Have Difficult Economic Times Changed Our Values?

Posted on May 30, 2013 by Kathryn Stillings

“The continued positive outlook—despite the hard times—is a measure of the resilience of American values. The Pew Research Center’s twenty-five-year tracking of American values finds little indication of deflation in the public’s basic confidence in the efficacy of hard work, the nature of personal success, and the nation’s capacity to solve its problems.”

Working with Cultural Detective over the years, I am always interested in the role values play in our lives. So I was eager to read a new working paper for the Council on Foreign Relations released by Pew Research Center pollsters Andrew Kohut and Michael Dimock, entitled Resilient American Values: Optimism in an Era of Growing Inequality and Economic Difficulty.

We in the USA are a nation of optimists. We believe that with hard work we will get ahead. “Unlike Europeans, they [US Americans] believe that they themselves, not larger forces in society, determine whether they will be successful in life.” And, in spite of the recent difficult economic times, US Americans continue to believe that it is through their own initiative they can and will succeed.

Although the economic situation in the US has changed radically in the last 25 years, research finds that this shift has not drastically changed our values. This research indicates that the core Cultural Detective: USA values of Self-reliance (It’s up to you) and Capitalism (Reach for the American Dream) are alive and well throughout all levels of US society.

However, what really caught my interest in the paper was the research that showed US Americans are upset not by rich people being “too rich,” nor by the widening economic gap between the rich and the poor, nor by the large drops in wealth and income among most in the last decade. To the contrary, US Americans are most concerned by the apparent unequal nature of the economic system, and a government ideologically paralyzed and unable to institute meaningful reform.

“During a time of prolonged economic hardship, Americans are clearly upset about a perceived lack of fairness. What the public wants is not a war on the rich, but rather more fairness in public policy, and policies that promote opportunity.”

Sounds to me like the results of this study also suggest that the CD: USA values of Equality (Level the playing field) and Law and Order (Play by the rules) remain an integral part of the society. We want the same opportunity to work hard and get ahead as everyone else—even those with far more money and power than we ourselves have. While there is great diversity in our ranks, perhaps this study has once again shown us what unites us as US Americans.

We invite you to take a look at this study—it is full of interesting information about US values and attitudes. We’d love to hear how you see your cultural values playing out in difficult economic times.

Tango! Kabuki! Bollywood! Jazz! What Do They Have in Common?

Posted on May 28, 2013 by Dianne Hofner Saphiere

(English followed by Español, 日本語版 and हिंदी संस्करण, below)

Tango! Kabuki! Bollywood! Jazz! You have to admit they all sound exciting—full of life, excitement, drama and…culture. Each is currently the basis of a hugely lucrative industry, and many of us greatly enjoy at least one of these art forms.

But what do the histories of these four forms of entertainment—from such divergent places on our planet—have in common?

Each has its origins among the poor, underprivileged and marginalized of society. And each was, at some point, much maligned and considered improper and lacking decorum. Several of these now-popular forms of entertainment were banned, some more than once, before they grew in popularity and finally gained respectability.

Tango, born in the latter part of the 1800s amidst the docks of Buenos Aires, was originally played and danced by poor immigrants. The middle and upper classes were first exposed to tango in bars and brothels. While we can easily imagine they secretly enjoyed it, tango wasn’t something one openly listened to or danced in “polite company.” Given such humble roots, I was shocked at the price of a “tango show” ticket when in Buenos Aires recently!
Kabuki, perhaps the most famous form of traditional Japanese entertainment, began in the 1600s among the common people, and was originally performed outdoors on a riverbed. Kabuki was invented and performed by women, often prostitutes, and later by adolescent boys, many times prostitutes as well. Prior to that point, theater in Japan had been for aristocrats only, and primarily involved the very slow-moving noh. Kabuki has come a long way, baby.
Bollywood, the Hindi film industry based in Mumbai, rose to prominence during the 1900s, and is only a part of the huge Indian film industry. It has long been seen as a caricature, as melodramatic and unrealistic—not to be respected like classical Indian dance and theater. Yet, these days, you can travel anywhere in the world and enjoy a Bollywood film. The industry has introduced Indian culture to the world, while it speaks to universals such as love and loss.
Jazz began in the southern USA from African American roots. Its beginnings can be traced to traditional African music turned into work songs and “field hollers.” The music evolved amidst the injustice of slavery, spirituality that provided the hope of redemption, and courage to face adversity on the quest for freedom. What was to become jazz moved from the fields to the brothels and bars, and eventually was “discovered” and is now respected, admired and played worldwide.

Why are these seemingly very different topics on my mind? If you read this blog regularly, you know that I recently had the pleasure of visiting Argentina, and there I learned about the history of the tango—the first thread. I know about the history of kabuki from the years I lived in Japan, and the similarity of histories intrigued me. Pondering the history of jazz, I noted three similar threads. Then, just yesterday, Lord Meghnad Desai’s article about Bollywood crossed my desk, and it occurred to me that perhaps these threads weren’t just coincidence; I’d better pay attention!

In my academic discipline, intercultural communication, some refer to the concepts of “big C” and “little c” culture (Bennett, 1998). Culture with a capital “C” usually means the objective aspects of a culture, that which is visible and overt. This includes the art, music, dance, etc.—the artifacts of culture, if you will. It also includes what it is that people say and do, the observable ways culture is expressed through its members’ behavior in daily life. This idea correlates with the “Words and Actions” section of a Cultural Detective Worksheet.

In contrast, “little c” culture refers to shared customs, norms, communication styles, values, assumptions, etc. This subjective part of culture is generally hidden, expressing itself in the verbal and nonverbal behavior of its members. Subjective culture is what lies beneath the behaviors, that is, why people do what they do, and correlates with the “Values, Beliefs and Cultural Common Sense” portion of a Cultural Detective Worksheet.

In some way, I reflected, each of these four art forms derived from an expression of “little c” culture that morphed into “big C” Culture, usually over some decades. Could this be the way of the world?

I first moved to Mexico in the 1970s as a foreign student, and was thrilled to live in Coyoacán, home to both Frida Kahlo and “La Malinche”! I was saddened to learn, however, that both these facts seemed disturbing or embarrassing to my host family; to me it appeared that there was little pride in national traditions or “things Mexican.” People with money purchased European designer brands and housewares; handmade and “artesenal” were looked down upon as signs you couldn’t afford “better.”

How happy I am to be living in Mexico again, and to find that now traditional arts and crafts, and local heritage and traditions, are much more celebrated. This perceived change would seem to echo the question I’d begun asking myself about if and how “culture” evolves into “Culture.”

What, if any, are the characteristics shared by these initially despised but now-celebrated art forms? Each involves overacting, melodrama, emotion, and exaggeration. Usually their themes revolve around the pain of injustice, and, frequently, love spurned, often due to class differences.

While researching these four forms of entertainment for this blog post, I realized the best part: each is a product of the creativity that comes about when cultures begin mixing and changing! Perhaps those often viewed as marginal and on the outskirts of a culture can have a powerful influence on the evolution of the culture. And, just maybe, this intermingling of different peoples in similar difficult circumstances can spark enormous creativity.

As The Jillbrary tells us, Bollywood is an intentional hybrid. It does “not speak to just one religious group, language, geographical area, or caste (as unrealistic as that may be)… The music incorporates styles from various traditions—North Indian and Carnatic classical, light classical, religious, and folk music, Hollywood, Latin, Chinese, and reggae. In Bollywood films, Muslims marry Hindus, Hindus marry Christians, and people from different societal classes can succeed and collaborate.”

Likewise, jazz is a hybrid, born out of African Americans living a marginalized experience, straddling two or more cultures, and dealing with powerlessness. What creativity and power that combination brought forth!

Tango and kabuki both rose to prominence alongside (or inside) brothels, and involved bending and blending of gender identities—in tango men teach men the dance steps, and in modern kabuki male actors play all the roles regardless of gender. Needless to say, these innovations emerged from the margins or edges of the culture; they were not initially activities of “mainstream” society (and thus, were not regarded as “art”)!

I find this tapestry intriguing. There are so many art forms, “Culture,” that originated with those living on the “fringes” of society. Often poor, underprivileged, and lacking resources, it may take time for mainstream culture to recognize such artistic contributions. When I grew up in the US Southwest, “Indian jewelry,” pottery, and weavings were not generally perceived to be worth much more than the materials involved in their creation; they were certainly not popularly considered the prized possessions many are today.

How does this view of “culture” morphing into “Culture” fit with your experience? Let’s continue the conversation! Please share with us some of your favorites, with links, if you would. Many thanks!

—

¡Tango! ¡Kabuki! ¡Bollywood! ¡Jazz! ¿Qué tienen en común?
Traducido por Maryori Vivas

¡Tango! ¡Kabuki! ¡Bollywood! ¡Jazz! Usted tiene que admitir que todos suenan emocionantes — llenos de vida, emoción, drama y… cultura. Cada uno es actualmente la base de una gran y lucrativa industria, y muchos de nosotros gratamente disfrutamos al menos una de estas formas de arte.

¿Pero que tienen las historias de estas cuatro formas de entretenimiento — desde lugares tan divergentes de nuestro planeta — en común?

Cada una se origina entre los pobres, desfavorecidos y marginados de una sociedad. Y cada una fue, en cierto punto, muy difamada y considerada impropia y con falta de decoro. Muchas de estas ahora populares formas de entretenimiento fueron prohibidas, algunas más de una vez, antes de que ganaran popularidad y finalmente se ganaran el respeto.

Tango, nacido a finales de 1800 en medio de los muelles de Buenos Aires, fue originalmente interpretada y bailada por inmigrantes pobres. La clase media y alta fueron expuestas al tango inicialmente en bares y burdeles. Mientras podemos imaginar fácilmente que ellos lo disfrutaran en secreto, el tango no era algo que alguien bailara o escuchara abiertamente “en compañía cortés.” Considerando estas raíces humildes, quedé en shock al conocer el precio de una entrada a un “tango show” cuando estuve en Buenos Aires recientemente.
Kabuki, quizás la forma más famosa de entretenimiento tradicional japonés, comenzó a finales de 1600 entre la gente común y era originalmente interpretada en las afueras en el lecho de un río. El kabuki fue inventado e interpretado por mujeres, frecuentemente prostitutas, y más tarde por chicos adolescentes, muchas veces en la prostitución también. Antes de esto, el teatro en Japón había sido únicamente para los aristócratas y principalmente involucraba el muy lento movimiento noh.
Bollywood, la industria fílmica Hindú con sede en Mumbai alcanzó posiciones de prominencia durante los años de 1900, y es solo una parte de la enorme industria fílmica India. Durante mucho tiempo se ha visto como una caricatura, melodramática y no realista — no para respetarse como la danza clásica india y el teatro. A pesar de todo, usted puede viajar a cualquier lugar en el mundo y disfrutar un film de Bollywood. La industria ha presentado la cultura india al mundo, mientras envía mensajes universales como el amor y el duelo.
Jazz comenzó en el sur de Estados Unidos con raíces afroamericanas. Sus comienzos se remontan a la música tradicional Africana transformada en canciones de trabajo y “gritos en el campo”. La música evolucionó en medio de la injusticia de la esclavitud, la espiritualidad que brindaba la esperanza de la redención, y el coraje para enfrentar la adversidad en la travesía hacia la libertad. Lo que se convertiría en Jazz se trasladó de los campos a los burdeles y bares, y eventualmente fue “descubierto” y ahora es respetado, admirado e interpretado alrededor del mundo.

