites? What if the monarchy was God's ultimate will 

and altogether needed? The Old Testament narrative contains evidence for both 

sides of the argument. One way to resolve the dilemma is to look at the life of Jesus 

for the best understanding of God's original intention. Did Jesus strive to renew a 

culturally homogenous people? Was he ethnocentric? 

The gospels contain stories of Jesus reaching beyond the Jewish ethnic 

people group. In John 4, he spoke with a Samaritan woman and she became the 

first evangelist as she ran to tell the good news to her village. And while Samaritans 

were a different group than the larger category of Gentiles and Jesus reaching out 

to the Samaritan woman perhaps represented a restoration of united Israel rather 

than an outreach to Gentiles in general, her conversion is significant, as 

Samaritans were hated by the Jews (Sloyan, 1988, pp. 52-55). The inclusion of the 

Samaritans was the beginning of the breaking apart of ethnocentrism that was 

common to many Jews of Jesus' day. In Luke 7, Jesus healed the slave of a Roman 

centurion. The centurion asked Jesus not to come into his house because he 

believed himself unworthy to have Jesus enter. He also stated his belief that Jesus 

could heal the slave by merely speaking the word from where he stood. Jesus 



praised him and said, “I tell you, not even in Israel have I found such faith,” and the 

slave was healed. 

The most dramatic illustration of Jesus intentionally threatening the 

vi 

ethnocentrism of Second Temple Judaism was his visit to the Nazareth synagogue 

(Luke 4). Jesus, chosen as Torah reader of the day, read from Isaiah 61, a 

messianic scripture that also promises Jubilee (Yoder, 1972, p. 29). When Jesus 

declared himself as the fulfillment of this scripture, the crowd spoke well of him 

(verse 22). Even after remembering his hometown boy status, they didn't harm him. 

But when Jesus threatened their ethnocentrism by saying that God cared for a 

Phoenician widow and Naaman the Syrian, they tried to throw him off the cliff. Jesus 

took the intended scope of Jubilee and applied it to people groups other than Jews. 

His fellow Jews were enraged (Craddock, 1990, p. 63). 

The early church made an emphatic statement for cultural diversity 

through the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. Spurred by the conversion of Cornelius, 

a Roman centurion, Acts 10, where Peter realized that God has no favorites (Acts 

10:43), the Jewish believers gathered to decide how to incorporate the Gentile and 

vii 

Samaritan believers. One option, attractive for many, was to have Gentiles 

become Jewish in order to be followers of Jesus. This included a ritual bath, special 

diets and for males, undergoing circumcision (Barclay, 1961, p. 17). In this option, 

ethnicity achieved through these rituals was a prerequisite for admittance to the 

People of God. This option was particularly attractive because in some Old 

Testament stories, uncircumcised men were circumcised as part of joining God's 

viii 

people (Achtemeir, 1996, p. 185). Given this background and the importance of 

circumcision for the covenantal relationship itself (Gen. 17:10-11), the decision not 

to require Gentile males to be circumcised is paradigmatic. One could also say that 

part of the decision of the Jerusalem Council was also a compromise, as James 

instituted some food laws as mandatory for the new non-ethnic believers. Does this 

deviation mask the groundbreaking new direction to affirm Gentiles as equal 

members of the church? Or was the Jerusalem Council a step toward the fulfillment 

of Genesis 12:3? 

How did the apostle Paul handle the tension of the need for a unity that 

doesn't squelch diversity? Paul called for the radical union of two diverse 

groups—Jews and Gentiles. He heralded the ministry of reconciliation in II 

Corinthians 5:17. Paul's statement that “There is new creation” refers to the 

ix 

creation of one people of God, made up of Jews and Gentiles (Martin, 1986, p. 146). 

He reaffirmed this new creation in Galatians 3:27-29, writing “there is no longer Jew 

or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male or female, for all of 


29

30 


you are one in Christ Jesus” (Cousar, 1982, pp. 85-85). However, this unity didn't 

completely erase the particularity of the different groups. In Galatians 3:27-29 Paul 

was not asking Christians to give up their genders and become unisex (he was not 

announcing a new type of physical humanity). Similarly, he was also not asking 

Jews or Gentiles to give up their specific cultural identity. But in Christ, Paul argued, 

those identities are given equal status. Ephesians chapters 2-3 lend more support. 

Here Paul claimed that Christ had torn down the “dividing wall” between Jews and 

Gentiles (Eph. 2:11-22), a wall that was both a metaphor and a real wall at the 

Temple with a sign that warned death to any Gentile who ventured past it (Yoder 

x 

Neufeld, 2002, p. 115). Ephesians 3 explains the mystery—that the Gentiles have 

become fellow heirs (3:6) and this was God's intention all along. 

From the deliverance of a mixed ethnic group of slaves to the miracle of a 

church where Jews and Gentiles are equal to the vision of the book of Revelation 

where saints from every tribe and nation worship the Lamb (Rev. 5: 9), one could 

view the biblical narrative as supporting cultural diversity. However, there are other 

stories within the Big Story, and they give voice to another side. The Bible must also 

deal with the problem of syncretism and the need for a unifying identity. Is there a 

superior homogeneity, a story that reveals truth more than other stories? Is there a 

way of living that lends itself to more healthy relationships than other ways of living? 

And does the Bible, particularly the story of Jesus, claim to reveal it? 

The Israelites understood the need for a unifying story. The words found in 

Deuteronomy 26:5-10a were spoken every year at a festival (Christensen, 2002, p. 

638) where the Israelites gave offerings to the priest. A careful reading shows that 

the people recited the story using present tense verbs, as if the story had happened 

to them, even though it happened many years before their birth. This demonstrates 

the power of story to make events of the past become present reality. The story also 

provided the proper motivation for response—gratitude. This cultic recitation 

follows the same pattern as the Ten Commandments and Joshua's retelling of the 

story. First comes the story of God's deliverance—whether in one “Reader's Digest” 

one-verse version in Exodus 20 or in a longer recitation—followed by the response 

of gratitude. But was the group experience also important for the way it nurtured 

unity, giving the people a common story? Because it was a shared cultural 

experience, did reciting this story serve to nurture religious homogeneity, positively 

molding a people's identity? 

The story of God's deliverance at the Red Sea and God's providence in the 

wilderness was not the only story in town. The Canaanites were a threat because 

they tempted the Israelites to participate in Baal worship (Judges 2:11-13). The 



situation reached its lowest point at the end of the judges' period, Judges 21:25. 

Perhaps the greatest motive for getting a human king was the reality of “all the 

people doing what was right in their own eyes.” Here the individual voices, or at 

least the power of a competing story, threatened chaos and the dissolution of God's 

people. A new cultural homogeneity formed in the late judges period, which led to 

monarchy and the boundaries it placed on who could be God's people. We can 

decry the choices made in this homogeneity, but we must also realize the moral 

degeneracy that prompted it. The center had collapsed. 

In response God sent individual voices—the prophets, to address the 

situation. God didn't mandate or enforce a return to the correct story and away from 

syncretism with the Baal gods. God did not equip the prophets with weapons of war 

or governmental support to coerce the people back to the right way. But they did 

retell the story. Part of their solution was to call the people back to a certain 

xi 

theological homogeneity, back to an alternative vision of shalom. 

What about Jesus? Did he support the need for homogeneity and if he did, 

what kind of homogeneity was it? Jesus upheld the Law and Prophets (Matt. 5:17- 

20), in essence bringing them back to their original intention and function through 

his teaching in the Sermon on the Mount (Hare, 1993, pp.46-49). Jesus called 

people to high standards of conduct (John 8:11) and also provided a way for people 

to live out those impossible standards (John 14:17, 25, 15:5, 16:12). Jesus said of 

himself, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except 

xii 

through me.” Through both his teaching and life, Jesus called people to follow him. 

This implies a theological homogeneity, which always has cultural ramifications 

and thus at least implicitly nurtures a certain cultural homogeneity. 

At one point, Jesus even sounded ethnocentric himself. In Matthew 15: 21- 

28, a Canaanite woman begged Jesus to heal her daughter of demon possession. 

Jesus said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel,” and “It's not right to take the 

children's bread and toss it to their dogs.” “Yes, Lord,” she replied, “But even the pet 

xiii 

dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the master's table.” Jesus praised her great 

faith and her daughter was healed. 

There are several explanations for this seemingly out of place story. 

William Herzog II uses it as an example of an honor-shame riposte (Herzog, 2000, 

pp. 129-130). Nowhere in scripture is Jesus bested—except in this story. If this was 

an honor-shame challenge, then it affirmed non-Jews and women in that a 

Canaanite woman did what no Jewish religious leader was ever able to do. 

Amy-Jill Levine gives two alternative explanations. She raises the 

possibility that Jesus humbly received theological correction. The Canaanite 

woman understood God's ultimate will better than Jesus did. But it is more likely, 


31

32 


says Levine, that Matthew used this story as part of an intentional literary pattern. 

In this most “Jewish” of all gospels, this story is a matched pair with Matthew 10:5-6 

which also has Jesus saying, “go only to the lost sheep of Israel.” These two 

xiv 

scriptures, found in the middle of the book, form a contrasting chiasm with the 

Magi at the beginning of the book and Matthew 28:19-20 at the end. Both of these 

“bookend” scriptures emphasize the inclusion of all people into God's people. Here 

Matthew creatively portrays our central tension—the tension between the unique 

calling of Israel and the specific call to be missional—the call to make disciples of all 

xv 

nations (Levine, 2006). 

Given this tension, how do we discern God's ultimate will for us in this time? 

How does God both avoid chaos or syncretism (the potential danger of particularity) 

and avoid ethnocentrism and an exclusive stance toward others (the potential 

danger of cultural homogeneity)? The problem with overarching stories that give 

unity and cohesion to a group is that they can nurture an oppressive cultural 

homogeneity. What can keep the biblical story from falling into this same trap? How 

can Christians be a cohesive, cooperative, missional community, revealing God's 

particular truth, without the motives that can become oppressive—that is, the 

motives of political pressure, violence or material reward? 

For those of us who are Christian, we must admit that our track record is not 

impressive. Throughout history there have been fierce arguments about the exact 

nature of that core identity. And many times the history of the church has been 

stained as the individual voice has been inappropriately snuffed out. The Crusades, 

the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, and the exploitation of people groups by 

Christian missionaries are but a few of too many historical examples. It is 

interesting to note that these atrocities began after Constantine accepted 

Christianity as a legal religion in the Roman Empire and Theodosius made it the 

official Roman religion; they began after the church had the power to enforce 

homogeneity. Is that the way Jesus used power? 

Jesus fostered a unity through the power of vulnerability. He was born to 

poor parents, lived a simple life and died a criminal's death. Compared with much of 

church history, especially during the years of Christendom, Jesus did all the wrong 

things. Unlike the church when it had political power, Jesus refused to use the 

xvi 

sword. Unlike the church that at times curried political favors, Jesus refused to be 

king in that way (John 6:15). He met with Elijah and Moses on the Mount of 

Transfiguration instead of David and Solomon (Luke 9:30). Jesus ate and drank 

with tax collectors and prostitutes (Mark 2:15) and called for inner change instead of 

change enforced from outside sources. 



A final periscope from the gospels will illustrate. Jesus was tempted by 

Satan in the wilderness (Matthew 4; Luke 4). While the three temptations can be 

interpreted in a variety of ways, it's clear they represent ways Jesus could bring in 

his kingdom. They are proven effective ways to create homogeneity. People will 

follow a messiah who provides material needs (stones into bread), and one who 

can razzle-dazzle with supernatural signs (jumping off the Temple), and of course 

people must follow a military messiah or face consequences (Satan handing all 

political powers to Jesus). Jesus was committed to bringing about the kingdom, but 

he refused to bring it about in ways that forced obedience. Jesus wanted people to 

follow him voluntarily and out of love; even the “soft” coercion of free food could lead 

to oppression. Jesus realized that refusing to force allegiance to the kingdom, 

refusing to enforce homogeneity, was really the only way to birth and nurture the 

kingdom (Boyd, 2005, pp. 73-73). Jesus chose to use a different kind of power than 

the church has used when it has been oppressive. 

But did the plan, this power of vulnerability, work? Depending on your 

viewpoint, one could say the project is a failure. Can we excuse the church just 

because it didn't follow the example of Jesus when it came to forcing order and unity 

at the price of persecuting the dissenting voice? On the other hand, the church has 

also failed when it listened too much to dissenting voices and blended too much 

with other truth systems, watering down Christianity until it seemed irrelevant not 

because of oppression but because of its lack of convictions. 

I don't know the answer to this question. Yet I, along with many others, have 

experienced a different kind of church. I have worshipped with Christians 

committed to live in the tension, refusing to use violence or coercion of any sort to 

protect their convictions, refusing to take the task of squelching the dissenting voice 

into their own hands. And yet they have strong convictions; they have a story that 

gives them cohesion. Furthermore, I have experienced this kind of church in 

Klaipeda, Lithuania. For the past year, I've gathered with other Christians from 

several denominations and theological traditions. At a variety of church settings, we 

have worshipped together—Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant and 

Anabaptist. There is a homogeneity here that is valuable, indescribable. It is 

voluntary, vulnerable, and trusts that Jesus will guide all of us as we seek to follow 

an exclusive/inclusive God. Like the Israelites when they remembered their story, 

we are motivated by gratitude for what God has done. There is much diversity, 

including theological diversity. Our worship together is deep and rich. 

And I suspect that this is the only kind of church that can have integrity with 

my Eastern European students. I taught an introductory biblical survey course to 

students who came from various parts of Eastern Europe. The majority of them are 


33

34 


not Christian, and they took the class as part of their general education 

requirements. In the beginning of the class, many were hostile toward biblical 

studies. For some, the only Christianity they knew was an oppressive one, one that 

had sanctioned wars, anti-Semitism and other atrocities. For others, it was a 

cultural novelty--benign, old-fashioned, superstitious, or anti-intellectual. For 

some, Christianity was homogeneity gone bad; for others there were no central 

convictions that made it unique or of any value. And before me lay the responsibility 

of teaching a narrative that could be interpreted in many ways. The questions of 

homogeneity and particularity became real in a new way. 

But when I got to the part about Jesus, and when, given my own set of 

interpretive blinders, I explained this different kind of power that Jesus used, their 

interest increased exponentially. Here was an example of someone who had core 

convictions, who espoused a theological homogeneity and yet one who held it 

lightly, relationally. Here was one who held truth but would not force that truth on 

others. And yes, not everyone bought the idea of a non-violent Jesus, given the 

reality of wars in the Old Testament; not everyone was convinced. But the 

atmosphere in the room changed, and the conversations went long into the night. 

My students were wrestling with the possibilities of this different kind of power. 

Can there be a way to live out a story that unifies and creates a positive 

homogeneity and at the same time, honors the particular voice? When the people 

of God are willing to follow the power of vulnerability that Jesus used, and when 

they glean their motivation from gratitude for what God has already done, perhaps, 

in limited ways, they can. 

End Notes 

This verse can be translated several ways; it is ambiguous in that it could be an individual new creation 

(he is a new creation) or it could mean something corporate (there is new creation). The latter is 

preferred. See Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians: A New Translation, p. 314. 

The word Gentile can be applied to a wide variety of people groups, but despite the vast diversity, one 

can i define Gentiles as other than Jews. One could argue that “Jew” can refer to a diversity of people 

groups as well. During much of the biblical story timeline, there was animosity between “Jews” and other 

people groups. See Acts 10:28. 

ii For a discussion on the Hebrew verb form of “blessing,” see Wenham, Word Biblical Commentary, p. 282. 

The word for “nations” in the LXX version of this verse is the same word in the New Testament that is 

translated “gentiles,” so the phrase could be translated “. . . to be a light for the gentiles.” 

God's steadfast, covenantal love, where God gives people better than what they deserve. This 

corresponds iii with God's command in Micah 6:8 to “love kindness,” an action Jonah struggled to accomplish. 

iv 

One could argue that there was only some homogeneity in First Century Judaism. There were many 

competing stories of how to define the covenant people of God as represented by four major parties 



v 

(Essenes, Pharisees, Sadducees and Zealots) and several sub-parties. 

Another important event was Pentecost, where the gift of speaking in tongues was a re-enactment of 

vi the presence of diverse tongues at the Tower of Babel, this time with the positive effect of bringing a 

diverse group of Jews together, who heard the gospel in their first language. 

See Joshua 5:3 for an example and Genesis 34 for a negative example of this custom. See also I 

Maccabees vii 1:48, 60 when Antiochus Epiphanies forbade the Jews to practice circumcision. 

See also Shillington, V. George, Believers Church Bible Commentary: 2 Corinthians, p. 130, for a 

good analysis of the Greek. 

viiiSee 

also Hertzog, Jesus, Justice and the Reign of God, p. 118 for a more thorough explanation. 

Brueggemann rightfully asserts that the prophets' vision (which can become homogeneity) was never 

ix far removed from the historical event of God's deliverance. There is always need within the story for the 

prophetic voice that both helps the community grieve an oppressive status quo and reenergizes it with 

God's x radical hope. 

xi For an interesting commentary on this verse from a Messianic Jewish perspective, see David Stern, 

Jewish New Testament Commentary, pp. 196-198. 

Two different Greeks words are used here, which adds nuance to the derogatory tone. See Hare, pp. 

176-179. 

xii For the purpose of this paper, a chiasm refers to a literary arrangement of sentences or ideas in a text 

that forms a mirror-like reflection—AB/ba. 

xiii For another interpretation, see Hare, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and 

Preaching,pp. 176-179. 

xivThe 

only possible exception lies in Luke 22: 35-38, where the disciples show Jesus two swords and he 

says, “It is enough.” Given the literary context of the verses where Jesus rebukes one of them for using a 

sword xv (Luke 22:51), that he meant this statement literally is questionable. Also, the phrase “it is enough,” 

can be translated “enough of that,” as per the Septuagint of Deut. 3:26. See Green,The New International 

Commentary xvi 

on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke, pp. 774-775. 

References 

nd 

Achtemeir, Paul J., editor (1996). HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, (2 Ed.) New York: HarperCollins 

Publishers. 

Barclay, William (1961). The Mind of Jesus. San Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers. 

Boyd, Gregory A. (2005). The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power is 

Destroying the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing. 

Brueggemann, Walter (1978). The Prophetic Imagination. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. 

Christensen, Duane L. (2002). Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 6B: Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12. 

Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

Cousar, Charles B. (1982). Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and 

Preaching:Galatians.Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press. 

Craddock, Fred B. (1990). Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Luke. 

Louisville, KY: John Knox Press. 

Fretheim, Terence E. (1991). Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and 

Preaching: Exodus. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press. 

Furnish, Victor Paul. (1984). Anchor Bible: II Corinthians, A New Translation. Garden City, NY: 

Doubleday and Company. 

Green, Joel B. (1997). The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke. 

Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing. 

Grenz, Stanley J. (1996). A Primer on Postmodernism. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing. 


35

36 


Hare, Douglas R. A. (1993). Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Matthew. 

Louisville, KY: John Knox Press. 

Herzog II, William R. (2000). Jesus, Justice and the Reign of God: A Ministry of Liberation. Louisville, 

KY: Westminster John Knox Press. 

Keener, Craig S. (1993). The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: 

InterVarsity Press. 

Levine, Amy-Jill (2006). “To All the Gentiles”: A Jewish Perspective on the Great Commission, Review 

and Expositor, 103, Winter 2006. Retrieved from http://www.rande.org/winter06.htm. 

Limburg, James (1988). Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Hosea - 

Micah. Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press. 

Martin, Ralph P. (1986). Word Biblical Commentary: 2 Corinthians. Waco, TX: Word Books. 

Shillington, V. George (1998). Believers Church Bible Commentary: 2 Corinthians. Scottdale, PA: 

Herald Press. 

Sloyan, Gerard (1988). Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: John. Atlanta, 

GA: John Knox Press. 

Stern, David H. (1992). Jewish New Testament Commentary. Clarksville, MA: Jewish New Testament 

Publications. 

Wenham, Gordon J. (1987). Word Biblical Commentary: Genesis 1-15, Vol. 1 Waco, TX: Word Books. 

