Joshua Neves. Underglobalization: Beijing’s Media Urbanism and the Chimera of Legitimacy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, . ix, pp. Hardcover $., ISBN . Paperback $., ISBN . Focusing on the distribution of the social along the dividing lines between the legal and the illegal, between the legitimate and the illegitimate, and between legality and legitimacy, Underglobalization: Beijing’s Media Urbanism and the Chimera of Legitimacy examines the frictional forms, technologies, practices, and infrastructures of these dividing lines. The book’s author Joshua Neves argues that “illegality and illegitimacy as global techniques and techniques of being global” (p. ) frame norms of Chinese citizenship. The book’s title “underglobalization” refers to “the ways social actors undermine or underperform” (p. ) the implementation of procedures and protocols of globalization at different scales. The concept is intended to address “the illicit or underworldly practices—often illegal but valid in their own contexts” (p. ). Neves demonstrates an impressive engagement with an interdisciplinary body of scholarly works. Compared with most of the books in Chinese studies written for a small audience in a specialized field, this book is written for a broader spectrum of readers from such fields as film studies, media studies, urban studies, anthropology, postcolonial studies, intra-Asia cultural studies, and popular culture studies. Chinese studies readers should appreciate the ways in which Neves assembles diverse prominent scholarly works: for example, Chinese film and literature (Chris Berry, Lu Xinyu, Yomi Braester, Yingjin Zhang, Sheldon Lu, Mi Jiayan, Zhen Zhang, Michael Berry, Rey Chow, Jason McGrath, Lisa Rofel), television studies (James Lull, Hong Junhao, Ruoyun Bai, Geng Song, Ying Zhu, Michael Curtin, Anna McCarthy), intellectual property rights related media studies (Ackbar Abbas, Laikwan Pang, Andrew Mertha, Shujen Wang, Fan Yang, Winnie Wong), labor and technology studies (Pun Ngai, Aihwa Ong, Cara Wallis), and “postsocialism” studies (Arif Dirlik, Xi Chen, Ralph Litzinger, Xudong Zhang). Neves proposes “Beijing as method” (p. ) by using Chen Kuang-hsing’s concept of “Asia as method,” that is, Asia as an anchoring point for understanding the ways in which diverse historical and social practices in Asia become reference points for each other. While the author acknowledges a large body of scholarly Review© by University of Hawai‘i Press works on Chinese cities (e.g., Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Taipei), his analysis mostly engages ideas generated by studies of cities in the Global South, for example, Mumbai (Nikhil Anand), Delhi (Ravi Sundaram), Jakarta (Neferti X. M. Tadiar), and Johannesburg (AbdouMaliq Simone). Thus, the book demonstrates the relevance of pursuing comparative urban studies of globalization by connecting Beijing to cities in Asia and Africa from the perspective of critical media studies. Neves uses Partha Chatterjee’s “political society” to examine “the workings of democracy in zones marked by informality, illegality, weak entitlements, fractured citizenship, and other uncertain relations below and beyond the law” (p. ). This concept serves as an alternative to the theme of the state–society relations in Chinese studies (e.g., from Philip C. C. Huang to Craig Calhoun). It offers a productive discussion of “fake” and “piracy,” which commonly refer to counterfeit goods and intellectual property piracy, especially copyright and related violations in the legal context of business practices. The book aims to reorient this kind of research toward “concrete failures in legality, democracy, and globalization” (p. ). That is, rather than legal issues of informal and illicit practices, the book focuses on the sociality of these practices. The book’s examples include issues of housing demolition, relocation of Beijing residents; claims on the city shaped by ambient television, cinematic spectatorship, and piracy; and mundane and informal forms of creativity that are “widely dismissed as mere imitation and yet drive social infrastructures and urban belonging” (p. ). The book’s organization corresponds to the three stages of the author’s fieldwork in Beijing between and . The first two chapters cover research at the initial stage that focuses on a “representational and ethnographic study of Beijing’s film and TV cultures and their relationship to Olympic-era development” (p.). Chapter addresses both the production of Beijing as “a set of competing vectors—partitioned between the fading past and the future perfect” and the circulation of Beijing “across subnational and transnational scales as/in media” (p. ). The...
Read full abstract