¿Por qué estos temas, aparentemente muy diferentes, en mi mente? Si usted lee este blog regularmente, usted sabe que recientemente tuve el placer de visitar Argentina y allí aprendí de la historia del tango — el primer sorbo. Conozco de la historia del kabuki de los años que viví en Japón, y la similitud de historias me intrigó. Ponderando la historia del jazz, me dí cuenta de tres historias similares. Luego, sólo ayer el artículo de Lord Meghnad Desai sobre Bollywood llegó a mi escritorio y pensé que quizás esas historias no eran simple coincidencia, ¡debería mejor prestar atención!

En mi disciplina académica, comunicación intercultural, algunos se refieren a los conceptos de la cultura de “C mayúscula” o de “c minúscula”. Cultura con “C” mayúscula usualmente se refiere a los aspectos objetivos de una cultura que son visibles y evidentes. Esto incluye el arte, música, danza etc. – los artifacts si prefiere. También incluye lo que la gente dice y hace, las maneras observables de la cultura expresadas a través del comportamiento de sus miembros en su vida diaria. Esta idea se relaciona con la sección “Palabras y Acciones” de la hoja de trabajo de Cultural Detective.

En contraste, la cultura con “c minúscula” se refiere a las costumbres, normas, estilos de comunicación, valores, supuestos, etc que son compartidos. Esta parte subjetiva de la cultura está generalmente escondida, expresándose a sí misma en el comportamiento verbal y no verbal de sus miembros. La cultura subjetiva es la que se esconde tras los comportamientos, esto quiere decir por qué la gente hace lo que hace, y se relaciona con la sección “Valores, Creencias y Sentido común cultural” de Cultural Detective.

De alguna manera, reflexioné, cada una de estas cuatro formas de arte se derivan de una expresión de la “c minúscula” que se transforma en “C mayúscula”, usualmente luego de varias décadas. ¿Podría ser esta la manera de ser del mundo?

Me mudé por primera vez a México en los años 70 como estudiante extranjera, y estaba emocionada de vivir en Coyoacán, la tierra de Frida Kahlo y “La Malinche”. Yo estaba muy triste de saber, sin embargo, que estos dos hechos parecían molestar o avergonzar a mi familia anfitriona; a mí me parecía que había poco del orgullo por las tradiciones nacionales o “cosas mexicanas”. La gente adinerada compraba marcas de diseñadores europeos y artículos para el hogar; las artesanías y lo hecho a mano se veía con menosprecio por ser una muestra que usted no podía comprar algo “mejor”.

Qué feliz me siento de estar viviendo en México nuevamente, y de encontrar ahora artes tradicionales y artesanías, y herencias locales y tradiciones, ahora son mucho más celebradas. Este cambio perceptible parecería hacer eco de la pregunta que me había hecho acerca de cómo la “cultura” evoluciona en “Cultura”.

¿Cuáles, si algunas, son las características compartidas por estas formas de arte inicialmente despreciadas y ahora valoradas? Cada una involucra sobreactuación, melodrama, emoción y exageración. Usualmente sus temas se desenvuelven alrededor del dolor de la injusticia, y, frecuentemente el amor desdeñado, usualmente debido a la diferencia de clases.

Mientras investigaba estas cuatro formas de entretenimiento para esta nota del blog, me di cuenta de la mejor parte: ¡cada una es producto de la creatividad que llega cuando las culturas comienzan mezclándose y cambiando! Quizás aquellas que son percibidas como marginales y en la periferia de una cultura pueden tener una poderosa influencia en la evolución de la cultura. Y, tal vez esta interrelación de diferentes personas en similares circunstancias difíciles puede detonar una gran creatividad.

Como nos dice The Jillbrary, Bollywood es un híbrido intencional. “No haba únicamente a un grupo religioso, idioma, área geográfica, o casta (tan irrealista como esto puede ser)… La música incorpora estilos de varias tradiciones — del norte de India y Carnática clásica, clásica ligera, religiosa, y música folclórica, Hollywood, Latina, China, y reggae. En los films de Bollywood, musulmanes se casan con hindúes, hindúes se casan con cristianos, y la gente de diferentes clases sociales puede triunfar y colaborar.

Del mismo modo, el jazz es un híbrido nacido de afroamericanos viviendo una experiencia marginadora, horcajadas de dos o más culturas, y lidiando con la impotencia. ¡Qué creatividad y poder originaron de esa combinación!

El tango y el kabuki los dos llegaron a ocupar un lugar de prominencia junto a (o dentro de) burdeles, e involucraban la participación y mezcla de identidades de género — en el tango los hombres enseñan a los hombres pasos de baile, y en el kabuki moderno los actores (puros hombres) pueden representar cualquier papel sin importar el género. No hace falta decir, estas inovaciones emergieron en el margen o bordes de la cultura; no eran actividades de la corriente principal de la sociedad.

Encuentro todo esto fascinante. Hay muchas formas de arte, “Cultura” que se originaron con aquellos viviendo en al “borde” de la sociedad. Frecuentemente pobres, desfavorecidos y con falta de recursos; puede tomar tiempo para la cultura principal reconocer sus contribuciones artísticas. Cuando crecí en el suroeste de los Estados Unidos la “joyería india’’, cerámica y tejidos no eran generalmente percibidos con un costo mucho mayor que aquel de los materiales usados en su creación; ciertamente no eran popularmente considerados las preciadas posesiones que muchos de ellos son hoy.

¿Cómo esta visión de “cultura” transformándose en “Cultura” se ajusta a su experiencia? Sigamos con esta conversación. Comparta con nosotros alguna de sus experiencias favoritas con enlaces, si le es posible. Muchas gracias.

—

タンゴ ！　歌舞伎 ！　ボリウッド ！　ジャズ ！　すべてにつながっていることは？
翻訳：幸田隆

タンゴ！　歌舞伎！　ボリウッド！　ジャズ！　これらのすべては人をワクワクさせます。活気、興奮、ドラマ、そして、文化。それぞれのアートは今や、私たちに大きな富をもたらしてくれるものです。これらの中で、少なくとも１つは大いに楽しんでいる人も多いのではないでしょうか。

地球上の様々な場所で広がった、これら 4 つのエンターテイメントの歴史に、共通していることとしては、どのようなことがあるでしょうか。

それぞれのエンターテイメントの原点は、貧しい、恵まれない、疎外された社会にあります。これらすべてのエンターテイメントには、社会で、多くの非難を浴び、不適切で、品性に欠けていると考えられていた時期があります。今や日常的な娯楽となった、これらのエンターテイメントは、社会で、人気を博し、よいものとして認められるまでに、少なくとも一度は禁止されたことがあります。

タンゴ：　1800 年代の後半、ブエノスアイレスで生まれ、貧しい移民が演じ、踊ったもの。タンゴは当初、バーや売春宿で、中流、上流階級によって楽しまれたものでした。タンゴを聞いたり、踊ったりすることはマナーのある人が公然とすることではありませんでした。秘かに楽しまれていたタンゴの様子は想像できると思います。このようなひかえめなタンゴの歴史を考えると、最近ブエノスアイレスへ行ったときに見た、「タンゴショー」チケットのあまりにも高い値段にショックを受けました！
歌舞伎：　おそらく、日本の伝統芸能で最も有名なもの。1600年代に大衆の間で広がり、もともと、野外の河川敷で行われました。そもそも歌舞伎を始め、演じたのは女性で、その多くは売春婦であったと言われています。しばらくすると、男性によっても演じられましたが、その多くは水商売にかかわる男性でした。歌舞伎以前の演劇は、貴族だけが楽しめるもので、ゆっくりとした動きの能が主なものでした。歌舞伎はこんなにも長い道のりを歩んできたのです。
ボリウッド：　1900 年代に広がり、ムンバイに拠点を置く、インドの映画業界のこと。ボリウッドは、巨大なインドの映画産業の一部です。ボリウッドの映画は、風刺、メロドラマ、非現実的なものとして長い間考えられていて、インドの古典舞踊や演劇のように尊敬を集めるものではありませんでした。でも、今や世界中のどこへ旅をしても、ボリウッドの映画を楽しむことができます。ボリウッドは愛や悲しみという普遍的な価値を伝えながらも、世界中にインド文化も紹介しています。
ジャズ：　アメリカ合衆国南部、アフリカ系アメリカ人により始められたもの。そのルーツは、仕事をしながら歌う歌、「畑の叫び」に関係した伝統的なアフリカの音楽につながっています。ジャズは、奴隷制度は不当であるという思いから広がりました。自由を勝ち取るために逆境に立ち向かう勇気、いつかは救われるという希望を魂で訴える力から広がりました。ジャズとして確立される前のものは売春宿やバーで表現されていました。それがやがて注目され、今や、よさが認められ、たたえられ、世界中で奏でられるようになりました。

どうして、一見してあまりつながらないようなこれらのエンターテイメントが、私の頭に同時に浮かんだのでしょうか？　定期的にこのブログを読んでいただいている方は、私が最近、アルゼンチンを訪ね、タンゴの歴史（最初の投稿）にふれたことをご存知でしょう。歌舞伎の歴史は、私が日本に数年間住んでいたときに学び、とても興味をもったものです。ジャズの歴史に関しては、ブログで３つの投稿をしています。そして、昨日、メグナッド・デサイ卿のボリウッドに関する記事を、自分の書斎で偶然読みました。これらのことは偶然ではない。深く考えた方がいい。このように思った次第です。

私の専門である、異文化間コミュニケーションの領域では、“大きなC”の文化と“小さな c”の文化という考え方があります。大文字のCで始まるCulture、つまり“大きなC”の文化は、文化のはっきりと、目に見える客観的な側面になります。芸術、音楽、ダンスなど、人間が生み出した工芸品が“大きなC”の文化になります。“大きなC”の文化は日常生活で表現される人々の言葉や行動でもあります。この説明は、異文化間コミュニケーション教材「Cultural Detective Worksheet（異文化の探偵ワークシート）」の「言葉と行動」の章に書かれています。

それに対して、“小さな c”の文化は、習慣、行動規範、コミュニケーション・スタイル、価値観、当たり前と思っている常識などを意味しています。“小さな c”の文化は、文化の主観的な側面で、通常、言葉や非言語の表現の中に潜んでいます。主観的な文化は、行動の背後にあること、つまり、どうして、人はそれをするのかという理由と関係しています。このことは、教材「Cultural Detective Worksheet」の「価値観、信念、文化的な常識」の章に書かれています。

ある意味で、これら４種類のアートであるエンターテイメントは、それぞれ、長い間、“大きなC”の文化に形を変えてきた“小さな c”の文化の表現なのかもしれません。世の中には、このようなことが、よくあることなのでしょうか？

1970 年代、私は留学生として、初めてメキシコに行ったことがあります。私は、メキシコシティのコヨアカンで暮らしました。ここは画家のフリーダ・カーロと「ラマリンチェ」の故郷で、毎日ワクワクした気持ちで過ごしていました。でも、私のホストファミリーにとって、これらの話題は何となくはずかしくて、避けられているものだということを学びました。当時の私には、メキシコ人が「メキシコらしいもの」や自分の国の伝統に、あまり誇りというものをもっていないようにも思われました。メキシコのお金持ちはヨーロッパのデザイナーブランドや食器類を好んで買い求め、手作りの伝統工芸品は、お金に余裕のない人が買うものとして、避けられているような気がしました。