Yoder, John Howard (1972). The Politics of Jesus: Behold the Man! Our Victorious Lamb. Grand 

Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing. 

Yoder Neufeld, Thomas R. (2002). Believers Church Bible Commentary: Ephesians. Waterloo, ON: 

Herald Press. 


PRAXIS IN PRESERVING NATIONAL IDENTITIES IN LITERATURE 

Geri Henderson, PhD. 

LCC International University, Klaipëda, Lithuania 

Abstract 

The concept of globalization, even a theory of globalization in literature, has been 

around for almost twenty years. Yet, national literary cultures continue to make 

their voices heard, creating tension in the discourse of the theoretical versus the 

pragmatic. Inclusive philosophies have mandated that World Literature in English 

and in English translation become an important staple in Comparative Literature 

programs internationally. As an example of this tension, standard-bearers of the 

old English canon of the mid-twentieth century resist the pressure to change, to be 

inclusive. On the other hand, there is not a definitive canon in any conception of 

World Literature that is stable. By it's very definition, World Literature must be 

representative of individual countries and identifiable cultures, not a global 

homogeny of all literatures. 

The difficulty, and beauty of a liberal arts education is its breadth. The 

balance between individual, national literature and world literature has tipped in 

favor of world literatures. A majority of undergraduates do not study literature as a 

major focus of study, relegating the study of all literature to a few select works within 

limited possible classes. Are we educating generations of students who will not 

have heard of Milton, Chaucer or Wordsworth, not to mention a host of other lesswell 

known authors, no less worthy? The situation is paralleled in national 

literatures of all countries and is perhaps even direr where English and its literature 

dominate the curriculums of many universities. 

This paper posits the subsuming of national literary identities in the drive 

toward inclusive, egalitarian, political-correctness in literature studies, one of the 

critical points in which national culture is situated. Further, it raises the question of 

what “national” really is and considers the effect of transnationalism, the exchange 

of information and literature, that has been around for centuries, not decades. 


37

38 

GERI HENDERSON / PRAXIS IN PRESERVING NATIONAL IDENTITIES IN LITERATURE 

Introduction 

The topic of national literary identities is intensely interesting but there is noisy 

critical discourse on the subject of globalization theory in literature these days 

because it is as complex as it is interesting. Preserving national literary identities is 

just a corner in the noisy room where the discourse on these subjects has been 

held. What this paper intends to do is quietly enter the room, allow several 

conversations to be heard, along with my own comments, and upon leaving the 

room, make an assessment of where current conversations seem to be headed. 

Simon Gikandi has written that globalization is “caught between two competing 

narratives, one of celebration, the other of crisis” (2001). I would say there are more 

than two. 

National Literature 

One of the conversations, voiced initially by Marx and Engels, argues that the ideas, 

forms and the dissemination of literature throughout the known world are as old as 

ancient times when the written word was shared wherever the literate lived 

(O'Brien, 2001, p. 604). In other words, the effects of globalization and especially 

electronic and digital information on shared worldwide literature are only multiplied, 

not new. Another school of thought states that the idea that there is any “pure” 

national literature is erroneous. Cross-cultural insemination and the transnationals 

who cause it, have also been around for centuries. Both of these points of view are 

true. The English lexicon, or any other for that matter, attests to the multi-national 

nature of almost every enterprise where borrowed words and even idioms become 

part of everyone's accepted vocabulary. That is the point: what do we seek to 

preserve in literary identities and can those identities be strictly defined as national? 

While the idea of preserving literary identities may have the ring of an altruistic 

intention to guard the precious and individual characteristics of national literatures, 

the issue cannot be defined by a preservationist's altruism. What may be seized on 

and defined as “national” may not be at all geographically or politically national. 

Even a clear definition of what constitutes national literature and the 

identities it holds within it is hard to come by. Definitions that attempt to restrict 

national literatures to only that which is produced within a nation's borders have 

ignored the national literatures of the Diasporas, literatures that, no matter where 

they were written, first belong to the previous locations of the writers. And one of the 

most well-known Lithuanian stories of the last century, “Lithuanians by the Laptev 

Sea: The Siberian Memoirs of Dalia Grinkevièiûtë” details experiences well outside 



of Lithuania that could only be written by a Lithuanian about Lithuanian experiences 

(1990). There are numerous examples of this kind of “national” literature and 

examples too of the sorts of generic works that could have been written anywhere 

by anyone. One of my freshmen students recently wrote a research paper on the 

demise of Lithuanian fictional forms in favor of the more commercial “euronovel.” 

The one element that keeps Lithuanian literature within its borders is the language 

but that has not protected the genres and forms from the changes forced onto them 

by the marketplace and a borderless EU. Literature written in English and world 

Englishes have spawned world literature that is borderless, transnational or even, I 

would suggest a-national. More provokingly, the Jewish assimilation and 

enculturation within numerous European societies, centuries ago, so that what 

they wrote prior to WWII was taken to be German, Austrian, Dutch, Swiss, and so 

on, was automatically Jewish, post WWII, as they suddenly became “other.” 

Cross-Cultural Literatures and Postcolonialsim 

This multi-layered literature, so difficult to categorize and so representative of the 

shifting identifiers we have always come to expect that are related to nationality, 

has been seen as another venue for postcolonial theory by some scholars for, as 

Susie O'Brien and Imre Szeman state in the introductory chapter to The 

Globalization of Fiction/ The Fiction of Globalization (2001) “If globalization theory 

doesn't necessarily acknowledge the concerns of postcolonialism, postcolonialism 

has always, at least implicitly been concerned with the implication of globalization” 

(P. 606). At least, they continue, globalization theory and postcolonial theory need 

to recognize their points of convergence and divergence. There is much that 

postcolonial theory can contribute to an understanding of the trans-bordered 

literature I have described, above. 

Of course the issue of literature in translation is directly related to 

postcolonial theory as we accept the metamorphosis translation necessarily forces 

on original texts. What does a “national” literature become when it undergoes the 

inevitable metamorphosis of translation? Translation makes world literature 

possible, accessible but Walter Benjamin asks, “How far removed is a [language's] 

hidden meaning from revelation?” (Cooppan, f. 35) Vilashini Cooppan argues that 

although the foreign can never be rendered true to the original there is 

“nonetheless, a distinct kind of knowledge to be gained from shuttling between the 

two, eschewing the mirages of faithful reproduction …or an all-inclusive canon” 

(2004, p. 25). The metaphors and imagery, for example, in Arabic poetry are 


39

40 


almost untranslatable but there is a way of reading or listening that equals 

something like appreciation, if not complete understanding. 

Such questions as literature in translation, literature written in English by 

non-native speakers, literature written by immigrants and emigrants have sent 

critics in search of an appropriate tool to deal with the multiple layers of culture and 

nationality such literatures represent. Too, grappling with the genre and the global 

focus of literatures has forced theoreticians to look for ways of reading and 

understanding. It seems now that post-colonial theory has been generally adopted 

as the literary critical lens through which this literature can be interpreted. 

In the short term, this is appropriate for is not most literature postcolonial in 

some sense? Literature, in the main, is produced either by those who are the 

dominant class/race or are not. But there is another domination that is more invasive 

than class/race and colony—it is, of course, the continued expansion and acceptance 

of English as a world language and while our borders become increasingly porous and 

our understanding of what constitutes “national” becomes increasingly fuzzy, it 

becomes less clear all the time how we define ourselves, much less our arts as the 

usual linguistic divisions disappear. Because World English has become the preferred 

language of scholars and, increasingly, the younger reading public, preserving national 

identities, in the purest understanding of what that might be, is nearly impossible. Just 

as language and literature have expanded to include awareness of the global, as often, 

perhaps more often, than the national, so have national identities. They continue to 

evolve to embrace a mobile and diverse population. 

National and Weltliteratur 

What difference does it make? Is there a national literature that must be 

preserved? One would think that these questions might be answered simply—that 

“Yes, it does make a difference, the loss of national literatures—especially those 

that are not yet written and will not be—represents the extinction of something vital 

to a nation, on many levels.” However, the very idea, the very concept of national 

literature is being challenged by scholars for whom world literature has been a 

changing landscape ever since and even before the term Weltliteratur, was coined 

and defined by Goethe, beginning serious conversations about it. Goethe's vision 

for the sharing, reading and study of Weltliteratur seems now to be born of naïve 

altruism. He states: “…not that the nations shall think alike, but that they shall learn 

how to understand each other, and, if they do not care to love one another, at least 

that they will learn to tolerate one another” (1973). 



Universities are generally presumed to be the locus for the greatest 

exposure to literature and discussions of it, certainly to the kind of Weltliteratur 

envisioned by Goethe. However, the reality of time restrictions, restrictions that are 

being defined in the Liberal Arts ever more narrowly, translates into one, or perhaps 

two, classes in literature for most students. Can anyone say what the irreducible 

minimum might be? Even attempts to deal with the most important works of 

Anglophone literature cannot be completely successful in such environments. In 

the Utopian world of curricular choice students would be in school for ten years. 

But the Dystopian world of reality dictates a 3-4-year course of study for the liberal 

arts undergraduate and within that constraint, some very tough choices have to be 

made. In a discussion with administrators about the inclusion of a mandatory 

Literature class and the works covered in it, we acknowledged the need for greater 

inclusiveness in the list of readings but acceptance of the fact that such lists can 

never be prescriptive. They will necessarily be based on professorial choices that 

are based on interest and study. It is pointless to include more with less time for 

each without the interest or background to present them evenhandedly. 

Reconciling praxis with theory is grist for the mill of administrators who 

must also include practical considerations of economy, time, and graduate needs 

beyond the BA, in addition to the liberal arts education that is the promise of many 

schools in the United States and a number of schools elsewhere. While it is 

difficult to imagine a native-English speaker who does not know Shakespeare, 

Chaucer, or Faulkner much less the likes of Milton, Pope, or Thoreau, it is possible 

to imagine that students in the world of the international all-English university, 

having never read them, are quipped with the tools and perhaps even the 

motivation to find and read these and other authors someday for the beauty of their 

language or for the thoughts expressed in their works. Exposure to world literature 

will insure that at least there will be an awareness of literatures of non-English 

cultures. More often than not, at least in English-speaking environments, World 

Literature reading lists will sacrifice works of the time-honored English canon 

resulting in a global acquaintance with literature worldwide that cannot have depth 

nationally, but may approach something like Goethe's conception of Weltliteratur. 

National Identities and Global Reading 

Not everyone is concerned about what might be considered by some to be a 

general drift toward global literature. Some writers seem almost complacent about 

the homogenizing effect of globalization on literature. Cooppan teaches at Yale 


41

42 


and deals with such issues as well as the unspoken mandate that the educated 

woman or man will have read some essential parts of the English/Anglophone 

canon. The dyad of the global and local has been named “glocal” and, as it relates to 

the curriculum Cooppan states, “[T]he world literature course is characterized 

precisely by the de-emphasis of the category of the national … and a renewed 

emphasis on some model of the global” (2004, p. 12). But Muhsin al-Musawi's 

argument that national identities still persist in literature provides a counterargument 

and raises “serious suspicions about the promised accompanying 

discourse of global diversity” (2007, p. 305) 

Al-Musawi points out that globalization's forward march, propelled by great 

economic forces, have goals that may “endanger societies and cultures” (2007, 

p.306). On the other hand there is evidence that a strong postcolonial drive is 

releasing literature “from the limitations of specific disciplines and ideologies” as it 

moves toward stronger engagements with the negative and positive aspects of 

globalization. Examples of Arabic literature demonstrate awareness and 

engagements with cyberspace, the Internet, and something Al-Musawi calls 

technoregions, all serving to defy traditional classifications, i.e. time, place, 

borders, boundaries, and limits (2007, p. 307). These works create an alternative 

connection that is a-national and Arabic, representative of all Arab nations and 

cultures. Al-Musawi holds up Sonallah Ibrahim's The Committee (1981) as an 

example of a novel that that will become a global text (in translation) but remain 

firmly identified with Arab culture (2007, P. 309). 

This is not a new phenomenon, of course. Works such as Homer's 

Odyssey, Beowulf, and The Epic of Gilgamesh that are rooted in their culture, their 

location, and tied to a specific national identity have been read globally for 

hundreds of years because their worth is unquestioned. The degree to which this 

still occurs may be less noticeable because both the number and speed with which 

they are disseminated have increased dramatically. The idea then that literature 

can be strictly national or global is perhaps inaccurate despite the fact that columns 

of course offerings in many university catalogs label them as such. 

Thus, while I might argue for the preservation of national literatures, there 

is a movement to globalize even the field of American Literature, for example, to decenter 

it. As Sarika Chandra puts it in her introduction to the volume Shades of the 

Planet: American Literature as World Literature (Dimrock, 2007), each essay within 

“proposes its own particular way of decentering American literature, ranging from 

including literatures written in languages other than English to reimagining the 



spatial coordinates of America as beyond national boundaries” (2008, p. 829). 

This is evident in the multiple varieties and specializations of American literature 

available to the graduate student: Afro-American, Chicano, Chinese-American, 

and so on. The expansion of the literatures to which “American” can be attached 

places both it and literary criticism in a no-man's land, neither strictly in one place or 

another, neither national, whatever that means for “American,” nor global. 

Reading nationally is no longer appropriate according to Cooppan who 

promotes reading “globally” (2004, p. 12). Sarah Lawall explains, “Reading world 

literature is a process of reading for the world: of recognizing the worlds involved in 

the text, or in the reading of texts” (in Cooppan, 2004, p. 12). This is a simplification 

of the discussions surrounding world literature. As we have seen, World Literature 

is a fixture in college courses, but what it means, what is embraced within its 

required reading lists is not, nor will be, static. A canon of World Literature would 

suggest a body of works that are being studied, will be studied and be preserved for 

future study and veneration. However, as discussions of the “canon of Literature 

(in the English Language)” become less important, so will ideas of a canon in World 

Literature. While it is impossible to imagine the study of Literature in English 

without certain authors or to imagine the study World Literature without certain 

works now considered “classics” by anyone's judgment, room will have to be made 

for new classics, new genres, and an ever-expanding idea of what literature is and 

how it fits in discussions of national culture and identity. 

Conclusion 

Literature, as it reflects the time, place, audience, and author is perhaps being 

linked more closely to individual rather than national identities. Thus the “problem” 

as stated in the title of this paper can be simplified by forcing a divide between 

perceived historical national identities and current, changing identities that are 

being mirrored in some measure by their authors, citizens, emigrants, and 

immigrants. All three classes of writers are both contributing to the preservation 

and evolution of a new, perceived national identity that is transitional and not 

necessarily recognized by everyone as something distinct from “global.” While it 

might be a frightening prospect to know that scholars have defined global as a 

movement that will expand and homogenize the world, Cooppan suggests a binary 

possibility: 

[G]lobalization's effects have been … homogenizing or heterogenizing, 

liberating or stratifying, either enacting the mass standardization … of 


43

44 


markets, cultures, ideologies, and dreams, or else catalyzing a worldwide 

explosion of difference (2004, p. 11). 

Walter Veit sees the tension between particularity and universality as the 

very thing that will ultimately preserve national literary identity. Adrian Marino 

recognizes “that a universal literature is governed by a persistent…dialectic 

between nationalism and universalism, unification and differentiation, 

homogenization and particularization” (Veit, 2008, p 417). In other words, the 

important discussions that such tensions evoke are the very reasons that national 

literary identities can never be completely subsumed by a universal 

monoculturalism. I would like to be able to endorse this position fully but there are 

many instances where the encroachment of World English, for example, is 

affecting the style and subjects of literature being produced. If the march to English 

continues, publicly and privately, writing will follow and the rhythms and tunes may 

lose the richness of variety and dissonance. 

Within this space, the complexity of the topic only allows a short time in the 

presence of so many long and sometimes heated discussions. There are reasons 

to hope that everyone's voice carries elements of truth. Yes, World Literature is 

replacing Literatures of geo-political regions, at least in university classrooms. 

Yes, more writers are choosing to write in English for a broader and international 

audience. Yes, more readers are reading in English to allow them wider choices in 

reading. On the other hand, fiercely nationalistic writers of all sorts but especially in 

poetry, continue to write in ways best understood by their native brothers and 

sisters. This writing continues to hold tightly to a national identity that is 

st 

unmistakable, identifiable, and still relative in the 21 -Century. I do not believe we 

are in danger of losing nor losing touch with our national identities, no matter how 

global we and our countries become. As a matter of fact, the more open the 

borders, the greater the number of immigrants, the more importance a national 

identity. Literature embodies this and embraces this. 

References 

Al-Musaw, Muhsin J. (2007). “Engaging Globalization in Modern Arabic Literature: 

Appropriation and Resistance.” Modern Language Quarterly, 68:2 (305-329). 

Attali, Jacques. (1985). Noise: The Political Economy of Music, Brian Massumi, trans. in Nicholas Brown 

(2002). “The Eidaesthetic Itinerary: Notes on the Geopolitical Movement of the Literary 

Absolute.” South Atlantic Quarterly, 100:3, Summer 2001. (829-51). 

Brown, Nicholas. (2002). “The Eidaesthetic Itinerary: Notes on the Geopolitical Movement of the 

Literary Absolute.” South Atlantic Quarterly, 100:3, Summer 2001. (829-51). 



Chandra, Sarika. (2008). “Re-Producing a Nationalist Literature in the Age of Globalization: Reading 

(Im)migration in Julia Alvarez's How the García Girls Lost their Accents.” The American 

Quarterly. Vol. 60. No. 3, September. (829-50) 

Cooppan, Vilashini. (2004) “Ghosts in the Disciplinary Machine: The Uncanny Life of World Literature.” 

Comparative Literature Studies. 41:1. (10-36). 

Dimrock, Wai Chi, and Lawrence Buell. (2007). Shades of the Planet: American Literature as World 

Literature. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 

Gikandi, Simon. (2001). “Globalization and the Claims of Postcoloniality.” South Atlantic Quarterly. 100 

(629-30). 

Goethe, Johann von W. (1973). “Some Passages Pertaining to the Concept of World Literature.” 

Comparative Literature: The Early Years. Hans –Joachim Schulz and Philip Rhein (Eds.). 

Grinkevièiûtë, Dalia. (1990) “Lithaunians By the Laptev Sea: The Siberian Memoirs of Dalia 

Grinkevièiûtë.” Laima Sruogynitë, trans. Lituanus: The Lithuanian Journal of Arts and Sciences. 

Vol. 36 (4, Winter). Retrieved from lituanus.org/1990_4/90_4_05.htm 

O'Brien, S. and Imre Szeman. (2001). “Introduction: The Globalization of Fiction/the Fiction of 

Globalization.” The South Atlantic Quarterly. 100:3 (603-626). 

Veit, Walter F. (2008). 'Globalization and Literary History, or Rethinking Comparative Literary 

History—Globally. New Literary History. 39 (415-435). 


JEWISH ROOTS TOURISM AND THE (RE)CREATION OF LITVAK IDENTITY 

Zita Darguþytë 

Social Anthropology Centre, 

Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania 

Abstract 

The main aim of this paper is to demonstrate the way roots tourism works as a 

personal response to the homogenising effects of global processes. This is 

exemplified by the case study of Jewish roots tourists' visits to Lithuania. By 

remembering, re-visiting and re-appropriating their personal and cultural Litvak 

heritage in Lithuania, these roots tourists emphasized their considerable 

“extraordinarity” when in comparison to other Jews and to mainstream society in 

general. Consequently, these meaningful roots trips, though varying in their scope 

and intensity, have nonetheless served in creating an integral “authentic” ethnic 

Jewish identity vis-à-vis increasing cultural homogeneity. 

Key words: Roots tourism, Lithuania, Litvak identity, globalisation 

Tourism as a cause and consequence of globalisation 

There are many differing attempts to explain contemporary global processes. 

Probably the only agreement they can reach is an acknowledgement of the fact that 

nowadays the flows of people, goods or ideas have reached an unprecedented 

scale, and their impacts are hardly predictable. Also, a great deal has been said 

about the globalising effects of these flows, about the contemporary world as a 

“global village”, and “cultural imperialisms”, among others. Tourism, being one of 

the forms of population flow, is quite often viewed as a homogenising force: 

transnational hotel chains or entertainment sites have monotonous, trans-local 

qualities in any country, and most often promote the consumption of certain brands. 

