Näytetään tekstit, joissa on tunniste language. Näytä kaikki tekstit
Näytetään tekstit, joissa on tunniste language. Näytä kaikki tekstit

perjantaina, tammikuuta 08, 2010

Desires

After an all-too-long break, I'm here, writing again. I do have a lot of things to write about, but somehow I've gotten out of the habit of writing. Got to get back in there again!

Anyway, recently, I've thought a lot of about desires in the sense of "I want X". Two specific cues got me thinking about this:
  1. While visiting a friend, he asked me: "Would you like to have something? Tea, coffee, juice...?" Usually, I don't have strong desires and I would go something like "Yeah, um-h, sure, I don't know, whatever." Some argue that an offer like that is literally an offer and a sign of the hospitality of the host. Therefore I can and should choose whatever I feel like, without consideration of the cost or practicality for the host.
    Personally, I would prefer more a dialog, with an answer like "Sure. What do you recommend?" or "Sure. I'll have what the other's are having." Such answers give the host more room to serve what is practical or especially good.
  2. Another friend, a female, stated that she wants that the man takes the initiative, that the man should "make the move" so to speak. In that particular moment, I have to admit that I had no idea whether she implied that I should make a move (which was a tempting thought), or that men in general should make the move. This confusion originates from the fact that she did not give any indication whether she was interested in me or not. While this puts a lot of pressure on the man (me), it is also in contradiction with well-researched facts about human courtship. It is true that it is generally the men who "make the move", but generally "the move" is successful only if the female has first given a sign that she is interested, that she would like the man to make a move.
In my mind, these two examples demonstrate problems with stereotypical concepts of desire. I would argue that trying to force out statements of preference (or desire) squeezes out flexibility. When a host asks "Tea, coffee, beer or champagne, perhaps?" merely answering "Champagne", might be impractical if you are the only one drinking and the host has to open a bottle just for you. Or perhaps all the other guests are driving and cannot drink alcohol. "I would feel like champagne, but only if others join me", would state the preference, but gives the host as well as the other guests the option of nudging you to a more practical choice when needed. In this sense, in my opinion, forcing choices, or forcing statements of preference, makes the situation too black and white.

A second argument is that the "I want" attitude is an egoistic one. It excludes social interaction. "I want champagne." Period. Personally I feel that drinking champagne with a friend, let along a female friend, is doubly as pleasant as drinking it alone. Although I really, really like champagne, sometimes I would rather not drink champagne, then drink it alone. In the courtship context, I feel that it is perfectly ok that a man makes the moves in a context where the man and the female do not know each other from before, such as a bar. I would even see that as the preferred way of action. However, if the man and female know each other from before, if they are even friends, then the stakes are higher. To interpret the situation wrong, to make moves when the female is not interested, can incur serious damage to a friendship. An interaction will then probably lead to a more "mutually fulfilling" (pardon the pun) sequence of events. Thus the social interaction often gives a better result than just blurting out your own preference.

The other side of the coin is that persons without definite opinions are often perceived as weak, as if they were incapable of making a choice. Paradoxically, I do agree with this argument as well. Inability to choose is lame. It is a serious handicap. Paralysis before a menu in a restaurant is really annoying for the others in a group. To this problem I would offer a simple trick. Instead of the two opposite alternatives 1. "I choose X" and 2. "I'm unable to choose", I would suggest a third alternative 3. "I do not have a preference". In the original host/guest scenario we could then proceed with
  • (Host) "Would you like some tea, coffee or juice?"
  • (You) "I don't know", meaning, "I don't have a preference", and then continue "What are the others having?"
  • (Host) "We're all drinking tea."
  • (You) "I'll have one, too."
Note that, in addition to being practical for the host, this kind of conformity to the group standard will unify the group and build sense of community, instead of "He's the (different) one who drinks coffee."

In a situation where we really do have to make a choice, such as when eating in a restaurant, I would offer the no-preference case two different solutions.
  1. Again, interact. For example, ask the waiter "What would you recommend?" if he did not already offer his opinion (they often have something ready). Say, the specials of the day are often something that the restaurant bought in a big quantity, whereby you'd get better quality for a cheaper price. Perfect.
  2. The advanced technique: If you don't know what you prefer, then all the available options must be more or less of equal preference to you. Therefore, pick one at random. Number 3 is as good a choice as any. I've tried that a lot of times. In all parts of the world, it always works. Easy.

keskiviikkona, tammikuuta 07, 2009

Stories from the United States of Germany, part 1

Due to my increasing international circle of friends, I've decided to start to write in English at least some times and at least on topics that could interest a larger audience. I realise that this comes with a great annoyance to my German friends, who would prefer me to write in German, but right now I'm most interested in communicating with as many people as possible, so English is a natural choice.

