Culture, in human societies, has two main aspects; an external, formal aspect and an inner, ideological aspect. The external forms of culture, social or artistic, are merely an organized expression of its inner ideological aspect, and both are an inherent component of a given social structure. They are changed or modified when this structure. They are changed and modified when this structure is changed or modified and because of this organic link they also help and influence such changes in their parent organism. Cultural Problems, therefore, cannot be studied or understood or solved in isolation from social problems, i.e. problems of political and economic relationships. The cultural problems of the underdeveloped countries, therefore, have to be understood and solved in the light of larger perspective, in the context of underlying social problems. Very broadly speaking, these problems are primarily the problems of arrested growth;
they originate primarily from long years of imperialist-Colonialist domination and the remnants of a backward outmoded social structure. This should not require much elaboration European Imperialism caught up with the countries of Asia, Africa or Latin America between the sixteenth
and nineteenth centuries. Some of them were fairly developed feudal societies with ancient traditions of advanced feudal culture. Others had yet to progress beyond primitive pastoral tribalism. Social and cultural development of them all was frozen at the point of their political
subjugation and remained frozen until the coming of political independence. The culture of these ancient feudal societies, in spite of much technical and intellectual excellence, was restricted to a
small privileged class and rarely intermingled with the parallel unsophisticated folk culture of the general masses. Primitive tribal culture, in spite of its child like beauty, had little intellectual content. Both feudal and tribal societies living contagiously in the same homelands were
constantly engaged in tribal, racial and religious or other feuds with their tribal and feudal rivals.
Colonialist – imperialist domination accentuated this dual fragmentation, the vertical division among different tribal and national groups, the horizontal division among different classes within the same tribal or national groups. This is the basic ground structure, social and cultural,
bequeathed to the newly liberated countries by their former over lords.
In human societies, there are two main facets of culture: extrinsic and intrinsic. The former is a manifestation of inner ideas. Both are an integral part of society and change as society changes.
Any alteration in society causes change in these two characteristics which, in turn, effects the host species. Cultural problems in less developed countries, which originated with their colonization, are wedded to social issues and have to be understood in a broad social scenario.
Societies in such countries were either feudal or tribal and their evolution ceased with colonization. In countries, where these two segments co-existed, they engaged in disputes over different issues. Colonialism deepened the chasm between them. Thus, colonists left a
disintegrated society in countries where they ruled.
Cultural Issues in Underdeveloped Countries: a legacy of Colonialism
Effect of Colonization on Culture
Required words = 362/3 = 120
Words after making precis = 122
From Plato to Tolstoi art has been accused of exciting our emotions and thus of disturbing the order and harmony of our moral life.” Poetical imagination, according to Plato, waters our experience of lust and anger,
of desire and pain, and makes them grow when they ought to starve with drought. “Tolstoi sees in art a source of infection. “Not only in infection,” he says, “a sign of art , but the degree of infectiousness is also the sole measure of excellence in art.” But the flaw in this theory is obvious. Tolstoi suppresses a fundamental moment of art, the moment of form. The aesthetic experience – the experience of contemplation- is a different state of mind from the coolness of our theoretical and the sobriety of our moral
judgment. It is filled with the liveliest energies of passion, but passion itself is here transformed both in its nature and in its meaning. Wordsworth defines poetry as “ emotion recollected in tranquility’. But the tranquility we feel in great poetry is not that of recollection. The emotions aroused by the poet do not belong to a remote past. They are “ here”- alive and immediate. We are aware of their full strength, but this strength
tends in a new direction. It is rather seen than immediately felt. Our passions are no longer dark and impenetrable powers; they become, as it were, transparent. Shakespeare never gives us an aesthetic theory.
He does not speculate about the nature of art. Yet in the only passage in which he speaks of the character and functions of dramatic art the whole stress is laid upon this point. “ The purpose of playing,” as Hamlet
explains, “ both at the first and now, was and is, to hold, as, twere, the mirror up to nature; to show virtue her own feature, scorn her own image, and the very age and body of the time, his form and pressure.” But the
image of the passion is not the passion itself. The poet who represents a passion doest not infected us with this passion. At a Shakespeare play we are not infected with the ambition of Macbeth, with the cruelty of
Richard III or with the jealously of Othello. We are not at the mercy of these emotions; we look through them; we seem to penetrate into their very nature and essence. In this respect Shakespeare’s theory of dramatic
art, if he had such a theory, is in complete agreement with the conception of the fine arts of the great painters and sculptors.
Art – According to artists
Artists like Plato, Tolstoy, Shakespeare and Hamlet explains their instinct through their art. The attraction of their art not affected current mass vigorously as perceive to do so. They explained the power of nature,
theme of tranquility, and such as other opinions to adherent amass, which are not meeting the desired outcome because of knowledge of prior decades are under the observance of today
s world and utilizing the strength of knowledge according to the todays norms.
For more Past Paper click here