As Michael Kearney points out, “the compression of space, the shift from 

production to services, the scrambling of and the invention of traditions, and 


47

48 

ZITA DARGUÞYTË / JEWISH ROOTS TOURISM AND THE (RE)CREATION OF LITVAK IDENTITY 

a heightened production and consumption of simulacra all come together in the 

world's largest industry, tourism” (1995, p. 555). But mostly the invention of 

traditions and a heightened production and consumption of simulacra are among 

the major forces of homogeneity in tourism. Yet a notorious bundle of all these 

markers is the case of the recent tours to impoverished and crime ridden city 

districts in developing countries. According to Monica Ines Cejas, “under the 

effects of globalisation, impoverished inhabitants of Third World cities and their 

environments have become new commodities to be consumed by the North, 

fashioned as an “exotic experience” “that you cannot see in the States”” (2006, p. 

224). However, by considering tourism only as a form of neo-colonialism, one would 

dismiss its positive psychological, social and environmental impacts too quickly. 

McKean points out that “tourism can be viewed as not an entirely banal pleasureseeking 

escapism (MacCannell, 1976), but as a profound, widely shared human 

desire to know ''others,'' with the reciprocal possibility that we may come to know 

ourselves” (1989, p. 133). Even more so: visits to the places that people have strong 

emotional attachments to, or that have importance in their family history, include all 

sorts of motivations and all sorts of feelings. Visits paid by diasporic people to their 

ancestral homelands are one of the most salient examples. Ideas of belonging, 

cultural identity, and social relations based on ancestral connection and blood were 

always significant elements of identity creation for diasporic people but today these 

ideas are much more easily (and thus more visibly) expressed through visits to 

ancestral places (Clifford, 1997). It is my intention here to look more closely at such 

visits by focusing on Jewish roots tourism to Lithuania. I will to draw my insights from 

similar case studies in the roots tourism field and from my own fieldwork data, 

gathered since June 2008. My major research methods are semi-structured 

interviews, informal conversations, and participation in roots trips or related 

activities. I gathered these interviews through a snowball sample. To protect the 

confidentiality of interviewees I use pseudonyms for nonpublic persons quoted 

here. 

Tourism and ethnic identity (re)constructions 

Irena Ðutinienë among others emphasizes the emergence of the salience of 

cultural-ethnic elements in the construction of one's identity, which is mostly 

interpreted as a response to homogenisation at the global and unification at the 

nation-state levels (2006, 19). Similarly, Jonathan Friedman goes further by adding, 

“ethnic and cultural fragmentation and modernist homogenisation are not (...) two 



opposing views of what is happening in the world today, but two constitutive trends 

of global reality” (1994, 102). And here tourism serves as a litmus test in measuring 

these realities. 

Travel brings into contact people who are quite usually members of 

different ethnic groups. However, there has not yet been enough consideration of 

the way ethnic identities shape and are shaped by tourism. Michael Hitchcock 

(1999, 17) pointed out that “ethnicity permeates many aspects of tourism, but 

remains poorly understood in this context”. Generally, until now we have had much 

greater knowledge about the economic impacts for receiving countries rather than 

about the impacts tourists themselves receive. Thus, it is important to ask how 

people of various cultural Diasporas are affected by what they see, do, and 

experience during their travels to ancestral lands. And even if we do have some 

kind of knowledge of that, categorisations of tourism behaviour are, as Marcus 

Stephenson warned us (2002: 17), “far removed from the perceptions and 

interpretations of those individuals who are actually being conceptualised”. In any 

case, roots tourism research from an anthropological perspective is an apt 

approach to analyse the way ethnic identities are being formed, performed and 

negotiated. 

In its broadest scope, roots tourism is performed by diasporic communities 

which travel in search of their roots, connections to certain territories, be they 

ancestral or very recent. The main aim of these trips is to reinforce or reaffirm 

diasporic identities. Such trips are often highly emotional and might take the form of 

a secular pilgrimage as lots of people seek to discover more about themselves, and 

their ancestors by visiting places associated with their family history. For example, 

Paul Basu (2004) found that there are three main modes, or routes, to Scottish 

diaspora's roots: homecoming, pilgrimage and quest. But, as mentioned earlier, 

emotional peaks are not necessarily part and parcel of roots trips. Sometimes such 

trips are a form of appreciation of the cultural and family legacy of one's community 

(Timothy, Teye 2004). One explanation for why heritage (personal and/or collective) 

is valued is given by David Lowenthal (1975) who states that “people need the past 

to cope with the present because today's complex world makes better sense of (sic) 

them if they share a past with it” (cited from Timothy, Teye 2004, 112). 

Jewish ethnic identity and roots tourism in Lithuania 

Since the end of the Cold War, many diaspora members have begun to 

travel on their own or in groups to Eastern Europe. They do this to honour their 

ancestors, out of nostalgic reasons or even “to be of use to one's own country” 


49

50 


(Èiubrinskas 2006). Inevitably, these East European “homelands” are loaded with 

traumatic memory for the majority of the Diaspora people, and this is always the 

case for the descendants of East European Jews. Just as “the dispersal of Africans 

taken from the continent to the New World has left its mark on the very tropes of 

heritage and identity” (Ebron 2000: 910), so did the Holocaust leave its mark on the 

very tropes of Jewish heritage and identity. The end of WWII also marked the end of 

the vibrant life of Yiddish language and culture in East and Central Europe. 

Yiddish language and culture are the cornerstones of Ashkenazim identity 

uniting Jews who live in different countries and are of different Judaic convictions 

(cf. Misnagdim and Hasidim Jews). This sense of a shared Jewish culture and 

history fosters a sense of commonality and belonging especially for those Jews 

whose Jewish identity is not bounded to a religious practice, but rather constitutes a 

self-imposed definition of what it means to be a Jew. Songs, witty phrases and other 

“joys of Yiddish” along with East European Jewish food, provide a fascinating 

aspect of commonality with an occasional outgrowth of “nostalgic sacredness”. 

This very specificity of Yiddishkeit of this region is what pulls many Jews to visit not 

only Israel but also the post-Holocaust countries. 

Still more remarkable are the visits paid by the Jews who have 

genealogical ties to these countries. Caryn Aviv and David Shneer, among others, 

have noted the multiple territorial attachments that the Jewish Diaspora engages 

in. They said that, “although Jews' relationship to the mythic Zion has always been 

one of the markers of Jewish difference from the people around them, Jews have 

always had many diasporas and many homelands – from Sephardic Jews who 

were expelled from medieval Spain in 1492 and longed for a mythic return, to 

nineteenth- and twentieth-century German Jews, who, before the Holocaust 

viewed Germany as their homeland (2005, 6). As for my research participants, who 

are in almost all cases the descendants of Lithuanian Jews (i.e. Litvaks), a trip to 

Lithuania was a means to find out more about their family history and, 

simultaneously, their “Litvakish” roots. Most usually it was (great-) grandparents 

who triggered their curiosity in their family history and background, and this interest 

eventually evolved into visiting a place where they once lived. Additionally, there 

was a great deal of talk about Litvaks and their considerable “extraordinariness” 

when compared to other Jews. Probably the most vivid picture of a stereotypical 

Litvak is suggested in this description: “a thin, humourless erudite, learned but 

sceptical, pedantic, ambitious, shrewd, clever, sharp, sly, ruthless, shallow in piety 

wanderers who desert wives; a people more rational, dogmatic and authoritarian 



than other branches of Ashkenazi Jews” (Tatz et. al. 2007, 12). Litvaks are best 

known popularly for being among the most learned Jews. Generally, there is a 

considerable veneration towards them and the specificity of the Litvaks is 

transmitted through the social or experiential memory. A retired professor from the 

USA obviously felt proud of his grandparents when telling me that “The Schneider 

family proudly preserved their identity and heritage not just as Jews but as “Litvaks”, 

long after they had left that land“. 

Abraham, just like any other Jewish roots tourist, came to Lithuania 

because of his interest in family history. And, as with many Jewish roots tourists, 

Abraham hastened to add that he was also very much interested in the overall 

context, “just to get a better sense of what kind of place my family lived in and how 

their daily life might have looked like”, he said. He went on by saying that “I remind 

myself that I am interested in this old Lite, not just in the fact that they were killed 

here”. The stories of Abraham and others about their trips to Lithuania show that 

their attitude towards Lithuania as “invisible in any other way but as a site of the 

Holocaust, and Lithuanians are only noticed as the fellow nationals of the 

executioners who collaborated with the Nazis in WWII … ” (Paulauskienë 2007, 

157) seemed to change eventually. More and more Jews each year come to 

Lithuania in August wishing “to steep themselves in Yiddish language and culture” 

(Judaicvilnius 2009a) by enrolling into Vilnius Yiddish summer school. Proverbially, 

Vilnius, or Vilne, the Northern Jerusalem, used to be the heart of the Litvak culture. 

And that it still holds some importance as a Jewish cultural centre can be grasped 

from a remark made a research participant who considered enrolling in the Yiddish 

summer school in Vilnius after visiting Lithuania for the first time. He uttered: 

“Yiddish in Vilna, such nakhes [joy/delight/pleasure]!” 

On the other hand, difficult questions of identity and belonging are 

encapsulated in an eloquent phrase by Ellen Cassedy, a former Vilnius Yiddish 

summer school student. In one of her articles she refers to Yiddishland – “this place 

of love and pain” (2007). Thereby she expresses ambiguous feelings that many 

Yiddish summer school students and Jewish roots tourists feel upon their arrival – 

love and pain, relief and sorrow. She says that she decided to enrol in Yiddish 

classes after her mother died so that Yiddish “could offer me the comforting sense 

of continuity that had been ruptured by my mother's death, a metaphorical, 

linguistic home”. But she also acknowledges that “[t]his land of my forebears – a 

country where Jews and their culture had been systematically exterminated – [is] a 

curious place to come looking for a sense of belonging”. Again, what we observe in 


51

52 


this story is a widespread desire to re-discover certain elements of a displaced 

heritage by actual coming to a place where it was once created. It is clearly a desire 

to find a sense of belonging to that larger part of culture or even cultural homeland 

which would help to “construct a sense of identity, meaning, attachment, and 

stability” (Bruner 1994, 411) in a “land of Jewish ghosts and lost cultures” with 

Yiddish having nostalgic sacredness (Aviv, Shneer 2005, 8). Precisely this 

“nostalgic sacredness” is becoming the main motive which draws Jewish roots 

tourists to their cultural and familial lands. 

Another issue emphatically emphasized during the interviews with the 

research participants was the preservation of Jewish heritage in Lithuania. 

Dissatisfaction is the most frequent feeling and the following quotation of a French 

middle-aged lady transmits the general idea: “Lithuania is not very much concerned 

about its Jewish legacy and let it rot away”. Others noted similarly: “Because there 

are almost no Jews, heritage sites in Lithuania will simply disappear if the situation 

continues like that. Someday every site will merely be a field of ruins with a plaque to 

mark the site”. Whereas, a plaque on a building saying that there once was a 

synagogue “is a crumb to a [heritage] hungry Jew like him”, to put it in the words of 

another informant. Generally, the larger implication of such acts of remembrance is 

that preserving and maintaining Jewish heritage is not just about history and its 

cultural value. It is also about preserving personal and collective Jewish identity as 

well as empowering it at the face of global transformations. 

Therefore, this research data suggests a complementary perspective to 

the recreational functions of tourism. Tourism, besides being a holiday, a 

recreational activity, becomes a tool for re-creating one's own ethnic identity. The 

case study of Jewish roots tourism in Lithuania demonstrates the way visits to the 

sites of displaced heritage aid in recovering and enhancing one's Litvak identity 

while at the same time coming to terms with traumatic post-Holocaust memory. 

Also, the complex relationship between globalization and tourism is explicit in this 

case: tourism here manifests itself not only as one of the globalizing forces but also 

as a means to resist them. 

References 

Aviv, C.; Shneer, D. (2005). New Jews: The End of the Jewish University Press Diaspora. New York: New 

York. 

Basu, P. (2004). Route Metaphors of “Roots-Tourism” in the Scottish Highland Diaspora //Coleman, S., 

Eade J. (eds.) Reframing Pilgrimage: Cultures in Motion. London: Routledge, 150–174. 



Bruner, E. M. (1994). Abraham Lincoln as Authentic Reproduction: A Critique of Postmodernism // 

American Anthropologist, 96, 397–415. 

Cassedy, E. (2007). Home, In So Many Words. Retrieved from http://www.hadassah.org/news/content/ 

per_hadassah/archive/2007/07_jan/feature_1.asp 

Cejas, M. I. (2006). Tourism in Shantytowns and Slums: A New “Contact Zone” in the Era of globalisation. 

Intercultural Communication Studies XV: 2, 224–230. 

Clifford, J. (1997). Routes. Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century. Harvard: Harvard 

University Press. 

Èiubrinskas, V. (2006). To Be of Use for Your Own Country–Lithuanian Missionary Identity of the 

Lithuanian Transmigrants // Socialiniai mokslai, 3(53), 25–32. 

Ebron, P. (2000). Tourists as Pilgrims: Commercial Fashioning of Transatlantic Politics // American 

Ethnologist, 26(4), 910–932. 

Friedman, J. (1994). Cultural Identity and Global Process. London: SAGE. 

Judaicvilnius (2009). Yiddish Summer School 2010. Retrieved from http://www.judaicvilnius. 

com/en/main/summer/introduction 

Hitchcock, M. (1999). Tourism and Ethnicity: Situational Perspectives // International Journal of Tourism 

Research, 1(1), 17–32. 

Kearney, M. (1995). The Local and the Global: The Anthropology of Globalisation and Transnationalism. 

Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 547–565. 

McKean, P. F. (1989). Towards a Theoretical Analysis of Tourism: Economic Dualism and Cultural 

Involution in Bali // Smith, V. L. (ed.) Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism. 

Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 119–138. 

Paulauskienë, A. (2007). Lost and Found: The Discovery of Lithuania in American Fiction. Amsterdam 

and New York: Rodopi. 

Stephenson, M. (2002). Travelling to the Ancestral Homelands: The Aspirations and Experiences of a 

UK Caribbean Community // Current Issues in Tourism, 5(1), 378–425. 

Ðutininë, I. (2006). Lietuviø tautinë tapatybë globalizacijos kontekstuose: raiðka ir kaitos tendencijos // 

Filosofija. Sociologija, 2, 18 – 26. 

Tatz, C. M.; Arnold, P.; Heller, G. (2007). Worlds Apart – The Re-migration of South African Jews. Dural, 

N. S. W.: Rosenberg. 


Area of science and research interests: Social anthropology; anthropology of tourism, identity and 

heritage, ethnicity and ethnic identity, social memory, anthropology of space and place. 


53

LIFELONG LEARNING – UNMASKING NEW CHALLENGES IN 

GLOBALIZATION AND HYPER COMPETITION 

Aleksandra Ðvec, Margarita Pavloviè 

LCC International University, Klaipëda, Lithuania 

Abstract 

Traditionally, the core purpose of education - a form of a societally organized 

learning - has been the transmission of culture, values and accumulated national 

knowledge to the next generation. But in the light of globalization and development 

of knowledge societies, learning and education gain a different meaning and 

purpose. Hyper competition, increased mobility, and rapidly changing technology 

move the focus from the learner and facilitators of learning to the context where 

learning takes place: teaching is substituted by self-directed learning while learning 

as a one-time event is substituted by learning as a non-stop process. Globalization 

triggers the emergence of a new breed of human being - Homo discens - a "learning 

man". The nature of work and the exponential growth in the volume and speed of 

the creation of new knowledge requires that individuals learn life-wide and lifelong. 

Thus, learning is being taken away from the monopoly of educational institutions 

because in a new knowledge era it occurs in all aspects of people's lives, different 

contexts and even through simple day-to-day activities. As a result of globalization 

and the acknowledgement that learning processes can take place in many social 

contexts, learning has become a necessity for survival in a hypercompetitive 

globalized world for both individuals and organizations, at the same time bringing 

new challenges and opportunities for the society. 

The article reviews theoretical aspects of lifelong learning in the context of 

globalization processes and discusses the opportunities and challenges brought 

by globalization to the area of lifelong learning. 

Keywords: lifelong learning, homo discens, globalization, education. 


55

56 

ALEKSANDRA ÐVEC, MARGARITA PAVLOVIÈ / LIFELONG LEARNING 

When planning for a year, plant corn. 

When planning for a decade, plant trees. 

When planning for life, train and educate people. 

(Chinese proverb) 

Introduction 

Learning is “any process that in living organisms leads to permanent capacity 

change and which is not solely due to biological maturation and ageing” (Illeris, 

2007, p. 3). In other words, learning could take any form (formal and informal, 

structures and unstructured, planned and incidental, etc.) and happen anywhere 

and anytime. Illeris (2007) emphasizes that societally organized forms of learning 

are particularly important and valuable for the society because “the complex social 

structures make it necessary for the members of society to have certain 

competences and a certain degree of common orientation in many areas” (p. 238). 

As a rule, organized learning processes take place within the education system and 

working life, and these two areas are considered to be the driving forces of the 

social change (Jarvis, 2006, p. 47). 

While the working environment for decades was relatively dynamic and 

responsive to the changes in business, politics, and society, education systems of 

many countries have long been regarded as the most conservative social 

institutions. Traditionally, the core purpose of education has been the production of 

knowledge and transmission of culture, values and accumulated national 

knowledge to the next generation. However, in attempt to develop a sustainable 

st 

globalized knowledge society for the 21 century, politicians and academia 

changed their attitudes towards the conservatism of education institutions and their 

monopoly over the learning processes. A new idea, emphasizing that only welleducated 

and constantly learning members of society are capable of ensuring 

continued economic growth and international competitiveness, social cohesion, 

and common welfare, was formed and promoted all around the world (European 

Commission, 2000, p. 5). 

In addition, domestic and international hyper competition, increased mobility 

of tangible and intangible capital as well as rapidly changing technology moved the 

focus from the learner and official facilitators of learning to the context where 

learning takes place. According to Skule (2004), “major advances have been made 

during the last decade to conceptualize learning as informal, contextual and 

situated”, thus addressing the importance of environments and contexts for 

learning processes (2004, p. 10). Illeris (2007), from his side, also emphasizes the 

importance of environments and situations in which learning occurs by stating that 



"the necessity of including the environment as an element of learning … lies in the 

fact that all learning is situated, i.e. that the learning situation not only influences, 

but also is a part of, the learning” (p. 97). This newly recognized, exceptional role of 

learning contexts and situations also supported the idea of promoting lifelong 

learning. 

Therefore, in the light of development of knowledge-based societies and 

globalization processes, it was acknowledged that learning can be produced 

outside the academy. Lifelong learning ideas pointed out that learning processes 

take place in many social contexts in all aspects of people's and organizations' lives 

and should be considered as the means of functioning in the knowledge-based 

world. Even more than this, learning has become a necessity for survival in a 

hypercompetitive globalized world for both individuals and organizations, at the 

same time bringing new challenges and opportunities for the developing 

knowledge society. 

This article reviews theoretical aspects of lifelong learning in the context of 

globalization processes. It begins by discussing the concepts of Homo discens as a 

new human breed and lifelong learning (LLL) as a norm for every Homo discens. 

The concepts of globalization and individualization are also presented. The article 

is continued by a discussion of challenges and opportunities brought by 

globalization into the area of LLL with the focus on two aspects: availability of 

technological advances and mobility, and globalized commodification of learning. 

Homo Discens and Lifelong Learning: New Concepts for the New Society 

According to the World Development Report 1998-1999 (World Bank, 1999), 

currently living individuals already stepped into the era of knowledge-based 

economy and society. The main aspect, distinguishing this era from any other point 

in history is the fact that knowledge is considered to be the most valuable capital, 

even more powerful and valuable then land, natural resources and financial capital 

all together (World Bank, 2003). Production and possession of knowledge as well 

as ability to apply available knowledge when and where needed make individuals 

and organizations powerful and successful in global competition. Therefore, it is 

possible to talk now about the emergence of a new breed of human being - Homo 

discens - a "learning man" who constitutes a new learning culture which, from its 

side, serves as the cornerstone for the new knowledge society. 

