During last class someone in class brought up the recent study that found Britons suffered a strikingly large percentage of the fatalities during the Titanic sinking. Intrigued, I found an article on the study and learned more about this claim. Though there is no way to truly explain the phenomenon, the prevailing theory is that British 'queued up' and waited to board life-boats while American's were more prone to jump right on.
What strikes me is not that American's would act savagely, but that cultural norms could still prevail in a crisis situation. The impassibility of these norms and traditions, deeply embedded in our psyche, govern our rationality even during the irrational. Most of the passenger's on the Titanic had probably never been on a sinking ship before, yet they all (well, the British anyway) collectively decided on the norms of behavior and conformed to such. I would have thought irrationality would have prevailed in such a circumstance, however one man is quoted saying "be British, boys!"
If our cultural norms and biases are present even in our final moments, it makes wonder how we might overcome them to maintain good diplomacy, international relations.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/more-britons-than-americans-died-on-titanic-because-they-queued-1452299.html
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Collective Forgetting
As a history major, I am acutely aware of how different governments and people twist history for their own ends. Governments, in particular, constantly revise and rewrite history textbooks and other mediums that are used in public classrooms to effect how future citizens will view different issues. No where was this practice more apparent to me then when I was studying abroad in China last semester.
Although my experience in China gave me a deeper appreciation for Chinese culture, I have to admit I was often disturbed by how the Chinese government affected the flow of information to its citizens. Beyond just censoring material that was critical of the CCP, the government also banned a host of other information, including documents and videos pertaining to the Tienanmen Square incident in 1989. Even trying to access videos on You-tube about the event would lead to a short interruption of one’s internet. More than just irritating (especially if one is trying to do a project on that event), I found these restrictions morally troubling. Many Chinese people that I talked to were either unaware of the significance of the event or had not heard of it at all. Coupled with the endless censoring on the part of the government, one could also make an argument that for the Chinese, it was like Tienanmen had never happened.
Now, I know that the textbook mentioned how in Chinese culture, riots and political strife were not as serious issues as in Western culture. And, given that many in the West tend to demonize whatever the Chinese government does, especially here in America given the government’s Communist history, I also know that my own view of China must be skewed to some degree. However, going back to the issue of universalist versus relative values that I was talking about last week, I have to admit I was having trouble swallowing what the Chinese government was/is doing. When I was walking around my Chinese campus, talking with different students, I could not help but question their views or opinions on different issues because of the restrictions placed on public knowledge and written publications. I do not know if I am being ethno-centric or just a good critic.
Although my experience in China gave me a deeper appreciation for Chinese culture, I have to admit I was often disturbed by how the Chinese government affected the flow of information to its citizens. Beyond just censoring material that was critical of the CCP, the government also banned a host of other information, including documents and videos pertaining to the Tienanmen Square incident in 1989. Even trying to access videos on You-tube about the event would lead to a short interruption of one’s internet. More than just irritating (especially if one is trying to do a project on that event), I found these restrictions morally troubling. Many Chinese people that I talked to were either unaware of the significance of the event or had not heard of it at all. Coupled with the endless censoring on the part of the government, one could also make an argument that for the Chinese, it was like Tienanmen had never happened.
Now, I know that the textbook mentioned how in Chinese culture, riots and political strife were not as serious issues as in Western culture. And, given that many in the West tend to demonize whatever the Chinese government does, especially here in America given the government’s Communist history, I also know that my own view of China must be skewed to some degree. However, going back to the issue of universalist versus relative values that I was talking about last week, I have to admit I was having trouble swallowing what the Chinese government was/is doing. When I was walking around my Chinese campus, talking with different students, I could not help but question their views or opinions on different issues because of the restrictions placed on public knowledge and written publications. I do not know if I am being ethno-centric or just a good critic.
Crimes of the Past Affecting Today
It is interesting the different histories that shape culture and intercultural communication. The things that happened in the past shape our current and future perceptions of events and even people. For instance, in the Martin and Nakayama textbook there are two students’ voices that talk about different perspectives involving the Holocaust.
One student is German and of typical Aryan description. Even though he was obviously not a Nazi, because of his ethnic history he was persecuted by people for being linked to a particularly bad period of German history. The other student was living in Germany and dating a Jewish boy. She characterized all the Germans in this day and age as having Nazi tendencies. There is no doubt that the Holocaust was a terrible and tragic period in Germany's history, but just because German's share the same ethnicity as the Nazis does not mean that they should continually be persecuted for what their ancestors did. I have also been affected by this history. Even though I am American and most of my family is, my ancestors were German. When I was younger I had a friend that was Jewish. When I was learning about the Holocaust in school, I remember being really upset about what my ancestors did to hers.
