Metaconsumption and Re-memory

Shalini Shankar's article, Metaconsumptive Practices and the Circulation of Objectifications, and Divya Tolia-Kelly's article, Locating Processes of Identification, offer to the reader differing views on the power that objects hold for those people living in diasporas, and how it is these objects come to signify both the past, present, and future of these people. At the same time, much of the discourse surrounding diasporic objects contains several key assumptions, which are present in both articles despite the differing approaches to the topic.

      In Shankar's article, the author discusses the role of objects to diasporas in terms of their consumptive value and use rather than emphasizing the historical significance an object may have. Unlike most discourse surrounding diasporic objects, Shankar takes a look at how those living in their host country acquire objects of societal importance unique to that society, and use language in order to attach meaning and importance to those objects. This paper is not centrally interested in heirlooms, relics, or antiques from the diasporic individuals homeland. Rather, Shankar focuses on the acquisition of items commonly referred to as “status symbols” by those in the individual's community. By examining several families, and the way in which the acquisition of objects, namely expensive cars and electronics, Shankar describes a sense of social hierarchy which is created for not only the individuals or families which own said objects, but can be transferred to extended family and even friends through what Shankar defines as “metaconsumption.” Through this practice, those who may not directly have claim to an object of worth, can in fact create a sense of ownership through the use of language to allude to some form of entitlement to the object. The point in doing so for these South-Asian communities living in America is undeniably linked to both status and identity, which were concepts touched upon in our first class discussion.

      While a relative may have the ability and financial security to afford an extravagant item like a Mercedes CLK, those relatives who do not can effectively lay claim to some of the status and identity which come along with owning such an object. But this is not to say that the objectification and metaconsumption of objects exists in a strictly status-tinged environment. As Shankar describes, even though some of the South-Asians may have the financial stability to excel up the social ladder, many choose to remain where they are, instead focusing on community and kinship, both which are central to the study of diasporic objects. The author finishes by discussing the second generation in the South-Asian diaspora in relation to their interactions with consumer culture; namely hip-hop culture. This relationship revolves around certain objects: cars, jewelry and branded clothing. Once again these are given meaning through metaconsumptive language. While Shankar does not discuss how this metaconsumption exists in relation to diasporic objects from the homeland, the reader is given insight into the world of language and objectification, both which are important to understanding how objects are given meaning.

      Tolia-Kelly's article focuses on the importance which memory and re-memory play in the lives of South-Asians living in England. The concept of re-memory is central to the article, which differentiates itself from memory by focusing not on the experienced, but rather the ways in which sensations can trigger such recollections. The importance of objects in connecting individuals in diasporas to their homeland is arguably the central function in which diasporic objects exist to serve. But these objects not only resurrect a sense of home and belonging for the individual, but also facilitate the construction of a common cultural heritage among individuals living in diasporas. While objects from the homeland are often ascribed which certain narratives which the individual has experienced, it is the re-memory which exists in a unique realm. Everyday experiences can trigger a re-memory for those living in diasporas, not based on an actual experience of the individual, but rather an experience which has been illustrated through a cultural narrative discussed amongst the diaspora. This is where the power of language is once again realized. 

     Through the use of language, individuals in a diaspora can impart social narratives to objects as well as sensations which others may, or may not have experienced. As the use of objects to establish a sense of social and cultural history amongst diasporic individuals is a practice documented by many scholars, the ability of these objects to illicit a re-memory in the individual is a phenomena which must be understood in order to truly grasp how these individuals traverse through an environment which is not their 'home'. One issue with this article is the position of memory and re-memory as a phenomena which is associated with colonial rule, and the post-colonial experiences of diasporic individuals. The placement of these individuals into the “victim” diaspora taints their experiences as if to say they need objects in order to maintain their cultural and social sovereignty. While diasporic objects may facilitate a sense of history and create community through shared memories, they are but one avenue through which individuals can express agency.

Questions:

1. What are the ramifications of the metaconsumption of diasporic items? Are such practices community building or segregative amongst those in diasporas?
2. As a concept, does re-memory exist in later generations living in diasporas? Do the children of first-generation diasporic individuals have the capacity for re-memory having no actual experienced memory of the homeland?