Not only the meaning of knowledge and learning has changed in the last 

decade, but the possibilities of individuals to acquire knowledge and learn have 

undergone significant changes as well. Graf and Rathmayer (2008) suggest that 


57

58 


“this change has not only considerably influenced human beings in their process of 

knowledge acquisition itself, but also in reference to basic technical conditions, and 

has hence finally created a new learning culture”, thus making the new paradigm of 

the Homo discens possible to develop (p. 1). For a Homo discens, learning, as an 

existential and a very complex non-stop process, begins in the kindergarten or 

preschool is not finished until the Homo discens passes away. That is when the 

concept of lifelong learning (LLL) comes to stage. 

As described by the European Commission (2000), currently “lifelong 

learning is a common umbrella under which all kinds of teaching and learning 

should be united” (p. 4). The term LLL was first used in 1972 by Edgar Faure in his 

seminal work for UNESCO, but it was not as popular and widespread in 1980s and 

st 

1990s as it became in the 21 century. Knapper (2001) notes sadly that the concept 

of LLL is often applied as “an expression that has come to mean whatever its users 

want it to mean” (p. 130). Thus, it is important to look at the definitions and 

explanations of this expression provided in the literature (Table 1). 

Table 1 

Definitions and explanation of LLL 



In brief, the key messages incorporated in the concept of LLL are the timing 

for learning as well as the activities constituting the process of learning. LLL calls 

strong attention to the fact that learning occurs in all aspects of people's lives 

through day-to-day activities. The traditional “syllabus acquisition” is not able to 

meet the changing needs of the changing economy and society, and the traditional 

schooling system is now complemented by a developing adult education system. 

However, institutionalized education is only a small part of the complex learning 

processes because, again, the timing and activities of LLL emphasize its “all the 

time”, “everywhere”, “in all possible ways” dimensions. 

LLL for Homo discens is considered to be a norm rather than a special, 

exceptional activity. Inability to update knowledge and skills, especially in response 

to the changing demands of the globalized world, can make individuals and 

organizations lose their competitiveness in the market and so-called “membership” 

in the Homo discens society quickly, and sometimes irreversibly. Therefore, 

learning life-wide and lifelong is exactly what the globalized society of Homo 

discens requires from all its members. 

Globalization: “Unification of Everything” vs. “Individualization of Everyone” 

As promptly pointed out by Jarvis (2007), the idea and concept of LLL was brought 

to the public attention at the same time as the processes these days unified under 

globalization term emerged. Around the same time, economists and politicians 

began to call public attention to the fact that the capitalistic principle of exchange 

and high competition has become a firm foundation for the renewed global 

economy. In order to survive and, ideally, to prosper, organizations (and their 

members) had to change their business strategies and relocate financial and 

human capital as well as production to the countries or areas with the cheaper labor 

and lower taxes, heavily invest into the development of the knowledge capital and 

innovation, develop new markets and keep the old ones for selling their produced 

goods and services, and, finally, attempt to keep what they have invented and 

developed. The world changed rapidly, and the term globalization came into secular 

language to describe “the processes through which sovereign national states are 

criss-crossed and undermined by transnational actors with varying prospects of 

power, orientation, identities and networks” (Beck, 2000; in Jarvis, 2007, p. 3). 

These processes covered economic, political, social and cultural changes 

which include but are not limited to the increased mobility of different types of 

capital, growing interconnectedness of individuals, groups, organizations, 


59

60 


networks, communities, nations and regions, expanding global markets, and 

increasing power of international organizations and transnational corporations. 

With globalization processes in motion, many boundaries and restrictions which 

existed for centuries disappeared almost overnight, and more freedom and choices 

became available for each and every individual and organization. Globalization 

processes unified many big and small markets and economies into a one common 

hypercompetitive space, and attempted to do the same with communities all 

around the world. 

However, it did not happen with human beings the same way as it did with 

markets because individualization processes were set in motion as a response to 

“unification of everything". According to Beck (1997), the concept of 

“individualization refers … to the growing autonomy of individuals vis-à-vis social 

structures and cultural and moral orders, and the fact that individuals must resolve 

systematic and institutional frictions essentially on their own” (in Glastra et al., 

2004, p. 293). In the global and highly competitive environment, individuals are 

faced with the necessity to distinguish themselves from - rather than associate 

themselves with – certain groups in order to be exceptional, and thus, to be noticed 

and win in the global competitiveness for a better life. Such radical 

detraditionalization and disassociation of individuals could make their social and 

cultural identities confused and undefined, thus kindling the fire of the non-stop 

competition for the place under the sun and producing the sense of constant fight 

and insecurity. 

Thus, globalization processes on one hand caused homogeny and 

eradication of uniqueness of nations and communities while on the other hand they 

promoted the individualization as means of survival in competitive environment. In 

the context of globalization processes and individualization as a response to 

“unification of everything”, lifelong learning became a logical response to the 

changing demands of the global economy and society. As stated by Glastra et al. 

(2004), “globalization confronts nation-states, organizations, and individuals with 

learning challenges as they struggle to cope within rapidly changing and unstable 

global and local environments” (p. 293). Indeed, it brought and continues to bring 

many challenges to individuals and organizations, but it also opens up new 

opportunities for them. Next sections of the article will focus on discussing two 

aspects of the effect of globalization processes on the area of LLL: availability and 

access to ICT and mobility opportunities for learning as well as the phenomenon of 

commodification of learning content and outcomes. 



Technological Advances and Increased Mobility in LLL: Available but not for All 

For Homo discens living in the era of globalization and individualization, learning 

can and should take place in many different contexts that in the past were not 

recognized as suitable physical sites or environments for learning processes. 

Increased mobility of all types of capital (in particular, knowledge capital and human 

capital) and multiple technological advances, which due to increased mobility of 

everyone and everything could be spread almost overnight, offered more flexibility 

and freedom for individuals, and also many new opportunities for intentional and 

incidental learning, although equal availability and access to new good mobility and 

high-tech was not ensured. 

Technological advances that became available in the area of LLL with the 

help of globalization brought innovations and facilitated the emergence of new 

forms of learning. Distant learning and online programs emphasize the fact that the 

location and time are not important anymore, giving a true meaning to the word 

“global citizen”, and promoting not only the LLL itself but also multiculturalism. 

Geographical barriers disappear as well as other barriers such as age, background, 

etc. Education and training become more accessible and “the dream of LLL - 

helping people learn what they want, when they want and where they want – is 

coming true” (Oladokun, 2006, p. 102). However, even with the rise of ICT and 

innovations, there are still many areas in the world without the access to the latest 

technology. Thus, bringing new fascinating opportunities for LLL to some areas and 

individuals, globalization also increased the gap between developed and 

developing regions intensifying social inequality. 

The trend of “going global” has also increased the commercial interest in 

education. Campuses of “clicks”, particularly from the Western part of the world, 

have been actively expanding their global markets and consequently threatening 

the traditional campuses of “bricks”. Altbach (2001) has pointed out the threats 

associated with further globalization of formalized learning and fears that 

transnational education will be detrimental to smaller nations and languages, 

exacerbating “dramatic inequalities among the world's universities, with a dominant 

role of the world-class universities in Western industrialized countries” (Van der 

Wende, 2003, p. 198). In a knowledge-based, globalized world, the autonomy and a 

competitive potential of smaller and poorer countries will be affected. 

In addition to the emergence of new forms of learning, globalization allowed, 

and even encouraged many individuals to move freely all around the world. 

Academic exchanges, qualification courses, entrepreneurship training in 


61

62 


neighboring countries became available for those willing to be equipped with skills 

and knowledge that could bring personal benefits and ultimately the economic 

benefits of the country where small and medium enterprises flourish. On the other 

hand, interconnectivity of capital movements brought job insecurity, mass migration 

and brain drain. Globalization has opened borders not only for goods and services 

but for labor as well. “Free movement” strategy is accompanied by a linguistic shift 

from 'human capital flight' and 'brain drain' to 'professional mobility' or 'brain 

circulation'. The report of the Global Commission on International Migration (2005) 

provided explanation for changing the terms: 

In the current era, there is a need to capitalize upon the growth of human 

mobility by promoting the notion of “brain circulation,” in which migrants 

return to their own country on a regular or occasional basis, sharing the 

benefits of the skills and resources they have acquired while living and 

working abroad (p. 31). 

Marchal & Kegels (2003) note, that “in reality this mobility is very 

asymmetrical, to the detriment of less developed countries, which lose not only 

much-needed human resources, but also considerable investments in education 

and fiscal income” (p. 89). Thus, mobility has given individuals opportunities for 

learning in other countries, helping them to develop their competencies that can be 

applied in a variety of contexts. Through mobility individuals and organizations 

connect anywhere, anytime to improve convenience, enhance customer 

responsiveness, and increase competitive advantage; however mobility can be a 

threat to less economically advanced countries. Therefore, technological advances 

and increased mobility brought to the area of LLL by globalization processes 

provide Homo discens with resources and access to knowledge that help 

individuals and organizations stay competitive in the markets and useful and 

successful in the community; but they also challenge the traditional forms of 

learning which together with uneven distribution of technology and asymmetrical 

mobility and migration result in increasing the gap between those who can learn 

and those that cannot. 

Globalization Processes in Motion: Commodification of Learning 

Since learning has become an individual responsibility demanding certain skills, 

people must not just acquire knowledge but also acquire knowledge about how to 

acquire knowledge. Lifelong learning has to start within a formal education system. 

Many educational institutions have put the development of the lifelong learning 



competencies on the agenda of their educational programs. It has been widely 

discussed in national and European legal documents such as Bologna Declaration 

(1999), Memorandum on LLL (2000), and Making European Area of LLL a Reality 

(2001). However, it is important to mention that “the politico-economic imperatives 

place importance on developed human capital, science, and technology, 

consequently reducing the concept of LLL to a narrow interpretation of equipping 

the workforce with necessary skills and competencies” neglecting LLL “as a lifestyle 

“ideal”, synonymous with terms like: a fulfilled life, personal development, 

empowerment and individual liberation” (O'Donoghue & Maguire, 2005, p. 139). P. 

Jarvis (2007) is also convinced that adult education and LLL have only become 

popular because of their orientation to the work environments. Lifelong learning has 

become a tool for globalization to increase international economic 

competitiveness. In discussions of LLL, a great emphasis is placed on 

employability of individuals and their opportunities in the labor market. In this way, 

“LLL becomes LLL for work” (Glastra et al., 2004, p. 299). As a result, the education 

is commoditized. Educational institutions are like corporations complete with 

products and services, adjusting their “product line” by adding and removing 

courses and programs trying to satisfy the growing needs of the outer world and 

with that all the “rules and processes of the business environment come into 

perspective” (Abeles, 2001, p. 4). 

As a result of commodification of education, courses and programs are 

being restructured for better marketing. As pointed out by Smith (2002), this 

“included marketing new courses such as MBAs, modulization (to achieve 

economies of scale), and the increased use of part-time and distance learning 

programs (to target those already in work)”. The commercial concern is more about 

lifelong education rather than lifelong learning. In this case, learning becomes a 

luxury and limited in time. LLL should extend beyond the formal education 

providers. The shift from education to learning suggests a growing interest in 

workplace learning. On one hand, LLL principles apply to organizations in the 

same way as they apply to individuals. Those that fail to continuously ensure the 

employees' skills are up to date will be struggling to survive in the hyper competition 

environment. Adaptability to changing circumstances and readiness to learn new 

work-related knowledge and skills have become more important than technical 

skills (Knapper, 2001). The problem is that workplace learning is often oriented to 

employer or consumer interests and to gaining economic advantage. There has 

been little real interest in learning for democracy and community. Thus, hyper- 


63

64 


competition and globalization have affected the perception of lifelong learning as a 

“commodity or as an investment rather than as a way of exploring what might make 

for the good life or human flourishing” (Smith, 2002). 

Conclusion 

Globalization and emergence of knowledge-based economies have questioned 

the traditional forms of learning and have placed a great importance of lifelong, lifewide 

learning. It was acknowledged that learning can and should take place in 

many social contexts, for instance, in the academic environment, online and at work 

and the lifelong learning skills have to be developed from early age. Currently, 

“global citizens” have more opportunities for learning in terms of technologies, 

travel, employment and communication. 

As a result, individuals and organizations can instantly react to the demands 

of rapidly changing global, knowledge-based markets and societies. Personal 

competitive advantage of Homo discens and the competitive advantage of the 

organization to which they belong are dependent on individuals' LLL skills. Although 

globalization brings a lot of opportunities to economically developed countries, 

smaller and poorer nations might face even more challenges with the rise of global 

hypercompetition, uneven distribution of technological resources and increased 

outward mobility. 

LLL has been the subject of many national and European policies and 

indicates that countries should maintain their commitment for developing highly 

competitive and dynamic knowledge-based societies. Life-wide and lifelong 

learning processes play an important role in fighting labor shortages and 

competence gaps as well as helping to develop flexible, learning-oriented, skilled 

workforce. However, commercialization and commodification processes of 

learning that emerged as a result of non-stop global competition of individuals and 

organizations might result in a loss of another important function of learning - 

learning for community and democracy. 

References 

Abeles, T. P. (2001). The impact of globalization. On the Horizon, 9(2), 2-4. 

Beveridge, D. (1996). Globalization and sustainability: Issues and options for adult education. 

Convergence, 29(4), 68-77. 

European Commission. (2000). A memorandum on lifelong learning. Brussels: European Commission. 

Retrieved from http://www.bologna-berlin2003.de/pdf/MemorandumEng.pdf 



European Commission. (2001). Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality. Brussels: 

E u r o p e a n C o m m i s s i o n . R e t r i e v e d f r o m h t t p : / / w w w . b o l o g n a - 

berlin2003.de/pdf/MitteilungEng.pdf 

Glastra, F. J., Hake, B. J., & Schedler, P. E. (2004). Lifelong learning as transitional learning. Adult 

Education Quarterly, 54(4), 291–307. 

Global Commission on International Migration. (2005). Migration in an interconnected world: New 

directions for action. Geneva: Global Commission on International Migration. 

Graf, S. & Rathmayer, S. (2008). Homo discens – a new scale of lifelong learning. Proceedings from 

Ilerning Forum 2008: Exploiting the full potential of digital identity. Champlost: European 

I n s t i t u t e f o r E - L e a r n i n g . R e t r i e v e d f r o m h t t p : / / w w w . e i f e - 

l.org/publications/proceedings/ilf08/contributions/Exploiting%20the%20Full%20Potential%2 

0of%20Digital%20Identity/Graf_etal.pdf/?searchterm=homo%20discens 

Illeris, K. (2006). What is special about adult learning? In P. Sutherland & J. Crowther (Eds.), Lifelong 

learning: Concepts and contexts (p. 15-23). London: Routledge. Retrieved from 

http://books.google.com/books?id=tK_6t4Fm5u8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=f 

alse 

Illeris, K. (2007). How we learn. London: Routledge. 

Jarvis, P. (2006). The lifelong learning and the learning society trilogy. Vol. 1: Towards a comprehensive 

theory of human learning. London: Routledge. 

Jarvis, P. (2007). The lifelong learning and the learning society trilogy. Vol. 2: Globalization, lifelong 

learning and the learning society. London: Routledge. 

Knapper, C. (2001). Lifelong learning in the workplace. In A. M. Roche & J. McDonald (Eds.), Systems, 

settings, people: Workforce development challenges in the alcohol and other drugs field (p. 

129-138). Adelaide: National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction. 

Marchal, B., & Kegels, G. (2003). Health workforce imbalances in times of globalization: brain drain or 

professional mobility. International Journal of Health Plan Management, 18, 89-101. 

O'Donoghue, J., & Maguire, T. (2005). The individual learner, employability and the workplace: A reappraisal 

of relationships and prophesies. Journal of European Industrial Training, 29(6), 436- 

446. 

Oladokun, O. S. (2006). The networked world of lifelong learning and the challenging role of the library. 

Information Development, 22 (2), 102-109. 

Smith, M. K. (2002). Globalization and the incorporation of education. The Encyclopedia of Informal 

Education.Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/biblio/globalization_and_education.htm#corp 

orate 

Skule, S. (2004). Learning conditions at work: a framework to understand and assess informal learning 

in the workplace. International Journal of Training and Development, 8(1), 8-20. Retrieved 

from http://ssrn.com/abstract=513603 

Van der Wende, M. C. (2003). Globalisation and Access to Higher Education. Journal of Studies in 

International Education, 7(2), 193–206 

World Bank. (1999). World development report 1998/99: Knowledge for development. Washington, DC: 

World Bank. Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/wdr/wdr98/contents.htm 

World Bank. (2003). Lifelong learningin the global knowledge economy: Challenges for developing 

c o u n t r i e s . W a s h i n g t o n , D C : W o r l d B a n k . R e t r i e v e d f r o m 

http://books.google.com/books?id=7pGrOiU7O3kC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=f 

alse 


65

SEARCHING FOR THEOLOGY OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS: FROM SERVILITY 

TOWARDS CREATIVITY 

Henrikas Þukauskas 

Klaipëda Evangelical Baptist Church, Lithuania 

Abstract 

It is impossible to truthfully assess the issue of homogeny in the modern Lithuania 

without keeping in mind the totalitarian past. Did the totalitarian past engrave itself 

to such extent, that when Lithuania became open to the Western liberal-democratic 

systems of life, it received them with a servile mentality? Is the dialectical pattern of 

sacrificing the other for the sake of uniformity enforced rather than abolished by the 

change of ideologies? 

It might be expected that one can learn to resist from the religious 

communities, but the philosophers of the social explain that social institutions 

cannot guarantee the immunity against the ideology, because they themselves are 

or become ideologically charged, quenching creativity for the sake of uniformity, 

sometimes even in the name of God. Are there theological resources, which would 

be able to dispel the spell of dialectics, recreate the individual and lead into the 

patterns of the structural healing? 

Theology of the Holy Spirit of Yves Congar, with the help of Thomas 

Aquinas leads towards wholesome spiritual anthropology connected with spiritual 

ecclesiology. In the backdrop of servility it theologically affirms that God does not 

abolish the creature. The freedom of Spirit is articulated in the ecclesial reality. The 

ecstatic—going out into the other of creation, as other by the Spirit in love, 

supplements the structure, actualizes memory, and dispels destructive dialectic. 

Theology does offer its insights and, in its own way opens the way for creative 

engagement. 

Keywords: totalitarianism, creativity, theology, philosophy of the social, Pneumatology, Congar, 

Aquinas. 


67

68 

HENRIKAS ÞUKAUSKAS / SEARCHING FOR THEOLOGY OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS 

Specters of the Past Still Present 

The question of homogeny in the Lithuanian context cannot escape the question of 

the totalitarian past. This past might bear upon the attitude of reception of new, 

“Western” systems of life. Within the surge of materials concerning Lithuanian 

identity, some stand out for their penetrability and discernment of deeper historical 

and cultural patterns. Donatas Sauka (Sauka, 1998) seems to explore the seedbed 

of such cultural creativity in the stream of the Western culture. 

The author cannot escape the presence of totalitarianism. Quite 

interestingly, he (Sauka, 1998, p. 390) uses Erich Fromm and his concept of 

running from freedom towards a totalitarian system. He sees that even as 

Lithuanian culture resisted Soviet totalitarianism, the danger of the mass following 

of “authoritarian characters” was not evaded. Authoritarian characters are active, 

courageous, believing and powerful, but these qualities are not to be associated 

with creative freedom, they are derived from the reference to “bigger,” which 

commands appeal by showing itself invulnerable and unshakeable. Thus, the 

result is the negation of thinking, the culture of enforced conformity. 

Sauka looks at the entrance of Lithuanian society and culture into the 

“Western” systems of life. The implications are that as one bigger reference (the 

Soviet one) has shown its vulnerability and departs, the other bigger reference 

might be sought for (Western systems). If that is right, the underlying servility in the 

conformity to capitalism, fear of the ability to create, resonating with the following of 

the “authoritarian character” is alarming. Sauka rightly asks whether in this context 

there is an underestimation of effects of totalitarianism. So, I would like to approach 

the question of homogeny from the context influenced by a totalitarian regime. 

