Reconstructing Self-Identity: Local, Global and Technological Drives

  • Vilmantė LiubinienėEmail author
Part of the Numanities - Arts and Humanities in Progress book series (NAHP, volume 3)


Linking the local with the global and the reverse, localizing the global, have become the reality nowadays. Modern technologies have made a tremendous impetus for globalization and, consequently, have set a new political agenda for communication between cultures and languages. Can the local cultures grounded on local values, beliefs, languages, religion, historical heritage act as drivers of innovation and creativity, or will they act as hindrances in the process of self-identity building? On the other hand, is the rapid spread of new technologies and the network society able to initiate any levelling between the diverse cultural mapping on a global scale? The aim of this chapter is to find out the possible interactions of the local and the global cultural influences and to analyse the stages of self–identity reconstruction in the age of pervasive technological development. Is the digital society leading us towards an establishment of the transmediated self? Methodologically the research is based on Ronald Inglehart’s (Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 65:991–1017, 1977, Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1990, Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1997) theoretical framework of universal value change, Manuel Castells (The Rise of the Network Society: the Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture.Wiley, Oxford, 2010) conceptual paradigm of the network society, J. Sage Elwell’s (Convergence The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 20(2): 233–249, 2014) study on the transmediated self as well as on the theoretical assumptions by Jacques Lacan (The subversion of the subject and the dialectic of desire in the Freudian unconscious response to students of Philosophy concerning the object of psychoanalysis. Seuil, Paris, 2001), Charles Horton Cooley (On Self and Social Organization. University Of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1998) and many others.


Globalization Local Identity Digital generation Network society New media Identity markers Visual representation Lithuanian national identity 


  1. Bell, Philip. 2001. Content analysis of visual images. In Handbook of visual analysis, ed. T. Van Leeuwen, and C. Jewitt, 10–34. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Brockes, Emma. 2013. How you Strike a Selfie Pose Says a Lot about You. The Guardian. Accessed 12 May 2014.
  3. Buffardi, Laura E. and Keith W. Campbell. 2008. Narcissism and social networking sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34: 1303–1314. London: Sage. doi: 10.1177/0146167208320061.
  4. Buhr, Renee, Marharyta S. Fabrykant, and Steven M. Hoffman. 2014. The measure of a nation: Lithuanian identity in the new century. Journal of Baltic Studies 45 (2): 143–168. London: Taylor & Francis. doi: 10.1080/01629778.2014.883418.
  5. Castells, Manuel. 2010. The Rise of the Network Society: the Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Chalfen, Richard. 2002. Snapshots “r” us: the evidentiary problematic of home media. Visual Studies, 17 (2): 141–149. London: Taylor & Francis. doi: 10.1080/1472586022000032215.
  7. Chouliaraki, Lilie. 2012. Self-mediation, New Media, Citizenship and Civil Selves. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Cooley, Charles Horton. 1998. On Self and Social Organization. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. DeNinno, Nadine. 2014. Felfie: Farmers Posting Selfies are the Cream of the Crop on Social Media [PHOTOS]. International Business Times. Accessed 30 May 2014.
  10. Diltz, Joshua. 2011. Digital voices. Journal of Visual Culture. 10: 55. London: Sage. doi: 10.1177/1470412910391558.
  11. Elwell, J. Sage. 2014. The transmediated self: life between the digital and the analog. Convergence The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies. 20 (2): 233–249. London: Sage. doi: 10.1177/1354856513501423.
  12. Garreau, Joel. 2008. Friends Indeed? As we Click with More Pals Online, the Idea of Friendship Multiplies. The Washington Post. Accessed 22 May 2014.
  13. Geertz, Clifford. 1983. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  14. Gordon, Wendy and Virginia Valentine. 2000. 21st Century Consumer—a New Model of Thinking. London: MRS Conference.Google Scholar
  15. Greenfeld, Liah. 1992. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Inglehart, Ronald. 1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Inglehart, Ronald. 1997. Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Inglehart, Ronald. 1977. The silent revolution in Europe: intergenerational change in post-industrial societies. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 65: 991–1017. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kapidzic, Sanja and Susan C. Herring. 2014. Race, Gender, and self-presentation in teen profile photographs. New Media Society 1–19. London: Sage. doi: 10.1177/1461444813520301.
  20. Klausner, Alexandra. 2014. The Most Dangerous Selfies yet? Scores of Teens Compete in ‘Selfie Olympics’ Outdoing each other with Riskier Poses, Mail Online. Accessed 16 May 2014.
  21. Klumbyte, Neringa. 2003. Ethnographic note on nation: narratives and symbols of the early post-socialist nationalism in Lithuania. Dialectical Anthropology 27: 279–295. Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Kohn, Hans. 1955. Nationalism: its Meaning and History. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company.Google Scholar
  23. Kress, R.Gunther, and Theo van Leeuwen. 2006. Reading Images. The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Lacan, Jacques. 2001. The subversion of the subject and the dialectic of desire in the Freudian unconscious response to students of Philosophy concerning the object of psychoanalysis. Trans. Jeffrey Mehlman in October 40, Spring 1987. In Autres Écrits, Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  25. Liubinienė, Vilmantė. 2004. Transformation of values in the process of democratisation. In Björklund, F.; Liubinienė, V. Value Change Related to the Process of Democratisation in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Research Reports 1, Stockholm: Södertörns Högskola.Google Scholar
  26. Nelson, Hilde. 2001. Damaged Identities, Narrative Repair. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Schechtman, Marya. 1996. The Constitution of Selves. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Slater, Don. 1995. Domestic photography and digital culture. In The photographic image in digital culture, ed. Martin Lister, 129–146. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Strano, M. Michele. 2008. User descriptions and interpretations of self-presentation through Facebook profile images. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 2 (2), article 1, = 1 Accessed 12 May 2014.
  30. Uldam, Julie. 2013. Self-mediation. New media, citizenship and civil selves. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 57 (3): 431–434. London: Taylor & Francis. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2013.816713.
  31. Van Dijck, Jan. 2008. Digital photography: communication, identity, memory. Visual Communication 7: 57–76. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. 2014. Evolution of a Selfie Obsessed Generation. Accessed 25 May 2014.
  33. Zhao Shanyang, Grasmuck Sherri and Jason Martin. 2008. Identity construction on Facebook: digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior 24: 1816–1836. Elsevier.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kaunas University of TechnologyKaunasLithuania

Personalised recommendations