私は幸運にも今また、メキシコに住んでいます。そして、今は、メキシコの伝統工芸品や地元の遺産や伝統が、人々によって大切にされるように変わったことが感じられます。メキシコで、自国の文化に対する見方がこのように変わったという、この体験が、自分の中で、エンターテイメントの話とつながりました。“小さな c”の文化は、どのように、“大きなC”の文化へと形を変えていくのでしょうか？

初めは人々に軽べつされていても、今になると芸術的なものとして評価を受けているもの。そういうものには、どのような特徴があるのでしょうか？それには、大げさな演技、メロドラマ、感情、誇張表現が関係しています。格差社会によって生み出されることが多い、不公正な現実へのつらい気持ち、拒絶された愛がテーマとなっています。

このブログの投稿のために、これら 4 種類のエンターテイメントについて調べていて気づいたことがあります。それぞれのエンターテイメントは、いくつかの文化が混ざり、変化し始めたときに生まれる創造性の表れであるということ。文化の発展に大きな影響力をもっているのは、そのときの主流の文化からはずれていて、社会の境界線上に住んでいると考えられる人々なのかもしれません。同じ困難な境遇におかれた、様々な人たちがかかわり合うことで、創造性の大きな花が開花していくのではないかと思いました。

ジルブラリィの記事によれば、ボリウッドは、意図的なハイブリッド文化です。ボリウッドは、１つの宗教、１つの言語、１つの地域、１つのカースト（非現実的ではありますね) という枠を超えたものです。ボリウッドの音楽は、北インドの音楽、南インドのカルナティック音楽、ライトクラシック音楽、宗教音楽、フォーク、ハリウッド、ラテン、中国、レゲエなど様々な伝統やジャンルを統合したものです。ボリウッドの映画では、イスラム教徒がヒンズー教徒と結婚したり、ヒンズー教徒がキリスト教徒と結婚したり、様々な社会階層の人が成功したり、力を合わせて働いたりもします。

同様に、ジャズもハイブリッド文化です。社会の本流からはずれる体験、２つ以上の文化にまたがる体験、無力感を味わった体験をしてきたアフリカ系アメリカ人から生まれました。こうした体験が混ざり合って、創造性とパワーが生み出されたのです。

タンゴと歌舞伎は両方とも、売春宿に関係したところ（あるいは、その中）で発展していき、男女の性別が変わったり、混じったりしながら演じられてきました。タンゴでは、男性が男性にダンスのステップを教えていたし、現代の歌舞伎では、すべての役を男性が演じることになっています。これらの革新的なスタイルは、境界線上にある文化に表れたものです。当初は、社会の主流ではありませんでした。

私は、このようなタペストリー（つづれ織り）に心を惹かれます。社会の片隅に暮らしている人々によって創り出されるアート、つまり“大きなC”の文化は、世の中に実にたくさんあります。貧しくて、差別を受け、恵まれない人たちの芸術的な貢献に、そのときの主流の文化の人たちが気づいていくには時間がかかるのかもしれません。アメリカ南西部で育った私は当時、アメリカインディアンの宝物、焼き物、織物が素材以上の価値あるものとしては社会に認められてはいないと感じました。でも、今は、たくさんの人が、それを好んで求め、価値あるものとして認めるようになりました。

いかがでしょうか？　“小さな c”の文化が“大きなC”の文化へと形を変えていくという、この考えは、みなさんの経験に当てはまるでしょうか？　話を続けていきましょう。このブログを、みなさんのお気に入りに登録していただいたり、リンクを張っていただければうれしいです。ありがとうございます。

—

टैंगो! काबुकी! बॉलीवुड! जैज्ज़ ! क्या इनमें कोई समानता है?
मृदुला दास द्वारा अनुवादित

मानना पडेगा कि ये चारों नाम सुनने में काफ़ी मज़ेदार और रोमांचक लगते हैं I ज़िन्दगी से भरपूर, रोमांचक संकृति के प्रतीक, ये कला के रूप अपने आप में भिन्न भिन्न देश और भाषा के लोगों द्वारा तैयार किये गए हैंl प्रत्येक रूप अपने आप में वर्तमान में एक बेहद आकर्षक उद्योग का आधार है, और हम में से कई इनमें से कम से कम एक कला रूप का आनंद तो लेते ही हैं ।

पर क्या ये चारों मनोरंजन के अवतार- जो कि इस धरती के भिन्न भिन्न देशों के उपज हैं- के जन्म और इतिहास में कोई समानता है?

प्रत्येक मनोरंजन – टैंगो, काबुकी, बॉलीवुड, या जैज्ज़ – का जन्म किसी गरीब,अल्पाधिकारप्राप्त, और मार्जिनलाइज़ड देश में हुआ हैl प्रत्येक रूप को किसी न किसी समय में निन्दित और अनुचित एवं असंगत माना गया हैl आज के ये चर्चित मनोरंजन के रूप कभी न कभी, इनके लोकप्रियता में वृद्धि से पहले, समाज और समाज के ठेकेदारों द्वारा एक बार नहीं, बल्कि अनेकों बार प्रतिबंधित और वर्जित किये गए हैंl ये और बात है की इन रूपों को अंततः प्रतिष्ठा और लोकप्रियता प्राप्त हुई हैl

टैंगो की पैदाइश ब्यूनस आयर्स (Buenos Aires) के नाव घाट के बीच १८०० के उत्तरार्द्ध में हुई हैl टैंगो, मूल रूप से गरीब आप्रवासियों द्वारा नृत्य किया गया और खेला जाता था.मध्यम और उच्च वर्गों के रसिक टैंगो से पहल पहल मदिरालय और वेश्यालयों में परिचित हुएl हम आसानी से कल्पना कर सकते हैं कि ये वर्ग के लोग इस मनोरंजन का चुपके से मज़ा तो ले रहे थे लेकिन उसे सभ्य समाज में अभी तक कोई मान्यता प्राप्त नहीं थी और लोग उसे खुलकर सबके सामने नाचने और मज़ा लेने की जुर्रत नहीं करते थेl इस अत्यंत ही गरीब कला का हाल ही में जब ब्यूनस आयर्स में एक ” टैंगो शो” के टिकट खरीदने गयी तो टिकेट की कीमत देख कर मैं अचंभित हो गयीl
काबुकी, शायद सबसे प्रसिद्ध परंपरागत जापानी मनोरंजन का रूप हैl यह आम लोगों के बीच १६०० सदी में शुरू हुआ था , और मूल रूप से सड़क पर या नदी के सूखे ताल पर प्रदर्शन किया गया था। काबुकी का आविष्कार और प्रदर्शन मूल रूप से महिलाओं और कभी कभार वेश्याओं द्वारा की जाती थीl आगे चलके इसका प्रदर्शन सिर्फ किशोर बालक और वेश्याएं ही करने लगेl इसके पहले जापान में रंगमंच केवल संभ्रांत श्रेणी के लिए था और इस पर अत्यंत ही धीमे गति वाला नोह का प्रदर्शन होता थाl काबुकी अपने आदि रूप से काफी आगे पहुँच चूका है और आज हम सब को रोमांचित करने में कोई कसार नहीं छोड़ी हैl
बॉलीवुड ने, जो की मुंबई स्थित हिन्दी फिल्म उद्योग का हिस्सा है , १९०० के दौरान प्रमुखता प्राप्त की l इसे लंबे समय तक एक कार्टून, नाटकीय और अवास्तविक कला के रूप में देखा गया और इसको शास्त्रीय भारतीय नृत्य और थियेटर की तरह सम्मान नहीं दिया गया l फिर भी, इन दिनों, आप दुनिया के किसी भी कोने में बॉलीवुड फिल्म का आनंद लें कर सकते हैंl इस उद्योग ने दुनिया को भारतीय संस्कृति से परिचित कराया है जबकि इसमें अन्तर्हित सार्वभौमिक प्रेम और वियोग कथा सभी दर्शकों के लिए सामान हैl
जैज्ज़ अमेरिकी अफ्रीकी जड़ों से दक्षिणी संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका ( साउथ अमेरिका) में शुरू हुआ। इसकी शुरुआत पारंपरिक अफ्रीकी संगीत को कर्म क्षेत्र गीतों,यानी काम के साथ साथ गाये गए गीतों) के रूप में हुई l यह संगीत गुलामी से मुक्ति और आजादी की खोज करने वाले बंधुआ मजदूर को विपरीत परिस्थितियों का सामना करने के लिए साहस और आध्यात्मिक शक्ति प्रदान करता रहा l धीरे धीरे जैज्ज़ खेतों से निकल कर मदिरालय और वेश्याघरों में पाया जाने लगा l अंततः इसकी प्रतिष्ठा स्थापित हो गयी और अब जैज्ज़ को सम्मान और प्रशंसा के साथ दुनिया भर में बजाया और गाया जाता है l

अब प्रश्न यह है कि इन अत्यंत अलग दिखने वाले विषयों को क्यों मैं एक कड़ी में बाँधने की कोशिश कर रही हूँ?

अगर आप मेरा ब्लॉग नियमित्ग रूप से पढ़ते हैं तो आपको पता होगा की हाल ही में मैं अर्जेंटीना गयी थी और वहां मुझे जैज्ज़ के इतिहास का ज्ञान हुआ— इस प्रसंग की पहली कड़ीl जापान में रहते हुए काबुकी के इतिहास के बारे में मैं पहले ही जानती थी l इन दोनों कलाओं के इतिहास की समानता मुझे काफी कुतूहल कर रहा हैl अब जैज्ज़ के इतिहास के बारे में सोचते हुए मुझे तीन सामान कड़ियाँ मिल रही हैंl कल ही मैं लार्ड मेघनाद देसाई ( Lord Meghnad Desai) की लेख पढ़ रही थी जिसमें बॉलीवुड के इतिहास का ज़िक्र हैl अब मुझे इन सभी कड़ियों को जुड़ने और इनके समानता का आभास हो गया हैl

मेरे अकादमिक डिसिप्लिन, “इण्टर्कल्चुरल कम्युनिकेशन” (Intercultural Communication)में बिग C ( Big C) और स्माल c (Small c) कल्चर ( संस्कृति) का ज़िक्र उठता हैl बिग C कल्चर का मतलब है किसी भी संस्कृति का वस्तुनिष्ठ पहलू जो की दिखाई देता है और लोगों को उपरी सतह पर नज़र आता है, जैसे की नृत्य, संगीत इत्यादि– जो की कला के प्रतिकृतियाँ हैंl इस केटेगरी में लागों के बोलचाल और व्यवहार भी सम्मिलित है जो प्रत्यक्ष रूप में किसी भी दर्शक के लिए उपलब्ध है यह विचार कल्चरल डिटेक्टिव कार्यपत्रक ( Cultural Detective Worksheet) के “शब्दों और कार्यों” (“Words and Actions” ) अनुभाग के साथ सम्बंधित है l