What if the totalitarianism was internalized and now lives under disguise? This 

might be a particular historical case of bigger psychological or social patterns and 

be applicable to the other post-totalitarian contexts. 

Sauka's analysis does not stay on the level of intuitions. He looks for 

creativity and engagement with the anti-creative effects of the totalitarianism in the 

socio-cultural institutions (Sauka, 1998, p. 398). But what if the socio-cultural 

institutions are themselves deeply affected, their network disrupted, and disabled 

or infected? This might be especially in case of totalitarian systems, incapable of 

limiting themselves, seeking for totality, “inside” of the socio-cultural structures and 

human personality. In this case the account of Sauka would profit from the truthful 

assessment of being under a totalitarian system. 



The literary image used by Kyrgiz author Chingiz Aitmatov (Aitmatov, 1983, 

p. 119f) –“mankurt” –slave without memory, and thus totally controllable, is very 

useful. It is a picture of a person, captive, enslaved inwardly, through eradication of 

memory, by means of extreme pain. The powers of human personality striving for 

survival, by the shackles of the inhumane system are forced upon themselves and 

eradicate the seedbed of humanity. Especially tragic is the figure of “ mankurt's” 

mother, who by her presence, words and memories tries to recreate the memory 

and save the son. The end of the myth is tragic—the mother dies from the hand of 

the son. The account shocks with its hopelessness. It is this hopelessness that 

socio-cultural institutions and theology have to take at face value to realistically 

assess different effects totalitarianism has. Aren't our attempts like the attempts of 

the mother? Aren't they seeking to rehabilitate memory, or baptize into the new 

memory without addressing the significant harm done to the personhood? 

Churches claim that they have hope and good news for the other 

communities, because of their Scriptures, signs and first of all, loyalty to God, 

thinking that they evade the patterns of human and cultural destruction. However, 

the historical experiences witness the sobering reality, that such communities 

internalize totalitarianism as well. Fear and servility, characterizing the regimes, 

invades the churches. Is it possible to account for this? Is it possible that joy, peace, 

justice, stemming from the salvation by Jesus Christ is acknowledged in the 

community, but its members are living in totalitarian fear? Might it be that professing 

Christian faith, the erected structures promote, create and sustain a different ethos, 

resembling the surrounding “totalitarian” culture and even promoting it. How is it 

possible to avoid the fate of the mother of “mankurt”? What are the theological 

resources to be uncovered and unleashed? 

Setting the scene for engagement 

French thinker Louis Althusser (1969) helps to navigate in these murky waters. As a 

philosopher he does not want us to live in the world of illusions, but seeks to help us 

to acquire the knowledge of reality. He uses concepts, which show, how human 

thinking comes to that knowledge. “Ideological” and “the theory” are for him the 

tools, whereby the experienced reality is reworked into the knowledge of the real 

and practical. Theologian Clodovis Boff (1987, pp. 70 - 72) in an analogous way 

reworks this insight into the production of the theological knowledge, where the first 

truths of faith, through the medium of hermeneutics, are used as “theory,” reworking 

the raw material of social sciences into the real knowledge of the world. So, beside 


69

70 


their ontological claims, the ideology and the truths of the faith might be (in 

analogical way) seen as competing ways to make sense, to understand reality. I am 

aware of the ambiguity of the meaning of ideology. Althusser uses the term as an 

epistemological category, but in the context of totalitarian ideology, it is very hard to 

use it as solely epistemological. I identify with the account of the ideological by Tim 

Noble (2009). He notes the totalizing intent of ideologies, which, consequently, 

leads to “a negation of the other, attempting to assimilate him or her to the same, to 

the identical” (2009, p. 121). I likewise identify with Boff's theological proposal, as 

necessary to avoid idolatrous nature of ideologies. The interaction, struggle of 

ideology and faith should not surprise. What is the framework of this struggle? 

Althusser writes that the meaning of particular ideology “depends on its 

relation to the existing ideological field and on the social problems and social 

structure which sustain the ideology and are reflected in it” (1969, p. 63). As these 

realities influence particular ideology, they shape the theological or religious 

framework of interpretation as well. Whatever the patterns and instincts of life, 

society's thought is embedded in the structural, which forms the way we produce 

knowledge. Totalitarianism as the ontological claim that one particular way of 

seeing reality is all that there is, is the way to view the world. It structurally effects the 

production of the understanding, is capable of interiorizing, with the result that the 

liberty and creativity of human being has to be suppressed. Can the memories and 

structures, even the most sacred, easily recover the authenticity of human 

understanding, its creativity and variety? 

For Althusser, this does not remain on the level of observation and purist 

simplicity. Both individuals and communities continually face issues of survival. 

These issues are necessarily complex and practically engaged. Althusser (1969, p. 

98) views society in terms of 'contradiction' or struggle, his account is engaged, 

contextual, and structural, specific, involves the social whole, from the 

superstructure (the State, the dominant ideology, religion, politically organized 

movements, economy) to the concrete social body, its formal conditions and the 

concrete instances. We thus do well if we see the struggle between the ideology of 

totalitarianism and “faith” in an engaged and socially complex way, noting the 

imperatives of survival, both socio-cultural and economic, their effect on the 

structures and the ways of seeing. The implications of this are not easily dismissed. 

The structure of the church seeking to establish itself in the society legally and 

culturally, necessarily affects its social organization and thematic patterns, i.e. who 

and why emerge as leaders, what counts as leadership and how agenda of being is 



formed. The notions of “effectiveness” and “practicality” in the issues of the 

economical and cultural viability of small church communities have definite 

demands on the life of the churches and how their message is formulated. 

So, is the co-existence of two conflicting interpretational frameworks, 

whether they exist at the same time, as in the church, the case of society, or at times 

of revolution, possible? Althusser (1969, p. 115) hints about that, when he writes 

that revolution in the structure does not “ipso facto modify the existing 

superstructures and particularly the ideologies at one blow,” but that the new 

society, produced by the revolution, “ensures the survival, that is, the reactivation, 

of older elements through both the forms of its new superstructures and specific 

'circumstances.'” This would allow explaining the presence of two competing 

frameworks, totalitarian ideology and faith in the social organism and structure of 

the church or any other community. Second, it allows discerning the lingering power 

of totalitarianism, its prevalence, even as society ideologically changes in the 

direction of the liberal democracy. Neither faith without the structure, nor new 

ideology without structure and structural struggle, nor theology, which does not 

articulate itself in these realities, can guarantee ideological independence 

throughout engagement with totalitarianism, but they might preserve it in new 

forms. 

And this provides the opportunity for theology. The historical moment and 

world context are actual and structurally embedded. As these patterns change in 

society, the churches are not exempt. New revolutions with new, bigger authorities 

and even God, justifying old as well as new, characterize the communities. For the 

survival of totalitarianism, it justifies it in practice, if not in theory. So, what might be 

the marks of the theological proposal, which would be realistic, but also provide 

some necessary new resources to dispel the dialectics and lead into more 

wholesome vision, taking and saving the best in human endeavor, but avoiding 

tendencies to totalize or idolize? I would like to take the lead of Tim Noble and 

explore the possibilities of Pneumatology in supplementing engaged and practical 

theological discourse (2009, p. 266). The theology engaged in mission in society 

under the specter of totalitarianism has to find within itself, its point of view, 

resources to engage, reclaim presence, to dispel the spell of enforced dialectics, 

and challenge the survival of the ideology of totalitarianism in the socio-cultural 

fabric. Beside the issues traditionally linked with Christology, memory and structure 

(Congar, 1997, Vol. I, p. 24, Vol. II, p. 8), I will explore the possibilities and the 

resources of Pneumatology. How does theology of the Spirit help to readdress the 

issue of “mankurt,” theologically resourcing the concepts and realities engaged? 


71

72 


purpose and end, God communicates the divine life by grace, by Holy Spirit. This 

does not abolish God given “principles of a behavior which is truly its own” to each 

nature. For the human being is freely fulfilled by its 'haviors,' having in itself the 

abilities, actions and virtues or vices. Congar sees “the principle outside us that 

moves us toward the good (that) is God, who teaches us by the law and helps us by 

grace” (1997, Vol. I, p. 119). 

This further articulates what we saw earlier by including the social 

organism. The outward restraints are monitored, and subjected, as due attention is 

drawn to grace. By it, the virtues and the gifts, a believer is able to act 'beyond the 

means of man (woman).' These movements, divine impulses, make the Christian 

ready to grasp and follow the inspirations of the Spirit that is “by another who is 

infinitely superior and has sovereign freedom, in other words, the Holy Spirit” 

(Congar, 1997, Vol. I, pp. 119,120). By the Spirit, God, and the Kingdom of God, 

open the structural reality to different but not annihilating face. It works through and 

in human originality and understanding. 

According to Althusser, he theological opens to the spiritual Absolute in the 

structural and beyond it, empowering and giving it a face, remolding the issue of 

“mankurt” towards hope. God's concern is to “ensure supernatural principles of 

action and a supernatural organism that are really our own (that is human),” us 

being the subjects of our own life and action, but going beyond the purely human 

mode of experience and practice by means of the exterior principle (Congar, 1997, 

Vol. II, pp. 135,136). This provides the other face or even faces of the same Christ to 

be seen or seeking to emerge in the structural in the face of totalitarianisms. 

But what about the historical, particular, engaged realities, locked into 

dialectics? As there is a bigger dance in the universe towards the restored creation, 

directed by the Spirit, Congar (1997, Vol II, pp. 26 and 130) sees gifts of the Spirit in 

persons belonging to “a people, a tradition, a culture and a sociological group,” and 

even “original collective gifts and resources - those of different peoples and cultures 

and of historical experiences and traditions.” So, the catholicity of the church “calls 

for these gifts to be gathered together and exchanged” through the realities of local 

and particular churches. The implications of Thomas Aquinas in the context of 

ecclesial liberty are that compelled “from within and through our very own 

movement” we see that “the Spirit as the principle of freedom ... applied to the 

Church as the people of God or messianic people” (Congar, 1997, Vol II, p. 130). 

External regulations have to be necessarily taken (and pruned) in the 

perspective and reality of permeating, liberating, creative Spirit. It is the task of the 

Spirit “to contain and resolve this fertile tension between the particular and unity.” 



A Theological proposal expands the horizon beyond the humanly and 

socially possible 

In the engagement with totalitarianism, theology (faith) has a peculiar affirmation of 

human creativity and liberty, as the understanding is connected with human spirit. 

Yves Congar (1974, p. 198) writes, that “St Thomas (Aquinas) had an extremely 

vivid perception of the originality of the human subject, of his, in a certain sense, 

autocreative liberty” and this resounds with the issue of “mankurtism” and is 

structural in several ways. First, Congar finds that Thomas (Aquinas, Summa 

Theologica, IIa pars) treats the human being not as “nature,” but as “creator of that 

which he is called to be, by his virtuous acts and the habitus” (1974, p 199). Thomas 

(Aquinas, quoted by Contra Gentiles IV, 11) sees in personhood the supreme 

realization of the created being. Writing about generation of the Word of God, 

Thomas (Aquinas, ST Ia q. 29 a. 3 and ST Ia IIae prol.) uses the identity of 

understanding and being in God as the ultimate perfection in life and in this light 

addresses human intellect. This understanding of personhood tackles the reality of 

“mankurtism” from a theological basis and is a fresh way of seeing. External 

memory or knowledge is not enough; being is interconnected with understanding, 

personhood, and acknowledgement of human liberty. 

Second, Congar (1974, p. 198) sees that “Thomas treats first of all of the 

realities and structures prior to man's exercise of his liberty, and thus prior to history 

and then of the conditions in which this liberty is exercised.” Structural is the 

environment of the liberty of the person (Aquinas ST Ia IIae q. 108, a. 4). The 

human being is viewed between servitude and liberty, where freedom is connected 

with the achieving of that which is proper to human beings, inclined towards justice. 

Freedom demands a distinction between commandments and counsels, to work 

out the tensions. This leaves the “mankurtism” as too tragic an account of humanity 

and challenges the oppressiveness of structural. Obedience is liberating and 

fulfilling the human (Aquinas ST Ia IIae q. 104, a. 5 and 6). Are we however only on 

the level of that which is human possible, or is there, some healing bigger reality, 

having its own face and force, able to save? Is this a reference to the larger, 

maintaining totalitarianism and once again negating the individual auto-creative 

liberty? 

Congar's account of the spiritual gifts in the particular and concrete social 

body of Christ (the church) shows that the structural might be actively sustaining, 

promoting and leading to a liberated and creative life, if it is within the wider reality, 

which is beyond the humanly possible. It is in the journey towards God as towards 


73

74 


(Congar, 1997, Vol II, p. 27). The Spirit is compelling the church to go beyond its 

present fragmented reality. This is not a movement without a face, as it is the 




REACTIONS ON CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS PLURALISM 

Ursula Glienecke 

Milltown Institute, Dublin, Ireland 

Religious Pluralism in a Changing World 

The growing necessity to cope with a religiously plural world has been described by 

Wilfred Cantwell Smith as a current that is about to become a flood (Ariarajah, 1991, 

p. 3)based on the fact that the earth is becoming a 'global village' due to social, 

political, economic and cultural changes. People of different cultures and religions 

are meeting, share the living and working space and face the problems of the world 

today. Even if the problems that different countries, parts of societies and people 

face are not the same, they influence and make themselves noticeable in other 

countries. In addition globalisation and migration has also brought ethnic groups 

which practice their own cultural traditions and religions to the so called North-West 

countries (the well-to-do European and North American countries) which leads to 

the fact, as Bhikhu Parekh formulates it, that: “almost all societies today are 

multicultural and likely to remain so for the foreseeable future” (Parekh, 2000, p. 6). 

New possibilities in areas of travel, communication, information and technology 

“which have brought together communities that were hitherto in comparative 

isolation” cause opportunities as well as tensions and pressures (Ariarajah, 1991, 

p. 3) as well. Therefore the need to understand and accept each other as well as to 

co-operate in the fight for justice and peace is also growing (Ariarajah, 1991, p. 7). 

Apart from that, for the first time in history, first-hand information about “the 

others” is widely available and studies have been done and books written about the 

world religions and comparative religious studies are well on the way. Even more: 

nothing has even come near the revolutionary changes in worldwide 

communication brought about by the introduction of the Internet. It remains to be 

seen what the long-term impact of Internet communication on the interaction 

between cultures and religions will be, but there can be no doubt that it has further 

accelerated the speed of the globalisation process. 


77

78 

URSULA GLIENECKE / REACTIONS ON CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS PLURALISM 

The challenge of the diversity and plurality of religions has caused a shift in 

theological reflection upon the relevance of other religions. Whereas in the past 

Christianity has had a habit of feeling superior to other faiths, not until very recently, 

only a small number of people had more than a faint (and often a distorted) 

knowledge about them. As long as the world's religious heritage was practically 

unknown, it was much easier to believe that the Christian revelation was 

unparalleled and unique in all respects. The whole situation has changed 

profoundly, as the knowledge of other traditions “increased in proportion to the 

development of scholarly sciences such as anthropology, sociology of religion, 

history of religions and oriental studies” (D'Costa, 1986, p. 2). The evidence of 

millions of people finding spiritual strength, comfort and moral and theological 

guidance in their faiths (Samartha, 1991, p. 192) for centuries as well as the 

holiness encountered in the others have since prompted a revision of earlier views. 

Certain sections of world Christianity have made an effort to develop a new 

way of thinking about other religions. The most obvious examples are the 

documents of the Second Vatican Council of the Roman Catholic Church and the 

new approach to inter-religious dialogue and collaboration suggested by the World 

Council of Churches. They spent the latter half of the twentieth century deepening 

their understanding of other cultures, improving their relationship and dialogue with 

believers of other religions and pursuing social justice. New appreciation and sense 

of commonality was born: “We recognise as part of the one Truth that sense of 

Majesty of God and the consequent reverence in worship, which are conspicuous in 

Islam, the deep sympathy for the world's sorrow and unselfish search for the way of 

escape, which are the heart of Buddhism; the desire for contact with ultimate reality 

conceived as spiritual, which is prominent in Hinduism; the belief in a moral order of 

the universe and consequent insistence on moral conduct, which are included by 

Confucianism” (Report of the Jerusalem Meeting of the IMC, 1928, p. 491). At the 

same time the evangelical faction further developed their exclusivist position 

regarding the possibility of salvation for non-Christians [as impossible] and devised 

strategies to evangelise the whole world as soon as possible. Since the theological 

difference underlying the split within Protestantism has never been settled, the 

conflict has lost nothing of its initial vigour. 

Three Basic Views on Religious Pluralism 

When it comes to the relationship between religions and their competing truth 

claims, three basic positions are known. They are called exclusivism, inclusivism 

and pluralism. Stephen B. Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder describe the current 



distribution of these positions as follows: “Evangelicals and Pentecostals hold an 

exclusivist perspective, with insistence on explicit faith in Christ; Conciliars 

[ecumenicals] move toward variances of inclusivist and pluralist perspectives; and, 

while all three approaches are present within the Catholic Church, there seems to 

be more attraction toward inclusivist and pluralist positions, or what Jacques 

Dupuis calls an 'inclusive pluralism'” (Bevans, Schroeder, 2004, p. 254. Cf. Dupuis, 

2002, p. 87-95). Among evangelicals and Pentecostals there are some exceptions 

leaning towards inclusivism. 

Exclusivism 

Exclusivists take as a matter of fact that “there is only one true religion” (Danz, 2005, 

p. 53), namely – their own. Christian exclusivists, in particular, regard what they 

consider to be the central tenets of the Christian faith as exclusively true. According 

to them, salvation is not to be found in or through other faiths. They are seen as per 

se false, misleading (Netland, 1991, p. 9f), “human-made” or even demonic no 

matter how many parallels, complimentary insights or similarities might exist 

between them and the Christian tradition. People who adhere to them or even 

simply to non-exclusivist interpretations of the Christian message are lost and 

condemned to suffer eternal punishment by never ending torment in Hell or by 

second death by a gas chamber-like annihilation. 

The evangelical exclusivist position is connected with a certain view of the 

world: 

1. All humanity is condemned: Since Adam and Eve all humans are sinners who 

have severed the primordial ties that connected them with God. As a result, 

they are under God's judgement and deserve God's wrath and punishment. 

This applies to everybody: all are lost and going to hell - even good and 

religious people. 

2. There is only one way to attain salvation: To believe in the substitutionary 

sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. God's solution to the problem of sin and 

damnation is to send his own son, Jesus Christ, to take God's wrath and 

punishment upon himself and suffer torture and death to pay this price in 

place of humankind. 

3. Salvation can not be found apart from an “explicit acceptance of his work 

through faith” (Manila Manifesto A.3.) (meaning accepting the atonement by 

substitutionary sacrifice theory). The same holds true for the Abrahamic 

traditions: Judaism and Islam. 


79

80 


Protestant reason for repudiating the truth claims raised by other religions is 

therefore of a soteriological and doctrinal, rather than an ecclesiological nature: 

there is no salvation outside the belief in a specific doctrine. The exclusivism found 

in the Roman Catholic Church is more ecclesiological: there is no salvation outside 

the Church ('extra ecclesiam nulla salus est', the Council of Florence, 1442 

(Mäkelä, 1999, p. 248; Erickson, 1996, p. 33f)). Today it is mainly conservative 

evangelicals and fundamentalists who still uphold the traditional exclusivist stance. 

According to this viewpoint interreligious dialogue can only serve as 

preparation to conversion to Christianity, because non-Christian religions cannot 

address what for evangelicals are the solemn realities: sin, guilt, God's wrath and 

judgment (Manila Manifesto, 1989). 

Critique 

The exclusivist position is usually criticised for the lack of knowledge about the 

other religions and the arrogance of claiming to be the only ones who possess and 

correctly understand the truth. Millard J. Erickson argues that exclusivism confuses 

a human conception of God and the living God Godself. He points out that “as such, 

it is an illicit substitution, usurping commitment to God with commitment to 

particular doctrines" as well as limiting what God can do (Erickson, 1996, p. 26). 