This brings to my mind one of the most baffling recurring experiences I've had here in Germany. It concerns the attitudes to languages, and especially, the attitude Germans have to their own language. In short, living in Germany, I face great pressure to learn to communicate in German. When arriving in Germany, I was determined and motivated to learn German, but this in-your-face attitude displayed everywhere has seriously deterred my motivation.

During the first weeks here, people would approach me and start a rapid unintelligible monologue in German, giving me the chance to interrupt with a "Wie, bitte?" only when they stopped to breath. Initially I thought that they just weren't accustomed to foreign languages, but this theory is contradicted by the large number of foreigners present both at the office and around town.

Once settled, I began to hear suggestions "We should talk German, shouldn't we?", which were soon changed to "We should talk German" or "Wir sollten Deutsch sprechen". Observe the lack of options. It is not really a question that would give me any chance to choose, but it is a statement, we really should talk German. I once made the mistake of asking a good friend why we are supposed to talk German, upon which she frowned at me and answered "because we're in Germany", like I've insulted her intellect (sadly, this event made me also question the depth of our friendship). Not satisfied with the answer, I tried to inquire why it is so important to talk German, and as an answer I got a emotionally heated story about a foreigner who had not learned the language after five years in Germany. Unable to connect the logic of this story with my present situation, utterly perplexed, I did not pursue the question further at that time.

A mysterious feature of these demands is the way they are presented. Like I already noted, the demands come as statements of something obvious, something that does not deserve to be doubted. But what is more stunning is that the statement is regularly finished off with a grin. "Wir sollten Deutsch sprechen [grin]" or in written form "Wir sollten Deutsch sprechen :-)". This attempt of making it a friendly gesture fails upon me. It feels like some sort of evil joy, "you must learn German, hah-ha"! I can almost see the Simpsons bully-character, Nelson, pedalling away on his tricycle with an sadistic smile.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand the motivation of the Germans. Germany is flooded with foreigners, most notably from Turkey, but also many from Eastern Europe, many of whom don't speak German. Such immigrants are often of low education, which combined with the inability to speak German is a receipt for trouble. They arrive here with hopes of improved standards of living. This can readily be seen as (a view that I don't completely share) living off the Germans, and it is thus fair to demand something from the immigrants as well, like conforming with the norms of the society.

To me, conformity requirements have a bad vibe, especially in a country like Germany. It brings back memories of some history lessons in high-school. Moreover, I have never been the one to conform with the majority unless in very rare cases when conformity has a specific purpose that I happen to agree with. Personally, I think cultural diversity is a value in itself, which is positive in all forms, with the exception that it does not go well with a low level of education and unemployment (just think about the unrest in Paris some time back).

So, when I face demands of learning German, it feels like a conformity requirement, motivated only if I am an immigrant of low education living off the German society. While I can't deny being a foreigner, I don't really see myself as an immigrant since I come from an EU-country and plan to stay only for a limited time. Immigration implies in my perception a more permanent change of country. Moreover, I definitely feel insulted if I am labelled a person of low education, which is in objective terms, a rather inaccurate label. Worse, if I am referred to as someone who lives off the well being of the German society, I take it as a rather harsh insult. Upon leaving Finland, one of my greatest two regrets (the other regret is not being with my friends and family) is that as the Finnish society invested so much in my education, I am now donating the fruits of my education and learning efforts to the Germans (for a rather low compensation salary-wise).

Finally, I think that I could take all this with a smile, if there wouldn't be for a one last thing (there's always a one last thing, isn't there?). If the Germans would be holding the moral upper ground, I can't believe I would have any objections of learning German. If, for example, most Germans would be speaking, say, five languages fluently, they would have the "right" to demand that I perfect my skills in my fourth language, indeed, I would feel it my duty to learn it no time at all. Thinking about it, it doesn't seem like a too far fetched utopia to imagine a centrally located country like Germany, where everyone would know several of the languages of the neighbouring countries. But reality is sad and I find it disturbing how few Germans speak more than two languages. Most people do hesitantly speak a few words of English (whereby their skills in English were on par with my skills in German when I arrived here), but most of the time that is about all they know.

At the end of this ramble I should decided upon a course of action. The obvious, but ill-advised action would be to protest, to attempt to not-learn German. While that is an intuitively attractive option, I find such a choice lame, too easy, an option only for the weakest of minds. My personal favourite is to continue learning German, but in addition attempt learning some other language, like French, which would be my fifth language. What better counter-insult than a straight-faced display of intellectual superiority? Ha-ha.