I feel like the same thing applies to Americans and slavery. Because of our history with the enslavement of black people and the awful things that we put our fellow human beings through in the past, we are still sometimes held accountable for those misdeeds today. There are still huge racial tensions between the different ethnicities of this country. Last fall I took a class on African American Experiences in the Performing Arts and the class turned out to be more about race relations than about the arts. The professor seemed to be still really angry about the racial history of America's past. She was still looking for the white kids in the class to apologize for what their ancestors did over 200 years ago.
I also have a friend who is Serbian. I met her when we were studying abroad in Prague last spring. For some reason many people kept getting in fights with her over the Bosnian genocide and the conflict over Kosovo that people of her ethnicity committed. Both her parents are from Serbia, but she was born and raised in the United States. She is held accountable for the awful things that happened in her ethnic history. It may not be fair, but we equate ethnic histories to the same ethnicities today.
It is hard to break away from stereotyping ethnicities today with crimes that they have committed in the past. We have to remember that, yes, the people may share the same ideas and sentiments as their ethnic predecessors, but that is usually not the case. History plays an important part in shaping our cultural beliefs about other ethnicities, but that is not all that we should focus on.
One student is German and of typical Aryan description. Even though he was obviously not a Nazi, because of his ethnic history he was persecuted by people for being linked to a particularly bad period of German history. The other student was living in Germany and dating a Jewish boy. She characterized all the Germans in this day and age as having Nazi tendencies. There is no doubt that the Holocaust was a terrible and tragic period in Germany's history, but just because German's share the same ethnicity as the Nazis does not mean that they should continually be persecuted for what their ancestors did. I have also been affected by this history. Even though I am American and most of my family is, my ancestors were German. When I was younger I had a friend that was Jewish. When I was learning about the Holocaust in school, I remember being really upset about what my ancestors did to hers.
I feel like the same thing applies to Americans and slavery. Because of our history with the enslavement of black people and the awful things that we put our fellow human beings through in the past, we are still sometimes held accountable for those misdeeds today. There are still huge racial tensions between the different ethnicities of this country. Last fall I took a class on African American Experiences in the Performing Arts and the class turned out to be more about race relations than about the arts. The professor seemed to be still really angry about the racial history of America's past. She was still looking for the white kids in the class to apologize for what their ancestors did over 200 years ago.
I also have a friend who is Serbian. I met her when we were studying abroad in Prague last spring. For some reason many people kept getting in fights with her over the Bosnian genocide and the conflict over Kosovo that people of her ethnicity committed. Both her parents are from Serbia, but she was born and raised in the United States. She is held accountable for the awful things that happened in her ethnic history. It may not be fair, but we equate ethnic histories to the same ethnicities today.
It is hard to break away from stereotyping ethnicities today with crimes that they have committed in the past. We have to remember that, yes, the people may share the same ideas and sentiments as their ethnic predecessors, but that is usually not the case. History plays an important part in shaping our cultural beliefs about other ethnicities, but that is not all that we should focus on.
The Cultural Iceberg
I really liked Weaver's analogy that culture is like an iceberg and that only a small part of our culture (our external culture) can be seen although most of the conflicts occur between the unseen parts of culture (internal culture). I think this is very true. For example, when we see someone who is wearing a burka, we may feel uncomfortable because it is different from what women in America wear, but any true conflict of culture will occur when values or beliefs that are under the surface are revealed.
Also I agree with the idea that we are often unaware of our internal culture, because at home we are surrounded by those who share a very similar internal culture. When I went to Japan five years ago, seeing the different ways the Japanese students lived and the different things they valued, made me more aware of my culture and my own self in general. I learned how much the Japanese value both family and history, which made me more aware that I might not value these things enough.
This hidden internal culture can also lead to ethnocentrism. When one spends most of their life surrounded by people with a similar culture, it is easy to believe that their culture is the only culture or the best culture. When meeting someone of another culture, one may be blinded by the difference in external culture rather than seeing through to the internal culture of the other person, which may not actually be that different.
In the past when I have learned about ethnocentrism it was presented as a bad thing, but I think it is almost always inevitable to have a sense of ethnocentrism, because our culture is such a large part of who we are. Especially when in a new or strange situation, it is always more comfortable to gravitate to people who share similar lifestyles and values. The key is not to let your ethnocentrism get in the way of appreciating and respecting the value of a culture that is different than your own.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Embodied Ethnocentrism
I am from Bahrain a small island in the Middle East and I'm sure most of you have never heard of it! I've been studying in the US for the past two years and every time I meet new people they ask me if being here is a culture shock. I had the advantage of visiting the US a couple of times before college so I had a first hand understanding of the people and way of living here. As a result, I do not feel uncomfortable or out of place.