According to evangelical exclusivists Christians of the first centuries lived 

in an environment in which “many gods and many lords” were worshipped, 

nevertheless the apostles boldly affirmed the uniqueness, indispensability and 

centrality of Christ (Manila Manifesto, 1989, A.3). What they forget, though, is that 

at the time when these texts were written the main focus of the Christian community 

was to establish itself and to form its own identity ("Gemeindebildung"), which was 

reflected in the texts as well. Once this task was finished there might be 

opportunities to listen to the others for a deeper understanding of one's own faith, 

being open to the experience and wisdom of others and mutual enrichment. 

Another point is that the biblical texts mainly refer to the political Roman imperial 

cult and Greek polytheism which pictures the same order of patriarchal, hierarchic 

society and not to the great world religions which seek for much deeper values and 

which have existed and offered guidance to people for millennia (even if their 

histories - as well as the Christian one - are not free from societal, ethical and 

political failures). Neither do they refer to mystical traditions which have proven to 

be very similar and to result in transformation, wisdom and charity, regardless of the 

religion they are born from. For the discernment of faiths, traditions and theologies 

including our own, the principle of what are their “fruits” can be well applied. 



Another difficulty with exclusivism is the image of God it creates. Erickson 

expresses the problem like this: "If God chooses to save some persons by 

providing them with an opportunity to fulfil his conditions by enabling them to hear, 

and condemns others who have not fulfilled those conditions or obeyed his 

command to believe in his Son, largely because they have not really heard of him, 

how can he be termed just? (...) Does God prescribe different standards for us than 

what he practices himself?" (Erickson, 1996, p. 24-25, 64). With this Erickson 

reminds us that Jesus taught his followers to forgive those who wrong them and to 

love not only their friends, but also their enemies. Exclusivism on the contrary 

paints an image of a God who “apparently does not love his enemies, who takes 

vengeance on them, and eternally so”(Erickson, 1996, p. 25), condemning the 

majority of humanity to hell or annihilation. 

Finally, exclusivism seems to follow the patterns of Western colonialism. 

The colonised people, their cultures and religions – without really knowing them - 

were regarded by the Europeans as inferior and therefore in need of a higher 

guardianship and a conversion to a “superior religion" (Hick, 1987, p. 20). Millard J. 

Erickson points out that "to elevate one's own culture and religion above that of 

others is to elevate oneself above the other. As such, Christianity's exclusivism is 

just another version of the Western imperialism that considers the Western way the 

right way, all others being in need of correction" (Erickson, 1996, p. 25-26). 

Evangelical exclusivists do not agree with this point of critique saying that they do 

not transport the Western worldview but rather a Scripture and a message given by 

God. The answer to this depends, of course, on one's view of the Bible: if it is seen 

as word-by-word dictated by God and thus infallible or as conditioned by the 

writers' position in time and history and thus in need of discernment; and if literal or 

critical interpretation of the texts is applied. 

Inclusivism 

Inclusivists (or superiorists) are willing to recognise various religions as genuinely 

true, yet this truth is of a fragmentary nature, whereas only one religion enjoys the 

possession of the full and absolute truth. However, other religions can also be used 

by God as means of salvation, even if these religions are only of secondary 

importance (Netland, 1991, p.9f). 

Inclusivism is most closely associated with the Second Vatican Council. 

The following quote from Lumen Gentium § 16 exhibits the typical characteristics of 

the Roman Catholic inclusivist way of thought: “Those also can attain everlasting 


81

82 


salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the gospel of Christ or His 

Church, yet sincerely seek God and, moved by grace, strive by their deeds to do His 

will” (Mäkelä, 1999, p. 249). 

On the Protestant side the idea of cosmic Christ who at the end of times offers 

salvation to all by virtue of a universal anakaphalaiosis (“recapitulation” or “uniting 

under one head”, Ephesians 1:10) represented by Joseph Sittler at the WCC 

assembly in New Delhi, 1961 was a complete novelty in Protestant and evangelical 

theology (Bosch, 1991, p. 480-481), despite its undeniable precedence in Origen's 

theological thinking. 

The most outspoken theologian of the Second Vatican Council was Karl 

Rahner, whose theology is predicated upon the central concept of the “anonymous 

Christian”. Rahner was convinced that non-Christian religions with the help of the 

grace of God that is at work all the time and everywhere could become “roads to 

salvation on which we can meet God and Jesus Christ” (Rahner, 1975; Mäkelä 1999, 

p. 248). Rahner's theological position was later modified by Heinz Robert Schlette, 

Raimon Panikkar, Arnulf Camps, Hans Küng and others (Bosch, 2004, p. 481). 

According to Schlette it is difficult to say what is outside the church, but as to 

the question what is outside God and his plan of salvation the answer is clear: “there 

is no extra, only an intra, no outside, only an inside, since God 'desires all men to be 

saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (Küng, 1965, p. 36 as quoted in 

Moltmann, 1977, p. 381-382). In other words inclusivists hold that salvation is 

available to all people of good will, partially through their religions, and that dialogue 

between them is important “both to enrich the understanding of one's own and the 

others faith and to help the other see that behind his or her faith lies a reality that can 

bring what is already believed to full completion” (Bevans, Schroeder, 2004, p. 

380). 

Universalism 

Classical universalism could be seen as another, more radical variant of the 

inclusivist position. Salvation is to be universal in the sense that everybody will be 

included in God's love, mercy and salvation. Charles Harold Dodd maintains that 

there is a parallel between the Fall and God's grace: just as sin holds sway over all of 

humankind, the entire human race will be saved by the grace of God. The final aim of 

God's salvific will is “a state in which God's mercy is as universally effective as sin has 

been” (Dodd, 1932, p. 183-184 as quoted in Erickson, 1996, p. 67). Nels F. S. Ferré 

and John A. T. Robinson share Dodd's view in this matter (Erickson, 1996, p. 65-75). 



Critique 

Inclusivism has been criticised for superficiality in its approach to religious 

pluralism. Christian inclusivists often regard Christianity as the fulfilment of other 

religions which would outlive them (Bosch, 2004, p. 479). In the case of 

universalism it can also be said that it contradicts human freedom by assuming that 

everybody will be saved if they wish it or not. Millard Erickson likened the inclusivist 

position to the Calvinist concept of election (cf. double predestination), the only 

difference being that the God of universalism elects all to be saved and none to be 

lost (Erickson, 1996, p. 75,79 and 82). 

Pluralism 

Pluralism can be described as soteriocentric (Bevans, Schroeder, 2004, p. 380) or 

theocentric (Mäkelä, 1999, p.170). The pluralist position (also called the mutuality 

model or the acceptance model (Bevans, Schroeder, 2004, p. 380)) holds that God 

is active in the world and is revealing Godself in all religious traditions and beyond 

(Nettland, 1991, p. 9f). Coming from this vantage point, Paul Knitter emphasises 

that “after all, despite their amazing differences, the religions turn out to be more 

complimentary than contradictory” (Knitter, 1985, p. 220 as quoted in Bosch, 2004, 

p. 481). Pluralism is represented by Ernst Troeltsch, John Hick, Paul Knitter and, 

from a Jewish perspective, Dan-Cohn Sherbock (Erickson, 1996, p. 85, cf. 

Strange). 

John Hick regards all religions as different human answers to the one 

divine Reality. They embody varied perceptions that have been formed as a result 

of different historical and cultural circumstances (Bosch, 2004, p. 481-482). The 

focal point is the divine Reality itself rather than one particular faith claiming 

superiority over all others. What is needed in theology is a kind of “Copernican 

revolution”. Similar to the discovery that the Sun and not the Earth is at the centre of 

the solar system this revolution “involves a shift from the dogma that Christianity is 

at the centre to the realisation that it is God who is at the centre, and that all the 

religions of mankind, including our own, serve and revolve around him” (Hick, 1973, 

p. 130-131). Paul Knitter goes one step further in criticising his own tradition by 

arguing that the traditional Christology is a later accretion and “not in keeping with 

Jesus' own self-understanding, which was theocentric” (Knitter, 1985, p. 173-175). 

He therefore advances the notion of a wider ecumenism that would include the 

inter-religious sphere (Knitter, 1985, p. 173-175). 


83

84 


By and large, the pluralist position puts great emphasis on dialogue which 

is seen as “important so that all religions can get beyond themselves to the one 

reality that they all point toward but never fully articulate” (Bevans, Schroeder, 

2004, p. 380). 

Conclusion 

Pluralists have often been criticised for the lack of commitment to their own tradition 

and is also often accused of falling into absolute relativism. 

On the other hand, pluralism goes further than exclusivism or inclusivism, 

because exclusivism can be seen as “presumptuous as well as arrogant while 

inclusivism is regarded as patronising or condescending” (Panikkar, 1988, p. 91 as 

quoted in Mäkelä, 1999, p. 194-195. Cf. Stott, 1992, p. 298). Pluralism opens space 

for the independent value of each religion, the mutual enrichment and deepening of 

one's own faith by sharing, and for collaboration in the pursuit of peace and justice. 

References 

Ariarajah, W. (1991). Hindus and Christians. A Century of Protestant Ecumenical Thought. Grand 

Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

Bevans, S. B., Schroeder, R. P. (2004). Constants in Context. A Theology of Mission for Today. 

Maryknoll: Orbis Books 

Bosch, D. (1991). Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. 19th printing. 

Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 

Bosch, D. (2004). Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. 19th printing. 

Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 

Danz, Ch. (2005) Einführung in die Theologie der Religionen. Lehr- und Studienbücher zur Theologie. 

Vol 1. Wien LIT Verlag. 

D'Costa, G. (1986). Theology and Religious Pluralism. The Challenge of Other Religions. Signposts in 

Theology. Oxford, NY Basil Backwell Ltd. 

Dodd, Ch. (1932). The Epistle of Paul to the Romans. NY: Harpner and Brothers, 183-184. 

Dupuis, J. (2002). Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontation to Dialogue. Maryknoll, N.Y. and 

London: Orbis Books, 87-95. 

Erickson, M. J. (1996). How Shall They Be Saved? The Destiny of Those Who do not Hear of Jesus. 

Grand Rapids: Baker Books. 

Hick, J. (1973). The Copernican Revolution in Theology. God and the Universe of Faiths: Essays in the 

Philosophy of Religion, ed. Hick, J. London and Basingstoke: The Macmillian Press Ltd., 130-131. 

Hick, J. (1987). The Non- Absoluteness Of Christianity. The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Toward a 

Pluralistic Theology of Religions, ed Hick, J., Knitter, P.F. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. 

Knitter, P. (1985). No Other Name? A Critical Survey of Christian Attitudes Toward the World Religions. 

Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books. 



Küng, H. (1965). Kristenheit als Minderheit. Einsiedeln as quoted in Moltmann, J. (1977) The C h u r c h 

in the Power of the Spirit. A Contribution to Messianic Ecclesiology. Hagerstown NY: Harper & 

Row Publishers, 381-382. 

Lumen Gentium (1964), §16, retrieved from http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils 

/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html 

Mäkelä, M. (1999). Mission According to John R. W. Stott. Abo: Abo Akademis Förlag- Abo Akademi 

University Press. 

Manila Manifesto. (1989). A. The Whole Gospel. 3. The Uniqueness Of Jesus Christ, 

Retrieved from http://www.lausanne.org/manila-1989/manila-manifesto.html 

Moltmann, J. (1977). The Church in the Power of the Spirit. A Contribution to Messianic Ecclesiology. 

Hagerstown NY: Harper & Row Publishers. 

Netland, H.A. (1991). Dissonant Voices: Religious Pluralism and the Question of Truth. Leicester: 

Apollos. 

Panikkar, R. (1988). The Jordan, the Tiber, and the Ganges. The Kairological Moments of Christic Self- 

Consciousness. Hick, J. Knitter, P. F. The Myth of Christian Uniqueness. Toward a Pluralistic 

Theology of Religions. Maryknoll: Orbis Books 

Parekh, B. (2000). Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. Basingstoke, 

Hampshire: Palgrave. 

Rahner, K. (1975). Über die Heilsbedeutung der Nichtchristlichen Religionen. Congresso 

Internazionalle di Missiologie „Evangelizatione e culture“. Pontificia Universita Urbaniana 

Roma. 

Samartha, S. J. (1991). Mission in einer religiös pluralen Welt. Horizontüberschreitung: Die 

Pluralistische Theologie der Religionen, ed. Bernhardt, R.. Gütersloh: Gütersloher 

Verlagshaus. 

Stott, J. (1992). The Contemporary Christian: An Urgent plea for Double Listening. Leichester: Inter- 

Varsity Press. 

Strange, D. Christian uniqueness, the challenge of pluralism and the 'theology of religions'. Retrieved from 

http://www.uccf.org.uk/yourcourse/rtsf/docs/christianuniqueness.pdf 

The Christian Life and Message in Relation to Non-Christian Systems: Report of the Jerusalem Meeting 

of the IMC (1928). Vol I. London: Oxford University Press. 


85

NEGALËS KULTÛRA KAIP IÐÐÛKIS KULTÛROS HOMOGENIÐKUMUI 

Rita Vaièekauskaitë 

Klaipëdos universitetas, Lietuva 

Anotacija 

Neágaliøjø dalyvavimas mene žinomas nuo senø laikø. Visi žavisi Antikos dainiumi 

tituluojamu Homeru. Taèiau tai, kad meno kûrinio autorius turi negalæ, daþniausiai 

likdavo nežinoma. Todël sunku ásivaizduoti, kad neágalieji kaip tam tikra socialinë 

grupë bûtø galëjæ pateikti atsakà kultûros homogeniðkumui. Ilgus ðimtmeèius buvo 

áprasta, kad jie yra tylûs, pasyvûs visuomenës gyvenimo dalyviai ir meno kûrëjai. 

Taèiau XXI a. neágaliøjø dalyvavimas mene ágavo platø mastà ir naujà raiðkà. 

Aukðtas neágaliøjø socialinës integracijos á visuomenæ lygis sudarë prielaidas 

susitelkti ir kolektyviškai dalyvauti kultûroje. Atsirado tokiø negalës kultûros þenklø 

kaip Londono neágaliøjø meno forumas, Islingtono neágaliøjø muzikos festivalis, 

Art&Soul festivalis Los Andþele, á kurá 1999-aisiais susirinko daugiau kaip trys 

tûkstanèiai dalyviø. Šia prasme negalës kultûra tapo neágaliuosius telkianèia jëga. 

Jø dalyvavimas mene yra ne tik kultûros fenomenas, bet ir socialinis judëjimas, 

emancipuojantis neágaliuosius, valorizuojantis dalyvavimo visuomenëje 

galimybes. Negalës kultûros ir politinës galios jungtis generavo iððûkio kultûros 

homogeniðkumui galimybæ. 

Reikšminiai þodþiai: negalë, kultûra, iððûkis, homogeniðkumas. 

Ávadas 

Negalë visais visuomenës istoriniais laikmeèiais buvo ir yra iððûkis þmogui, 

visuomenei, bendruomenei, kultûrai. Iðtisi ðimtmeèiai nuo Antikos laikø paþymëti 

neágaliøjø kaip visuomenës grupës ignoravimu, paèiø neágaliøjø socialiniu 

pasyvumu ir susitaikymu su savo situacija. XX a. viduryje þmogaus teisiø 

kontekste sustiprëjo neágaliøjø pasipriešinimas opresinei ir atskirties situacijai, 

todël atsirado siekis atrasti bûdus, kaip átraukti neágaliuosius á visuomenës 


87

88 

RITA VAIÈEKAUSKAITË / NEGALËS KULTÛRA KAIP IÐÐÛKIS KULTÛROS HOMOGENIÐKUMUI 

gyvenimà. Taèiau XX a. antrojoje pusëje pasiûlyti neágaliøjø socialinës integracijos 

modeliai ir teorijos stipriai kritikuojamos ðiandien. Visø pirma dël to, kad skatino 

neágaliøjø konformizmà ir normalizacijà, o integracija á visuomenæ realizuota tik 

formaliai (Wolfensberger, 2002). XXI a. pradžioje neágaliøjø integracijos problemà 

siûloma spræsti sutelkiant dëmesá á socialinio dalyvavimo ir kûrybinæ paradigmà 

(Ruškus, Mažeikis, 2007). 

Negalës diskursas yra integrali kultûros kaip visuomenës gyvenimo ir 

veiklos bûdo dalis. Neágalieji áneða savo indëlá á pagrindinæ kultûrà, kurdami 

muzikos, literatûros ar kitus kûrinius, jie formuoja alternatyvø gyvenimo stiliø. Anot 

Barneso (2003), Vakarø Europoje kultûra yra perpildyta negatyviø neágalumo 

ávaizdþiø ir simboliø, todël gali bûti traktuojama kaip iðskirtinai þmoniø be negalës 

kultûra, grindþiama jø normomis ir vertybëmis. Ðia prasme negalës kultûra yra 

svarbus socialinius pokyèius generuojantis mechanizmas, nes reprezentuoja 

augantá nepasitenkinimà dominuojanèia kultûra. 

Wolbringo (2006) poþiûriu, negalës kultûrà sudaro bendra neágaliøjø 

priespaudos ir pasiprieðinimo istorija. Neágaliøjø patirties pagrindu kuriama 

muzika, dailë, literatûra, simboliai ir kalba, unikali pasaulëþiûra, vertybiø ir nuostatø 

sistema, neágaliøjø gebëjimas didþiuotis savo identitetu. Paminëti elementai yra 

universalûs ir vitaliðki, todël vienija neágaliuosius kaip socialinæ grupæ, nepaisant 

skurdo, socialinës izoliacijos, iðsilavinimo, riboto mobilumo. Negalës kultûra iðkilo 

ið patirtos priespaudos gelmës ir jëgø, kurios siekë neágaliuosius segreguoti. Šia 

prasme, anot Geertzo (2005), kultûra atskleidžia þmoniø siekius suprasti save ir 

kurti savo bendrijas. 

Kalbëti apie negalës kultûrà svarbu ir žvelgiant platesne prasme. Negalës 

kultûros fenomeno iðkilimas gali bûti traktuojamas kaip atsakas á Vakarø pasaulio 

kultûros krizæ, kuri, anot Donskio (2009, p. 7), naujai sprendžia „laisvës, 

liberalizmo, racionalizmo, minties dominavimo, kitokios žmogaus raiðkos, kitokiø jo 

veiklos formø“ klausimus. 

Anot Tomlinsono (2002), kultûra parodo prasmæ þmogaus gyvenime. 

Negalës kultûra iðreiðkia neágaliøjø pastangas nutrinti nubrëþtà patologijos, 

kategorizacijos ribà tarp þmoniø su negale ir be negalës, išryškina neágaliøjø sieká 

bûti iðgirstiems ir pripaþintiems kaip unikaliems, ádomiai komunikuojantiems su 

juos supanèia aplinka, savitai per kultûrinius simbolius interpretuojanèiais 

gyvenimo prasmæ, socialines problemas. Ðiuo aspektu negalës kultûra gali bûti 

traktuojama kaip prasmës konstravimo alternatyva ðiuolaikinëje visuomenëje. Be 

to, tokios kultûrinës bendruomenës susiformuoja kaip pasiprieðinimo reakcija á 

vyraujanèias socialines tendencijas, ieðkant savarankiðkø prasmës ðaltiniø. 



Negalës kultûra yra atvira sistema, nuolat sàveikaujanti su socialine 

aplinka. Be to, negalës kultûros iðtakos, jos misija ir vizija yra orientuota á siekimà 

organiškai integruoti negalës diskursà á socialinæ kultûrinæ sistemà bei organiðkoje 

dermëje, á siekimà ágalinti þmones su negale. Kaip pažymi Barnesas ir Merceris 

(2001), neágaliøjø kuriama kultûra egzistavo ðimtmeèiais, taèiau ji stokojo 

pripaþinimo kaip fenomenalaus reiðkinio. Todël negalës kultûra ligi XX a pabaigos 

atliko siekimo ágauti „pagarbos segreguotiems“ misijà (Barnartt, 2009, p. 206). 

Šio straipsnio tikslas – analizuoti negalës kultûrà kaip išðûkio kultûros 

homogeniðkumui fenomenà. 

Tyrimo metodai – teorinë mokslinës literatûros analizë. 