इसके विपरीत, “छोटी सी” संस्कृति लोगों के रीती, रिवाज़, बोलचाल के ढंग, मूल्यों, मान्यताओं, आदि को दर्शाता है l संस्कृति का इस व्यक्तिपरक भाग आम तौर पर अपने ही सदस्यों की बोलचाल और हाव भाव में अव्यक्त रूप से छिपा हुआ रहता है l व्यक्तिपरक संकृति ( सब्जेक्टिव कल्चर ) लोगों के व्यवहार के पीछे छिपे अर्थ को उजागर करता है l यह ये बताता है की लोग जो करते हैं या कहते हैं उसके पीछे क्या कारन हो सकता है और वो ऐसा क्यों करते हैं l कल्चरल डिटेक्टिव कार्यपत्रक (Cultural Detective Worksheet )के “मूल्यों, विश्वासों और सांस्कृतिक सामान्य ज्ञान” (“Beliefs, Values, and Cultural Common Sense” ) अनुभाग में इस बात का ज़िक्र है l

काफी चिंतन के बाद मुझे ऐसा लगता है कि ये चारों कला के रूप का अविर्भाव कहीं न कहीं स्माल सी कल्चर के बिग सी कल्चर में सम्मिलित और परिवर्तित होना दर्शाता है l किसी भी संस्कृति का उभर के आना कोई एक या दो दिन का काम नहीं, इसके लिए सदियाँ लग जाते हैं. शायद यही दुनिया कि रीत है l

मैं पहली बार मेक्सिको में एक विदेशी छात्र के रूप में 1970 के दशक में गयी , और कोयुआक्न (Coyoacán ) में ठहरी, जो कि फ्राइडा काहलो (Frida Kahlo) और “ला मालिंचे” (La Malinche) का जन्म स्थान था l मैं तो बहुत खुश थी , लेकिन मुझे ये बात सता रही थी कि मेरे मेजबान, जिनके घर मैं ठहरी थी, इस बात से काफी शर्म महसूस करते थेl मुझे ऐसा लगा कि अपने राष्ट्रीय परंपरा और हस्त कला पर यह लोग कुछ ज्यादा गर्व महसूस नहीं करते हैं l पैसे वाले लोग यूरोपीय डिसाइनर ब्रांड्स और घर का सामान खरीदते हैं स्थानीय हस्तकला या मेक्सकन चीज़ों को इस्तेमाल करने से कतराते हैं क्योंकि यह गरीबी का सूचक है l

अभी मैं फिर से मेक्सिको में रहती हूँ और यह देख कर खुश हूँ कि आजकल यहाँ स्थानीय हस्त कला और और पारंपारिक वस्तुओं को बहुत मान्यता दे रहें हैं l यह जो सोच में बदलाव आया है,यह मुझे मेरे मूल प्रश्न को दुबारा दोहराने पे मजबूर करता है कि अगर स्माल सी कल्चर बिग सी कल्चर में बदलता है तो कैसे बदलता है ?

ये चारों कला के रूप आपस में कई समानताओं के कारन जुड़े हुए हैं l चारों के चारों शुरू में निन्दित और तिरस्कृत थे, लेकिन अभी अपने अपने संस्कृति के अभिन्न रूप बन गए हैं l चारों में ओवरएक्टिंग, भावनाओं कि अतिशयोक्ति और मेलोड्रामा शामिल है l आम तौर पर उनके विषयों में दर्द, अन्याय, ठुकराइ हुई प्रेमकथा, वर्ग भेद के कारण किया हुआ अन्याय का प्रदर्शन है l

इस ब्लॉग पोस्ट ( Blog post) के लिए मनोरंजन के इन चार रूपों पर शोध करते हुए, मुझे यह एहसास हुआ कि हर एक रूप अपने आप में भिन्न भिन्न संस्कृतियों के मिश्रण और वृद्धि के समय उमड़े हुए रचनात्मक उबाल का परिणाम है l शायद लोग जो मार्जिनलाइज्ड, और समाज के उपांत में है उनका संस्कृति के विकास पर एक शक्तिशाली प्रभाव है. और शायद इसी तरह कठिन परिस्थितियों में रहने वाले अलग अलग लोगों के मिलने जुले और एक दुसरे के संस्पर्श में आने से एक भारी रचनात्मकता चिंगारी उत्पन्न हो सकता है ।

जैसे कि ” द जिल्ल्बैरी” (The Jillbrary) में कहा गया है, बॉलीवुड एक सुविचारित मिश्रण है– यह किसी जाती या धर्म विशेष, भाषा या भौगोलिक क्षेत्र को संबोधित नहीं करता है l बॉलीवुड संगीत विभिन्न परंपराओं का सम्मिश्रण है- इसमें हिंदुस्तानी और शास्त्रीय संगीत, धार्मिक और लोक गीत, हॉलीवुड, चीनी, रेगे इत्यादि सभी का इस्तेमाल होता है l बॉलीवुड सिनेमा में हिन्दू, मुस्लिम, ईसाई सभी एक दुसरे से शादी कर सकते हैं और समाज के उच्च और निम्न वर्ग मिल जुल कर एक दुसरे के सहायता से सफल हो सकते हैं l

ठीक इसी तरह जैज्ज़ भी एक सम्मिश्रण है. अफ्रीकी अमेरिकियों के मार्जिनलाइज्ड होने का अनुभव से उत्पन्न यह कला उनके दो संस्कृतियों के बीच बंधे रहने कि बेबसी से निपटने कि अनुभूति कि पैदाइश है l इस रचनात्मक शक्ति का प्रदर्शन अतुलनीय और अत्यंत ही प्रभावशाली है l

टैंगो और काबुकी दोनों कि प्रसिद्धी वेश्यालयों के प्रसिद्धी के साथ (और वेश्यालयों के अन्दर) ही बढ़े l दोनों कला रूपों में पुरुष ही नृत्य प्रदर्शन करते हैं और एक दुसरे को सिखाते भी हैं, भले ही पात्र नारी या पुरुष का हो l आधुनिक काबुकी में पुरुष अभिनेता ही पुरुष एवं नारी दोनों भूमिकाएँ निभाते हैं l ज़ाहिर है कि इनका आविर्भाव समाज के मुख्यधारा के बाहर हुआ है; वे शुरू में “मुख्यधारा” समाज की गतिविधियों नहीं थे!

मुझे यह चित्रपट लुभावना लगता है। यहाँ कई कला रूपों, “संस्कृति” ( Culture)( बिग सी) का उत्पन्न समाज के “किनारे” पर रहने वाले लोगों के साथ हुआ है l अक्सर गरीब, वंचितों और कम संसाधनो द्वारा सृजन किये गए इन कलात्मक योगदान को पहचान देने में मुख्य धारा संस्कृति काफी समय लगाता है l US Southwest में, जहाँ मैं पली बढ़ी, इंडियन ( Native American) गहने, मिटटी के कलात्मक वस्तुएं, बुनावट, आदि का मुल्यांकन अपने सृजन में शामिल सामग्री से अधिक नहीं किया जाता था; आज के जैसे उन वस्तुओं को निश्चित रूप से लोकप्रिय, बेशकीमती संपत्ति नहीं माना जाता था l

आपके हिसाब से यह स्माल सी और बिग सी का सम्मिश्रण क्या आपके अनुभव के साथ ताल मेल खाता है? इसे पढ़ने के बाद, अगर आपको सही लगे तो, कृपया आपके अनुभव हमारे साथ बांटिये. अगर आपने इसे किसी किताब या नेट आर्टिकल से लिया है, तो उसका रेफेरेंस और लिंक भी भेजना मत भूलियेगा. धन्यवाद!

Royal Glitter in the Sober Dutch Egalitarian Culture

Posted on April 29, 2013 by Dianne Hofner Saphiere

(Versión en español sigue el inglés)

In preparation for the exciting inauguration of the new Dutch king and his Argentinian-born queen tomorrow, I am pleased to be able to share with you an article that Cultural Detective The Netherlands co-author Eleonore Breukel has co-written with Marcelo Baudino. It is indeed curious that the Netherlands has a Monarch, and always amazing how current events can so well illustrate the values in a Values Lens. Read on to learn how.

—

Is there a Dutch identity? Is there respect without titles and formalities? The multicolored Dutch manage to combine royal glitter and soberness. They place their King in the middle of the egalitarian society. Together they guarantee freedom and democracy.

Who are the Dutch?
The Argentinean born Princess Maxima of the Netherlands once said in an official speech “There is no Dutch identity”. That statement was not well received by the Dutch public. What she meant was that the Netherlands is so multicultural that it is hard to label it with one single identity. In large cities in the Netherlands, English is heard more often than Dutch and a range of skin tones can dominate in crowded streets.

Over the centuries people from all continents have come to the Netherlands in search of jobs, education, freedom of speech, a strong social system, and tolerance of race, religion and sexual orientation. Some came for the cannabis. It is a melting pot of people and languages. Immigration laws have become stringent. However, due to the open labor market of the European Union there is a large influx of European migrants, many come from Eastern Europe. Over time most immigrants adapt to the mainstream culture while changing that mainstream culture at the same time.

How egalitarian are you?
In the Dutch egalitarian society all people have the same rights and are treated equally under the same circumstances. The CEO of Shell or the Mayor of Amsterdam will be fined if they fail to pay a parking ticket or if they do not clean up after their dog poops on the street. The Dutch believe in equal rights, equal responsibilities and equal treatment – with the law as the authority – no matter who you are.

CEOs get their own coffee at work, the prime minister often commutes on his bicycle, and Princess Maxima’s kids go to a regular public school. A position of great responsibility doesn’t come with expectations of special rights or special treatment. This often confuses foreigners visiting Dutch organizations. Without formalities around status it can be hard to distinguish who the boss is. The Dutch communication style is also very informal and very direct. Respect is earned by training trust rather than through formalities, job titles or academic achievements.

Do Freedom and Trust sleep on the same cushion?
In the Netherlands they do. Freedom of speech, euthanasia, and use of soft drugs, are all permitted, but strictly regulated. There are laws, procedures and permits for just about everything. You even need a permit to cut down a tree in your own garden. All these regulations exist to protect both individuals and businesses. On one hand they slow down business processes but on the other hand it inspires trust. Like other Northern European countries, the Dutch trust the ability of their national institutions and the government to function well. Favoritism or bribing is punished severely. It is this trust which makes the social economic climate of the northern countries pleasant and predictable.

Soberness and glitter boost the economy
There is soberness in the Dutch culture, which contrasts greatly with the glamour and glitter of the Monarch’s annual ride in their golden carriage. Extravagance is often seen as wasteful and is met with disapproval. This has proved to be a positive trait during tough economic times when, but it can be very embarrassing if one brings an unexpected guest for dinner – meals are rarely prepared with the intention of having left overs.

This soberness, or rather disapproval of abundance and excesses, is rooted in history in the various forms of Protestantism of the Northern European countries originating in the 16^th century. Each individual had to earn his salvation through soberness, honesty and hard work. The Protestants opposed the Catholic papal supremacy and authority and they condemned the grandeur of the Catholic ceremonies, the lavish and sinful lifestyle of its clergy, and the adornment of gold, precious stones and paintings in their churches. The Protestant houses of worship were large and empty, with simple ceremonies and no adornments that might distract from worshiping God. The Dutch followed the severe Calvinist doctrine within Protestantism.

