Ethnography Reflection

When the idea of an ethnography project was first introduced in the beginning of the year, I was daunted by the task, partially because I did not really understand what we were being instructed to do. Once my group decided on Howard University, I was a little bit intimidated and anxious, as seen by our explanations of our stereotypes of the university. I even remember feeling a little bit sick to my stomach on the ride there from nerves.

Once we got there, it was a completely different story. We really did not know where we were or what we were doing. Thomas had called ahead and had learned that there was a shuttle to campus. The shuttle was late and students began gathering around us, some staring. Once the shuttle arrived, we began casually chatting with the people on the bus and I found myself becoming more at ease, especially when I was reunited with my childhood friend, Lindsey.

When we got off the bus, people noticed that we looked lost and helped us find our way. Once we were in the dining area, it felt like we were just getting lunch at a new place. We noticed our surroundings, sure, but most people do that when they are in a new environment. I even felt awkward taking notes because I felt that I was using the people around me as test subjects when they could end up being potential friends.

The way people acted there put me at ease. I had already been homesick and having people around me behaving as though we were in the South made me feel as if I was back home.

Overall, the experience was a positive one. Our group bonded and even made plans to meet up after the project was done. I am truly glad to have had this experience, one that I will never forget!

Korean Hallyu=Soft Power in Asia

The "Korean Wave" is a key example of soft power and its positive effects. Created in direct reaction to losing production to China, they had to create a way to sustain their economy. So, they created an entire entertainment industry, complete with drama, film, and music. With key branding, the advertising for the country was aired in Japan, China, and southeast Asia. The effect was an increase in tourism and an obsession with Korean culture, to an extent by some. "K-pop" stars became popular, even though they might not sing in the language of their fan's country. To aid this, many music stars are fluent in more than one language so that they can expand their fan base. The end result was that Asian women were having plastic surgery to look more "Korean" and women wanted to marry Korean males.

I believe that America should take note. Korea has created a sphere of influence (not exactly in the history sense of the phrase) in the sense that Asian countries began to notice the country. With an increase in tourism, more people explored the country which also boosted their economy. If America was to create more entertainment opportunities that were geared at gaining support, America's reputation as a whole could improve. Not to mention it would return us to the good days of decent popular culture that was something to be proud of and not embarrassed by....

Cultural Diplomacy= A Must!

When studying cultural diplomacy, the question arose as to whether we should let pop culture speak for America. In my opinion, it should! The only other way that other countries learn about America is through our foreign policy initiatives, which are sometimes not the greatest. Pop culture is the only positive aspect of Americans in some countries.

I think that it says something when countries that want to bomb us are addicted to "Baywatch", or other examples of quality trash TV. In order to form positive relationships with other countries, we need to find common ground, which in this case is entertainment. During the Cold War, America still had a positive influence on the USSR, thanks to jazz. Though uniquely American, all could relate to it. It wasn't vulgar, though some believe the culture associated with it was, and added to the culture. Everyone appreciated it for what it was. Entertainment is probably the best area for cultural diplomacy. It doesn't change the structure of the government or change a country's values because it is only there to entertain.

If we were to find or create a positive way to access other countries, our own reputation might improve. But we also need to be receptive to other countries' "cultural diplomacy". We need to learn from others and not just think that others need to learn from us.

Disney's Effect on Children- Are We Raising Racists?

I had heard speculation that there were hidden messages in Disney films, such as that the smoke in "Aladdin" spells out words such as "sex." But when discussing Hollywood's effect on how we view Arabs- it got me to thinking about other Disney films.

"Aladdin" portrays Arabs in any stereotype possible, as mentioned in the video “Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People” that we watched in class, many of those stereotypes being false. But then "Pocahontas" stereotypes Native Americans and makes it seem that she had to get rescued by the British guy in order to be happy in life. "The Lion King" brings to life African stereotypes too.

Though these films are supposed to educated the children and show them other cultures and good values, what are they really teaching them? The hidden messages in these films can be misleading and can possibly lead to racism later on in life, I believe. Children need to be exposed to the truth (though not at an extremely young age in which it could damage them), but they also need to learn values. So while Disney is a good alternative to most of the trash on TV, there is still more work to be done.

But it ended up working...

When Professor Hayden gave us the ethnography project assignment at the beginning of the year, I wasn't buying it. I thought that kids would probably end up making up a bunch of stories to make it sound like they had had some sort of experience. Students would pretend like they had gained insight into some other culture and they would give their presentation and forget about it.

Luckily, this turned out to not be the case at all. Having done the ethnography project myself, I really feel like I learned something. I don't think I ever recognized the very real differences in culture that can exist in so small a space. I didn't think there was much difference in culture within a single state, much less a city.

Even hearing the cultures that people had chosen for their project, I doubted that there would be any definitive norms or behaviors. And yet when people gave their presentations, I was very much surprised by how many differences there were even within the American campus, much less the mall.

I am glad that we got to do these projects. I feel like my view of what defines a culture has definitely changed. I used to think that a culture was a fixed group of people and everyone had one culture. Now I recognize that everybody's identity is mixed in with multiple cultures and the definition of "culture" can vary depending on the context.

Last week, the presentation which is concerning of the ritual subject, it has given me the idea of a ritual. Yes, a ritual has combined actions, religious, social and anthropological points. All are related to specific occasions, or at free will of the individuals, or communities. Especially is to whom has a very religiosity, and always want to pray. According to Merskin, prayers believe that praying is comforted them in sorrow, giving them strengthen of the journey ahead. I believe that each group has different religion and each one has its own religious rite. This depends on individual groups, which creates social bonds.

What is Culture? (Baby Don't Hurt Me, No More)

After watching one's group ethnography presentation and then doing one myself, I started thinking about what exactly defines a culture. This question came during the presentation about the Davenport Coffee Lounge and whether or not the group members considered "Davvers" to be a culture. But what is this elusive word?

It's a word we throw around a lot in class. Martin and Nakayama define it as "learned patterns of behavior and attitudes shared by a group of people".

So, by this definition, nearly anything can be a culture, right? Do the people walking on the sidewalk in Manhattan in rush hour constitute a culture? For the most part, they all walk at a similar pace and value getting places quickly. They use similar mannerisms (i.e. the hand motion used to hail a taxi) and are generally stereotyped as "typical New Yorkers". In class, Professor Hayden discussed how people immediately pegged him as a California native, implying that people from the area display certain behaviors and mannerisms, which is essentially a simplistic definition of culture. Most people, however, would not consider such a widespread, disconnected group like this a culture.

In class, we discussed the different cultures of the schools at American University (i.e. the difference between an SIS student and a Kogod student). I can definitely buy that argument, but I've heard from some people who, for example, consider University College programs "cults". Is a cult a culture? Are the people who go to clubs and frat parties a culture? The list of possibilities is endless.

As this class (and unfortunately, this blog) comes to a close, I realize that there are things that I simply don't know. I have my own personal views on what constitutes a culture, but it is impossible to create a universal definition that can apply to every situation/circumstance. It's not an easy answer but it's the truth.

"Its Culture, Stupid" and More

After reading the class articles I wanted to focus on the “Its Culture, Stupid”. Some interesting points were brought up in that article; such as the one about narrative media having the capacity to reinforce negative stereotypes. Although this concept is relatively common sense, we do not realize how true it is until we bring forth examples. By constantly talking about something like war, the other side becomes a personal enemy not just nation wide. For example, to this day, to the majority of the people the German language is seen as “ugly”. Although many say it is because it sounds ugly, don’t you think that the narrative media all the way back during World War II brought this unconscious not liking to the German language?

Another interesting point that was made in this article is that minds can’t be changed through direct confrontation but through complex process involving emotion and empathy. Think about it, people are more prone to crying when watching a movie than in real life. We associate our emotions to that of the character which intensifies the scenario. So, if a movie portrays an idea that we are against, if we watch it, we might chew on the “other side of the argument” much more than if somebody came towards us and started arguing about it. 

One last interesting point is how creative expressions can help build bridges across cultures and facilitate understanding of cultural differences. Just by smiling we can learn so much about another culture or person. 