Negalës ir kultûros santykio metodologinis konceptualizavimas 

Negalës ir kultûros santykis visada buvo ypatingas. Negalë visais laikais buvo 

ryškus dailës ir literatûros kûriniø leitmotyvas. Anot Ruðkaus (1997, p. 25), „drauge 

su Renesanso pakilimu asmenø su negale klausimas uþplûsta europietiðkàjà 

kultûrà“. Þymûs raðytojai savo kûriniuose daþnai pasitelkdavo neágalø personaþà, 

kurio vardu iðsakydavo kritikà visuomenës atþvilgiu. Ðtai Hugo romano „Paryžiaus 

katedra“ personaþas Kvazimodas (Kuprius) iðreiðkia þmogaus dvasinio nuopuolio 

ir moralinio vieniðumo bûsenà. Tokie kûriniai skatino keisti visuomenës poþiûrá á 

neágaliuosius, suvokti juos kaip jautrius, nuoðirdþius, sàþiningus, draugiðkus, 

iðtikimus þmones. Kita vertus, juose atskleidžiamas „normalios“ visuomenës 

normø reliatyvumas. 

Dailëje taip pat galima rasti kûriniø, pozityviai vaizduojanèiø neágaliuosius. 

Meno tyrinëtojams gerai žinomas Jano Victorso (1620–1676) paveikslas „Aklas 

smuikininkas“. Šio paveikslo centre – du neregiai muzikantai, dëvintys to meto 

apiplyðusius drabuþius, bet skrybëlëti. Priekyje einantis barzdotas vidutinio 

amžiaus vyriškis griežia smuiku. Kitas, kiek jaunesnis, eina už jo ir groja dûdele. 

Juos abu veda nedidelis, juodas kaip anglis ðunelis. Ádomu tai, kad šunelis veda 

abu neregius: ilga virvë uþkiðta uþ pirmojo muzikanto ilgà beranková ðvarkà 

prilaikanèios juostos ir uþ antrojo kelniø dirþo. Matyt, kartu su vyriðkiais keliauja ir 

vieno ið muzikantø þmona, ant nugaros iðradingai prisitvirtinusi dvejø trejø metø 

vaikelá. Moteriðkë ið muzikos besiklausanèiø renka á delnà smulkius pinigus. 

Susidomëjimas muzikantais didžiulis. Gyventojai, iðëjæ ið savo namø, su 

neslepiamu smalsumu stebi keliaujanèiø muzikantø grupæ. Kad gyventojai 

geranoriðkai priima muzikantus ir jø muzikà, liudija šypsenos þiûrovø veiduose. 

Ypaè didelio dëmesio sulaukë neregio þmona su vaikeliu. Galbût kai kas ið kaimo 


89

90 


gyventojø pirmà kartà suþinojo, kad neregys toks pat žmogus kaip ir kiti: gali turëti 

ðeimà, iðmokti groti. Galima daryti prielaidà, kad ðis paveikslas þiûrovams darë 

toká patá áspûdá kaip ir pavaizduotiems kaimo þmonëms, t.y. formavo teigiamà 

poþiûrá á neregius (Gudonis, 2008). 

Menà kûrë ir patys neágalieji (Gudonis, 1996). Daþni atvejai, kai turintys 

negalæ þmonës yra lyderiai meno, politikos, kultûros srityse. Taèiau daþniausiai jø 

neágalumas likdavo visuomenei nežinomas. Apie tai byloja tokie vardai kaip van 

Gogh'as, Bethovenas, Einsteinas, Newtonas, Washingtonas, Leonardo da Vinci. 

Nepaisant paèiø neágaliøjø kuriamo meno ir jø vaizdavimo mene, tarp 

þmoniø su negale ir be negalës tiek kasdieniame gyvenime, tiek mene visada 

egzistavo takoskyra. Ilgà laikà takoskyrà tarp neágalumo ir kultûros palaikë 

medicina ir jos patologijos diskursas. „Racionalus þmogus dialogui su beproèiu 

deleguoja psichiatrà. Sveikàjá þmogø su beproèiu jungia vien tyla. Ðioje tyloje 

atsiranda psichiatrijos kalba, kuri yra proto monologas apie beprotybê“ (Foucault, 

cit. Baranova, 2003, p. 10). Kritinis psichiatrijos metodø diskursas skatina 

paþvelgti á neágaliuosius, ypaè su proto ir psichine negale, per kultûrinæ prizmæ ta 

prasme, kad analizuojama, kaip þmonës màsto apie gyvenimà, kaip savo 

màstymu formuoja vertybes ir poþiûrius. 

Negalës studijos (angl. disability studies), prasidëjusios 1980-aisiais 

Jungtinëje Karalystëje, šiandien sukuria plaèias tarpdisciplinines negalës tyrinëjimo 

ir aiðkinimo tradicijas, o negalës ir kultûros santykio tyrinëjimai papildo 

tarpdisciplininæ ávairovæ. Anot Gray (2009), kultûrinë sociologija (angl. cultural 

sociology) kelia klausimà, kokià reikðmæ negalei teikia kultûriniai simboliai. 

Kultûrinë antropologija (angl. cultural antropology) analizuoja kultûriná atsakà á 

neágalumà (Turnbull, Stowe, 2001). Anot Conyerso (2002), negalës kaip 

„multikultûrinës patirties” traktavimas iðkelia jà á kokybiðkai naujà lygmená. Mitchellis 

ir Snyderis (2006) konceptualizuoja kultûriná negalës modelá (angl. cultural model of 

disability). Tikimasi, kad labai skirtingus tyrinëjimus á darnià visumà sujungs negalës 

kritinis diskursas (angl. critical disability studies) (Price, 2007). 

Anot Mostauskio (2011, p. 14), Vakarø humanistikoje kûrybingumo ir 

patologijos santykiø problemoms seniai skiriamas didþiulis dëmesys, kuris dar 

labiau sustiprëjo kilus postmodernizmo ideologijai su jai bûdinga nuostata tirti 

marginalinius ir krizinius reiðkinius. Negalës tyrinëtojai (Corker, Shakespeare, 

2002) skiria ypatingà dëmesá negalës ir postmodernizmo santykiui. 

Postmodernizmo metakalba leido prabilti apie neágalumà pasitelkiant naujas 

màstymo kategorijas. Neágalumo kaip skirtingumo sàvoka ágauna kokybiðkai 



naujà turiná taikant tokius postmodernaus màstymo konceptus kaip Derridos 

„différance“ – begalinis skirtybiø þaismas. Anot Andrijausko (2010, p. 476), 

postmodernizmui bûdinga stiprëjanti kultûrinio gyvenimo demokratizacija, 

tolerantiðkesnis poþiûris á kasdienybës, masinës kultûros apraiðkas bei anksèiau 

estetinio paþinimo periferijoje buvusius reiðkinius. Postmodernizmo kontekste 

susidarë palanki terpë kultûriniam marginaliniø reiðkiniø patirties perteikimui. 

Negalës studijose atsirado daug jautraus neágaliøjø kasdienio gyvenimo patirèiø 

tekstualizavimo, kuris ligi tol patologinëmis laikytas neágaliøjø kasdienio gyvenimo 

patirtis leido pažinti kaip unikalias, ypatingas ir tam tikra prasme bendražmogiškas. 

Gyvenimo natûralumu ir kûrybiðkumu besiremiantis negalës konceptualizavimas 

buvo kaip atsvara ligtoliniam mediciniškai ir psichologiškai racionaliam, moksliškai 

abstrakèiam paþinimui, kuris „ëmë vis labiau primesti gyvenimui savo tuðèias 

abstrakcijas“ (Rubavièius, 2003, p. 53). 

Negalës kultûros fenomeno konceptualizavimas yra labai svarbus, nes 

uþpildo kultûriniø mediumø erdvæ. Anot Martinkaus (2004), kitoniðkumas yra 

nepatogus kultûrai ir visada kelia problemø, bet visuomenëje svarbus „kultûriniø 

mediumø” (Donskis, 1994, p. 29) egzistavimo pripažinimas. „Þmogus 

sudëtingame, prieðtaringame, neretai jam prieðiðkame pasaulyje adaptuojasi, 

ásitvirtina, save iðreiðkia ir tobulina tomis formomis, kurias jam suteikia kultûra” (ten 

pat, p. 29). Visuomenei, linkusiai á pagrindinæ kultûrà, neágaliøjø kultûrinis 

mediumas realiai neegzistuoja, t. y. nefunkcionuoja kaip kultûros fenomenas. 

Kadangi skirtingi socialinës ir kultûrinës veiklos lygmenys nekomunikuoja, tai 

þmogus siekia susitapatinti su masine, vienmate kultûra, atsiriboti nuo neágaliøjø 

kultûros. Anot Mercerio ir Barneso (2001, p. 522), negalës kultûra yra tarsi iððûkis 

poþiûriui á negalæ kaip sutrikimà (skirtingumà), dël kurio kyla gëdos, savæs gailesèio 

jausmai, todël labai svarbus yra neágaliøjø solidarumas ir pozityvus 

identifikavimas(is). 

Iððûkiai kaip integrali kultûros dalis 

Daugelio þmoniø kasdienëje sàmonëje kultûra siejama su tradicija. Labai dažnai á 

kultûrà þiûrima kaip á tradicijas kuriantá ir palaikantá reiškiná, nors kita vertus, pati 

tradicija laikoma kultûros esmæ ir gyvastingumà, ilgaamþiðkumà ir atsparumà 

palaikanèiu reiškiniu. Ypaè naujai tradicijø reikðmë diskutuojama globalizacijos 

kontekste. Globalizacijos skeptikai mano, kad bûtent tradicija padës kultûroms 

nepaskæsti globalizacijos katile. Taèiau savo esme kultûra yra atvira sistema ne tik 

naujoms tradicijoms, bet ir iððûkiams. 


91

92 


Anot Donskio (2009), savo esme kultûra yra asmens laisvës deklaracija, jo 

emancipacija ir iððûkis nusistovëjusioms normoms. Pirminis kultûros idëjos 

iðkëlimas ir supratimas buvo neatsiejami nuo kaltës, pavydo motyvø. „Kad 

iðgelbëtø þmoniø giminæ nuo jà sunaikinti siekianèio Dzeuso valios, o kartu ir 

apsaugotø nuo nuolatinës tamsos ir þlugimo, Prometëjas pavogë dangaus ugná, 

atneðë jà þemën ir iðmokë þmones kurti: dirbti þemæ, statyti laivus, susekti 

þvaigþdþiø eigà, áspëti skaièiø máslæ. Visus menus ir mokslus þmoniø giminei 

atneða Prometëjas. Bet sykiu ðis þygis buvo didelis nusikaltimas Dzeusui ir 

Olimpui, uþ tai Prometëjas skaudþiai sumokëjo. Prometëjas nusilenkë 

aukðtesniam likimui ir priëmë jo sprendimà. Tad pirminë kultûros idëja gimsta kaip 

sukilusio žmogaus, neklusnaus, pasiprieðinanèio Dievui ir likimui, emancipuoto 

þmogaus kaltës idëja. Dël ðios kaltës ir emancipuoto þmogaus nuodëmingumo ir 

slypi kultûroje jai bûdingas dramatizmas ir tragizmas.“ (Donskis, 2009, p. 21) 

Kitas ne maþiau átaigus biblinis siužetas taip pat pasakoja apie tai, kad 

„kultûra buvo pastatyta ant nusikaltimo. Kainas nuþudë savo brolá Abelá ir, savo 

neramios sàþinës klajonëms sustabdyti, ákûrë miestà. Kaino giminë iðrado amatus 

ir menus, kolektyvinæ gyvenimo formà ir technikà. Vadinasi, pagrinduose to, kà mes 

ðiandien vadiname aukðtàja kultûra arba civilizacija, glûdi jos kûrëjo nusikaltimas, 

ið kurio šita civilizacija kaip tik yra gimusi“ (Donskis, 2009, p. 22). 

Homogeniðkumas kultûrai niekada nebuvo priimtinas, nes 

homogeniðkumas (vienodumas) veda á hegemonijà (Gramsci), kai dominuojanti 

grupë primeta kitoms savo valià, kai ásigali visuomenëje priespauda. Anot Maþeikio 

(2007), hegemoninë kultûra tvirtina, kad tik kai kurie ideologiðkai ar tautiðkai 

patikimi poetai ir raðytojai yra verti dëmesio, kad tik tam tikrø ðaliø atstovø sukurti 

meniniai kûriniai yra verti bûti išsaugoti, tik tam tikros interpretacijos yra cituotinos ir 

vertintinos. Taèiau kultûrinis dominavimas gali bûti ir nacionalinis, net klaninis, kai 

vietiniai valdininkai ir verslininkai yra suinteresuoti iðsaugoti savo átakà, rinkas ir 

todël paverèia pigià nacionalistinæ kûrybà kultûrine norma, jà atskiria nuo pasaulio 

kultûriniø sàveikø, izoliuoja ir privilegijuoja. Kultûrinë propaganda yra kultûros 

hegemonijos dalis. Sistemingà kultûrinio átikinëjimo politikà vykdo valstybës ir 

partijø kontroliuojamos kultûrinës industrijos. 

Iððûkio leitmotyv¹ kultûroje sustiprino postmodernizmo dvasia. Anot 

Valantiejaus (2003, p. 5), postmodernizmas gali bûti nusakomas kaip ámantri, 

avangardinë, netgi arogantiðka anarchistinë, taèiau vis dëlto paradoksaliai 

išlaisvinanti socialinës minties forma. Šia prasme postmodernizmas yra nukreiptas 

prieš vienovæ, totalumà, vidiná ryšá. Postmoderno sàmonë diskursyviai reflektuoja 



realià kultûros padëtá ir pripaþásta jos heterogeniðkà prigimtá (Grigaitis, 2006). 

Postmodernizmas sàlygojo „kultûros reliatyvizmà”, kuris pabrëþia, kad normos ir 

vertybës priklauso nuo socialinio, istorinio ir kultûros konteksto, kad normø ir 

vertybiø negalima „pagrásti” pasitelkiant visiðkai objektyvius kriterijus ir 

„falsifikuojant“ kai kurias „maþiau pagrástas“ kultûros formas. Vadinasi, kultûrinio 

reliatyvizmo forma lyg ir turëtø skatinti tolerantiðkumà kitoms kultûroms, kitiems 

paproèiams ir gyvenimo stiliams (bent jau pastangas suprasti kitus ontologiðkai 

apibrëþiamus dydþius) (Valantiejus, 2003, p. 6). 

Anot Barneso ir Mercerio (2001), ryškesniam negalës kultûros iðkilimui XX 

a. pabaigoje didelæ átakà padarë kultûros konceptualizavimo pokyèiai, kurie siejami 

su mokslininkø Hallo, Williamso, Woodwardo, Ingliso vardais. Jø kultûros studijose 

atkreiptas dëmesys á subordinaciná, hierarchiná visuomenës skirstymà, grindþiamà 

lyties, rasës kategorijomis. Subordinuojamos grupës generuoja „kontrkultûras“, 

kurios formuoja kultûriná konfliktà su dominuojanèia grupe. XX a. septintajame 

deðimtmetyje ðios studijos pagrindiná dëmesá skyrë jaunimo subkultûroms. 

Vëlyvaisiais XX a. deðimtmeèiais ðiø tyrinëjimø laukà papildë socialiniø kultûriniø 

skirtumø diskursas, apimantis amþiaus, lyties, neágalumo temas ir jø kuriamas 

subkultûras. Paminëtos visuomenës grupës ne tik áneða savo indëlá á pagrindinæ 

kultûrà kurdamos muzikos, literatûros ar kitus kûrinius, bet ir formuoja alternatyvø 

gyvenimo stiliø. Todël subkultûros, reprezentuodamos augantá nepasitenkinimà 

dominuojanèia kultûra, yra svarbus socialinius pokyèius generuojantis 

mechanizmas (Hall, Jefferson, 1976; cit. pagal Barnes, 2003). 

Unikali þmoniø su negale pasaulëjauta kaip prielaida negalës kultûrai 

Anot Barneso (2003), neágalumas ir kanèia buvo laikomi svarbiais prerekvizitais 

kûrybiðkumui. Socialinës mediacijos instrumentai, pavyzdžiui, Brailio raðtas, gestø 

(þenklø) kalba kuria neágalaus asmens kultûrinæ terpæ. Anot Vygotskio (2002, p. 

33), skaityti rankomis ir skaityti akimis yra du skirtingi psichologiniai procesai, nors 

ir atlieka tà paèià kultûrinæ funkcijà. Ilgainiui þmogus stipriai susigyvena su savo 

kultûrinës terpës tapatumu ir pagal já konstruoja savo gyvenimo realybæ. 

Ilgà laikà buvo siekiama atsakyti á klausimà, kaip tarpusavyje siejasi 

menas ir neágalumas. Skirtingais laikais autoriaus ir kûrinio santykis buvo 

traktuojamas nevienodai. Anot Mostauskio (2011, p. 177, 188), viduramþiais 

meninë forma á þiûrovà kreipësi „anonimiðkai“, nepabrëþdama autoriaus 

tarpininkavimo. Renesansas, atvirkðèiai, kûrinyje siûlë matyti pirmiausia autoriaus 

savybiø atspindá. Meno kûrinys supinamas su tuo, kuo jis nëra, t.y. tampa savotiðku 


93

94 


veidrodþiu, kuriame autorius pradeda áþvelgti pats save. Ðiuolaikinë epocha vël 

keièia poþiûrá: didina autoriaus ir kûrinio atotrûká, kartu „perbraukia“ jø vienovæ 

uþtikrinusá diskursà, kà galima bûtø vadinti autoriaus kûrybiniø intencijø ir 

perteikiamo turinio netapatumu arba ištarto þodþio ir já pagimdþiusios „minties“ 

atotrûkio paslaptimi. 

Kalbant apie meno kûrinio ir beprotybës santyká ne visada galioja tie patys 

dësniai, nors siekis mistifikuoti ir hiperbolizuoti autoriaus beprotybës bei meno 

kûrinio santyká išlieka. Vienà ið aiðkesniø atsakymø pateikia Foucaultas. 

Patografijos tyrinëjimuose jis atsiriboja nuo psichologijos ir psichopatologojos 

siûlomø perspektyvø. Beprotybë nebûtinai turi bûti suprantama kaip liga, kuri slegia 

menininkà. Net ir pats sveikiausias menininkas struktûriðkai sujungiamas su savo 

kûryba, su tuo, kuo jis ið principo bûti negali. Mintis – tai þmogus, dar nepadalytas á 

protingà ir beprotá (cit. pagal Mostauskis, 2011). 

Ðiuolaikinës negalës studijos taip pat siekia paaiðkinti neágaliøjø meninës 

kûrybos prielaidas. Manoma, kad unikalø neágaliøjø pasaulio pajautimà sàlygoja 

sinestetiniai gebëjimai, kurie atsiranda, nes „þmogaus nervø sistema sugeba 

prisitaikyti prie negalës sukurdama alternatyvias lytëjimo, uoslës, regos ar klausos 

patirtis, sustiprindama egzistenciná jautrumà. Net sutrikusio intelekto atveju 

pastebime ryðkius sinestetinius procesus, kai smarkiai sustiprëja analitiniai arba 

meniniai, precizikos arba abstraktumo gebëjimai“ (Ruðkus, Maþeikis, 2007, p. 263). 

Minëti mokslininkai paþymi, kad svarbu neágaliøjø sintetiniø gebëjimø raiðkà 

paskatinti, suteikti tinkamà aplinkà, kuri leistø pasinaudoti naujais gebëjimais. Ðia 

prasme bûtina kurti ir puoselëti alternatyvius semantinius pasaulius, kitaip tariant, 

naujas kultûrines, kûrybines nišas, parankias neágaliesiems (ten pat). 