Of course the Dutch have changed and very few still practice any form of religion. However some of the old values are expressed in new ways. The Dutch will prefer a solid car like a Volkswagen over a show piece such as a Lamborghini and many prefer to have more vacation days than a higher salary. Often couples decide that one of the partners will not work for some years after having children to prioritize time for family life over the luxury of two salaries.

Even the royal family does not excel in extravagance or spending lavishly. Their expenses are always scrutinized by the public. They are thought of as walking advertisements for the country. Their beautiful clothes are often the work of Dutch fashion designers. Willem Alexander promotes Dutch water management and sports around the world. The royal family plays a large role in the local and global economy. Not only are they related to many wealthy European royal families, they are also part of an enormous network of the most important and powerful people of the world – from Barrack Obama to Nelson Mandela and from Ratan Tata to Bill Gates. Many of these people are not just acquaintances but personal friends.

When making state visits, large trade delegations accompany the royals. Dutch businessmen are introduced to local companies but also have the opportunity to talk to the royal family during their trip. It is always good to be “seen with your queen”.

Who wants to be queen?
Ask any woman in the street if she wants to switch positions with Maxima and the answer will be, “Oh heavens no, the poor girl”. It is hard to find anyone who wants to be king, queen or a member of the royal family. Status, glitter, travels, and money are not seen as attractive compensation for the responsibilities required. Members of the royal family are always in the public eye and must exercise great restraint airing their own opinions or simply being themselves. Even though Willem Alexander and Maxima have taken steps away from protocol to be closer to the people, every move, smile, and sentence is scrutinized. What will happen to the lively, enthusiastic and charming Maxima when she becomes queen? The country is waiting to see how she will balance these national contradictions.

About the authors
Eleonore Breukel
– Director of Intercultural Communication bv in Amsterdam
www.intercultural.nl • ebreukel@intercultural.nl

Marcelo Baudino
– Socio Consultor Iceberg Intelligencia Cultural in Buenos Aires www.icebergci.com • mbaudino@icebergci.com

Resources

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prinsjesdag
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism

Brillo real en la sobria e igualitaria cultura holandesa
¿Existe una identidad holandesa? Existe respeto pero sin los títulos y las formalidades. Los multicoloridos holandeses lograron combinar al brillo real con la sobriedad. Ubican a su rey en el medio de una sociedad igualitaria. Juntos garantizan libertad y democracia.

¿Quiénes son esos holandeses?
Máxima, la princesa argentina de los Países Bajos, una vez dijo en un discurso oficial: “no existe una identidad holandesa”. Esta afirmación no fue bien recibida. Lo que quiso decir fue que los Países Bajos son tan multiculturales que es difícil identificar una sola identidad. Es un verdadero desafío incluso detectar una persona holandesa blanca en la multitud de colores cuando se camina en las calles de las grandes ciudades holandesas. Con frecuencia, el inglés es más escuchado que el idioma holandés.

A lo largo de los siglos, personas de todos los continentes han emigrado hacia los Países Bajos en búsqueda de trabajo, estudio, libertad de expresión, tolerancia de razas, religión y orientación sexual, un sistema social sólido y algunos llegaron en búsqueda del cannabis. Un verdadero crisol de personas e idiomas. Las leyes de inmigración son más rigurosas hoy en día, sin embargo, debido al libre mercado laboral de la Unión Europea, la llegada de otros europeos, especialmente del este de Europa, es enorme.

Con el tiempo, todos los inmigrantes se adaptan a la cultura dominante mientras cambian que, al mismo tiempo, cambian a la cultura dominante.

¿Qué tan igualitario eres tú?
En una sociedad igualitaria como la holandesa, todas las personas tienen los mismos derechos y son tratados equitativamente en iguales circunstancias. El CEO de Shell o el alcalde de Ámsterdam serán multados si no pagan el estacionamiento cuando deben o si no limpian la suciedad que deja sus perros en la calle. Iguales derechos, iguales responsabilidades e igual trato, no importa quién eres. La ley es la autoridad.

Un CEO se sirve su propio café en el trabajo. El primer ministro suele ir a trabajar en bicicleta tal como lo hacen muchas otras personas. Los hijos de Máxima asisten a una escuela pública regular. Por más que uno tenga una posición con mucha responsabilidad, no puede esperar obtener derechos especiales o un trato particular.

Esto puedo confundir a los extranjeros que visitan organizaciones holandesas, ya que es difícil distinguir quienes son los superiores cuando no existen formalidades específicas con respecto a las jerarquías. El estilo de comunicación holandés también es muy informal y directo. El respeto no se obtiene a través de formalidades, del trabajo o de títulos académicos, sino a través de ganarse la confianza.

¿La libertad y la confianza duermen en la misma cama?
En los países bajos sí. La libertad de expresión, eutanasia, drogas suaves, etc. son libertadas aunque estén estrictamente reguladas. Existen regulaciones, procedimientos y permisos para prácticamente todo. Necesitas un permiso hasta para cortar un árbol en tu propio jardín. Todas estas regulaciones buscan proteger a los individuos y a las empresas. Por más que hagan más lentos los procesos de negocios, también inspiran confianza.

Como cualquier otro país del norte de Europa, los holandeses confían en el correcto funcionamiento de sus instituciones y el gobierno. El favoritismo y los sobornos son castigados severamente. Es la confianza en la ley lo que define al clima social y económico como amable y predecible.

La sobriedad y el brillo impulsan la economía
Hay sobriedad en la cultura holandesa. Es un gran contraste con el glamur y el brillo de paseo anual en al carruaje de oro del monarca. Las extravagancias suelen ser vistas como un desperdicio. Los holandeses no son frugales pero no aprueban el derroche, un rasgo positivo en la época de las sustentabilidad de recursos. Si alguien llega con un invitado inesperado a una cena, puede causar mucha incomodidad en los anfitriones holandeses. Cuatro porciones son exactamente cuatro porciones y no cinco.

Esta sobriedad o rechazo de la abundancia y los excesos se retrae a las varias formas de Protestantismo de los países de Europa del norte en el siglo 16. Cada individuo debía ganarse su propia salvación a través de la moderación, la honestidad y el trabajo duro. Los protestantes estaban en contra de la autoridad católica suprema del papa y condenaban la grandeza de las ceremonias católicas, la vida de lujo y pecaminosa de su clero, los adornos de oro, piedras preciosas y pinturas en sus iglesias.

Los lugares de culto de los protestantes eran grandes y vacíos, con ceremonias simples y sin adornos o cualquier otra distracción que no sea la de venerar a su dios. Los holandeses siguieron la severa doctrina calvinista dentro del protestantismo.

Por supuesto que los holandeses han cambiado y las religiones se han desvanecido. Aun así, prefieren un auto sólido como un Volkswagen por encima de una pieza de arte como un Lamborghini. Muchos prefieren tener más días de vacaciones que un salario más alto. A veces las parejas deciden que sólo uno de ellos trabajo durante los primeros años luego de tener un hijo. Una buena vida por encima del lujo de dos salarios.

Incluso la familia real no se destaca por la extravagancia y por gastar profusamente. Sus gastos son siempre escrutados por la gente. Sus hermosos vestidos suelen ser de diseñadores de moda holandeses. Guillermo Alejandro es un promotor global de la gestión de agua holandesa y los deportes. La familia real juega un rol clave en la economía local y global. Además de estar relacionados con muchas realezas europeas, tienen una enorme red global de contactos importantes y poderosos. Desde Barack Obama hasta Nelson Mandela y desde Ratan Tata hasta Bill Gates. Muchas de estas relaciones no solo son conocidos, sino también amigos personales. En sus visitas de estado, los acompañan grandes delegaciones comerciales. Los empresarios holandeses son presentados a las compañías locales, pero también tienen la oportunidad de hablar a sus reyes durante el viaje. Siempre es bueno ser visto con tu reina.

¿Quién quiere ser reina?
Pregúntale a cualquier mujer en las calles de los Países Bajos si les gustaría intercambiar posiciones con Máxima y la respuesta será: “Por dios no, la pobre niña”. Es difícil encontrar a alguien que quisiera ser rey, reina o miembro de la familia real. Estatus, lujos, viajes, dinero no siempre compensan las difíciles tareas que tienen. Siempre en el ojo del público. Nunca poder ventilar tus propias opiniones. Nunca ser tú mismo. ¿Qué le pasará a la entusiasta y encantadora Máxima cuando se convierta en reina? Aun cuando los nuevos reyes decidan prestar menos atención al protocolo y estar más cerca de la gente, cada sonrisa, movimiento y oración serán pesados en una balanza de oro.

—

This article is a reprint, with permission, of the original. They’ve written a second article as well, entitled “Influence on Dutch Economy of the New King and Queen of Netherlands.”

Using Social Media to Rebrand Culture

Posted on March 14, 2013 by george simons

What’s the story…?

This is the sixth in a series. (#1, #2, #3, #4 and #5 are here.)

Stories can be made to say what we want them to say. I went shopping this evening and, at the checkout, the cashier, seeing the bandage on my nose, asked what happened to me. To her horror, I explained it this way: “A couple days ago, I had an encounter with a young man, who had me held down and cut me with the blade that he had in his hand.”

Her reaction naturally changed to one of amusement and empathy, the moment I mentioned that the young man in question was my surgeon, and the immobilization was being strapped to the operating table! There is no untruth in the first story, but the discourse it calls forth depends on who the listener is, and evokes a substantially different discourse with the omission or addition of a few details. Had I told the same to my policeman neighbor, I’m sure a different automatic discourse would have sprung up for him, and he would have started to ask different questions, though, knowing him, I am sure he would have had a hearty, guys-will-be-guys laugh at the end. The key to the ultimate meaning of stories is intentionality. I was taking advantage of my strange appearance to lighten my pain and have a little fun. Understanding intentionality is the key to cultural competence, not just recognizing difference and learning to adapt behaviors to the situation.

How can new media be used to shape discourse and create culture?
We are forever telling stories, in old as well as new media. So, let’s move on from the question we discussed last time about what messages new-media themselves may bear. Let’s turn our attention to the second question, namely, how we use these media, deliberately or unconsciously to create, change or maintain certain forms of discourse as cultural building blocks. Can, for example, the interactivity of social media play an important role in reshaping cultural discourse and cultural identity? What has been done, accomplished, what is being done to create the stories that articulate today’s and tomorrow’s cultural realities?

Creating stories to do this is not new. We’ve created identity stories throughout history and we do it all the time. Recently a friend of mine sent me a photograph of mother dog instructing seven puppies, with a story which ends: “…and then the mean old kitty stole all of the doggie treats and ran down the street, and that is why we chase cats to this day.”

This doggy story is humorous, because it is so true. Patriots and dictators, oppressors and the oppressed each create their own story, not only of who they are but of how they are defined in reaction to others, usually seen as “the bad guys.” They expect mothers and teachers to pass it on. In the USA, when the Berlin wall came tumbling down and the Communist bloc shrank, after a brief period of euphoria, we started to need a real enemy to feel good about ourselves. There had to be some bad guys, some rustlers out there. Though it is not essential, identity myths pick up currency by emphasizing superiority, whether racial, moral, military or cultural as well as by identifying outside threats.

Branding a Nation
Nonetheless, to discuss what is being done, or what we might do with contemporary media in this respect, it might be instructive to look at a classical case of rebranding, not of a product, but of a nation, something that occurred at a time when mass media could largely be described in two words: newspaper and radio.