Besides the article, we had ethnography presentations in class. Ours was about the difference between Howard University and American. The second group presented on whether there was a culture to the “Dav”. I only went to the Dav once with my roomate and to be honest I was too nervous to order anything because I felt out of place. Listening to the presentation I learned more about the Dav and that although there is no “culture” there is a distinction between those who are regulars and the new comers. After learning about that, I probably will go back to the Dav and see whether I notice the things they did and if I would feel more comfortable ordering a dirty chai!

Cutural Diplomacy Faces As Today America's Foreign Policy!

In the article The Return of Cultural Diplomacy by Martha Bayles mentioned that the america's old popular culture of the entertainment as sexual movies should not export, because it is old idea and many countries in the world such as Rusia, India, Muslim countries, and ect... hate to watch it. So, instead of it, America should export the other entertainments that would have the richment of artistic and literarute heritage that the rest of the world unknown it such as the idea of exporting of the artist and writers tours, libraries, transportations and cuturally oriented international broadcasting. Those are should be exploding and exporting more serious forms of entertainment. THe "Dark Knight" and "Baywatch" which concerning more topersonal's spiritual life need to show the world how is such new investment in American of "smartpower" that challegnes to the world. It is addresing the main foreign policy that America today's facing.

International...Service???

To be perfectly honest, I found last week's conference rather dry and uninteresting. Listening to the panelists, I realized I have no interest in diplomacy and international politics/economics/business, like I once thought I did. This epiphany made me think back to when I first decided to attend American University, and I was planning on majoring in the School of International Service.

That got me thinking. Why the word "service"?

One of Webster's Dictionary's definitions for the term is "the duty or work of public servants", so it makes sense that out future diplomats and businessman and policymakers would study in a school of "service". Technically though, a student majoring in Law and Society might end up being a prosecutor, but his school is not called the "School of Public Service". No, the word "service" in SIS has a much deeper meaning.

Another one of Webster's definitions is "the act of a helpful activity". The idea that the United States needs to "help" other nations is becoming outdated, since many countries are catching up to us, power-wise. When I think of "community service", I think of cleaning and fixing up dirty areas, teaching uneducated children, giving to those who need it. The person/group doing the service tends to be better off than the person/group receiving it. If we use this definition, then negotiations and business deals and such should not be considered "service", but "relations" or something of a similar sort. If we reinforce this idea that the U.S. is all-powerful and needs to fix the world's problems, this might shift students' perceptions on the world they will eventually be controlling and changing.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it. I just think it's interesting to think about.

Significance of Disney Movies on Children

First of all, culture globalization in Joseph Chan’s view is Westernization. This is most prominent in Disney movies. Mulan was the first Asian story that Disney created basing on the a legend on Mulan, a young woman who for the obligatory love to her father dressed up as a man and went to war.  Yet, most of us have seen this movie, and fall for the trap. Believing that what is portrayed in Disney is what happened. 

Mulan, according to the Chinese is an unacceptable portrayal of who the true Mulan was. In the movie she is more Americanized, by being giving feministic and individualistic approaches. This leads to the point of this blog. As kids we already form stereotypes, but these stereotypes are not really ours, they are ingrained in us by what our culture thinks of others. Meaning, in this case, Walter Disney formed a subconscious stereotype about Asians. 

Most American children are first introduced to China when there mother sticks in that Mulan DVD.  The movie shows symbols that the Chinese take seriously (like dragons, or ancestors) and make them a joke (Mushu, the dragon who can never breathe fire until the very end, or the ancestors rocking the temple house when Mulan comes back with the Emperor’s sword). Also, landmark events in the movie such as the Tianamen Square or the Buddha caves are shown as part of the Chinese culture to these children. Although these movies are informative they also start as a base for what an American views of a Chinese culture for example. 

Furthermore there are some American aspects that are included such as the fried eggs and sausage for breakfast that Mushu makes for Mulan before she heads out.  All in all,  most cultures in these movies are Americanized thus fundamentally creating a bias for children at a young age.  Another example would be Pochantas, its not until middle school when you realize that John Smith was not “that beautiful man who you wish was yours”.  In the movie the Native Americans are portrayed as savages, whilst the Whites are doing a favor to this nation. 

To sum up, my true question is, are these movies a great source of entertainment for children, or do they subconsciously create stereotypes about other cultures that could be dangerous?

Cultural Diplomacy Conference!

Yes, the conference last week was really help me to understand how cultural diplomacy important in the relationship between US and other countries. The conferences' goal, in which is really want to bring to audiences understanding that US needs offering and focusing on the diplomacy in the culture, so that the worldwides can get to know better about the US culture via humanity and the media. Overall, I think that culture is everything in our lives. It is important to have a good knowledge about the culture and its concerning. Also cultural diplomacy has a very significant in relations which can not lack in a global complex nowaday.

Cultural Diplomacy Conference

Last week, at the cultural diplomacy conference, one presentation that I found really interesting was the man who spoke about his experience in Russia. When he described the fact that Russians see culture in a completely different way than Americans do, I felt like that related to the core concepts of this class. i really enjoyed the fact that he gave a concrete example of something that we have discussed so much in class because I feel like I understand the importance of culture far more now.

Not only do differences in culture separate groups of people, but people assign different meanings to their collective culture. The example the panel gave was that Russia sees culture as their major contribution to the world. They believe that Russia shares one culture and that it is the same for everyone. In contrast, the United States believes itself to be made up of many different sub-cultures and places far more importance on ideas than culture anyway.

I thought that the example of the different meanings assigned to culture in Russia and the US gave me new insight into the definition of culture and makes me understand just how complex the subject really is.

U and W curves which ones affects us more?

First of all, Nakayama and Martin define the U-curve theory as: "A theory of cultural adaptation positing that migrants go through fairly predictable phases -- excitement/anticipation, shock/disorientation, adjustment -- in adapting a new cultural situation" (327). Yet, once one has experienced the U-curve there is the other half, known as the W-curve theory. This is defined as: "A theory of cultural adaptation that suggests that sojourners experience another U curve upon returning home" (331). 

Coming to the United States was not much of a culture shock to begin with. I sort of expected to feel different, after all, its not my hometown, nor am I in any way culturally the same. Just by sheer fact that I come from a relatively collectivistic country, I knew I had to not greet people by kissing them on the cheek. However, that does not mean other things shocked me. Anybody who is visiting a foreign country does expect to be shocked so, they enter with the knowledge of being more observant of their actions and those of others. As mentioned previously, people have a space bubble in the United States which does not exist in Morocco. By being aware of the small cues, its is easier to fit in. Also, when one travels to a foreign country, and after the shock/disorientation phase of the U-curve; one realizes how much home meant to them. For example, I wish I continued by belly dancing skills so that I could teach my friends more than just the basic hip movements. 

Yet, as a freshman, in December I am going to go back home and experience something that will not be expected which is the W-curve. This brings up the question about which one affects us more. Since we are prepared for a culture shock when we go to a foreign nation, the U-curve is not as steep. Whereas, when we think "I am going home" we are subconsciously believing that everything is going to be the exact way we have left it. Whilst staying in a foreign country, we learn more about our "homeland". We do not realize that when we go back we are going to go with an adjusted pair of eyes. 

Word of advice? Remember that although you are going home, prepare yourself as though going to a foreign country. That way, you do not have to live another, stronger, culture shock than you did upon entering the foreign country. 

Stereotyping in Popular Culture

In “Intercultural Communication in Contexts”, Martin and Nakayama discuss the importance of studying popular culture in an intercultural context. The last section of the chapter discusses stereotyping in popular culture, and I definitely agree that even in the simplest of entertainment, there are many hidden messages and reinforced cultural norms. As an avid movie fan, I decided to look at the ten films from 2008 with the highest worldwide box office and see how many cultural messages, obvious or subtle, I could find.

According to Box Office Mojo, the highest grossing films of 2008 were The Dark Knight, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Kung Fu Panda, Hancock, Mamma Mia!, Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa, Quantum of Solace, Iron Man, Wall-E, and The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian.