Mokslinëje ir groþinëje literatûroje (Brown, 1998) galima sutikti aprašant 

daug sinestetiniø gebëjimø raiškos pavyzdþiø. Gestø kalbos vertëja Sussi Toft, 

auginanti kurèià dukrà, Vilniuje 2001 m. vykusioje paskaitoje pasakoja: „Vienà dienà 

maþas kurèias vaikas stovëjo ðalia manæs, ir mes þiûrëjome, kaip á jûrà leidþiasi 

saulë – labai graþi, oranþinë. Vaizdas buvo nuostabus. Aš žavëjausi ðiuo vaizdu, 

aikèiojau ir aiðkinau tam berniukui, kaip tai graþu. Jis þiûrëjo, þiûrëjo ir paklausë: „O 

kà sako saulë?“ Aš atsakiau: „Nieko nesako, kà jinai gali sakyti? Kvailas klausimas“. 

Berniukas nesuprato, kaip taip gali bûti. Juk mes visada sakome, kad paukðteliai 

graþiai èiulba, kad medþiai ðlama. Jeigu ið nieko gali bûti garsas, kaip tada tokia 

didelë ir graþi saulë yra nebyli (cit. pagal Valenta, 2003, p. 110). 

Golemanas (2009, p. 7), analizuodamas emociná intelektà, apraðo 

afektinio aklumo fenomenà. Þmogø, pavadintà gydytojø pacientu X, iðtiko du 



insultai, kurie suardë akiø ir uþ regëjimà atsakingus smegenø centrø ryðius. Nors jo 

akys galëjo priimti signalus, smegenys negalëjo jø iððifruoti ir netgi uþregistruoti. 

Ðia prasme pacientas buvo kaip aklas. Atliekant tyrimus, pacientui X buvo rodomi 

ávairûs pavidalai – apskritimai, kvadratai, nufotografuoti vyrø ir moterø veidai, bet jis 

nieko nesuprato, k¹ mato. Taèiau užteko parodyti piktø arba laimingø þmoniø veidø 

nuotraukas, ir jis netikëtai sugebëjo atspëti vaizduojamas emocijas. Atliktas 

smegenø skenavimas pacientui X spëjant jausmus atskleidë, kad esama 

alternatyviø regos bûdø, kurie vizualinê informacijà ið gumburo siunèia tiesiai á 

migdolinius kûnus, emocinæ prasmæ iðgaunanèius iš nežodinio pranešimo. Tai 

ávyksta per mikrosekundes, dar prieð tai, kol suvokiame, á kà apskritai þiûrime. Nors 

migdoliniai kûnai yra nepaprastai jautrûs tokiems praneðimams, jie nëra tiesiogiai 

susijæ su kalbos centrais; ðiuo poþiûriu migdoliniai kûnai tikr¹ja šio žodžio prasme 

yra bežodþiai. Kai registruojame jausmà, schemø signalai smegenyse uþuot 

suaktyvinæ verbalines sritis, kurios þinias gali iðreikðti þodþiais, mëgdþioja ðá 

jausmà mûsø paèiø kûne. Taigi pacientas X matë emocijas veiduose tiek, kiek jas 

jautë. Ði bûsena vadinama afektiniu aklumu. 

Negalës kultûra kaip socialinis judëjimas 

Neágaliøjø dalyvavimas kultûroje visada buvo paþymëtas ypatingu ženklu. 

Viduramþiais, karaliø ar princø rûmuose gyvendavo juokdariai, kurie galëjo iðjuokti 

dvaro aplinkà. Taèiau tik neágalieji (liliputai, kuprotieji) turëjo privilegijà iðjuokti ne tik 

dvaro aplinkà, bet ir patá valdovà (Ruškus, 2002, p. 67). Šitokios iððûkio paraiðkos 

buvo grieþtai kontroliuojamos ir nevienijo neágaliøjø kaip visuomenës grupës 

bendram iððûkiui. Negalë visada buvo iððûkiu ne tik dominuojanèiai kultûrai, bet ir 

politikai. Prisidengus beprotybe visais laikais buvo paranku užduoti draudžiamus 

klausimus ir teikti nepriimtinus atsakymus. 

Negalës ir kultûros santyká ið esmës pakeitë neágaliøjø socialinës 

integracijos procesai, prasidëjæ XX a. antroje pusëje Vakarø Europoje ir JAV. 

Ieškota ir bandyta diegti daug skirtingø socialinës integracijos strategijø: 

normalizacijos, socialiniø vaidmenø valorizacijos, ikliuzijos, gyvenimo kokybës, 

socialinio dalyvavimo. Taèiau daugelis jø nedavë kokybiðkø naujø socialinës 

integracijos proceso pokyèiø. Pastaruoju metu vykstanti socialinës integracijos 

procesø kritinë analizë nurodo poreiká kurti specifines kultûriniø niðø erdves, kurios 

sudarytø prielaidas kokybiðkai naujiems neágaliøjø socialinës integracijos 

procesams (Ruškus, Mažeikis, 2007). Negalës kultûros koncepcija þymi slinktá nuo 

socialinës integracijos kaip visuomenës raidos tikslo realizavimo prie socialinës 

integracijos kaip individo saviaktualizacijos ir savirealizacijos. 


95

96 


Anot Barneso (2003), ilgà laikà neágaliøjø santykis su menu buvo 

grindþiamas paternalizmu – kaip pagalba psichologiðkai prisitaikyti prie negalës, 

kaip reabilitacijos priemonë. Toks depolitizuotas neágaliøjø santykis su menu 

sustiprino negalës kaip individualios tragedijos koncepcijà, palaikë neágaliøjø 

socialiná pasyvumà. Tik palyginti neseniai XX a. paskutiniais deðimtmeèiais 

neágaliøjø kuriamas menas tapo kolektyvinës ir individualios emancipacijos jëga, 

skatinanèia neágaliøjø socialiná aktyvumà, ágalinanèia pasitikëti savo galimybëmis. 

Anot Barneso ir Mercerio (2001, p. 524), nuo 8-ojo deðimtmeèio JAV labai 

populiaru tapo rašyti apie savo neágalumo socialinæ patirtá. Þmogaus teisiø judëjimo 

kontekste ðiais raðiniais siekiama atkreipti dëmesá á diskriminacines praktikas 

visuomenëje neágaliøjø atþvilgiu. Tokios knygos kaip J. Charltono „Nieko apie mus 

be mûsø“ (angl. „Nothing About Us Without Us“) pateikdavo aktyvistø dël neágaliøjø 

teisiø visame pasaulyje patirtá. Fergusonas, Ferguson ir Tyloras (1992, p. 301) 

paþymi, kad kalbëjimas apie negalës socialinæ patirtá solidarizavo neágaliuosius, 

stiprino neágaliøjø kaip tam tikros visuomenës grupës politinës galios veiksmus. 

Todël ðiandieniniai negalës kultûros þenklai yra ágavæ daugiau kolektyvinës 

raiðkos simboliø, kurie negalës kultûrà atskleidžia kaip socialiná judëjimà. Anot 

Wolbringo (2006), pasaulyje yra daug negalës kultûros þenklø, pavyzdþiui, 

Londono neágaliøjø meno forumas. Bullitis, Chance, Doyle (1999) mini tokius 

negalës kultûros þenklus, kaip Islingtono neágaliøjø muzikos festivalis, vykstantis 

Londone nuo 1996-øjø, Art&Soul festivalis, 1999-aisiais Los Andžele surinkæs 

daugiau kaip tris tûkstanèius dalyviø, DADAA (angl. Disability in the Arts, 

Disadvantage in the Arts, Australia) tinklas Australijoje. Bet Barnesas (2003) 

paþymi, kad negalës kultûra kaip judëjimas negali bûti susiaurinama su neágaliøjø 

siekiu dalyvauti pagrindinëje kultûroje ir atkreipia dëmesá á neágaliøjø socialinës 

integracijos pastangas. 

Helen Keller (1880–1968) – aklos ir kurènebylës, universitetiná 

iðsilavinimà ir mokslø daktaro laipsná ágijusios raðytojos, aktyvios politinio gyvenimo 

veikëjos, pamokslininkës atvejis yra tas pavyzdys, kai dalyvavimas kultûros ir 

visuomenës gyvenime buvo ryški socialinio judëjimo dalis. Ji paraðë 12 knygø ir 

daugybæ straipsniø, kuriuose analizavo aklumà, kurtumà bei kitas socialines 

problemas. Ji buvo ne tik raðytoja, bet ir politinë veikëja, skyrusi daug dëmesio 

darbininkø klasës þmoniø problemoms. Reikðmingas jos indëlis ne tik á neágaliøjø, 

bet ir á moters teisiø klausimo sprendimus. Ðia prasme ji buvo sufraþistë, 

pasisakiusi ávairiais klausimais, susijusiais su moterø lygiø teisiø uþtikrinimu 

visuomenëje, áskaitant ir gimstamumo kontrolæ. Ji visada rodë interesà akløjø ir 



kurèiøjø ugdymo, prevencijos klausimams ne tik savo gimtojoje šalyje. Apkeliavusi 

39 šalis ji tapo žinoma paèiose tolimiausiose šalyse. Kad jos kûryba buvo átakinga 

to meto visuomenës gyvenimui rodo tokie jos veiklos apibûdinimai: „Akla moteris, 

kuri iðmokë pasaulá matyti“ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pimu/797918121/). 

Išvados 

Negalës kultûra yra nauja XX a pabaigos ir XXI a. pradžios koncepcija, kuri þymi 

kokybiðkai naujà visuomenës poþiûrá á kiekvienà neágaløjá ir neágaliuosius kaip 

visuomenës grupæ. Negalës kultûros fenomenas pirmiausia yra neágaliøjø kaip 

visuomenës grupës „sàmonëjimo“ iðraiðka. „Sàmonëjimà“ galima apibrëþti kaip 

sieká suvokti savo socialinio veikimo galimybes, nepaisant ið paþiûros statiðkos 

socialinës ir politinës tikrovës. Negalës kultûra atskleidžia, kad neágalieji kokybiškai 

naujai reflektuoja savo asmenines, istorines, socialines patirtis. 

Nuo seniausiø laikø neágalieji stengësi iðreikðti savo pasaulëþiûros 

unikalumà kurdami ávairius dailës, literatûros, muzikos kûrinius, kurie visais laikais 

žavi savo intelektinës, jausminës ir vitalinës orientacijos savitumu. Nors ir 

pripaþástama kaip ástabi, neágaliøjø kûryba vis dëlto netapo iððûkio paraiðka. Tam 

stokota palankaus socialinio konteksto. Neigiamos visuomenës nuostatos, 

neágaliøjø segregacija, netgi naikinimas neskatino ir netgi baugino þmones kalbëti 

apie neágalumà. Daugelis þymiø meno kûrëjø buvo net neþinomi kaip turintys 

negalæ, o ir patys daþniausiai neidentifikuodavo savo kûrybos kaip negalës 

kultûros. Vis dëlto tylus neágaliøjø dalyvavimas kultûroje buvo reikðmingas, nes 

skatino pozityvaus visuomenës poþiûrio á neágaliuosius formavimàsi. 

Iððûkiai kultûrai yra normalus, netgi sveikintinas reiðkinys, nes, anot 

Donskio (2009, p. 34), kultûros terminas negali apimti visos istorijos ir visuomenës 

gyvenimo fenomenø ávairovës, todël neiðvengiamai formuojasi subkultûros, 

kontrkultûros, superkultûros. Gerokai anksèiau negu pradëta kalbëti apie negalës 

kultûrà kaip fenomenà, kaip savita subkultûra arba mikrokultûra buvo pripaþinta 

kurèiøjø pasaulëþiûra (Hallahan, Kauffman, 2003). Taèiau ði subkultûra taip pat 

netapo iððûkio kultûrai paraiðka. Kurèiøjø mikrokultûra skatino perþengti negalës 

kaip patologijos ribas ir socializuoti kurtumo sàlygotà patirtá. Vis dëlto manoma, kad 

plëtoti negalës subkultûrà ir kalbëti apie jà yra prasminga. Bullitis, Chance, Doyle 

(1999) siûlo kalbëti ir apie Dauno sindromo kultûros (angl. Culture of Down 

Sindrome) fenomenà. 

Neágaliøjø dalyvavimas kultûroje yra þinomas nuo Antikos laikø. Taèiau 

ilgus ðimtmeèius jø dalyvavimas kultûroje atliko garbës ir orumo misijà. XXI a. 

pradžioje negalës kultûra yra išaugusi iš neágaliøjø pasyvaus dalyvavimo kultûroje 


97

98 


rëmø. Negalës kultûra gali bûti traktuojama kaip socialinis judëjimas, telkiantis 

žmones su negale valorizuoti savo socialinæ situacijà. Negalës kultûra yra kaip 

iððûkis kultûros homogeniðkumui, nes iðkilo kaip atsvara, opozicija neágaliøjø 

socialinës ir kultûrinës patirties devolarizacijai. Ðia prasme negalës kultûra yra ne 

tik kaip kultûros fenomenas, bet ir kaip politinës valios paraiška. 

Literatûra 

Albrecht, G. L. (2004). Disability as Global Issue. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Handbook of Social Problems. A 

Comparative International Perspective (p. 586–599). Sage Publications. 

Andrijauskas, A. (2010). Neklasikinës ir postmodernistinës filosofijos metamorfozës. Vilnius. 

Baranova, J (2003). „Anapus Kanto“: M. Foucault nujoji moralës genealogija. Problemos, 63, 1-14. 

Barnes C., Mercer, G. (2001). Disability Culture. Assimilation or Inclusion. In G. L. Albrecht, K. D. 

Seelman, M. Bury (eds.) Handbook of Disability Studies (515-534). Sage Publications. 

Barnes, C. (2003). Effecting Change; Disability, Culture and Art'? [Discussion Paper Based on High 

Beam Seminar May 5 1998 February 1999 S. Chance and E. Bullitis] [þiûrëta 2009 08 30]. 

Prieiga internete: http://www.artsaccess-sa.org.au/downloads/DisabilityCulturePaper98.pdf 

Barnartt, S. N. (2009). The implications of disability protests for social work practice. In F. K. O. Yuen, 

C.B. Cohen, K. Tower (Eds.) Disability and Social Work Education. Practice and Policy Issues 

(p. 195-216). Routledge. 

Brown, Ch. (1998). My Left Foot. England [London]: Vintage. 

Bullitis, E., Chance, S., Doyle, T. (1999). Disability Culture [Discussion Paper Based on High Beam 

Seminar May 5, 1998] [þiûrëta 2009 05 20]. Prieiga internete: . 

Chance, S., Bullitis, E. (1999). Disability Culture. Discussion Paper Based on High Beam Seminar May 5 

1998 February [þiûrëta 2009 09 20]. Prieiga internete: [http://www.artsaccesssa.org.au/downloads/DisabilityCulturePaper98.pdf]. 

Charlton, J.I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Opression and Empowerment. Berkeley, 

CA: University of California Press. 

Conyers, L. M. (2002). Disability: An Emerging Topic in Multicultural Counseling. In Trusty, J. Singh 

Sandhu , D., Looby, E. J. (Eds.) Multicultural Counseling: Context, Theory and Practice, and 

Competence (p. 173-202). Nova Science Publishers, Incorporated 

Corker, M., Shakespeare, T. (Eds) (2002). Disability/Postmodernity. Embodying Disability Theory. 

Coontinuum. London New York. UK. 

Donskis, L (2009). Moderniosios kultûros filosofijos metmenys (2-as pataisytas leidimas). Vilnius: 

Versus Aureus. 

Donskis, L. (1994). Moderniosios sàmonës konfigûracijos. Kultûra tarp mito ir diskurso. Vilnius. 

Ferguson, F. M., Ferguson, D. L., Taylor S. J. (Eds.). (1992). Interpreting Disability. A Qualitative Reader 

(p. 295-302).Teachers College, Columbia University. 

Geertz, C. (2005). Kultûrø interpretavimas (vert. á liet.). Vilnius: Baltos lankos. 

Gerber, M.M. (2007). Globalization, Human Capital, and Learning Disabilities. Learning Disabilities 

Research&Practice, 22(3), 216-217. 

Goleman, D. (2009). Visuomeninis intelektas. Naujas mokslas apie þmoniø santykius (vert. á liet.). 

Vilnius: Presvika 

Gudonis, V. (2008). J. Victors. Aklas muzikantas. Mûsø þodis, 10. [Þiûrëta 2010 sausio mën.] Prieiga 

internete [http://www.lass.lt/mz/200810/str18.htm] 



Gudonis, V. (1996). Socialnije osnovi y puty integraciji lyc c narushenim zrenijem. Klaipeda: Eldija. 

Gray, C. (2009). Narratives of Disability and the Movement from Deficiency to Difference. Cultural 

Sociology, 3 (2), 317-332. [DOI: 10.1177/1749975509105537]. [Þiûrëta 2010 kovo 

mën.] Prieiga internete [http://cus.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/3/2/317]. 

Grigaitis, M. (2006). Postmodernizmas ir kitos literatûrologijos baimës. Ðiaurës Atënai, 815. [Þiûrëta 

2010 kovo mën.] Prieiga internete [http://www.culture.lt/satenai/?leid_id=815&kas=straipsnis 

&st_id=4601] 

Hallahan, D.P., Kauffman J.M. (2003). Ypatingieji mokiniai. Specialiojo ugdymo ávadas (translation into 

Lithuanian). Vilnius. 

Holden, C., Beresford, P. (2002). Disability and Globalization. In Barnes, C., Oliver, M., Barton, L. (Eds.). 

Disability Studies Today. Polity Press, Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 

Irvin, D., Yalom, M.D. (2005). Terapijos dovana (vert á liet k.). Vilnius: Alma Littera. 

Mažeikis, G. (2007). Balet¹ – kaimui. [Þiûrëta 2010 kovo men.] Prieiga internet¹[http://www.anarchija.lt 

/index.php/teorija/36.html?task=view]. 

Martinkus, A. (2004). Skirtumø kultûra. Kultûros barai. 4, 16-20. 

Mostauskis, S. (2011). Beprotybës kartografija. Vilnius: Kronta. 

Price, J.E. (2007). Engaging Disability. Feminist Theory, 8 (1), 77-89. [DOI: 

10.1177/1464700107074199]. [Þiûrëta 2010 m. kovo mën.] Prieiga internete 

[http://fty.sagepub.com] 

Rubavièius, V. (2003). Postmodernusis diskursas: filosofinë hermeneutika, dekonstrukcija, menas. 

Vilnius. 

Ruškus, J., Mažeikis, G. (2007). Neágalumas ir socialinis dalyvavimas. Šiauliai: ŠU leidykla. 

Ruškus, J. (1997). Neágalus asmuo ir visuomenë. Šiauliai. 

Skarderud, F. (2001). Nerimas. Klajonës po modernøjá Að (vert.á. liet.). Vilnius. 

Tomlinson, J. (2002). Globalizacija ir kultûra (translation into Lithuanian). Vilnius: Mintis. 

Turnbull, H.,R., Stowe, M.J. (2001). Five Models for Thinking About Disability. Implications for Policy 

Responses. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 3, vol. 12, 198-205. 

Vaitkevièienë, A. (2006). Vidutiniðkai sutrikusio intelekto jaunuoliø Að veiksmingumo lavinimas 

edukacinëmis situacijomis skatinant dalinæ raiðkà: daktaro disertacija. Šiauliai. 

Valantiejus, A. (2003). Postmodernizmas ir epistemologinio reliatyvizmo spàstai. Sociologija. Mintis ir 

veiksmas, 2, 5-49. 

Valantiejus, A. (2004). Kritinis sociologijos diskursas. Vilnius. 

Valenta, A. (2003). Noriu bûti gyvenimo dalininkas. Etiudai apie neágaliøjø reabilitacijà ir integracijà. 

Vilnius: Brailio spauda. 

Vygotsky, L. S. (2002). Osnovnije problemi sovremenoj defektologiji. V. M. Astapov, J. V. Mikadze (sud.), 

Psichologija detej s narušenijami i otklonenijami psichišeskovo razvitija (p. 10-46). Sankt- 

Peterburg. 

Wolbring, G. (2006). Disabled people: A social group with cultural identities? [Þiûrëta 2009 m. kovo 

mën.] Prieiga internete: 

Wolfensberger, W. (2002). Social Role Valorization and, or Versus, “Empowerment”. Mental 

Retardation, 3, 252-258. 


99

lcc liberal arts studies / 2010 volume iii - LCC International University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?