SOC3SOC Journal 2: Critical Analysis of Griswold’s Cultural Diamond Theory

The theory of cultural diamond, by Wendy Griswold explains the connection between culture and society, by emphasising how cultural objects, audience, creator and the wider social context are involved in shaping the cultural and social perceptions. This journal critically analyses the Griswold’s cultural diamond framework by assessing its strengths and limitations, using cultural and social theories, literature and real world examples.

Griswold (2012) proposes that people understand/perceive cultural by looking into the relationship or interaction between the cultural objects (such as piece of art, music etc.), the audience, the creator and the wider social context. This theory of cultural diamond model highlights its effectiveness and applicability in bridging the gap between the social and scientific perspectives of how people perceive culture, or how people make meanings form cultural objects in a specific social context. This theory reflects the concept of shaping culture, as it focuses that culture is not created alone, instead, it is shaped by the overall society, on a broader level. The theory highlights that culture forms through a collectivist approach, where the audience, creator, the cultural object and the social wider world collaborate and set cultural norms.

The first strength of this theory is that it provides a broad picture of culture in a societal context, as it does not only highlights the role of creator, but also highlights the role of the audience and the interaction between them. The case of the Vietnamese music video “There’s no one at all’ is a perfect reflection of the cultural diamond theory which shows how the interaction between the elements i.e. creator (Son Tung), the audience, the music video and the wider social context, impacted how people understood the music (cultural object) (Hai, 2023). The music video was misunderstood by the people, as they perceived that it is about suicidal thoughts, as a result of which the video was banned. This shows how the audience and the broader social context influenced the cultural object (music video) and the creator (artist), imitating how culture is shaped by these interconnected elements.

The second strength of this theory is that it imitates the influence of cultural norms in the production and perception of cultural objects in the society (Griswold, 2012). This ideology has also been supported by Shao et al. (2019) which says that culture or creativity is the outcome of cultural norms and beliefs, and these norms somehow facilitates, shapes or acts as a point of reference for the process of creativity. For example, in the light of Hofstede’s cultural dimension Xing and Jin (2023) reflects how cultural thoughts/values or perceptions such as power distance, individualism or feminity impacted people’s buying intentions of cultural products. Therefore, this highlights the effectiveness of applicability of the cultural diamond theory.

However, despite the strengths of this model, there are certain limitations, which might impact the applicability of this model on a broader context. The first limitation is the ignorance of the element of power dynamics in shaping culture, as the cultural diamond theory only highlights the role of interaction between creator, audience, cultural object and social context. However, in some cases/situations, power also acts as an influencer, of how culture should be perceived by people. The study by Alison and Debo (2024) can be considered for a better understanding of this point, as it imitates how language acts as a symbol or an exercise of power in a social context, and the voice of the marginalized people is silenced. For example, the forced adoption of English languages in colonial context and suppression of indigenous languages has shaped the societal values, making the English language as a norm. This shows how power dynamics come into play and shapes the cultural norms and perceptions on a wider level. Therefore, the cultural diamond theory cannot be applied in this context, which is a limitation.

Moreover, the second limitation of the cultural diamond theory is the over-emphasis on the role of societal interaction and wider social context while shaping culture. However, this is not always the case, as studied in the lecture that some theorists such as William Raymond believes that culture is not always shaped on a broader social context, instead it can also be shaped on individual level based on what has been thought or known by the people (Wright, 2025). The study by Dhawan (2019) also gives an example from William’s viewpoint that culture dominated by public does not account for the practices that are practised in the private culture. This point also limits the applicability of the Griswold’s theory on an individualised/private level.

To conclude, it could be said that the Griswold’s cultural diamond theory provides valuable insights on the interconnectedness and relationship between the culture and society, such as among the audience, the wider social context, the creator and the cultural object. However, this model is not applicable in the context of role power dynamics or individualist perspectives of shaping culture, which are the identified limitations of this model.

References:

Alison, R. & Debo, D. (2024). The power dynamics in language and culture. Culture, 1-5. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387456943_The_Power_Dynamics_in_Language_and_Culture#:~:text=The%20power%20dynamics%20in,need%20for%20critical%20engagement

Dhawan, A. (2019). Raymond William‘s Perception of Culture: An Insight. Research Review Journals, 4(01), 1-3. https://old.rrjournals.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2001-2003_RRIJM190401256.pdf

Griswold, W. (2012). Cultures and societies in a changing world. Sage.

Hai, H. (2023). Using the Culture Diamond Model to Analyze the Relations between the Artists on Audiences through Music Videos under Vietnamese Social Context Based on Case Study MV “There’s No One At All”: Perspective from Students at FPT University. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 13(5), 333-337. https://www.ijssh.net/uploadfile/vol13/1167-CS5016.pdf

Shao, Y., Zhang, C., Zhou, J., Gu, T., & Yuan, Y. (2019). How does culture shape creativity? A mini-review. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1219. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01219

Wright, D. K. (2025). Making Culture: Art and the culture Industries, Week 4 lecture-part 1 [PowerPoint slides]. La Trobe University. enter URL

Xing, Y., & Jin, C. H. (2023). The impact of cultural values on attitude formation toward cultural products: mediating effects of country image. Sustainability, 15(14), 11172. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411172