Even though all of these films were funded and produced by American studios, I was amazed at how most of the popular films from last year featured non-American characters as villains. During the entire beginning of “The Dark Knight”, the main antagonist is a gang from Hong Kong involved in a plethora of criminal activities. In “Indiana Jones”, Harrison Ford and company battle a group of malicious Soviets bent on destroying the world. In “Quantum of Solace”, Daniel Craig fights a corrupt businessman trying to take over Bolivia’s water supply, who happens to be French. “Iron Man” is especially egregious in the way it paints Middle Easterners as cruel, weapons-loving savages who can only be put in check by American intelligence.

Are there implications for an American society in which so much media paints people of other cultures and countries as evil? From the ancient civilizations to modern day, there has always been an “us versus them” sentiment. The events of September 11, 2001 perpetuated these ideals, and were reinforced in the books we read, the websites we visited, and the movies we watched. Before 9/11, there were definitely films that painted foreigners as bad guys (“Die Hard” comes to mind), but the number of international bad guys has dramatically increased in the 21st century. While I believe the average person is able to distinguish truth from fiction, I must reiterate my point from my last blog entry about representation of Asians in the media. When we see something often enough, we are more likely to believe it to be true. As young adults, we might brush off Spielberg’s portrayal of the Soviets in “Indiana Jones” as harmless, but what about the influences it might have on a young child? What about films that are much more culturally insensitive (like “Aladdin” and its portrayal of Arabs)? I am not a huge proponent of the idea that media exposure destroys children, but it definitely has a strong influence.

On the list of the 2008 films, there are three films aimed for kids. I found it intriguing that two of them, “Kung Fu Panda” and “Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa”, take place in foreign countries yet make their settings as American as possible. Many of the characters in these films have qualities that are typically considered to be “American”. Po, the main character in “Kung Fu Panda”, is a lazy, clumsy glutton who accidentally finds fame and glory. The “Madagascar” characters are neurotic, sassy, proud—all traits attached mainly to Americans. Obviously, the characters are all courageous and loyal and warm-hearted, but I was amazed at how even when a children’s film takes place in somewhere other than America, the film is still as American as it can get. From the voice actors to the dialogue to the plotlines in general, these films’ locations never ring true. It seems as if the animators are always attempting to project the American way of life, even in something as simple as a children’s movie.

American cinema has a long-standing history of imposing American values, morals and beliefs; not just in cartoons, but in comedies, westerns, thrillers, musicals etc. This sentiment is expressed most eloquently and poetically in the film “Team America: World Police”:

AMERICAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!! F**K YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Up to them, right?

I realize that this is probably an unpopular position to take, but while everyone is complaining about the US and its domination of pop culture in other societies, we should take a look back and remember, it's all up to them.

People in other societies make their own decisions when they decide to consume media from the United States. I have heard a lot of people say that the US should stop being so domineering and stop shoving our culture into other countries, but those countries have apparently accepted our media. I think that it is pretty obvious that, in the US, where there is a profit to be made, someone is willing to step up and make it. Therefore, when other countries offer to pay for pop culture from our country, someone is always going to be willing to sell it to them. That's not domineering, that's just business.

I also hear a lot of people say that the US pop culture is destroying the culture of other countries and we should just let them keep their own culture. The problem with that is that obviously consumers in other countries are asking for US products. It is their own decision to consume the US pop culture if they want to. I don't think that it is the place of the United States to act as a censor for what people from other countries can and cannot consume,

Another important thing to remember is that culture isn't static. While the pop culture that the US is putting out right now may be exclusively US culture, if it becomes widespread enough, maybe it will someday become a global culture.

Why should the US limit or stop the exporting of its pop culture? If other countries want to consume it, it should be up to them, right?

Pop-Culture in Encoding as Transimittion

Pop-Culture is common people of which excellent in arts. It is in particular stage of civilization and its beliefs of the charcteristic of an exacting of social, ethnic or age group. The Pop-up advertises new daily as madness, senseless folly, intense excitment or passion. Therefore, Pop-culture madness is one-stop information location for Pop-culture, Pop music, trivia, jokes and bunch of other stuff and it is entire of ins and outs resource. And one of the top rated basic is cable television networks, the pulse code of modulation which is the peak to peak amplitutude range of the signal to be transmitted to be divided into a number of standard value, each having own code. After that each sample of the signal is transmitted as the code for the nearest standard amplitude. The Pulse code can either become zero of telecommunication signals or the binary signal is encoded using rectangular pulse amplitude with polar non return to zero code. This NTZ system to be sychronized using in band information. There must not be long sequences of identical symbols, such as ones or zeroes. For binary PCM system, the density of one symbols is called ones density. This density often controlled using precoding techniques such as line coding (encoding), where the PCM code is expanded into a slightly longer code with guaranteed bound one sdensity before modulation into the chanel. In other cases, extra framing bits are added into the stream which guarantee at least occasional symbol transitions.

Life After 09/11

After reading the article "The Construction of Arabs as Enemies: Post- 9/11 Discourse of George W. Bush", it reminded me of my experience and how life did change for me after that atrocious event. 

Before September 11, I traveled with my Moroccan passport everywhere -- Germany, France, even the United States. However, post 9/11 things changed dramatically. Arabs were portrayed as the mortal enemy, and Muslims become a third species. Ever since that day, I have now been traveling with my American passport. My Moroccan passport was expired for five years before it was renewed. This shows that George W. Bush's speeches did have an impact to Arabs nationwide, not only Americans. It was the first time where I became aware of the convenience of having dual citizenship. I remember the summer after 09/11, we had to raise our passports right as we got off the plane so that the ones with "the blue passports can stand in line to go down the escalator first". 

This extends to the movies we were watching last class about Arabs. The truth is, its not really anything new that Arabs are portrayed as "Satan's sidekicks" or "Barbarians". Hollywood has depicted this image of Arabs for years, even pre 09/11.  Yet, what is different is, due to 09/11 people have a personal connection which thus cemented their stereotypical views from the media to be fact in their eyes. 

The real question is, will there ever be a period in Hollywood, where Arabs wont be perceived as the bad guys?

Culture and nature are inextricably interwined. Nature is that can not change it, but culture is that can change it. It changes by over time, passing through people or influenced by environment, that is why nature can change the culture. So in order to protect nature and biodiversity, it is neccesary to protect traditional culture. The demand from poeople to preserve their own ethnic and religion with desire of a sharing culture and transitory it from generations to generations.

Asians in the Media

Last class, while discussing representation of certain groups in the media, I brought up the ways in which Asians are stereotyped in American media. As an American-born Chinese, I don’t necessarily find these stereotypes offensive but I am intrigued as to why more creators of media choose to reuse and recycle the same caricatures over and over again. The major roles for Asian actors are the kung-fu master, the gang member, and the nerd. While I don’t think that these stereotypes are particularly harmful in the short-term, they have drastic implications on cultural relations in the long-term. Studying the media of a particular culture is a method that cross-cultural scholars of Martin and Nakayama’s critical approach use.

The typecasting of an Asian as the martial arts master has been prominent across several decades of cinema. Actors like Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan, and Jet Li popularized this genre, while the influx of “wuxia” films in the 21st century like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, and House of Flying Daggers furthered it. Some argue that the “wuxia” genre did more good than bad, since it got Americans interested in Asian culture. While I appreciate the fact that a foreign film such as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was able to become popular in the States, I do feel that nowadays Americans will only think of Asian culture as “flying people kung-fu fighting” while there remain so many unexplored cultural aspects. The gang member can be seen in films such as Gran Torino and the Rush Hour films. Mostly, Asian gang members are portrayed as moronic and incompetent; they are rarely portrayed as the more sophisticated, refined gangsters played by white and black actors. The Long Duk Dong character in Sixteen Candles is a representative of the nerdiness that has now become associated with Asians. In fact, other current freshmen have said that they pictured me as a nerd after looking at my Facebook profile, simply because I was Asian and wear glasses. I have also been asked numerous times, both jokingly and seriously, if I know karate or tae kwan do or some other sort of martial arts. These stereotypes aren’t particularly damaging to my well-being, but they definitely affect others’ perceptions of me and other Asian people.

The above examples are very limited to Asian men; for Asian women, the number of roles is even lower. Going back to “wuxia”, some have applauded the genre for introducing strong Asian women to the American consciousness, but it doesn’t really do much when Americans can only see them as a martial arts warrior, a geisha, an exotic love interest, etc. It’s interesting how Asian men are mostly portrayed for their intelligence/ability whereas Asian women are only notable for their beauty.