As we discussed in class, there is the idea that when you are in a foreign country you tend to stick with people of the same background as yourself. It was interesting to me when we started talking about this since it’s a situation I'm going through. I do believe this is somewhat true. Most of my friends here are from the same area as me and with similar cultural backgrounds. The textbook explains this calling it embodied ethnocentrism. Embodied ethnocentrism is the notion that when we are in our own cultural surroundings we feel a sense of familiarity and comfort. I think that makes sense since it is what you are generally used to. However, I believe this idea is prevailing to those who have a strong identification with their own cultural conditions.
As for myself, even though I come from an Arabic culture, we are a pretty 'open-minded' society. It was funny when Professor Hayden brought up how Saudi Arabian boys behave pretty much like people here. Despite being from different ends of the world, surprisingly, we all go through the same problems and lifestyles as everyone else here. As a result, I do not feel so out of place.
As we discussed in class, there is the idea that when you are in a foreign country you tend to stick with people of the same background as yourself. It was interesting to me when we started talking about this since it’s a situation I'm going through. I do believe this is somewhat true. Most of my friends here are from the same area as me and with similar cultural backgrounds. The textbook explains this calling it embodied ethnocentrism. Embodied ethnocentrism is the notion that when we are in our own cultural surroundings we feel a sense of familiarity and comfort. I think that makes sense since it is what you are generally used to. However, I believe this idea is prevailing to those who have a strong identification with their own cultural conditions.
As for myself, even though I come from an Arabic culture, we are a pretty 'open-minded' society. It was funny when Professor Hayden brought up how Saudi Arabian boys behave pretty much like people here. Despite being from different ends of the world, surprisingly, we all go through the same problems and lifestyles as everyone else here. As a result, I do not feel so out of place.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
High-Context versus Low-Context Cultures and How Relative Should One's Values be?
There are two pieces of the discussion that was held last week that I would like to touch upon in my blog. The first piece deals with the article by Edward and Elizabeth Hall entitled, “Why Cultures Collide?” and the second deals with the discussion on universalist values versus ones that are more relative.
In regards to the article by Edward and Elizabeth Hall, I found his discussion about high-context cultures particularly interesting. Although this is not something that was explicitly touched upon in class to my memory, nonetheless, I believe it was one of the more important notions that we read about for that particular class. The reason why I found this whole notion of contextual situations so interesting is because I am an SIS student who is focusing his studies on a rising China. Looking at the potential for conflict with the U.S. in the coming years, it behooves me to better understand Chinese culture so as to better understand Chinese foreign policy.
China, as described by the Halls, falls into the category of a high-context society, which they describe as a society that has less mobility, that is harder to reform, and that has a lot of other characteristics. In contrast, the United States as well as many other Western nations falls under the category of a low-context society, which is mostly opposite. This is an interesting dichotomy to draw because this argument does accurately explain both the U.S. and China’s current political climate in which the former handles change much more fluidly than the latter. With this knowledge in mind, one can expect China to continue to be slow in adopting change which, in my mind, alters perceptions about the possibility of China being a revisionist power if it rises to pre-eminence.
The other interesting point that I wanted to bring up in this week’s blog pertains to the heated discussion about judging different cultures and whether one should look at these different societies through a universalist lens or a more relative lens. During the discussion, the debate evolved to the point in which people were talking about whether or not international aid organizations (that are mostly Western) have the right to challenge certain cultural practices in countries which appear to be gross violations of human rights. However, this debate does not only touch upon what should be considered good and what should be considered wrong, but also on how much value people should place on any particular culture. It seems to me that people have gotten it into their head that foreigners should be prudent in the ways they go about engaging other cultures so as not to disrupt or even damage the distinct cultural practices of different regions.
My own feelings could not be further from this point of view. I think cultures, like political or economical ideologies, should be open to challenges and if people who are introduced to new and foreign ideas want to change, they should be able to. I think that cultures are constantly in flux, that historically cultures have clashed before and left imprints on each other, and that this should not be shied away from. So, if an international aid organization wants to try to impose a certain kind of view on the world, I would say let them, and let the inhabitants of the area that is receiving the aid decide for themselves what is best for them. I think in our efforts to treat these people like human beings with distinct cultures, we, more or less, end up treating them like children who do not have the intellectual capacity to make their own choices.
In regards to the article by Edward and Elizabeth Hall, I found his discussion about high-context cultures particularly interesting. Although this is not something that was explicitly touched upon in class to my memory, nonetheless, I believe it was one of the more important notions that we read about for that particular class. The reason why I found this whole notion of contextual situations so interesting is because I am an SIS student who is focusing his studies on a rising China. Looking at the potential for conflict with the U.S. in the coming years, it behooves me to better understand Chinese culture so as to better understand Chinese foreign policy.
