Okay, I am convinced: blogs are here to stay, and are (or can be) authentic, studied, useful ways to communicate ideas, facts, arguments and opinions, not (as I first thought) a miasma of narcissistic ramblings by those with far too much time on their hands and far too high an opinion of themselves.
I will blog regularly, which likely means more than once a week but perhaps less than once per day. I plan new features; one for sure will be a series of Cross-Culture Tips (they will start as soon as I find a catchy title). I will keep adding to and maintaining my regular website, treasuremountain.com, but in July will shift most of the content and my focus to a new site, www.workingwithchinese.com. More on that soon.
I also have started a new blog, GlobalStartupCoach. A good friend is starting a company, but with a difference: he is starting a global, multinational from the very get-go. The firm is less than two months old and already has offices and/or 100+ staff in a half-dozen countries. The blog will follow the fortunes of the founder, an instant history as it were, looking at the issues and problems my friend will face as the business grows. My job is to be a sounding board and to offer advice, what I call perspective, a way to ensure that my friend doesn't lose focus or the Big Picture as he gets his hands dirty with the myriad of details that make up the life of an entrepreneur.
So keep your cards and letters coming in.
Cheers,
Greg
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Friday, May 30, 2008
One Video Worth A Thousand Pictures?
Whenever anyone asks for more information about me (it happens surprisingly often) I direct them to this video. Taken in the beautiful Sun Yat-sen gardens in Vancouver (an oasis of tranquility on the edge of cacophonic Chinatown), I think this video is worth a thousand pictures, and ten thousand words.
Every time I see it (which is not often!) all I see is that I need to lose some weight. There are more videos on YouTube: search for "Western-Chinese business."
Every time I see it (which is not often!) all I see is that I need to lose some weight. There are more videos on YouTube: search for "Western-Chinese business."
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Upcoming Open Events
Was sick, then I took the summer off, so ... I'm back. And maybe I do have something to say, some days anyway. But not today; today I do shameless advertising about my remaining open events this year. More details available on my site, www.treasuremountain.com.
Open Event Schedule Q3-4, 2008:
There, that`s what I am doing for the next few months. Besides private, corporate events that is, and writing and traveling, plus an occassional nap.
Back tomorrow with an actual post, about why nothing ever happens in Chinese meetings.
Open Event Schedule Q3-4, 2008:
September
Wearing Chinese Glasses Sep 12,
Wearing Western Glasses: Working With Westerners/In a Multinational Sep 13,
Logic & Communication for Leaders Sep 14-15 (2-days long: Chinese only)
October
all classes are Wearing Chinese Glasses (1/2 day version)
St. John's (Oct 1), Halifax (Oct 2), Ottawa (Oct 3), Montreal (Oct 4), Kingston (Oct 9), Toronto (Oct 10, London (Oct 12), Winnipeg (Oct 15), Edmonton (Oct 16), Calgary (Oct 17), Vancouver (Oct 22), Victoria (Oct 23)
November
November 13,
November 14, Fribourg, Wearing Chinese Glasses (1-day)
November 16, Lugano, Wearing Chinese Glasses (1-day)
- contact the International School of Business,
Wearing Chinese Glasses (Westerners only)
Wearing Western Glasses: Working With Westerners/In a Multinational (Chinese only)
Logic & Communication for Leaders (2-days long: Chinese only)
- dates/times set mid-Oct. Check treasuremountain.com to receive advance notice of workshop details.
Wearing Chinese Glasses (1-day: Westerners only)
Working With Westerners/In a Multinationall (1-day: Chinese only)
- dates/times set mid-Oct. Check treasuremountain.com to receive advance notice of workshop details.
There, that`s what I am doing for the next few months. Besides private, corporate events that is, and writing and traveling, plus an occassional nap.
Back tomorrow with an actual post, about why nothing ever happens in Chinese meetings.
Monday, April 30, 2007
So long as they spell my name right
Controversy. Has only just started, but it will come. Write negative about Chinese, be it culture, people, system or history, and your inbox could fill with angry emails, your name might appear on blogs (within 25 words of terms like wrong, incorrect, hates Chinese and ignorant).
I see three lines of attack.
1. I am not Chinese, therefore my examples/facts/arguments/conclusions are incorrect
2. much of my experience is from Taiwan, and China is different than Taiwan, therefore my book does not apply to China Chinese (or to Singapore or Hong Kong Chinese).