The United States has a long-standing history of exploiting its minority groups in the media, reinforcing stereotypes and prejudices, and putting them into the media of the next generation. It’s a vicious circle. We need more people like John Cho, who along with Kal Penn, created one of the first mainstream films set in contemporary society that featured relatable main characters who happen to be Asians. We need more films like Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist, that features characters who are Asian (as well as gay) who aren’t the butt of jokes. Overall, I feel we need a more fair and accurate representation of minorities in the media. We live in a global community. If our media continues to perpetuate distorted images of different groups of people, how will be able to know the truth?

Language of Argument

In class the other day, we discussed how George W. Bush used language to portray Arabs as terrorists. I was thinking about how this concept is used in other situations. One of the main things that I came up with was the argument over abortion.

On the pro-life side, the name itself makes it hard to argue with them. Just as Bush named his war the "War on Terror", those who oppose abortion give their movement a name with which nobody can disagree. The language that they use makes anybody who argues with them seem, "pro-death" or "anti-life". Therefore, the language that they use makes themselves seem like the heroes and others seems like villains. This creates an us vs. them mentality. Pro-life activists also call the abortion "murder of a baby". The world baby connotes a sense of vulnerability and it is difficult for anybody to condone the murder of a child. Thus, activists use language to help their own cause.

Pro-choice activists use a similar strategy. It is hard for anyone to disagree with choice as a principle. They call abortion "abortion" which sounds very clinical and emotionless. They also call babies "fetuses" to decrease the emotional attachment that a person has about the procedure. Both sides of activists use language in an attempt to increase their popular support.

Adapting to my new habitat

I was really interested in learning about the U-Curve and W-Curve that we did last week since I think it is highly relevant in my life right now. As I adapt to living at college, I think that I will be able to understand how I'm feeling and maybe even predict when I will feel at home here.

The idea of the U-Curve makes a lot of sense to me because before I came here I was really anxious and college was just about the only thing that I talked about. Then, once I got here, I felt completely shell-shocked and out of my league. I wasn't sure how to fit in or what was expected of me. Now that I've been here for a while though, I am beginning to understand what I need to do and when I have time to relax. I feel more comfortable here but I think I still will feel more at home in Minnesota.

Eventually, however, I will come to see American University as my home. And when I visit Minnesota over breaks, I will experience the W-Curve. I am going to be visiting home this weekend and I'm not sure yet whether or not I will have a tough time fitting back in or whether I have changed my norms and attitudes. If I have, I expect that I will be surprised because I haven't been at AU for long and I don't think I have adjusted to the culture fully.

Through learning about the U-Curve and W-Curve, I feel like I understand how I have been feeling more fully and like I can now predict how it will feel to go home, whether it is for Thanksgiving break or summer break.

Technology connects people worldwide together!

Nowadays, with highly techonology, such as internet which is effectiveness to using IM that helps people aware different cultures via chatting online such as IM on Yahoo, MSN or AOL, etc.... The fact that is IM is a really great tool for people world-wide communicate to each, such as from Bottom line of Asia to the top line of America. People can communicate and learn from each other's cultures via IM at the same time doesnot matter what is zone time is. IM is the most fastest, and cheapest way and people can give all kind of information at any time and receive it at the same moment by text-based, via talking on microphone, or seeing each other on the webcam. They can express their ideas and learning everything from each other. More that that, people can open many windows at the same time and collecting information from individuals. And that the way technology connect people together in global. So that, I am wondering that people would be able to realize that while they are chatting is what they are perceiving different cultures and aware how amazing of technology create everything in front of us as magic.

"Our" Technology

If your parents are anything like mine, they were initially afraid of anything that had to do with technology (and still are to some extent). We finally got a computer in 2000 and I was the only one who knew how to work it because I had been in computer classes in school for 2 years at that point. I remember that they were so afraid to type anything on the Internet because they didn't know who "might see it". All of this plays into human nature's fear of the unknown. Technology was still some big mystery to the adults while children were really interested in it.

Technology became "our" way of communicating with our peers. At my elementary school, girls would "IM" after school at the age of 9. But back to the point, as technology grew (and continues to grow), we grow with it. It has become something synonymous with our generation. The movie shown in class is a prime example of this fear. The parents do not fully understand what is going on online and therefore do not want their child to take part in it. Although there are valid points concerning child predators, etc, because we have grown up around technology, it has been drilled into our heads what to do and what not to do online. But parents and adults can't always control what their child does and some believe that technology is just another forum for trouble.

Technology has enabled people to communicate with people all over the world. I personally keep in touch with friends in India and Israel, so in a way, it has allowed us to experience other cultures. It allows us to access so much information in such a short amount of time. What I am trying to do is show how dependent we are on technology (our generation, at least). I know that when we are senior citizens, we will probably still be using technology while being criticized by other generations who still might not understand our fascination with technology.

A New Identity with Just One Mouse Click...

The movie we watched in class had me in a state of awe. I heard stories before of people creating fake identities  and even heard of a girl getting kidnapped because she met up with her "internet boyfriend"; yet, I have never seen anything as shell-shocking as some of the stories in the movie. 

Just with the over controlling mother. I mean by not allowing her son to "communicate" like the rest of his generation she is actually hindering him. The new way for most people to communicate in our generation is via technology. Whether it is to send and email, text, or to purely call, its all technologically based. Although nobody really teaches us how to send an email, we learn by watching other's or trying different styles ourselves. For example, we know that the formality we use to email a teacher is not like the one we use to recount our lives to our friends. People in the United States are living in a more polychromic atmosphere, where everybody knows everything about everybody's lives (the obscurities of some people's Facebook status who reveal every minute thing they do). This brings back the point of the freaky mother. By controlling her children, she is actually pushing them to resort to secrets and sometimes trouble as they tried to find another mean to "stay in touch 24/7 with their friends".

Even more absurd was the anorexic girl, and all the commodity thats goes with it. It was amazing how some people actually built blogs to encourage others to pursue their anorexic behaviors. This alludes to the danger of the web and how everything can be posted. That you could literally find anything to support any of your ludicrous ideas just by searching on a web engine. 

Yet, the scariest thing would be how with just one mouse click, you could be the person you always wanted to be, or invent a person completely because you are that apparently bored. Remember the girl who posed pictures? The internet is a wall with a small door. You can open the door and throw anything about you, true or untrue, to the people on the other side. And when you shut that door, they will never know who you truly are. They scramble with what you have throw at them. You can be in this sense God, and create a whole new identity that could be based on anything, and the worst part is nobody will know its you, not even sometimes your friends. How scary is that?

The World and the World Wide Web

After watching the video last class, I was shocked at most of the stories we saw. I was horrified by the website that glorified anorexia and flabbergasted by the girl who created a pornographic alter-ego on MySpace to overcome her poor self-esteem and confidence issues. Although I had been introduced to the idea of identity shaping technology before, I didn’t have a good grasp on this concept until watching the video. It made me think about the ways in which one’s cultural identity shapes the way one uses technology.

In the article about the cultural differences in instant messaging, the authors discuss different ways that people of different cultures communicate online. They described how some cultures will talk to only one person while others may have several windows running concurrently. They compare different cultures’ uses of emoticons. The article discusses which types of cultures are more likely to use audio-video interaction. This reading is more focused on “what” different people do, but I am more interested in the “why” and the “how”.

In my experiences communicating with students from China and Korea, I have found several fundamental differences in the ways Eastern and Western cultures communicate via technology. Of course, my observations are biased since I am using my own personal experiences as well as those of my similarly aged peers, but I will attempt to be as balanced as possible in my analysis.

One recurring theme I have noticed is the differences in why we communicate in the first place. In the U.S., it is very normal to open your chat window when bored, lazy, procrastinating, or when there is nothing better to do. In Asia, this type of behavior is strongly discouraged; instead, they appear to only use online communication when absolutely necessary. How often do we hear American students say something along the lines of, “I got so distracted doing my homework because I kept talking to my friends”? In Asian countries, where academics are a much higher priority than social life, this attitude is unheard of.