China, as described by the Halls, falls into the category of a high-context society, which they describe as a society that has less mobility, that is harder to reform, and that has a lot of other characteristics. In contrast, the United States as well as many other Western nations falls under the category of a low-context society, which is mostly opposite. This is an interesting dichotomy to draw because this argument does accurately explain both the U.S. and China’s current political climate in which the former handles change much more fluidly than the latter. With this knowledge in mind, one can expect China to continue to be slow in adopting change which, in my mind, alters perceptions about the possibility of China being a revisionist power if it rises to pre-eminence.
The other interesting point that I wanted to bring up in this week’s blog pertains to the heated discussion about judging different cultures and whether one should look at these different societies through a universalist lens or a more relative lens. During the discussion, the debate evolved to the point in which people were talking about whether or not international aid organizations (that are mostly Western) have the right to challenge certain cultural practices in countries which appear to be gross violations of human rights. However, this debate does not only touch upon what should be considered good and what should be considered wrong, but also on how much value people should place on any particular culture. It seems to me that people have gotten it into their head that foreigners should be prudent in the ways they go about engaging other cultures so as not to disrupt or even damage the distinct cultural practices of different regions.
My own feelings could not be further from this point of view. I think cultures, like political or economical ideologies, should be open to challenges and if people who are introduced to new and foreign ideas want to change, they should be able to. I think that cultures are constantly in flux, that historically cultures have clashed before and left imprints on each other, and that this should not be shied away from. So, if an international aid organization wants to try to impose a certain kind of view on the world, I would say let them, and let the inhabitants of the area that is receiving the aid decide for themselves what is best for them. I think in our efforts to treat these people like human beings with distinct cultures, we, more or less, end up treating them like children who do not have the intellectual capacity to make their own choices.
Between Dead Soldiers and the Amish
Surprisingly, coming to AU was a big culture shock for me. I grew up in York, Pennsylvania, and many people have no idea where that is. Therefore, some friends and I always end up saying that we're from a place in between dead soldiers (Gettysburg, PA—home of the Civil War Battle of Gettysburg of 1863) and the Amish (Lancaster, PA—which has a large Amish population). We use those 2 places to give people a general idea of the location of where I'm from. Makes York sound like a great place, I know.
Until coming to AU, I had no idea how sheltered and lacking in diversity York, PA was. I generally thought that most communities were like my own. Now, I knew that outside of the US, life was very different from my own but I would have never thought that there were so many cultural differences within the United States. My town is generally all white, Christian, and Republican, so needless to say, the makeup of my high school was basically of the same demographics. I never really got the chance to interact with people outside my culture until I came to American.
First semester; I am roomed in a triple with a Mexican-American and a Haitian-American. My first class was World Politics, in which I had classmates from Mongolia, Vietnam, Venezuela, Japan, and other countries from all over the world. Despite not being exposed to these cultures that were vastly different from my own, I loved every minute of being immersed in a pool of multiculturalism. Taking the US cultural quiz in the Martin and Nakayama book was a real eye-opener in the fact that the US is so diverse. I knew maybe one or two answers to the ten questions. Also, it wasn’t until I read the Hall article that I realized that cultural perceptions could be offensive. Just the way I live my life and my normal mannerisms could be misconstrued by people outside of my culture. This knowledge has made me aware that people judge everything I do and my most benign of intentions could mean a variety of things to them.
Until coming to AU, I had no idea how sheltered and lacking in diversity York, PA was. I generally thought that most communities were like my own. Now, I knew that outside of the US, life was very different from my own but I would have never thought that there were so many cultural differences within the United States. My town is generally all white, Christian, and Republican, so needless to say, the makeup of my high school was basically of the same demographics. I never really got the chance to interact with people outside my culture until I came to American.
First semester; I am roomed in a triple with a Mexican-American and a Haitian-American. My first class was World Politics, in which I had classmates from Mongolia, Vietnam, Venezuela, Japan, and other countries from all over the world. Despite not being exposed to these cultures that were vastly different from my own, I loved every minute of being immersed in a pool of multiculturalism. Taking the US cultural quiz in the Martin and Nakayama book was a real eye-opener in the fact that the US is so diverse. I knew maybe one or two answers to the ten questions. Also, it wasn’t until I read the Hall article that I realized that cultural perceptions could be offensive. Just the way I live my life and my normal mannerisms could be misconstrued by people outside of my culture. This knowledge has made me aware that people judge everything I do and my most benign of intentions could mean a variety of things to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)