Chapters 9, 10, & 11

The most visible cultural differences arise in three basic areas: communication, religion, and art.

The first area, communication, is, in fact, the first way one can usually use to identify a person with a different background than themselves. Language, “a systematic set of symbols and signs with learned and shared meanings,” is the most obvious difference amongst cultures (190). If you and another person don’t speak the same language, then you can tell you are not a part of the same language meaning making group.

Indeed, “ethnocentric” principles come into play when one not only recognizes the different cultures behind languages but also applies a hierarchical class system to which language has priority (194). For instance, Miller says that “although sign languages are complete and complex languages in their own right, they are often treated as second-class languages” (192).

Eurocentrism also exists in language. The current view is that Americans are stupid for being largely monolingual. However, this view fails to take into account that languages are found much closer together in Europe than in America. Thus, languages are learned out of necessity rather than because of the universal higher intellects of Europeans.

Americans, sadly, are also proponents of an ethnocentric ideal, though. They tend to view the language or accents of the newest immigrating group as inferior. I have said before in my blog that my family ditched Gaelic and their Irish accents for just this reason. Immigrants that speak only Spanish, however, have it much harder because they have to learn an entirely new language and are expected to do so as soon as they enter the country. Most people with this American ethnocentric view also refuse to learn Spanish, denigrating the language as gibberish.

There are also gestures—“movements, usually of the hands, that convey meanings. Some gestures may be universally meaningful, but most are culturally specific and often completely arbitrary”—which most people rarely think about (192). Consequently, nonverbal communication can be one of the easiest ways to offend someone from a different culture. (That article is hilarious, by the way.) For instance, how close do you stand to someone? Do you really think about it, or do you just do it? Well, the distance between people is usually a reflexive thing, and when someone invades your bubble, you probably back away. However, in countries such as Spain, they stand much closer together. Thus, if you move away, it is seen as somewhat offensive. It is the equivalent of someone talking to an American but keeping a room’s length between them. You might begin to try to interpret the action within your own shared cultural meanings: “Oh man, I must not have put on enough deodorant today.”

Another sure fire way to offend people is by talking about—you guessed it—religion. I know they say “never talk about religion, sex, or politics,” but, hey, let’s give it a whirl.

First off, what is religion? According to Barbara Miller, “religion consists of beliefs and behavior related to supernatural beings and forces. This definition specifically avoids linking religion with belief in a supreme deity, because some religions have no concept of a supreme deity whereas others have multiple deities” (212). Huh? Basically, all religions believe—and you should know up front that I’m going with magical ponies as a generalization—in a magical pony, many magical ponies, or the disembodied idea of a magical pony. And their pony is pretty much always the best. (In case you were wondering, I’m Buddhist. I hold with the disembodied idea of a magical pony, a.k.a. karma.)

(And why wouldn’t I? She’s clearly so much more stylin’ than your pony.)

In magic versus religion, religion is seen as the higher class belief. This is not surprising as many foundational thinkers were deeply religious. Also, religions have a lot of practitioners that express their beliefs through modern writings. Even Miller refers to a “magical religion in the modern world” as “so-called Wicca” (213).

But, what is the difference between magic and religion? Well, it’s a pretty fuzzy distinction, but Miller quotes Sir James Frazer in saying that magic is “people’s attempt to compel supernatural forces and beings to act in certain ways” while religion “is the attempt to please supernatural forces or beings” (212).

(Magic = I COMMAND YOU TO FLY, PONY!)

(Religion = I will brush your hair if you fly, pony. Pretty please?)

Now, we move on to “expressive culture, or behavior and beliefs related to art, leisure, and play” (236). Let’s jump right in and discuss that age old question.

(How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? No, I mean the other question. Sadly, woodchucks are still disinclined to chucking wood.)

What is art? Surprisingly, Miller presents one of the best definitions I have heard. She says that “art is the application of imagination, skill, and style to matter, movement, and sound that goes beyond the purely practical” (236). This definition is a lot more inclusive than, for instance, Eurocentric views on high-art being the only true art form.

(You might know it as ‘It’s not art unless someone is naked.’)

It is important to remember that “all cultures have art, and all cultures have a sense of what makes something art versus non-art” (236).

Actually, it is best to remember that cultures have different meanings and values for everything, including communication, religion, and art. So, try not to take yourself too seriously. It is okay to form opinions about these areas based upon the context of your own culture and experience. In fact, I encourage it. However, don’t expect others to conform to your ideas, and don’t vilify them when their ideas conflict with your own.

My Cultural Roots, Continued

In my previous blog, I detailed my family's Irish-American heritage, and the practices that carried over into our modern day lives.

However, when my family arrived in the United States, our cultural differences were hardly celebrated. They moved, as stated earlier, in order to escape the potato famine. The Great Famine, as it is known in Ireland, was largely a manmade catastrophe. Aside from the potato,

there was a great deal of food—such as beans and wheat—being produced in Ireland. However, the British landowners exported most of their Irish tenants’ food back to Britain, even though the Irish were starving (Corrie). The British did so because they perpetrated this system upon the Irish for many years prior without consequence, and they generally considered the Irish to be subhuman. The United States, largely populated by descendants of the English, took a similar attitude to the gangly, starving, “uncultured,” burr tongued immigrants invading New York during the time of the famine. The papers of the era most memorably vilified America’s newest citizens by means of cartoons, often portraying the immigrants as gorillas

(A Dublin famine Irish-American monkey)

In order to fit into their new hostile environment, my ancestors—like many Irish-Americans—tried to abandon a lot of their former cultural practices. The dialect went first as it was the easiest way to single out the Irish from the non-Irish. The accent, however, did not completely disappear because it changed the regional dialects, such as giving the Appalachian accent

harsher R’s. The Gaelic language, on the other hand, did disappear. Irish-Gaelic had already flagged for years under British rule of Ireland. In the new country, without any use for or anyone to teach them the language, Irish-Americans simply lost their native tongue. Many of them, as my family did, also converted to Protestantism. This caused them to abandon the Latin that had been a necessity for church. Class and educational values additionally superseded their own beliefs—though this seemed a welcome change. The British rule in Ireland generally perpetuated a system of British landowners and Irish tenants class system (Corrie). As in many farming societies, the Irish were afforded little opportunity for education and generally saw little point to it. In the United States, however, the class system made social mobility possible—though they began at the lowest possible rung. In addition, the economy and government necessitated higher education. Gradually, my ancestor’s went from farmers, to factory workers, and then to small business owners. Each generation saw an increased level of education ending with myself being the first person in my direct line to attend college.

As I said in my previous blog, probably the least similar kinship and cultural system is the one of the modern American portrayed in the media—living away from family, being a

divorced/single parent, interacting with mostly the grandparents, not being expected to support the older/younger extended family. Furthermore, the current media also portrays all Caucasians
in the same light as the bland, elite, dominant class. Many tend to forget that Irish-Americans escaped from starvation and the life of the tenant farmer to come to the United States where they faced rampant racism. Many forget that it is only within the last fifty years that either an Irish-American or African-American president was elected—and President Kennedy was a descendant of the Ulster-Scots, the ruling class in Ireland (Corrie). In summation, no matter how similar or different Americans may look, beneath our shared culture lies a vast and exciting mixture of unique values.

Bibliography

A Dublin famine Irish-American monkey [Newspaper cartoon]. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.travelgolf.org/images/a_dublin_famine_irish_american_monkey.jpg

Corrie, E. (2011, September 22). Conflict and peacebuilding in Northern Ireland. Lecture
presented at Reinhardt University sponsored by The Year of Ireland Committee and the
Chaplain's Office, Waleska, GA.