American students are much more lighthearted in their online communication and deliberately use their messages to display aspects of their personality. Have you ever seen a Facebook photo with dozens of bickering comments underneath it? Most of the time, there is not an actual conflict going on underneath the photo, but it is a reflection of the goofiness and playfulness our culture loves to use on the Internet. In Asian cultures, there is none of this. You say want you want to say, straight to the point, no dancing around. Asian people definitely have a sense of humor, but they don’t necessarily like to convey that when they speak to each other online.

I’ve noticed lots of Asian students have started using “lol” and similar text-speak phrases. I think that they are trying to emulate the American way of “chatting”, which I don’t think is a good thing. There is no correct way to communicate. It is crucial for a country to maintain its own culture and unique qualities. In some ways, I believe we should all start communicating like Asians. We might actually get some homework done.

Analysis Question #2

The diplomats are obviously aware that they are negotiating a very sensitive issue with a culture that is not their own.  As any person, we have the tendency to believe that our culture is dominant. The diplomats can not afford to negotiate within the conference room with that attitude. Moreover, there are many factors that might influence communication between the two which the diplomats should be aware of. For example, Arabs tend to be loud and use excessive hand gestures. One should not take this as an offense but simply as part of another cultures form of expression.

Furthermore, this is a negotiation occurring between a high context (Iran) and a low context (the United States). This means that they have opposite ways of conveying a message. In high context communication, less is explicit; the diplomats should not take offense and beware that if they says everything blatantly they might be offending the Iranian diplomats who would believe that the US diplomats consider them ignorant. 

One of the most important factors that is more ubiquitous between the two are the nonverbal communications. Most of these silent gestures are universal and diplomats should watch out for these signs in order for the negotiation to run smoothly. Meaning, they should be aware of the others facial expressions.  Since nonverbal are subconscious, what the diplomat is revealing through his/her facial expressions is what they truly feel. 

All in all, these dimplomats have to take into consideration that this is a complete different culture. Different in context as well as time (Iranians follow polychromic timing, whilst US monochromic). The last thing that a diplomat should do is consider their culture more dominant as mentioned earlier. 

Analysis Question Number 2

When negotiating with Iran, there are many factors to consider involving nonverbal communication. One is the idea of cultural space. While it may not seem like an important issue, different cultures have different ideas about boundaries and challenging these ideas can only be detrimental for the United States. There is a humorous example of this in "Seinfeld", where due to a colassal misunderstanding, an entire business transaction fails because an American refused to shake a Japanese man's hand. Understanding how the Iranians use space will prove very valauble in negotiations.

The use of silence is also a key aspect to consider. Stereotypically, Americans are very loud and boisterous, some would call us obnoxious. Some cultures who view Americans' behavior sum it up as "Americans just never stop talking". On the contrary, Iran, which is more of a low-context culture, might value ponderance and reflection, which usually requires a silence not found in the American way of business. There was a story in the textbook about an American and European student, who both claimed that they did not learn anything after being in the other culture because of a difference in the way the other culture utilized silence. Similarly, if both the Americans and Iranians are baffled at why the other culture is talking too much/too little, this could severely slow down the negotiation process.

Ethnic Identity!

Reading article "Mexican American Ethnicity in Biola, CA" by Eric Aoli helps me to understand that how ethnic identity play important in people's daily lives, especially the connection between family and religious which is supported as a relevant. Its impact to children growing up and how they took more independent roles. A person picks up own congreation and that changed over time. The value of the moral, faith is of what helps a person "to keep going in life" by providing hope, belief and guidance for ones formular. So the three theme of hard working, religion and family are really put in people mind and transfers into communication which evolving the interlocutors to understand one another of ethnic people. Applying in my situation, coming from Vietnam and with nonreligious and after reading this article I think how it helps me to realize that I am just such similar mexican in California, working hard, having moral standard which help me survival in a new country in U.S. that show my identity of who I am.

"What Goes Unsaid Goes Over Our Heads"

Last class, we participated in an exercise where we attempted to tell emotional stories using no nonverbal communication. It was hard. For me, I could not convey the fear and distress I was in without using elaborate hand gestures and changing the inflection of my voice. While the exercise was slightly comical, it really highlighted the necessity of nonverbal communication.

When I say that nonverbal communication is necessary, I don’t mean that we need to consciously remember to use it. The storytelling exercise in class proves that it is impossible to correspond with anyone without using it! When I say that nonverbal communication is necessary, I mean that it is necessary to learn about and understand nonverbal communication and understand its role and function in everyday society. The textbook described a woman in a foreign culture giving a friendly wave to a man from a balcony, only to have him come up to her door! On the surface, this sounds like a humorous anecdote but a combination of misunderstandings like this can result in terrible atrocities.

Reading nonverbal communication is a valuable tool for any person in any situation. For example, in justice class, we discussed reading the nonverbal messages given by people under question in depositions. Since depositions are very expensive, some legal scholars have suggested doing them over Skype or webcam to reduce travel costs. The biggest problem with this idea is the inability to read people’s nonverbal cues through a screen. Effective businessmen, teachers, doctors, plumbers, filmmakers, and everyone else under the sun must be able to pick up on nonverbal communication in order to be successful at their respective occupations.

What goes unsaid goes over our heads. This is my philosophy regarding humans’ abilities to consciously recognize nonverbal communication in the big scheme of things. Sure, we know that good eye contact and posture are always a positive, but can we articulate why that is? We have a clear distinction on what constitutes as personal space, but are we aware of the differences in proxemics with other cultures, and the implications that has for ours? When I say that nonverbal communication is a necessity, I mean that understanding nonverbal communication is essential, in the context of politics, economics, religion, history, sociology, or simply the phenomenon called everyday life.

On a completely unrelated tangent: Is it possible to understand and discuss nonverbal communication with others, nonverbally?

Code Switching

Last week, in the section focusing on language, the textbook introduced a concept called "code switching". After reading the description of what it was, which is when you purposefully alter the way you speak or act depending on the situation, I realized that it has always been a part of my life.

Yes, I grew up in Tennessee, a situation which I always despised. I felt that I had to fit a certain stereotype just based on where I was from. In school, I made a point not to say things like "y'all" or "fur" instead of "for", basically, I tried to be as anti-southern as I could. This was also intensified by the fact that we had a summer house in Boca Raton, FL, where most of the people are from New York or New Jersey. My accent, compared with theirs, stood out a great deal. At a young age, I began to mimic certain words that they said in an effort to yet again distance myself from my southern heritage.

Fast forward a few years to the present: During my first few days at American, people began pointing out certain words that I said or pronounced differently, including: "y'all", "crayon", and "tour" just to name a few. So I began code switching again, attempting to hide where I was from.

Now, I have accepted the fact that I am in the definite minority here by being from the south. While I do not say words such as "ain't", I have acknowledged the fact that I have a southern accent which I cannot hide. I will most likely attempt to code switch for the rest of my life, but for the time being, I allow a few "y'alls" to slip here and there and know that language distinguishes where we are from, something which none of us can hide, no matter how hard we try.

To Whom It May Concern in the State Department:

In your upcoming meetings with the Iranian government about nuclear arms, it is important that you keep in mind certain cultural differences in non-verbal communications.

An important thing to keep in mind is the different ways of viewing time. People in the United States tend to be very monochronic whereas people fromt the Middle East are more likely to be polychronic. This means that they do not stick to schedules as strictly as we may and they value relationships over events and accomplishments. Therefore, do not let late arrivals or slow starts sour the negotiations from the beginning. Instead, be sure to take your time to get to know the negotiators and develop a relationship before you attempt to deal with the actual issue at hand.

Another difference is that Iranians live in a high-context culture and they may not explicity say everything that they mean, but will instead leave it to us to infer what they want to really say. Do not get angry that they seem to be avoiding the subject but instead try to get to the implication behind their words. Facial expressions and body language may be a helpful way of decoding what they mean, but keep in mind that only six facial expressions are universal and some more subtle variations may not mean the same thing across cultural lines.

Be sure to research the meaning of eye contact in Iranian culture, because while in the U.S. it indicates respect and the fact that you are paying attention to the speaker, it can be a form of disrespect in other cultures so be sure to keep in mind traditional Iranian customs.