Dr. Hatice Sitki, a colleague in Australia, has done impressive work on the marketing and branding of national identity. If you think marketing is not relevant to cultural identity, think again. The whole idea of marketing is to create a discourse, which people take as their reality, a discourse that usually deals with them, sometimes with them as citizens, but more often today as consumers. Using a national example can tell us about commercial branding as well. What Hatice did was study the mythology, the brand, the discourse of Turkish identity, and connect it to the search for European identity, a topic that has been surfacing from time to time since the creation of the European Union—usually in times of stress, like the current financial crisis.

The most interesting part of Hatice’s work was the description of how Kemal Ataturk (literally so renamed as “Father of the Turks) selected from the myths the stories of origins and heroes that existed in Ottoman lore, and recombined them, rephrased them into a discourse, which gave a “real” national identity to Turks. There had been a tribal identity, an ethnic identity for Turks before this, but in the Ottoman Empire there was no sense of a specific Turkish nationality or citizenship. One belonged to the Empire. It was just that way.

So Hatice took a look at the marketing of identity not only historically, but also in terms of the future potential of marketing to the EU. She went on to explore how some of the current myths could be rebranded, so that the discourse about Turkey not being really European might be shifted, even integrated with the myths and discourse of European identity. After all, if one really looks at the Ottoman Empire in European history, it’s played a powerful role. It was frequently an ally of European countries against each other. World War I was only the tragic final act in this drama. Yet today Europeans are struggling with, “Can it be a part of Europe? “Can it join the European Union?” European resistance to the idea, among other factors, seems to be fueling a return to stronger Islamic identity after three quarters of a century of existence as a proud secular republic in the Islamic world.

When I first explored ideas about the flow of culture in a webinar addressed to a study group of the Project Management Institute, one of the participants from India remarked, “I think there’s a hidden morale in this presentation. At the PMI we need to understand the cultural difference, find common ground for all stakeholders to work as one.” How true, because if we think about image of the river, it’s carrying, integrating all these different waters, from all their different sources into one powerful flow toward the sea, and if we think of ourselves as collaborators in an organization, the diversity that our colleagues bring, whether personal, ethnic, or wherever it originates, as a resource.

The metaphor of the river is valid for understanding organizations as well as for exploring group and individual identity. Training multicultural teams to work in global environments, many of whom work almost entirely virtually, requires not only constant exploration of cultural discourse but efforts to shape a “third culture,” the agreed set of discourses by which team members will collaborate. Cultural Detective: Global Teamwork is an example of a tool that was developed by a virtual team to help teams identify and meet the key challenges of virtual collaboration. While such teams often have their own platforms, it is not uncommon for members to use social media to explore and solidify their connections with each other. In an academic context, it happens not infrequently that while students are provided with online tools by the university, many will eschew these for Facebook and other social media when they actually get down to working together on a common project, creating their group culture together on such sites. While we tend to think of deep culture as enduring and resurgent, we should not turn a blind eye to the functional but transitory cultures that are easily built as well as dismantled by new media tools. Even here it is a matter of sharing and shared discourse. If anything, impermanence may be a hallmark of much digital culture where the object of new media utterances is not to “build a monument more lasting than bronze” (Horace, Ode 3.30) but to learn habits that enrich the everyday with timely discourse for what we do to best meet our needs.

The river of discourse is a rich, rich resource. We need to know how to tap into its fullness. If not, the likelihood is what I described toward the end of the Culture’s Flow poem. It will flood over us, wash us away. I often think of colonialism and now rampant globalization as the human, cultural equivalent of burning down the rain forests. Most of us only see the destruction of environments from afar, but at the micro level what is going on is the extermination of species or discourse that will not return, resources that might play, in fact, very important roles in our well being.

We know that humans have created some very dangerous, even genocidal cultures, discourse about others that enables us to kill them en masse. Yet these realities and their consequences stem from our constructed discourse. Once we realize that we are enmeshed in all of these worlds of discourse, it asks us, how can we look at this, how should we look at what’s real, and, what’s really real may be simply our capacity to recognize different discourses for what they are, stories created in time to serve a purpose, hopefully to serve a good purpose, hopefully to help us succeed and survive in our environment. But so many of them have been dangerous; have been deadly, so it’s about getting the point that realities are ours to create.

What do new media bring to this challenge? A great freedom to question. Unparalleled contact with the diversity of others. A great liberty to seek out new discourses of identity. A vast universe of opportunities in which to discover, engage and enroll kindred souls. A limitless playground for new ideas and a place to grow up, space for our discourses to be questioned, to be reshaped, and to be created in unprecedented ways. The opportunity to create a critical mass of discourse that might just change some of the seemingly endless games we have been playing. The tools are there to shape our primitive discourses in ways that will humanely and constructively prevail. This will not happen by itself, nor will the media per se deliver this message. Rather it is we, the storytellers and our intentions, that will make a difference. Do new media guarantee change? Certainly, but not without risks. It is up to us, to our intentionality and our ability to share it that will determine the direction and results of that change.

—

This post originally appeared in the blog of the Center for Intercultural New Media Research and is provided with the assistance of its editor Anastacia Kurylo.

Entre Dios y Alá

Posted on March 13, 2013 by Maryori Vivas

(English follows Spanish)

Si pudiera resumir las noticias de las últimas dos semanas, podría sin duda mencionar dos nombres: Benedicto XVI y Hugo Chávez.

El primero desafió toda una organización, un sistema, una tradición. Hoy que escribo esta nota los noticieros hablan del humo blanco saliendo de la Capilla Sixtina que anuncie que hay un nuevo Papa. No me alcanzo a imaginar todos los cambios organizacionales a los que se enfrenta la Iglesia Católica para adaptarse a este nuevo cambio de innegable impacto mundial.

Por otro lado, tenemos la muerte del presidente de Venezuela Hugo Chávez. Los análisis políticos por supuesto han sido los protagonistas de su partida. Pero no podemos dejar de lado ese aspecto que nos une en este espacio de comunicación.

En medio de la sobre-exposición de la noticia en los medios, incluyendo detalles de su vida, su gobierno, sus frases célebres, visitas a países socialistas etc, está una noticia que este lado del mundo apenas menciona.

La foto del presidente de Irán, Mahmud Ahmadineyad, expresando sus condolencias a la madre del presidente Chávez ha causado no menos que indignación en su país y los países que siguen los preceptos islámicos.

Lo que para nosotros puede parecer normal, entendible y simplemente humano al brindar consuelo en un abrazo a alguien que vive el dolor profundo del duelo, en otra latitud no es más que el irrespeto a lo que ordena su ley, la cual indica que no debe haber contacto físico entre un hombre y una mujer si no es de su círculo cercano.

No siempre podemos entonces actuar como actúan otros, es decir a la tierra que vamos hacer lo que vemos. No siempre podemos adaptarnos a otro entorno, a pesar que podamos sentir la inclinación natural a ello.

Las culturas abiertas podríamos describirlas como permeables a otras culturas, donde son fácilmente identificables y permitidos otros valores, costumbres, tradiciones siempre y cuando prevalezca el interés común sobre el particular. Por el contrario, las culturas cerradas son herméticas y poco o nada tolerantes a las demás. El caso que enfrenta al presidente Ahmadineyad es una muestra clara, y atizado además, por comparar al presidente Chávez con Jesucristo.

Se unen de nuevo alrededor de Dios, de nuestras creencias religiosas los dos hechos noticiosos que mantienen en vilo al mundo entero.

Católicos y no católicos pendientes del Vaticano. Entre tanto el mundo Islámico levantando su voz de protesta por un hecho a todas luces, para ellos totalmente inadmisible hasta para un jefe de Estado.

Entre Dios y Alá, entre Dios y Dios. Hasta la próxima.

—

Between God and Allah, translation by Dianne Hofner Saphiere

If I were to summarize the news of the last two weeks, I could without doubt mention two names: Benedict XVI and Hugo Chávez.

The first challenged an entire organization, a system, a tradition. Today as I write this note there is news in the white smoke coming out of the Sistine Chapel announcing that there is a new Pope. I can’t begin to imagine all the organizational changes that confront the Catholic Church as it adapts to this new change of undeniable worldwide impact.

On the other hand, we have the death of Hugo Chávez, the President of Venezuela. The political analyses have of course been the protagonists of his departure. But we can not ignore that aspect which unites us in this communication space. Amid the over-exposure of the news media, including the details of his life, his government, his famous phrases, and his visits to socialist countries, etc., lies a story that this side of the world barely mentioned.

This photo of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, expressing his condolences to the mother of President Chávez, has caused no minor indignation in his country and in the countries of the world that follow Islamic principles. What to us may seem normal, understandable, and simply the human act of providing comfort with a hug to someone living the deep pain of grief, in another latitude is nothing more than disrespect to the order of law, which indicates there should be no physical contact between a man and a woman not within the same inner circle.

We cannot always behave as others do, that is to say, doing what we see in the land to which we travel. We cannot always adapt ourselves to another environment, although we might feel the natural inclination to do so.

Open cultures could be described as permeable to other cultures, those in which other values, customs, and traditions are easily identifiable and permitted as long as the common interest in the matter is maintained. By contrast, closed cultures are hermetic, and not so tolerant of others. The case facing President Ahmadinejad is a clear case in point, further stoked by comparisons of Hugo Chávez with Jesus Christ.

Our religious beliefs join again around God, in the two big news items that have captivated the world. Catholics and non-Catholics watching the Vatican. The Muslim world raising its voice in protest to an act committed openly, which for them is completely inadmissible for a Head of State.

Between God and Allah, between God and God. See you soon!

Happy International Women’s Day

Posted on March 7, 2013 by culturemovedotcom

(Vietnamese follows English)

I hate today, March 8th, which is called the International Women’s Day. While it does not make much sense in other countries, in Vietnam it makes me think that I am praised for the WHOLE DAY because I have been disadvantaged, marginalized, looked down on, and treated unfairly for the rest of the year, so today I can be patronized and my head can be patted on with a hidden patriarchal message: “See! Half of the world; you are not forgotten yet!”

This picture says it all. Born and raised in Vietnam, I have never seen a woman who only lives as a housewife. Vietnamese women always work, and work harder than men. They are expected to be super beings, that is, to “excel at work and be perfect at home.” I’m not exaggerating. This is the official motto of the Vietnamese National Women Association: “Gioi viec nuoc. Dam viec nha.” I suspect that this association is secretly run by men whose plot is to exploit women by telling them that in order to be a real woman, she needs to be earn money like a proper breadwinner, take care of the whole family like a respective full time working nanny, and still, be charming, sexy, obedient, and submissive towards her husband.

I long for the day this stupid March 8th will disappear like a remnant of a time when women have 1 out of 365 days to be remembered as proper humans.