3. these Chinese have changed in these ways, thus my book does not describe the "current Chinese behaviors" for these Chinese
No. 1 is used to prove me [what I say about Chinese ...] wrong. It is a classic ad hominem, that is, attacking something about the arguer rather than the arguer's argument. The rule is that you almost-never have to know anything about the arguer to analyze his/her argument. Smart people can say something stupid, stupid people can say something smart ... and Canadians can say something true about Chinese.
No. 2 confuses politics and economics with culture. Certainly Taiwan is different than China, and Singapore and HK, but different on what level or in what area? Different political and economic systems certainly, and different levels of development, okay. But different cultures? Meaning different Chinese? I am not so sure, at least not in the areas I write about.
All four Chinas have the same education system, top down, objective, memory-oriented. Each teach the same parables from the same ancient novels and poems, Li Bai, Dream Of The Red Chamber and Romance Of The Three Kingdoms. Each use identical Rules of Communication, for example, that negatives are best expressed indirectly, that disagreements should be polite, that you should not let people know you don't understand or that you should not embarrass people in front of a group. (And while China uses simplified characters and the rest use traditional, and while slang and word usage is different, each China uses the same language, and teaches the same dialect, Mandarin.) Each China still relies on guanxi in business, each reveres the family and each puts harmony and stability as the society's key goals. How different can they be?
The differences people see, especially Chinese people, are differences in outer attitude, in the way people act and dress.
No. 3 is accurate, just not especially important. Without a doubt there are Chinese sub-groups who have changed further than I say in my book. Yet, I do not ONCE say that "all" Chinese are anything, but rather say that "Chinese tend to ...," an argument to a general cause. And in a general argument exceptions are expected, just not very important. Only when exceptions become so numerous as to start being the norm rather than the exception do exceptions matter.
Ah, but how do we deal with these exceptions? How frequent are they? I strongly believe that there are far fewer exceptions than people realize, at least on the basic, fundamental level I write about. It is very easy to confuse outer appearance, good English say, nice appearance and good manners, to mean that these Chinese have changed from the norm. Well, they have changed...as far as outer appearances are concerned. Not so much on the fundamental levels I write about though.
It is my strong opinion that until the education system (home and school) changes Chinese will not change, at least on the fundamental levels I write about. For more see my April 19 post, "But Chinese Have Changed!"
So, let the controversies commence. And, using the old PR rule, anything said is good ... as long as they spell my name right: "Greg" with two Gs, one at the start and one at the end, and "Bissky" with double S, not single.
I see three lines of attack.
1. I am not Chinese, therefore my examples/facts/arguments/conclusions are incorrect
2. much of my experience is from Taiwan, and China is different than Taiwan, therefore my book does not apply to China Chinese (or to Singapore or Hong Kong Chinese).
3. these Chinese have changed in these ways, thus my book does not describe the "current Chinese behaviors" for these Chinese
No. 1 is used to prove me [what I say about Chinese ...] wrong. It is a classic ad hominem, that is, attacking something about the arguer rather than the arguer's argument. The rule is that you almost-never have to know anything about the arguer to analyze his/her argument. Smart people can say something stupid, stupid people can say something smart ... and Canadians can say something true about Chinese.
No. 2 confuses politics and economics with culture. Certainly Taiwan is different than China, and Singapore and HK, but different on what level or in what area? Different political and economic systems certainly, and different levels of development, okay. But different cultures? Meaning different Chinese? I am not so sure, at least not in the areas I write about.
All four Chinas have the same education system, top down, objective, memory-oriented. Each teach the same parables from the same ancient novels and poems, Li Bai, Dream Of The Red Chamber and Romance Of The Three Kingdoms. Each use identical Rules of Communication, for example, that negatives are best expressed indirectly, that disagreements should be polite, that you should not let people know you don't understand or that you should not embarrass people in front of a group. (And while China uses simplified characters and the rest use traditional, and while slang and word usage is different, each China uses the same language, and teaches the same dialect, Mandarin.) Each China still relies on guanxi in business, each reveres the family and each puts harmony and stability as the society's key goals. How different can they be?
The differences people see, especially Chinese people, are differences in outer attitude, in the way people act and dress.
No. 3 is accurate, just not especially important. Without a doubt there are Chinese sub-groups who have changed further than I say in my book. Yet, I do not ONCE say that "all" Chinese are anything, but rather say that "Chinese tend to ...," an argument to a general cause. And in a general argument exceptions are expected, just not very important. Only when exceptions become so numerous as to start being the norm rather than the exception do exceptions matter.