Also keep in mind gestures have different meanings in different cultures.

In general, when meeting with Iran, be sure to keep in mind how the Iranian cultures would view your actions and non-verbal communications

In the article "Iran: Cultural Value, Self images and Negotiation Behavior Shmuel Bar, the British Ambassador to Iran in the 1970s, Sir Dennis Wright, summarized his dealings with Iranians as follows "The Iranians are people who say the opposite of what they think and do the opposite of what they say. that does not necessarily mean that what they do does not conform to what they think." Iran is a central of Arab world, but it is not Arab country, and Iran has closer to West than other Asians. So, Iran's culture mixed part of east Asia, and WEst. It bears low context in documentation but high-context in communication with non-verbal clues as "when they tend to read contextual non-verbal connotations that their interlocutors had no intention." So with Iranian interaction in coomunication is highly complex such as hand and body gestures, eye contact, etc.... The connections of these gestures show the confidence between their opinions to each other, of the class-conscious in weekens or strengthen. Alos, in Iranian's head and hand gestures culture is differed in some way from Western models, such as raising the head has a meaning of disagreement or discontent, while lowering the head is an expression of confirmation. So in Diplomacy, they have to attention those factors which influence in communication in Iranian to have highly result.

Nonverbal Communication -- Can we talk without it?

A few days ago in class we had a little activity -- to try and tell a personal story without using any nonverbal communication. This lead to the discussion of what other nonverbal communications are there besides the basic; hand gestures, eyes opening wider to build suspense maybe a little eyebrow wiggling etc.  

By trying not to use any verbal communication we were in fact using them. Meaning, for example, when I was telling my story, I kept swiveling in the chair. Or Thomas who clutched the chair and sat rigid, not looking at anybody to avoid eye contact which is a nonverbal communication. 

Another interesting factor was how once we were allowed to use nonverbal communication, hands were flying about and the stories changed, they were more elaborate. The stories became more intriguing as emotions involved, with others feeling more like how the orator felt. This leads to as Martin and Nakayama point on nonverbal communication and how "nonverbal behaviors convey the "real" message. This is because our "nonverbal communication operates at a less conscious level". We discovered that as we had to attempt and tell our stories without using any non verbal behaviors. Kit's eyebrows for example raised at one point during her story, and when she was done and told that she raised her eyebrows she didn't even notice. 

All in all, we four students failed at telling the story without any non verbal communications, which lead to me to wonder, can someone actually talk without using any?

Me time

In class last week, we talked about the fact that different cultures run on different times (monochronic and polychronic). I agree that there are generalizations among large groups of people but I also think it is very important to keep in mind that each individual has specific practices.

One great example of this is the excercise that we did in class. People made a list of the actvities they do reguarly and what time they would start at. Then we were supposed to make a list of what time we actually arrive at the activity. My arrival times varied drastically from everybody else's. I tend to arrive anywhere from 15 to 25 minutes early to everything whereas most students in the class arrived around the start time or even a little late. This completely blew my mind because when it comes to getting somewhere on time, I start worrying about it an hour before I have to leave. To me, it is incredibly rude when somebody else is late because it shows that they do not value my time. My view of time doesn't really fit a monochronic or polychronic frame because, while it is closer to a monochronic frame, it does not focus on the event of the moment, but also simultaneously focuses ahead.

Therefore, I think that it is important to make sure that when generalizing, you keep in mind that everyone has a personal system for time and you should be respectful of their idiosyncracies.

Also last week, we tried to tell a story without using non-verbal communication. I think that this was very interesting excercise because it proved the point that it is impossible for someone to not communicate nonverbally. Even when you do not gesture, make facial expressions, or move, there is somebody interpreting your actions and attributing meaning to every physical movement you make. Even if we were to live life in the same way that we told out stories, the listener would assume that we were communicating distance or disinterest in the story. Thus, this activity shows that it is impossible to get rid of non-verbal communication.

Changing Cultural Space!

This week, we learned chapter 7, Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space. I am really interested in Changing Cultural Space, because it helps me to realize how travelling influenced me the way I reacted with others and space changed who I am so that I can fit into where I am and its culture "Changing cultural spaces means changing who you are and how you interact with others." (M&N)Yes, since I was 19 I have started travel alot, such as Australia, France, Germany, Marocco, Ukraine, Russia, Poland, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Indonesia, Holland, etc...I have been 5 continents with different countries. That really gives me the idea how I relocated and was adapting new cultures. However, it is still difficult to adjust the change language and customs because of the unfamiliar with the new cultural space. Because cultural spaces can be symbolic with previously places which serving as causes of existing self identity compromise in new spaces.

Speaking in Tongues

I’ve always been jealous of people who are fluent in multiple languages, and this jealously has increased exponentially since coming to American. It seems like everyone here is either bilingual/multilingual, or is taking a foreign language class, or has been all over the world and back again. This might sound strange coming from a person who has been to China ten times, but the most I’ve done there is visit family and attend one three-work summer program. I know a little bit of Mandarin Chinese and I took French for five years but I don’t feel like I have any real worldly knowledge or experience.

Learning languages is absolutely vital to me, for both personal and practical reasons. Right now, I am considering a major in international communication which means I need to know languages other than English in order to be successful at my job, which will provide me with a comfortable lifestyle and the freedom that money provides. Earning big bucks is not my only motivation for learning languages, although overseas is where all the money’s at. I believe studying a language is important in the same way that learning history and philosophy are; they provide a solid framework from which one can form ideas and beliefs. Of course, learning a language does nothing if you don’t use it but I still think the general knowledge of another way of “thinking” is very valuable.

This brings up an issue brought up in the book as well as our class discussion, the question of whether language affects reality. I do not think it does, simply because I do not believe there is one “main” reality that applies to everyone in the universe. Each person has his own reality, which is heavily influenced by his language. Even if there were a “higher reality”, the person describing it would have to use language to do so, resulting in a giant paradox. However, I do believe that the language you speak has an enormous impact on your perception of the world. We talked about languages that have both formal and informal versions of “you”; implying different hierarchical structures in those societies. We also discussed languages that assign a “gender” to words, which definitely say something about that culture’s gender roles. Even slang and informal language can be revealing about a certain group of people. In America for example, many non African-Americans have begun using words and phrases that have roots in African-American culture. Nowadays, it’s “cool to be black”. It’s a complete switch from a mere 150 years ago when slavery was still dominant and a mere 50 when segregation was a societal norm.

I’ll end this blog entry with a quote by Dale Carnegie that sums up my feelings on language: “There are four ways, and only four ways, in which we have contact with the world. We are evaluated and classified by these four contacts: what we do, how we look, what we say, and how we say it."

The Amazing Race

There were lots of interesting points brought up in last week’s class, but one that I found especially striking is the idea that whites will soon become the minority in America. In a 2008 Reuters article, Adriana Garcia explains how in a mere forty years, the Latino population is predicted to overshadow that of “non-Hispanic whites”. The effects of this cultural shift will be gradual; the entire world is not going to turn upside down the second a Latino baby is born that pushes the Latino total higher than the white total. Any major societal changes in the U.S. that are a result of whites being minorities will occur in the long run.

As I typed that last sentence, I had to stop and think to myself, “Can I really call it ‘American’ if whites no longer have the largest numbers?” I am Asian-American and even I think of whiteness the second I hear “America”. The textbook references this idea in the “Invisible Knapsack” feature inserted in the “Characteristics of Whiteness” section. Martin and Nakayama write, “Nonewhites indicated high agreement with the statement…’When people refer to ‘Americans’, it is usually whites they have in mind’” (page 189). Even with the current amount of diversity in people and lifestyles, the United States is still predominantly “white”. When we think about the history of the country, we think of powerful, white men drafting the laws fighting in battles; when we think about the perfect family, we imagine a white husband and wife with white children; when we picture the ultimate American Dream, the image of a white man going from rags to riches is usually conjured. The U.S. is still predominantly Christian and even though many different people practice Christianity, it is most associated with whites.

So what might start happening in 2050? The possibilities range from having more minorities in movies and television shows to a drastic change in immigration policy. Maybe more minorities will enter the higher-end workplaces typically inhabited by whites, earning more income and providing better education for their children. Maybe someone will create “Hispanic History Month”, similar to how February is “Black History Month”. Maybe the world will experience racial harmony and everyone will get along. Whether the changes are subtle or dramatic, I think it is imperative that we be open-minded about living in a future society that has different norms, values, and culture than the one we live in now.

Reuters article: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1110177520080212

Proud To Go To American

As of today, it has been exactly one month since I entered American University as a student. In only thirty-two days, I have participated in the freshman service experience, begun my first college classes, transitioned into living on my own, and have met (literally) hundreds of new people.

One of the most commonly asked questions during welcome week was “Where are you from?” While the most common answers were clustered in the Northeast United States, I was surprised at how many international students I met. Germany, France, China, Kosovo, Philippines, India, Spain, Japan, Vietnam, England, Nigeria, Egypt—there seemed to be no country that wasn’t represented at this university.

I bring this up because the idea of separate histories introduced in chapter 4 is definitely applicable to my experiences with intercultural communication at American University. Although most of the history described refers to written history, every single person has a political, intellectual, social, family, national, and culture-group history that he brings wherever he goes. In my sociology class, we refer to this as one’s “social location”. So when I have a conversation with Cindy from Japan about how our classes are going, we may say the same thing but we both have lived completely different lives that lead us to this conclusion. Consider the following example. I might say my classes are rather simple because all my life, I have grown up in a nurturing family that emphasized academics and schoolwork, while surrounded by peers who shared similar interests and academic levels, while living in an excellent public school system, under a president who made education his number one priority. Cindy might consider her current classes at AU easy because she grew up in a strict, overbearing family that forced her to study nonstop in a competitive academic atmosphere, in a country where getting the highest test scores are the key to living a successful life.

In the textbook, Martin and Nakayama discuss how “people bring four elements of personal history to intercultural interactions”. These four things are childhood experience, historical myths, language competence, and memories of recent political events. These all came into play in my first interactions with international students. The hardest thing to overcome was historical myths; no matter how hard I tried, I would always associate certain traits with certain countries/nationalities.

Understanding multiple histories is essential for effective communication; as well as a good understanding of one’s own social location. This is easier said than done. It is impossible to research the backgrounds of everyone one meets, and frankly, it is pointless. In my opinion, the solution is education. First, kids should be exposed to more international education, whether this be starting foreign language study earlier or learning about world cultures in more depth and detail than the typical curriculum allows for. I was only allowed to take French starting in 7th grade and my world geography/history classes were very minimal; as a result, my language proficiency and general knowledge about world affairs is much lower than I feel it should be. I also feel that we, as a collective society, should make broader attempts to reach across borders and immerse ourselves in other cultures. For students, this can be as small of a step as sitting at a different table at TDR. Our school has more diversity and internationalism than most colleges, but it seems like we, myself included, don’t take advantage of this. We’re missing out on so much.

Translation and Interpretations

Judith Martin and Thomas Nakayama define translation as: "the process of producing a written text that refers to something said or written in another language"(243). However that is notably different from interpretation which is "the process of verbally expressing what is said or written in another language"(243).  An example of this would be my friend who is learning Arabic. If he misunderstands a phrase, he would go to an online website to rewrite the phrase in Arabic and then go to google translate to have the phrase translated. The translation is made word for word rather than the interpretation causing the sentence to make no sense. For example, he looked up what "حروف شمسيا" was. On google it was translated as "ABC SOLAR". When he showed me this I laughed because in Arabic there is no such thing as a ". What the question meant was find the letter "ش" . This shows how limited and unreliable translations can be. With this in mind, when we do not know someone who speaks the language, how much can we fundamentally understand?

Language is not a prison house, it is a means of escape, escape from our thoughts, our ideas and our own personal perceptions. It is limiting, surely but as it is our only means of communication, it should be appreciated despite its flaws.

Language is not a barrier but can be used to express everything that a person is thinking, allowing humans to link with others. Without language, our perceptions of the world would be even more biased and limited than they are now with any bias language gives us. Without the ability to interact with others, humans would not be able to share their unique perspectives, and would be stuck assuming that their own viewpoints were the only ones.

Nonetheless, language has its own flaws, which should be acknowledged. Because I have studied three languages, I can see that each would influence me to think about the world in a slightly different way. For instance, the subjunctive tense in French and Spanish causes me to think about the world as less factual and clear-cut and instead as having more shades of grey. Another example is that, in French and Spanish, they label items as being masculine or feminine. One noticeable thing about this is that it influences the way that people see the objects and which adjectives they would use to describe the object.

Therefore, while language builds a framework for bias in our ways of viewing the world, it also provides a way of discussing how other people see the world, and gives us ways to expand our views.

Being Biracial...

One part of the reading that really intrigued me was the majority, minority and biracial identity development stages. My mother is American, born in upstate NY; while my dad is Moroccan, with American citizenship since he was born in Boston. At the age of 3, my father's family moved back to Morocco and lived there until he moved back to the United States for university. 

What did that result to, years after my parents met? Me. I'm half-American, half Moroccan; holding passports for both Morocco and the United States. 

By reading the biracial identity development stages, I came to realize that I was reading about myself. As a kid, my friends would frequently come up to me and tell me which I preferred being more, American or Moroccan. I was offended, because I am both. Even in our school yearbook I would make sure that for my nationality, they stated both countries. 

Yet, growing up things were difficult. I could never really "fit" in. I really did not care if Morocco lost its soccer game, or that the Patriots lost. While those who were "full American" or "full Moroccan" would go biserck.  I never felt fully devoted to one country; but over the years I became proud of this. Now, I am proud to be from both nations, having two drastically different cultures. I feel like I have an easier time making friends from other nations. Also, I'm proud to tell anyone who asks about both cultures. 

All in all, although I still get the frequent question "So do you prefer being American or Moroccan" I don't get offended but instead state that both are part of who I truly am. And, as in "Intercultural Communication in Contexts" states, I've reached the third level -- self acceptance.

Language is significant in cross-cultural communication!

So learning another language like adopt or learning another culture, it is not easy. As in the article "How does our language shape the way we think?" by Lera Borodisky, "learning a new language (especially one not closely related to those you know) is never easy; it seems to require paying atention to a new set of distinctions." It is similar how we recognize a different culture through language. When we comunicate we have to share our ideas, thoughs and feeling or perceive informations by using language. Language will help us less misunderstanding each other. Such as when I first came here to the U.S. I had a big issue in communication with people. Because the way I speak English is the way how my culture is and that is different with people speaking English in the U.S. . I created my own way to use English and people have misunderstood about me. Now I have been living here in U.S. for four years. I am trying to learn the way Americans speak and use English so that they can have a better understanding when I want to say something; or I would be able to share my thoughts and ideas. I realize that I am adopting U.S. culture through learning English and using it everyday. But it is extremely difficult at first as well as having long term to be able to use English as Native people.

Jewish Identity in Southern Society

Growing up in the south, the "Bible Belt" to be exact, it was not encouraged to be different and by the standards where I was, I am. I'm Jewish, fairly liberal, open-minded, not a supporter of the Confederacy, etc. But in order to have friends in high school, different aspects of my "identity" appeared at different times. You could say that impression management was a constant part of my life.

I attended a private Christian school where I was one of 3 Jews from grades 7-12, so religion was not a topic I would discuss with many people, though I did guest lecture in the religion classes every year. My religious identity was one that was well-hidden at school, especially when people were trying to convert me at least once a week.

Around certain friends I was able to truly be myself and talk about world events, gossip, fashion, or anything else that I am interested in. When I was with certain other people, I felt that I had to hide the fact that I am an intellectual, a major part of my own identity.

At home, I still hid various aspects of my identity. Since my father died in 2006, I have had to hide aspects of my identity that are attributed to him in order to not upset my mother. Other aspects that I didn't reveal to my mother included political identity (since she is conservative), true religious identity (she converted and I am much more religious than she is), and cultural identity (music, movies), though we do share a love of literature.

At college, I feel that my identity is still forming. It is true that your identity is influenced by the people around you- my mother has even commented on certain mannerisms of mine that have changed since arriving here. I am still deciding which aspects to reveal and which ones to keep hidden, though I feel that I am becoming much more comfortable with who I truly am.

Identity is influenced by those around you but also by yourself. You decide how you want to be perceived, though you cannot always control other people's perceptions. It is important to be conscious of who you want to be and think about how you are perceived by others. In high school, I was an outsider, a Jew who was not a fan of the South. Here, I feel that I am welcomed for who I actually am.

U.S. Health Care Reform in This Summer!

The identity conflict in the debate in this summer has deteriorated to inject ethics as in article " Debate on U.S. Health care Reform should Emphasize Ethical and Moral Obligations, Says Researchers" by Richard Saltus. So, as everything else that deals with Government, identity plays a big role in Health Care Reform creates a distinction between a health campaign based on caring for others and one for economic self-interest. Debates held across the country highlight the problems of conflating interests. The conscious of American people are being tested. A mojority of Americans are really concerned about the unisured population; largely, the Latino population. We should all agree that human dignity should motivate the health care reform and that all should be able to afford the necessary treatement in time is sickness. The Health Care Reform messages being conveyed to the American people are implicit to say the least. Those crafting the reforms need to adopt the right frames across the full spectrum of the public in order to gain their support.

One idea that fascinated me about last week's reading was the idea of spin control. People are always telling us to "be true to yourself" and "follow your heart", but in reality, every single one of us conforms to society and masks those parts of ourselves that we deem to be embarrassing or out of the ordinary. I think this demonstrates the fact that other people will always have a huge influence on our identity, no matter how much we like to believe that our "self" is our own creation.

Our interactions with other people are the main influence on our identity. Through interactions with our friends, family, and even the media, we learn what is considered to be good or bad behavior. If the theory of spin control is true, then we change our behavior to highlight the things that people have told us, either implicitly or explicitly, are good things. Thus, the interactions we have with other people determine our behavior.

Behavior is the basis of who we are because it establishes the ascribed piece of our identity, which in turn influences our avowed identity. As humans, we are always trying to determine how other people see us. Therefore, the identity ascribed to us by others will continually shape the way that we view ourselves.

I understand the desire to take credit, and also responsibility, for who you are and all that you have accomplished but the fact of the matter is that everything you have done has been encouraged or influenced by the people who surround you. Nobody has the willpower to completely block out the culture around them and so as a result, everybody is shaped, at least in part, by the interactions they have with others.

Power and Communication in Morocco

Skimming through the textbook pondering on what to write, I was interested in the intertwining of power and communication. Although power is "not always evident or obvious... or what kinds of meaning are constructed" it is found universally, especially in Morocco. 

Living in a monarchy, the influence of power is quite evident. Even though we have a parliament, the King has the last words. On a primary dimension, gender is an issue. Men and women are still not fundamentally equal, and in the rural areas the conception of a "house wife" still stands today. On a secondary dimension we cannot speak ill of the King no matter what our socioeconomic status-- we'd all end up in prison. 

Although Orebe claims that the "power is not a simple one-way proposition". In comparison to Morocco, that is false. Not only is there a constraint on speech, but there is censorship in our newspapers. Accidents, or murders are rarely published, thus we citizens perceive our nation to be free of crime. This alludes to the question how much good does this bring to an individual?

Moving to the United States for university, where there is a democracy is a culture shock. You may disagree with the President openly, yet how much good does that bring? Or constantly listening to the news about deaths, crimes and murder... its weary to hear such sad stories day after day. Would more power within the government actually do some good to the average American?

Collective Secrets

September 14, 2009

Weaver's idea of culture makes me curious about things that are hidden in our world. His belief that behavior is the only observable part of culture made me wonder what collective secrets our behavior in the United States is masking. The only problem with that is, we may have conflicting ideas of what that unspoken secret is.

When I explained to my roommate Weaver's theory of culture, and asked her for some ideas of what to write about, she mentioned the US tradition of watching TV. In recent years, everyone watches it all the time. So, according to Weaver, this habitual behavior is based upon a shared belief.

When I told my roommate, "Yes! People watch TV and it demonstrates the value of entertainment in the United States and the belief that entertaining yourself is a good way to spend your time," she stared at me in disbelief.

"What are you talking about? TV is not based on entertainment. It's a way of staying informed about the world around you. TV is the only way I have time to get my news in the morning."

I couldn't believe it. We both come from the United States, we both watch about 10 hours of TV a week and we both agree that life without TV would be unimaginable. With such similar backgrounds on the exact same behavior, how on earth did we come to such completely opposite conclusions about the values TV entails?

And so I did some more digging. Some behaviors, such as that of studying led us to the same conclusions about beliefs (we both believe that studying is a result of the belief that everyone should be an informed world citizen). But even such basic behavior as eating we believed symbolized different beliefs and values. My roommate thinks that eating is merely a biological necessity whereas I believe that, as a part of culture, eating a meal is more meaningful. I think that we eat with other people because Americans believe in the importance of community and value the company of other people. Yet my roommate and I are both are part of the same culture and attach completely different significance to the daily act of eating.

The fact that two such similar girls, who take part in the same activities daily, could view the meaning of those activities so differently made me question Weaver’s theory. If the beliefs and values that behaviors are based upon are never spoken aloud or discussed, how are we to be sure that they hold the same meaning for everyone?

week 2- chapter 4- History influnces to culture!

I am interested in chapter 4 about history and how it is important to culture. According to the article “Tea-a Chinese way of life and culture” tells us about the origins of tea in Chinese history has giving me an understanding better how history influences and becomes important to culture and communication. Tea in China as coffee in Western; of which the “appreciation was a major hallmark of a well-to-do lifestyle,” but “sometimes even was deemed to define the characteristics of a highly cultured person.” So tea as a best friend as they say “rather than go without salt for 3 days than without tea for a single day.” As custom of old Chinese people, they said that: “scholars and gentry identical would not have been able to entertain their guests without tea or the teahouse.” As well as today, even though in China “almost every family has radio, colour TV sets, a personal computer and there are a lot of coffee bars, such as Starbucks, in every big city, many people [but] people still like to go to tea especially businessmen and elderly people.” For a reason that they believe that the teahouse is a good place to meet their old friends and a place to communicate to each other, instead of being a silence or out-of-the-way spot for the achievement of their scholar.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090911/ap_on_re_eu/eu_germany_arctic_passage

The Digital Divide

At my high school, we had a senior thesis project. Part of it was to write your senior thesis but the other part was a group project. We were put into groups in which we chose a topic that was facing the world today that needs to be solved. My group chose the digital divide, specifically in the Middle East. The digital divide is a term that refers to the inequality of access to the Internet and other forms of technology that have become ever important in today's technological age.

Israel is seen as one of the leaders in technology yet its surrounding countries are definitely lacking in the technological field. The reason is some regions, including Afghanistan and Iraq, have opposed technology because they believe that it represents western culture. Others just don't have the funds. Countries in other parts of the world have set up government run Internet cafes so that citizens can use the Internet in order to communicate with possible employers and send their resumes, which is the case in eastern Europe. Others have given government issued cell phones. In these cases and others, the point is that there are solutions to helping bridge the digital divide.

Another example is $100 laptops- you can buy one for yourself, but you also have to purchase another which will be given to a student in need. This program is prominent in parts of Africa in which they are used in schools but the students also take them home, which helps teach the older generation how to use computers.

Though when discussing the digital divide, most assume that it just occurs in foreign countries, but the digital divide is also occurring within the United States. As the book pointed out, certain ethnic groups, along with people with household incomes less than $30,000, are less likely to have broadband Internet access than whites.

The digital divide itself is important because of the access to information. Information is a powerful thing- it has the ability to education people about anything from other cultures to how to use a certain computer program and everything in between. Those without such access are at a disadvantage when applying for jobs because they are not familiar with certain forms of technology. Because of its relation to jobs and therefore income, the digital divide widens the gap between the rich and the poor.

With the changing demographics within the United States, including the increase in minorities and the economic situation we are currently in, it is important for all to have access to technology so that we can all have equal access (in terms of technological background) to jobs and to provide access to other areas of the world so that we might learn to understand other cultures and regions of the world.