Cultural hyrbidity

Authors Avatar

“CONTEMPORARY UK SOCIETY HAS EXPERIENCED THE FORMATION OF A COMMON CULTURAL HYBRID.” EXAMINE AND EVALUATE THIS VIEW IN TERMS OF EXPLAINING ETHNIC IDENTITY.

The fusion of cultural and ethnic identities refers to hybridisation.  Most people acknowledge that they can be affiliated with an individual culture.  Banton (2000) notes that “in the contemporary UK ethnicity is becoming increasingly recognised as something everyone has”. Common interests or shared values help form and develop cultural attachment’s (culture, descent, ancestry, religion, languages, food and traditional values) which in turn develops and forges ethnic identities.  Migration of ethnic minorities has stirred some of the UK’s population into feeling the British national identity is under threat.  Hybrid identity can be attributed to the exchange of culture through globalisation.

Sheila Patterson (1965) studied first generation migrants in Brixton, London during the 1950’s.  Her study involved interviews, observation and participant observation with 250 whites and 150 Afro-Caribbean’s. Patterson (1965) believes the relationship between hosts and immigrants as not fixed but evolving all the time; “Whilst adaption through socialisation and acculturation was difficult for immigrants, the host’s experience was a more passive form of acceptance.”  Eriksen (2002) points out that “no serious scholar today believes that hereditary characteristics explain cultural variations.”  Patterson (1965) also states “the incoming group as a whole … adapts itself to permanent membership of the receiving society in certain major spheres notably economic and civil life.”  Patterson’s final stage of adaption is assimilation, where migrants or minority groups achieve complete acceptance in society. Patterson observed that physical amalgamation may lead to distinctive features of migrant groups and that of their hosts to be lost.  Patterson found the progress of the West Indian migrants in Britain was limited, “there was still opposition to the employment of West Indians by white workers.”  Nick names and jocular references resulted in conflict.  A rise in the number of West Indian landlords and the acceptance of West Indian tenants did however help alleviate housing problems.  Racism existed with some shops refusing the custom of ethnic minorities due to the colour of their skin.  Social relationships between migrants and hosts existed but only on a casual contact basis.  Patterson (1965) noted that some of the West Indians had adopted the British way of life however, there were few inter-racial marriages.  Paterson concluded “over the next decades in Britain the West Indian migrants and their children will follow in the steps of the Irish and achieve almost complete assimilation into British Society.” 

Join now!

Sheila Patterson (1965) came under scrutiny from John Richardson and John Lambert (1985), criticising the immigrant-host model, noting that it raised more questions than it did answers, whilst also assuming assimilation was a desirable goal.  They also believe it does not address the issue that racism existed and was a cause of ethnic conflict and inequality.  A further criticism notes that “it tends to ignore the cultural diversity and the wide variations in values that may already exist in the host society.”   Richardson and Lambert (1985) believe it is no longer possible to view Britain as having one dominant culture.   ...

This is a preview of the whole essay