Ah, but how do we deal with these exceptions? How frequent are they? I strongly believe that there are far fewer exceptions than people realize, at least on the basic, fundamental level I write about. It is very easy to confuse outer appearance, good English say, nice appearance and good manners, to mean that these Chinese have changed from the norm. Well, they have changed...as far as outer appearances are concerned. Not so much on the fundamental levels I write about though.
It is my strong opinion that until the education system (home and school) changes Chinese will not change, at least on the fundamental levels I write about. For more see my April 19 post, "But Chinese Have Changed!"
So, let the controversies commence. And, using the old PR rule, anything said is good ... as long as they spell my name right: "Greg" with two Gs, one at the start and one at the end, and "Bissky" with double S, not single.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
But Chinese have changed!
"But Chinese have changed!" The first—certainly not the last—criticism of my book. From a Chinese, though I expect to hear this from Westerners too (romantics or newbies). So, how to respond?
Have Chinese changed? Yes, they have.
Have Chinese changed? No, they haven't.
First off, when anyone, myself included, talks of "the Chinese" they are talking about a people in motion, a culture and society in transition. Sure, differences occur in all peoples, but I wager less in Switzerland or Canada than in Chinese Asia. Where 100 years ago the "Chinese" were nicely sorted into identifiable and homogeneous groups with few deviants (like Sun Yat Sen, Kang You Wei and all Chinese wanting to change China), today the "Chinese" range from totally modernized (which means what?) sophisticates to wash-clothes-in-the-stream traditionalists. Generalizations are inevitable, impossible to avoid, but dangerous and should be made with care.
Back to the point. Change in Chinese Asia. In 2006 I taught my Logical Thinking and Communication 3-day workshop in Taiwan to every Vice President of a huge Western bank. Thoroughly modern in appearance, each armed with an MBA or better, most from 'name' Western schools, if any Chinese have changed it would be this group and others like it.
Damn it was a fun class, my favorite kind of students, experienced enough to grasp why learning logic is crucial to their success.
So, it is obvious that these Chinese have changed. Dress, manners, bearing, all different than before (and from bankers working today for Chinese banks). Most married late or were still single in the mid 30s, and only one couple had two children , the rest had one or none, and no one said they cared about girl or boy. Wow! HUGE changes: ancestor worship is older than Confucius, and here in one generation is has been replaced by middle-class values, make money and enjoy life.
But ... I taught this group the same culture stuff I teach all Chinese, and no one blinked. I described the Chinese Rules of Communication, rules like "don't disagree openly," "don't let other people know you don't understand" and "being polite is most important." All agreed, all said these were the rules they were taught, and still followed. I described the Chinese education system, based almost entirely on memorization, almost no attention placed on student thoughts or opinions, almost no experience in debate or discussion. All agreed. I touched on the role of guanxi (which really means mutually shared obligations, not relationships!) in business and life, and no one complained.
I use avalanches and glaciers (borrowed from a French anthropologist who's name I've lost: anyone know?) to explain the different types of changes. Avalanche changes are dramatic, fast-moving and obvious to anyone walking the streets of any big Chinese city. The dress, the cars, crowded Starbucks and MacDonalds, people's English ability and general worldliness. The there are the absolutely beautiful buildings, hotel lobbies fashioned from square acres of marble, granite and cash, skyscrapers vying for world-record heights.
Then there are the glacier changes, slower and far less dramatic. Changes in the education system, in the importance of family, in the role of guanxi in business and the use of traditional Rules of communication and overall politeness, these all are changing, but very s l o w l y. Very slowly! Also changing but very slowly is the Chinese attitude towards law and relationships; it is still a ching li fa society (relationships are more important than law).
So, have Chinese changed? Yes. No. Both are true. If so, which are the most important for Westerners doing business with the Chinese? (This is a business blog after all). I argue that the changes that haven`t happened, the glacier changes, are the most important. The avalanche changes make life in Chinese Asia easier for Westerners and add to possible business opportunities, true, but success or failure depends on Westerners understanding glacier items. Which is more important to business success, how a Chinese dresses or how they communicate? Myself, I can work with people dressed up, down or naked, who cares? But if I frequently misunderstand them (to use just one example: this is a blog, not a book) business success will be elusive at best.
To Chinese who think Chinese have changed, please take a breath and consider the differences between avalanche and glacier changes. I will agree with any avalanche changes you argue for, but ... until you can prove to me that the Chinese education system has changed, that guanxi doesn't rule business and that Chinese are taught to disagree openly and to ask the boss, teacher or father possibly embarrassing questions, I will continue to say that the Chinese have not changed.
I believe that the key to change is the education system formal (school) and informal (parents). Until Chinese are taught to think for themselves, to debate, discuss and develop their own ideas and beliefs, well, China and the Chinese won't change. Yes, the avalanche will continue to change the outer appearance of Chinese people and infrastructure, but the far-more-important glacier changes will still happen with, well, glacier slowness. Think decades or generation, not months and years.
Have Chinese changed? Yes, they have.
Have Chinese changed? No, they haven't.
First off, when anyone, myself included, talks of "the Chinese" they are talking about a people in motion, a culture and society in transition. Sure, differences occur in all peoples, but I wager less in Switzerland or Canada than in Chinese Asia. Where 100 years ago the "Chinese" were nicely sorted into identifiable and homogeneous groups with few deviants (like Sun Yat Sen, Kang You Wei and all Chinese wanting to change China), today the "Chinese" range from totally modernized (which means what?) sophisticates to wash-clothes-in-the-stream traditionalists. Generalizations are inevitable, impossible to avoid, but dangerous and should be made with care.
Back to the point. Change in Chinese Asia. In 2006 I taught my Logical Thinking and Communication 3-day workshop in Taiwan to every Vice President of a huge Western bank. Thoroughly modern in appearance, each armed with an MBA or better, most from 'name' Western schools, if any Chinese have changed it would be this group and others like it.
Damn it was a fun class, my favorite kind of students, experienced enough to grasp why learning logic is crucial to their success.
So, it is obvious that these Chinese have changed. Dress, manners, bearing, all different than before (and from bankers working today for Chinese banks). Most married late or were still single in the mid 30s, and only one couple had two children , the rest had one or none, and no one said they cared about girl or boy. Wow! HUGE changes: ancestor worship is older than Confucius, and here in one generation is has been replaced by middle-class values, make money and enjoy life.
But ... I taught this group the same culture stuff I teach all Chinese, and no one blinked. I described the Chinese Rules of Communication, rules like "don't disagree openly," "don't let other people know you don't understand" and "being polite is most important." All agreed, all said these were the rules they were taught, and still followed. I described the Chinese education system, based almost entirely on memorization, almost no attention placed on student thoughts or opinions, almost no experience in debate or discussion. All agreed. I touched on the role of guanxi (which really means mutually shared obligations, not relationships!) in business and life, and no one complained.
I use avalanches and glaciers (borrowed from a French anthropologist who's name I've lost: anyone know?) to explain the different types of changes. Avalanche changes are dramatic, fast-moving and obvious to anyone walking the streets of any big Chinese city. The dress, the cars, crowded Starbucks and MacDonalds, people's English ability and general worldliness. The there are the absolutely beautiful buildings, hotel lobbies fashioned from square acres of marble, granite and cash, skyscrapers vying for world-record heights.
Then there are the glacier changes, slower and far less dramatic. Changes in the education system, in the importance of family, in the role of guanxi in business and the use of traditional Rules of communication and overall politeness, these all are changing, but very s l o w l y. Very slowly! Also changing but very slowly is the Chinese attitude towards law and relationships; it is still a ching li fa society (relationships are more important than law).
So, have Chinese changed? Yes. No. Both are true. If so, which are the most important for Westerners doing business with the Chinese? (This is a business blog after all). I argue that the changes that haven`t happened, the glacier changes, are the most important. The avalanche changes make life in Chinese Asia easier for Westerners and add to possible business opportunities, true, but success or failure depends on Westerners understanding glacier items. Which is more important to business success, how a Chinese dresses or how they communicate? Myself, I can work with people dressed up, down or naked, who cares? But if I frequently misunderstand them (to use just one example: this is a blog, not a book) business success will be elusive at best.
To Chinese who think Chinese have changed, please take a breath and consider the differences between avalanche and glacier changes. I will agree with any avalanche changes you argue for, but ... until you can prove to me that the Chinese education system has changed, that guanxi doesn't rule business and that Chinese are taught to disagree openly and to ask the boss, teacher or father possibly embarrassing questions, I will continue to say that the Chinese have not changed.
I believe that the key to change is the education system formal (school) and informal (parents). Until Chinese are taught to think for themselves, to debate, discuss and develop their own ideas and beliefs, well, China and the Chinese won't change. Yes, the avalanche will continue to change the outer appearance of Chinese people and infrastructure, but the far-more-important glacier changes will still happen with, well, glacier slowness. Think decades or generation, not months and years.
Saturday, April 7, 2007
Publish what they want
A few weeks ago a Chinese friend passed my first book, "Wearing Chinese Glasses: How (not) to Go Broke in Chinese Asia," to the Taiwan office of a huge Western publisher. Surprisingly, my book was passed up to an editor, who then contacted me. Fine, except he was more interested in my next book than in the first (existing) one. All he knew of Book 2 was the title, "Wearing Western Glasses."
I wrote a very long email, basically explaining that while I did plan Book 2, and that it would be for Chinese to help them understand Western people and companies, I wanted to discuss Book 1 first, that Book 2 only existed on "scraps of paper and ideas in my head." My point was that while I was flattered with his/their interest, for cash flow reasons I wanted to settle Book 1 first. A key lesson in any small business (any business) is "sell what you have."
His answer: that he needed to push this case to a higher level, and thus he was sending the emails and book to his boss in Asia Region HQ, Singapore. Very nice I thought. Opening my email the next day I was quite surprised to find an email from the Singapore, and even more surprised to read that she wanted to know if I had any sample chapters, outline or Table of Contents for Book 2.
Excuse me? Didn't the 2-days previous email clearly say all I had for Book 2 was the aforementioned paper scraps and ideas? Did she think that I had suddenly create an outline, write a sample chapter? I wrote a quick, and a bit sarcastic, email, but had the good fortune to stop and think before sending it.
I was doing it again, deciding what customers 'should' want rather than giving them what they 'did' want. It was obvious they quite liked the idea of Book 2, so why didn't I give them that? I could see no reason, so I cleared my desk, bought a package of cigarettes and started a Book 2 outline/TOC. Fourteen hours, 15 smokes and a handful of aspirin later (oh, and a couple beer) I had an 8-page outline, probably the most detailed outline I've ever created for anything! (I normally write just from the scraps of paper.)
Now I wait. Until I hear something it's back to using Book 1 to put bums in workshop or speech seats. Writing the outline was more fun, but won't pay the bills ... unless ... an advance ... fame ... riches ... celebrity.
Ha
I wrote a very long email, basically explaining that while I did plan Book 2, and that it would be for Chinese to help them understand Western people and companies, I wanted to discuss Book 1 first, that Book 2 only existed on "scraps of paper and ideas in my head." My point was that while I was flattered with his/their interest, for cash flow reasons I wanted to settle Book 1 first. A key lesson in any small business (any business) is "sell what you have."
His answer: that he needed to push this case to a higher level, and thus he was sending the emails and book to his boss in Asia Region HQ, Singapore. Very nice I thought. Opening my email the next day I was quite surprised to find an email from the Singapore, and even more surprised to read that she wanted to know if I had any sample chapters, outline or Table of Contents for Book 2.
Excuse me? Didn't the 2-days previous email clearly say all I had for Book 2 was the aforementioned paper scraps and ideas? Did she think that I had suddenly create an outline, write a sample chapter? I wrote a quick, and a bit sarcastic, email, but had the good fortune to stop and think before sending it.
I was doing it again, deciding what customers 'should' want rather than giving them what they 'did' want. It was obvious they quite liked the idea of Book 2, so why didn't I give them that? I could see no reason, so I cleared my desk, bought a package of cigarettes and started a Book 2 outline/TOC. Fourteen hours, 15 smokes and a handful of aspirin later (oh, and a couple beer) I had an 8-page outline, probably the most detailed outline I've ever created for anything! (I normally write just from the scraps of paper.)
Now I wait. Until I hear something it's back to using Book 1 to put bums in workshop or speech seats. Writing the outline was more fun, but won't pay the bills ... unless ... an advance ... fame ... riches ... celebrity.
Ha
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
You can use chopsticks!?!
Chinese are in love with the Chineseness of all things Chinese, historic, current or future. As if only a Chinese could either understand or perfect Chinese skills. Want an example? Okay. Are you hungry?
After a long morning flow charting a business process two Chinese teammates and I were hungry. "Chinese?" they asked. "Of course."
We sit, receive the Chinese-only menus and start negotiating the meal. (You do not 'order' a meal in a Chinese restaurant; you 'discuss' it with the server and/or the manager or chef, substituting this, changing how that is prepared, requesting a dish not on the menu, back and forth until satisfied.)
Minutes later (Chinese restaurants can be fast) the food arrives. I break apart my disposable bamboo chopsticks, rub them together to eliminate any shavings or splinters, and tuck in. It looked good and smelled better. Crunching happily on a stir-fried shrimp, I reach out and grab (pinch? pick up? select?) a piece of celery.
"Oh," one Chinese meal mate exclaimed, with genuine surprise, "you can use chopsticks!"
Huh? I'd just spent the morning with him, using mostly Chinese to understand that damn business process, had read the Chinese menu and participated fully in the meal negotiation, and had spent the time waiting for the food discussing baseball with him and his coworker. And now he is surprised that I CAN USE CHOPSTICKS!?!
Of all the snappy answers that popped into my head I went conservative (they were clients after all) and answered with a simple "yes." I could have told them that I had been using chopsticks since a teen, long before crossing the Pacific. Or that most Westerners, especially those in cosmopolitan cities like Vancouver, New York or San Francisco, can use chopsticks.
You often see this cultural/logical disconnect. A classic is speaking to a Chinese shopkeeper (say) while his back is turned. No problem, the words flow back and forth ... until he turns around and sees you are not Chinese. His mental steps are clear: this person is white (non-Chinese) and only Chinese can speak Chinese, so I can't understand what he is saying. That the conversation flowed perfectly mere seconds before is forgotten, replaced with the Chinese "but you are not Chinese" ideas of cultural uniquness.
I like Chinese culture, like many of the symbols, superstitions and sayings (kill a chicken to warn the monkeys, play piano to the cow), but please, give the "only Chinese can understand" attitude a rest. I promise you that no matter where you go in the West, no matter who you eat with or in what manner, style of size restaurant, no Westerner will look at you, poised to put something in your mouth, and cry out, "Oh, you can use a knife and fork!"
Getting along together across cultures is hard enough without bringing this cultural-uniquness (superiority) baggage with you.
After a long morning flow charting a business process two Chinese teammates and I were hungry. "Chinese?" they asked. "Of course."
We sit, receive the Chinese-only menus and start negotiating the meal. (You do not 'order' a meal in a Chinese restaurant; you 'discuss' it with the server and/or the manager or chef, substituting this, changing how that is prepared, requesting a dish not on the menu, back and forth until satisfied.)
Minutes later (Chinese restaurants can be fast) the food arrives. I break apart my disposable bamboo chopsticks, rub them together to eliminate any shavings or splinters, and tuck in. It looked good and smelled better. Crunching happily on a stir-fried shrimp, I reach out and grab (pinch? pick up? select?) a piece of celery.
"Oh," one Chinese meal mate exclaimed, with genuine surprise, "you can use chopsticks!"
Huh? I'd just spent the morning with him, using mostly Chinese to understand that damn business process, had read the Chinese menu and participated fully in the meal negotiation, and had spent the time waiting for the food discussing baseball with him and his coworker. And now he is surprised that I CAN USE CHOPSTICKS!?!
Of all the snappy answers that popped into my head I went conservative (they were clients after all) and answered with a simple "yes." I could have told them that I had been using chopsticks since a teen, long before crossing the Pacific. Or that most Westerners, especially those in cosmopolitan cities like Vancouver, New York or San Francisco, can use chopsticks.
You often see this cultural/logical disconnect. A classic is speaking to a Chinese shopkeeper (say) while his back is turned. No problem, the words flow back and forth ... until he turns around and sees you are not Chinese. His mental steps are clear: this person is white (non-Chinese) and only Chinese can speak Chinese, so I can't understand what he is saying. That the conversation flowed perfectly mere seconds before is forgotten, replaced with the Chinese "but you are not Chinese" ideas of cultural uniquness.
I like Chinese culture, like many of the symbols, superstitions and sayings (kill a chicken to warn the monkeys, play piano to the cow), but please, give the "only Chinese can understand" attitude a rest. I promise you that no matter where you go in the West, no matter who you eat with or in what manner, style of size restaurant, no Westerner will look at you, poised to put something in your mouth, and cry out, "Oh, you can use a knife and fork!"
Getting along together across cultures is hard enough without bringing this cultural-uniquness (superiority) baggage with you.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