—

Tôi ghét cay ghét đắng ngày 8/3. Nó làm cho tôi có cảm giác rằng mình được tôn vinh trong ngày này vì 364 ngày còn lại của năm mình đã bị đối xử tệ bạc, không công bằng, không được nhìn nhận đúng đắn hoặc không đực đánh giá đúng mức. Thế cho nên ngày hôm nay tôi được tặng này tặng nọ và được vỗ đầu với một cái thông điệp nặng mùi gia trưởng: “Đấy nhé! Một nửa thế giới! Các cô có hẳn một ngày…”Cả đời tôi chưa bao giờ thấy một người phụ nữ Việt Nam chỉ ở nhà làm nội trợ. Mẹ tôi thậm chí còn bĩu môi dè bỉu một cô em họ rằng “nó chẳng làm gì chỉ biết ở nhà ôm con”. Phụ nữ Việt Nam lúc nào cũng làm việc cật lực. Từ lúc sinh ra, họ đã bị cả xã hội mong chờ sẽ trở thành những siêu nhân, vừa phải “giỏi việc nước”, vừa phải “đảm việc nhà”. Đây thậm chí là một khẩu hiệu của Hội Liên Hiệp Phụ nữ Việtnam, cái hội sinh ra để bảo vệ quyền bình đẳng của phụ nữ nhưng tôi chắc chắn rằng nó đang được quản lý bởi một tổ chức bí mật của đàn ông nhằm bóc lột phụ nữ bằng cách làm cho họ lú lẫn mà tin rằng: Để có thể làm một người phụ nữ hoàn hảo thì cô phải vừa kiếm ra tiền như một người lao động chân chính, vừa quán xuyến việc nhà như một Ô sin mẫu mực, đấy là chưa kể phải vừa quyến rũ, nghe lời, gọi dạ bảo vâng, ngoan ngoãn với đức ông chồng của mình.Đến bao giờ cái ngày chết tiệt 8/3 biến mất? Đến bao giờ đàn bà nước tôi mới hết “được” “tôn vinh” một ngày để tiếp tục đầu tắt mặt tối hai tay hai súng 364 ngày còn lại?P/S sorry, quên mất! Thậm chí trong cái ngày được tôn vinh đấy phần lớn phụ nữ vẫn hào hứng khẳng định vai trò của mình bằng cách ngày thường cắm hoa đẹp rồi thì 8/3 cắm hoa đẹp hơn, ngày thường nấu ăn ngon rồi thì 8/3 nấu ăn ngon hơn…

PP/S. Việc ở nhà chăm sóc gia đình phải được coi là một nghề (cho bất kể đàn ông hoặc đàn bà), nhưng không ai trên đời có quyền yêu cầu một người bình thường phải vừa làm đàn ông vừa làm đàn bà. Hết.

If the medium is the message, what is the cultural message of a new medium?

Posted on March 7, 2013 by george simons

Once upon a time a carriage return returned the carriage and a folder was made of paper and we dialed the phone with a dial and mail needed a stamp. New media have changed all that though we still use the old words…

This is the fifth in a series (#1, #2, #3, #4 are here.)

If, as we have been discussing, the new media, and in particularly social networks, have been delivering such an enormous quantity of conversations into our mailboxes and our minds each day, it is important for us to look at the process of shaping the culture that is involved here. There are, I believe, two dimensions to look at. The first is what these media, as media, manifest about the cultures that create them, as well as what their own cultural message may be. The second is how can new media be used to shape discourse and create culture? We will discuss the first question today and the second in next week’s post.

When asking, “What is the cultural message of a new medium?” I am looking at the media through the lens that Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuhan offered us when he enunciated his famous dictum, “The medium is the message.” While we can look at the abundance of new media tools, platforms, and connections and ask about their role in connecting contemporary culture, it will be important for students of communication to have a careful look at each of the new media to determine what kind of message it sends simply by being what it is and working in the fashion it does.

Here are some of McLuhan’s distinctions that might provide starting points: for example, his distinction between hot and cool media in terms of its impact on the perceiver as well as the intentions of the sender. Generally speaking, hot media engage one or more senses rather completely and demand little interaction, while cool media require more participation to fill the gaps. What media and aspects of new media operate in one way or the other? Does this say something about the propensity to contribute or to lurk? This will require careful research and study, so I have to be satisfied with simply calling attention to this side of new media and their possible impacts on the users (the medium is the massage). I leave it up to experts in academic communication departments and think tanks to provide the workforce that will help us to understand what is happening to us as end-users of each medium and how their extensive use may shape culture.

McLuhan himself offered a model, which could be another starting point for steering our impressions and generating research about what a medium may actually do and how it affects cultural discourse and behavior. We can examine the media we are using and ask ourselves:

What changes when we use different forms of new media?

What does it enhance, what is amplified, enlarged, intensified?
What does it obsolesce, what drops in prominence or even disappears?
What does it retrieve, what is recovered, brought back of what was previously lost or diminished?
What does it reverse, what does it do when pushed to its limits?

Movement in any of these directions may affect the culture of the users, for example the mass availability of cell phones seems to have significantly increased frequency of communication in some cultures where people were inclined to be more taciturn in face to face situations. The documentary, McLuhan’s Wake, uses the cell phone as one example of these changes: the cell phone enhances the free use of the voice; it obsolesces the phone booth; it retrieves childhood yelling (to the point where we have coaches on the train that are “zen,” where cell phone conversations are forbidden); when pushed to its limits, it reverses freedom from the wire and becomes a virtual leash for those who cannot be without it. So the starting point for inquiry here is probably sharing your own experience with peers and across generations as to how your life has been affected, changed, as new media acquired more prominent places in your life and work. Such discussion should provide suggestions for more in-depth research.

How do new media emerge from culture?
McCluhan also observed, “We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us.” This should not surprise us as interculturalists, knowing that what we make in the world, scooters or cellphones, are products of our inner discourse. We make culture and culture makes us. When we’re talking about media, new or old, we are talking about ways we have projected our culture on reality. They are part of our culture.

So, the question is how, from what discourse, and from what need the development of new media tools and resources emerge. While the possibilities seem infinite, still what we create emerges from discourse we have about our needs and ourselves. Here’s an impossible question, but I find it fascinating to speculate on: what the Internet and new media would look like today, if their birth and infancy had occurred through the efforts of housewives rather than the exigencies of the 1950s military. How much to we have to feel threatened, in order to move forward? Apparently quite a bit, at least given the prevailing expression of our primitive discourse.

Today’s dominant discourse, in the socially constructed global marketplace that we live in, is Darwinian, despite the niceties we would like to embellish it with. This is rooted in the more ancestral and primitive biological discourse of survival, which at its worst is Homo homini lupus—”Man is a wolf to [his fellow] man.” This, to say the least, is unfair to wolves. “Kill and eat!” Survival shapes the first layers of primitive discourse and the stories that it tells. If we accept some validity for Maslow’s hierarchy, we must sadly admit that much of the time decisions are made in its basement, out of real or fictive insecurity and fear for one’s existence. Despite our technology and ability to create abundance, we have not been able to significantly alter or transcend this urcultural discourse.

Consequently we live in a world where both primitive and high-tech slaughter, violence, and torture contribute to the opulence of the few and the deprivation of the many despite it being a place where, paradoxically, there is more than enough to go around. New media are enablers of war by drone and pinpoint assassination. To date social media have done little to change this culture of survival by violence, though they have already provided support to movements and counter movements, revolutions and counter-revolutions. Without a shift in our primitive conversations about survival, the best intended movements and revolutions ultimately re-create the problem that summoned them forth in the first place. Harold Robbins, in The Adventurers (later made into a rather bad film), shows us a cynical picture of how revolution follows on revolution as the starry-eyed thirst for justice, almost overnight, turns into the steely-eyed exercise of power. The novel is stereotypically set in Latin America, but as contemporary history is proving, it could be anywhere and everywhere.

So creating discourse and shaping culture on a deeper level is the perennial challenge facing humanity, even as our consciousness grows about how the internecine wars of tribes, nations and classes over resources now threatens the human race as a whole. Those who are comfortable enough, throw up their hands and say, “Well it’s just human nature.” Alternative discourses of faith and philosophy, aimed at turning “swords into plowshares,” are quickly appropriated by discourses of fear and power and used to set the people’s faiths against each other. are fearful of cultural identity, of being labeled. This challenge of managing the larger social constructions of reality, what I have elsewhere called the “urcultures” has all too little been the focus of intercultural work and study, despite the fact that the kind of insight and tools needed to do this are more likely to be found in this field than in many others.

How new are our new media?
Do new media indeed bring something fresh to life or simply bring us more and faster same-old, same-old? Are they a “game changer,” a paradigm change or shift? Does the ease and abundance of communication change the shape of how we will think about ourselves or simply widen the channels for what we are already saying and doing or does it create a new dimension? Certainly given our understanding of the social construction of our realities, it’s we who are prone to bring the same-old, same-old to the construction and use of media, and we face each new development either with hope or horror, or both. There is strong tendency to look at new media as resources, goods, tools for power to be fought over, controlled, at the same time that we would like to see their accessibility is an enabler of democracy on a level not experienced before. If so, that would signal the arrival of a culture shift of significant proportions?

A SIETAR (Society for Intercultural Education, Training and Research) colleague of mine in Argentina, Natalia Sarro, has raised the question in a recent blog post as to whether we possess our stories, or whether they possess us. I am sure that the answer is, both! One of the prevailing discourses in the contemporary self-development movement at the personal level is that we must change negative stories into positive ones, limiting ones into liberating ones. This is becoming a sacred, almost religious discourse in US culture, whence it is rapidly globalizing. It is, as so many values in the US, focused on the individual, premised on individual salvation. One comes to the altar to profess one’s faith, whether it be in God or in Mammon. Both deities are pretty popular these days.

How do new media connect us, when they also disconnect us from each other and from our past?
McLuhan’s analysis of the effects of media raises interesting questions from a cultural point of view. One of these is whether the new media are creating a new sense of community in the human family or enhancing individuation—or both. Is there anything inherent in them that leads in one direction or another? Again my suspicion is both, hesitatingly said, hoping that users and scholars will offer reflection and research on if and how this is taking place. To what degree are the human connections that new media create, “real” or rather, avoiding the essentialist tone of that question, what is the nature of the reality they construct, how does it function?

A few weeks ago I was on an extremely crowded bus for the usual half hour ride home, which in this case took an hour and a half. As the bus left the station, standing room only, just about everyone under 50 (including a few over 50 like myself) was connected to their iPhone, iPod or iPad. Almost no one was talking to anyone else. When the bus ground to a halt due to road construction and traffic obstructions, gradually people put their handheld devices away and began talking to each other, both to peers and across generations, asking questions, telling stories related to our common plight. “You had to be there.” In other words, when the bus was reduced to a stop-start, mostly stop, creep, we grounded ourselves in the physical present and connected face-to-face. Sure, there were a few phone calls of the, “Honey, I’m going to be late” kind, but the focus had shifted from the distant and virtual to the here and now as people came to the presence of warm flesh and blood. I suspect this is an example of how stress reverts our discourse to more primitive levels, in this case one of tribal solidarity.

Another tantalizing question, raised by the emergence of new media, is that of the permanence, or at least endurance of the discourse and the stories that we create with them. This is about culture, what a discourse produces, its art and its arts and its artists, its architecture and literature. Fame depends on both memory and forgetfulness. It requires we hold the memorable and create the discourse that preserves it; prevailing discourse also demands that we forget those in the crowd in favor of those who stand out from the crowd. The charm of the tiny old streets of now high-rise Singapore lives in fewer and fewer of our memories. No future archeology is likely to reconstruct it. So inevitable we ask, “What human factors are the new media rendering obsolete?”

If you Google “Madonna”, most of the 230 million hits have to do with the singer, Madonna Louise Ciccone. You have to get a search a lot more specifically to find mediaeval or Renaissance paintings of the Virgin Mary, which would have been the culturally obvious meaning of “Madonna” for many only a few decades ago.

Will new media build on or over the cultural past? Will they create their own memorable cultural icons or lead us to a cultural fragmentation where identity is transitory and incidental? Should we worry about this? Culture is a discourse that requires consensus to exist. If, as Dominique Wolton insists, “Communication is cohabitation,” what is the human domestic architecture of new media for how we share the planet? We will look at the possibilities of rebranding identities that these media offer in the next post.

—

This post originally appeared in the blog of the Center for Intercultural New Media Research and is provided with the assistance of its editor Anastacia Kurylo.

Healing the Wounds of History

Posted on March 5, 2013 by Dianne Hofner Saphiere

Armand Volkas

Cultural Detective is about collaboration, authenticity, respect, and bridging differences. The CD Method has long leveraged drama — primarily through the acting out and resolution of critical incidents — as it involves our whole person: body, heart, head and spirit.

I was delighted to learn recently about one colleague who combines our goals with one of our favorite techniques in incredibly powerful ways! On a daily basis I am astounded by and grateful for the unique contributions you, our Cultural Detective community, make to the world around us, and I’m eager to share with you this latest example.

Armand Volkas is a psychotherapist and drama therapist, the son of Auschwitz survivors and resistance fighters from World War II. He is also the life partner of Anna Mindess, frequent Cultural Detective Series editor and co-author of CD Deaf Culture.

Armand created a process called “Healing the Wounds of History,” in which a group of people sharing a common legacy of historical trauma (Germans and Jews; Palestinians and Israelis; Japanese, Chinese and Koreans; African-Americans and European-Americans, to name a few) use experiential techniques to transform the pain of such legacies into constructive action.

“Healing the Wounds of History is based on the premise that there can be no political solutions to intercultural conflict until we understand and take into consideration the needs, emotions and unconscious drives of the human being.”

The project involves:

Breaking the taboo against “enemies” speaking to each other.
Humanizing each other through sharing our personal stories.
Taking steps towards healing personal and collective wounds using creative and experiential methods.
Transforming historical trauma into constructive action and service.

While unfortunately the sensitive nature of Armand’s work doesn’t lend itself to filming, those of you interested in a deeper feel for it can read through the transcript of one of his keynotes, which was acted out by members of a theater ensemble as well as Armand himself.

For more information on or to support the Healing the Wounds of History project contact Armand Volkas at +1 (510) 595-5500, Ext 11 or via email at info@livingartscenter.org

As They Say in Russia

Posted on February 26, 2013 by Dianne Hofner Saphiere

Guest blog by Tatyana Fertelmeyster, Co-author of Cultural Detective Russia and Senior Trainer of Facilitators
—

There is a Russian saying, “If a face is ugly, don’t blame the mirror.” I have been thinking about it lately as the topic of Russia has come up in different mirrors, and it is not looking all that good.

World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report for 2012: Russia ranks 67 out of 144.
The World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index: Russia ranks 112 out of 185.
Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index: Russia is 133 out of 174.
Reporters without Borders’ latest Press Freedom Index: Russia ranks148 out of 179.

In addition to all these, Human Rights Watch, in its World Report 2013, addresses a long list of concerns, concluding that 2012 was “the worst year for human rights in Russia in recent memory,” according to Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia Director at Human Rights Watch.

The official Russian response to all of that? It is complex, nuanced, and as contextual as everything in Russia. And most often it is about blaming the mirror or whoever is putting this mirror in front of Russia’s face. Just in the last few months Russia enacted laws that

Require NGOs with any foreign funding to register as “foreign agents”,
Reinterpret treason so broadly that almost anybody cooperating with foreigners can be — if necessary — accused of selling out the Motherland,
Prohibit Russian orphans to be adopted by US Americans.

Two other very common Russian sayings come to mind:

“I am a fool? You are a fool yourself!” and
“Don’t teach me how to live my life!”

Considering that Russia is the largest country in the world, with the seventh largest domestic market and the second largest nuclear arsenal, it might be useful to know what they say in Russia. And it will be priceless to understand what they mean when they say it.

Cultural Detective Russia is available in our new Cultural Detective Online system. I hope you’ll give it whirl and see how it might help make meaning of some of this.

Tatyana Fertelmeyster, Co-author of Cultural Detective Russia
Connecting.differences@gmail.com

Culture’s Dynamic… What Are You Listening? (#2 in a series)

Posted on February 14, 2013 by george simons

Dr. George Simons has long been researching the stories that make us who we are. In this series of blog posts he will be leading us in an examination of critical challenges that can lead us toward a fresh vision of culture. We will explore how we come to terms with our inner and shared identities and learn about how we construct the realities that shape our now and our future world.

If how we talk about culture, as I mentioned in the last post, appears too static, it is not because culture itself is static. Its dynamism penetrates every corner of life. Why this paradox? Why? We need to look at culture not as an idea, but in action.

I can’t tell how many of you are having conversations with your partner, children, dog, or friends at the moment you are looking at this blog, but what I am sure of is that, even if you’re not talking to anybody, you are talking a mile a minute. Research suggests that even in a face-to-face conversation, people are speaking to themselves about eight times as fast as they talk to each other. In a tele-conversation you can mute the microphone but not your mind. This means that, even if you’re not talking to any friends, pets, or other things in your ambience at the moment, you’re talking to yourself—unless of course you’ve fallen asleep and may be dreaming. Sometimes we are totally with these inner conversations—we call it “daydreaming.”

Talking and listening
This is to say, with your inner chatter you’re asking yourself, “What’s this all about?” “What’s he saying?” “Is this useful to me?” “Do I understand this, or this, or this?” Your mind is proposing all kinds of things about what’s going on around and in you, “What am I hearing?” “What am I doing?” “What am I feeling?” Trying to make what we are sensing fit in with what we know. There are even those little conversations we mislabel as distractions, “What’ll I do tomorrow or this afternoon or have for lunch?” We’re always talking to ourselves. We can’t help it. It’s the way we are. Some of us may have learned to meditate to slow down or to quiet our inner voices at times, but they keep chattering on most of the time, whether you pay attention to them or not. What are you talking to yourself about at this moment?

What is this inner flow all about? It is what we call “listening.” I know that sounds crazy because we’ve all probably been taught that to listen, we should shut up, stop thinking and hear the other out. Well, you can’t do that very well. What really happens is that the mind is forever proposing theories about: What’s going on here? What am I reading, hearing? Do I have a second opinion? What should I do? Is this good bad, beautiful or ugly, worth my time? Should I go do something else? And so on and so forth.

Listening is that voice—I’m describing it simply as a voice, but the flow of listening contains pictures, imaginative scenarios and feelings of all kinds that come up in reaction to what’s going on around you and in you. Actively listening means engaging with these conversations, deciding which are focal, which should take priority, which ones we wish to avoid, pursue, take action on.

This is culture!
The conversations, the discourse that you listen to is what we call “culture.” In other words we have inherited, built, built upon, and shared such discourse all of our lives. Today I’m inviting you to take a look at it in this new and different way. Listening is culture speaking. It is at once process and content. We have inner conversations, discourses about all kinds of things, about our goals, about the people we are, whether we’re how we should be or not. We have basic discourses about such things as: What’s a man? What’s a woman? How to live out my masculinity, my femininity? We have discourses that come from where we are born, the gangs we hang out with, and discourses that prevail at a certain point in my generation, in your generation.

That discourse not only originates from outside of us, but also springs up from within, as our unconscious mind brings these strains together. With old conversations rubbing up against the new, sometimes helpful, sometimes contradictory, we are ever awash with fresh ideas in the wired, or should we start saying, “wireless” world that we live in.

A torrent of discourse
So today the culture that builds our inner listening is a flow of discourse coming from countless sources; we live in worlds that are continually shaped by these flows of discourse within us and around us. They are continually flowing over us and into us, following old channels and carving new paths. What was once a slower moving stream of discourse has now become a torrent with the explosive growth of social media and facile, inexpensive means of communication. It sometime seems that everyone is wired, everywhere, or, again replacing the aging terminology, it seems that “everyone is wireless everywhere!”

When I was a student at Notre Dame graduate school, I kept a notebook in my dorm room where I jotted down what I needed to research at the library. Every Tuesday and Friday afternoon I trekked across campus toward the arms of “Touchdown Jesus,” the mosaic mural that welcomed scholars to the Hesburgh Library, to satisfy my learning needs and humor my serendipity. Today I can Google and Wiki most information quicker than I can stand up and walk over to the bookcase where I know the exact book that holds my answers. In terms of sheer quantity, I suspect that, now as a septuagenarian, I am learning a hundred times more each day than I did as a collegian. Shivering in the wee hours of the winter morning, I Skype with heat-oppressed colleagues in Australia or friends in Indonesia without thinking it magic. Yesterday I bought a USB flash drive about the size of the first joint of my index finger, but large enough, I am told, to hold 32 copies of the Encyclopedia Britannica I once owned. Go figure!

On the sociopolitical level, we see new media: Twitter, blogs, and Facebook, support the Occupy protests, the Arab Spring, and provide a conduit for wikileaks, all calling into question the way the culture of power is structured and exercised. Battlefields are managed from half a world away. On the commercial level we may feel helpless in the face of mind-bending electronic advertising, victims of strangers who can know everything about us, not just where but how we live, but our likes and dislikes, as well as the GPS coordinates of our smart phones at any given moment. Ought we call in the exorcist or take a digital sabbatical when our inner voices start to babble?

Dynamic culture
There is no end in sight. On one hand our identity seems diluted in the flow of discourse, sound bites and memes, while on the other hand we have powerful means to connect and coordinate our values and our actions to shape both the world we have inherited and this emergent electronic global village we now live in. Given this, we need a truly dynamic discourse about culture, not just a static definition that puts labels on what people have in common and do in similar ways, but one that enlightens us on the ways we share and influence, as well as misunderstand each other.

Please share some reflections on how you see your identity in this new context. What is changing? What is not? How are you and those about you connected, supported, or threatened by the discourse you share? What do you listen? What are the inner voices saying? What is culture telling you?

—

This post originally appeared in the blog of the Center for Intercultural New Media Research and is provided with the assistance of its editor Anastacia Kurylo.

+ Add your own event Eventbrite

	Multiracial Identity… on Dr. Carlos Cortés on Multicult…
	Day of the Dead Take… on Cultural Appropriation of Day…
	Day of the Dead Take… on Cultural Appropriation of Day…
	Flora on Catalysts For Intercultural Co…
	Darien on How Our Thoughts Affect Our Pe…

Cultural Detective Blog

Cultural Defective + Cultural Detective = Cultural Effective

Tag Archives: current events from an intercultural perspective

Have Difficult Economic Times Changed Our Values?

Tango! Kabuki! Bollywood! Jazz! What Do They Have in Common?

Royal Glitter in the Sober Dutch Egalitarian Culture

Using Social Media to Rebrand Culture

Entre Dios y Alá

Happy International Women’s Day

If the medium is the message, what is the cultural message of a new medium?

Healing the Wounds of History

As They Say in Russia

Culture’s Dynamic… What Are You Listening? (#2 in a series)

September 2037

	September 2037
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
30	31	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	1	2	3

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: