Cultural Mediation

It's the start of the new academic year and I'm all geared up for my third year--no, not third--final year!  I'm also refreshed & inspired after a bit of cultural mediation of my own.  Fifteen of my friends and family members came over from the States for our wedding earlier this month, so I had the amazing experience of being their local tour guide.  It was so interesting to see my adopted home through their eyes.  They asked so many questions, and I noticed so many things for the first time--little things, like digging through the sauce packets at a pub lunch: 'What's salad cream?  Is it mayonnaise?  No, here's mayonnaise--so is it like salad dressing? What does it taste like?'  (Confession: I've never tasted it...I use Italian on my salads...)  Sometimes, being unable to answer their questions made me feel like a bad host--but to be fair, there were a lot of questions.

The experience of showing them around made me think about the host country in a way that I never had before.  I realised that before they arrived, I had my own agenda: to show them certain favorite places, introduce them to favorite foods, take them sightseeing in York and Haworth, etc.  When they arrived, they had come with (15 different) agendas of their own: shopping, photography, pub crawls, sightseeing, hiking, travelling to Ireland/Scotland/Wales, etc.  My agenda was based on my personal experiences with Yorkshire over the past 4 years, and their agenda was informed by online research, travel guides & word-of-mouth advice.  Sometimes it was frustrating to try to keep things on schedule and it felt like we were just ticking things off a list--but then I remembered that this is what tourists do.  It's what I did as a tourist when I first came here.  I was thrilled to be here, just as they were, and I wanted to see and do as much as possible.  And I think this might be a key issue in cultural mediation--the adjustment period might be made all the more difficult because of the fact that the host and visitor each have different agendas.  The host wants to introduce the exchangee to the host's vision of the host country, while the visitor wants to explore the host country on his or her own terms (especially its tourist hotspots).  Can mediation really take place in these early days, while the visitor is still giddy about sightseeing?    I think in-depth culture learning might require getting the tourism out of the visitor's system.

(As it goes, they did have an amazing time, and my main goal was just that they could see why I love it here so much--and they did.  As my mom said, very matter-of-factly, "I don't know why anyone would want to live anywhere else.")

Over the honeymoon, I reversed the US-to-UK cultural mediation theme and showed my new husband around my favorite US places in California.  We took a 10-day road trip down the coast, starting up in Napa and San Francisco, and ending up in LA.  I hadn't been back to that part of the country since 2005, when I worked at a summer camp near Santa Cruz during uni.  It was so strange to realise that it had been 7 years since I'd lived there--and almost 5 of those 7 years had been spent in England.  Sometimes I felt just as foreign as Richard did.  Other times, it was so nice to just talk to waiters/hotel staff/shop assistants without getting comments about my accent.  Now Richard had to deal with the comments I usually get--Oh, where are you from?!  It was so comfortable and relaxing to just blend in for once.  Some of the Fulbright students in that pilot study had said the same thing--that they missed the comforting familiarity of home after awhile.  I definitely understand where they're coming from on that one.

We spent our last day at Disneyland, and Richard finally understood what I'd been going on about.  It really is 'The Happiest Place on Earth'.  My first visit was when I was 4 years old, and I still remember the amazement & the magic of it all.  The staff are also the friendliest people in the world, and they really are being genuine.  At a gift shop, we bought a wedding-themed photo frame, and the cashier was genuinely thrilled for us and gave us "Just Married" badges.  When we wore them, every other staff member we saw congratulated us--and they really do mean it.  I think it's a part of American culture that some people misunderstand, because we can come off as disingenuous and overly gushy.   Richard had a hard time getting used to restaurant staff on his first trip to the States--they're thrilled to bring you a free refill, seriously!  On previous trips to Disneyland, I'd never really noticed how American it is--this time, I was struck by Main Street, U.S.A. and its rows of flags, the "Rivers of the Americas" and the Mark Twain steamboat, Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln, etc.  We ran into a lot of foreign tourists, of course, and it got me thinking about the impression Disneyland gives them of America.  It seems too good to be true, of course, and quite artificial, but there are some elements of Disneyland, like the genuine friendliness of the staff, that are accurate representations of American culture.  At the same time, the cheapest adult ticket is $80, so everybody in the place 1) has disposable income, and 2) is determined to enjoy themselves, having just spent $80+ to get into the park.  It's a strange thing, really--and I think those two factors actually capture America well.  We've got wealth (even the poorest people in the US are better off than many others in the world), and we're determined to have a good time--'the pursuit of happiness' is an inalienable right for us.  If you can understand Disneyland, you're on your way to understanding American culture.

London 2012 Reflections

Once again, I'm all apologies--this blog has been terribly neglected.  This summer I've gotten a fairly decent start on my dissertation draft, written my first journal article, and planned a wedding, so this blog has slipped off my radar again.  I've completely missed the boat on reacting to the London 2012 Olympics ceremonies...

Thoughts on the Olympics:  Overall a successful event, partially because expectations weren't very high.  I think people doubted London could compete with Beijing in terms of being 'spectacular' and overwhelming, so the organisers took a different approach.  They didn't go for shock & awe--they went for a presentation of the Best of Britain, and relied heavily on British music to represent UK culture.  I saw a mix of comments on Facebook, from foreigners and natives, and many of the positive comments came from people who had studied here and returned home.  They expressed a sense of nostalgia for Britain--perfect evidence of educational exchange impact!  For my part, I was surprisingly patriotic and sentimental about my adopted country--I got teary-eyed at the start, with the kid soloist singing 'Jerusalem'.  I loved the references to Mary Poppins and Harry Potter, and the prominent use of so many Beatles songs in both the opening & closing ceremonies.  I thought the celebration of the NHS was an interesting choice, and I wondered how Republicans back in the States reacted to that one, as they vow to repeal Obamacare (which doesn't go nearly as far as true socialized medicine, but they call him a 'socialist' anyway...sigh).

In terms of public diplomacy, I'm not sure that it was a success--but I also doubt that it was supposed to achieve much in the way of public diplomacy.  This summer seems to be all about Britain, with the focus on the Jubilee, the Euros, and Team GB.  In my 5 years here, I've never seen much in the way of patriotism--at least not in the way you see it in the States, with flags and t-shirts to express your pride--but now, Union Jack paraphernalia is everywhere.  Looking at some of the references used, I think the ceremonies may have had more meaning for Brits than for the rest of the world.  But I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.  The domestic political situation has been messy for 2 years now, the economy has been struggling for even longer--so maybe turning inwards and celebrating British culture is a way of coping.  'We might be divided by politics and money and class, but we all love the Beatles, right?  Remember the Spice Girls, they were good, too?  And British comedy is great, isn't it?  Let's get Eric Idle in to cheer us all up!'   

To sum it all up, the ceremonies changed my mind a bit about the use of the Olympics as a public diplomacy tool.  They represented Britain well, of course, but I don't think they were overly concerned with the reaction of foreign publics--at least not as self-consciously as China and Canada have been in the past two Olympics.

Lingua Franca

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17958520

The Politecnico di Milano is switching to English--much like last year's post about German universities offering courses in English.  I'm not sure how I feel about this trend.  As someone who loves foreign languages, I think it's very sad to see English become the lingua franca in business and higher ed--but obviously, as a native English speaker, I benefit personally from it.  Why did I bother taking all of those foreign language classes in high school & uni?  (p.s. this is why foreign language education in the US is suffering...some Americans don't feel there's a point anymore!)

The interesting part about this trend, though, is the element of competition that it's created for UK & US universities to continue attracting foreign students.  If they can get an English-language degree abroad where it costs less, then foreign students may stop being a 'cash cow' for US/UK universities.
I wonder how much the concept will catch on, though.  Immersion is an important part of language learning, and I can imagine it would be difficult to speak English during classes, Italian at shops and restaurants, and your native language with friends and family.  I just wonder how their language acquisition will be affected by the experience--will these international students gain fluency in 'international English' and limited Italian skills?   How will potential employers view these degrees?

And of course, there's the native English speaker audience to consider, as well. With the fees in the UK rising to £9,000 this year, and US tuition being as high as ever (a state university like University of Washington charges around £8,000 for state residents, and over £18,000 for out-of-state and international students), it's no wonder that some native English speakers are drawn to these programmes.  This article featured anecdotes from UK students who went to the continent for cheaper degrees and loved their time abroad.  For native English speakers, there's really no downside--their future employers will be impressed by a foreign degree and will assume that the student picked up a second language outside of the classroom.  It's a bit unfair, really, when you compare it to the reaction that non-native English speakers might encounter.

I'm interested in seeing where this goes--whether it's a blip or the way of the future, whether it will be limited to Europe or if it will become truly global, etc.

Jubilee Weekend

This weekend I tried Pimm's for the first time, in honour of the Diamond Jubilee.  It was ok--like a weak, slightly fizzy version of sangria--but more importantly, it's a traditional British summer drink (even if we did have to drink it indoors because the weather didn't cooperate).  We ate pub food and wore red, white & blue (might wear the same outfit for my 4th of July bbq next month...), and had a lovely time celebrating all things British.

During the Royal Wedding last year, I read a few pieces on how the Royal Wedding (and the monarchy more generally) played a role in Britain's public diplomacy.  This time around, I haven't seen much PD-related discussion about the Jubilee.  It certainly hasn't been the media event that the Royal Wedding was.  My family back in the States reported only seeing highlights and brief news clips (even on BBC America).   Compare that to last year, when my mom and other fans in the Pacific time zone woke up at 3 a.m. to catch Will & Kate's big day.  2 billion people tuned in--nearly 1 in 3 people on earth--and this year, the big screen in Leeds' Millennium Square wasn't even turned on to catch the Queen's balcony moment (pictured above).  Just in terms of its rarity, the Diamond Jubilee is a pretty big deal.  Britain hasn't had a monarch last for 60 years since Queen Victoria.  (by the way, the royal family's official website posted a great interactive 'scrapbook' recently about her Diamond Jubilee in 1897: http://www.queen-victorias-scrapbook.org/index.html).  It's a rarer than a once-in-a-lifetime event--my great-grandma lived to be 102 and missed it by a few years on either side.  So why aren't more people interested?

My guess is that the Jubilee is more significant for the Queen's subjects in the UK & Commonwealth--and even there, you have some republicans who are against the monarchy--where as the Royal Wedding had a broader appeal.  Seeing an 86-year-old celebrate the fact she's still alive (much like a birthday) isn't really as compelling as watching a beautiful young couple get married.  The Diamond Jubilee doesn't have the same 'fairytale' factor that the wedding did--but it certainly does have the same merchandising, as witnessed in a Skipton shop window:

Keep Calm and Buy More Bunting

Since its appeal is limited to the Queen's subjects (and not even all of them), the Diamond Jubilee may simply have less potential as a PD tool than the Royal Wedding did.  Foreign audiences just don't appreciate the rain-soaked flotilla on the Thames the way that British nationals do. 

(The Daily Show was particularly harsh about it (mostly harsh about CNN's coverage): The Queen Who Stares at Boats - The Daily Show)

Academic Culture and International Relations

I got home from Munich last night, and I've been doing a lot of thinking about how to sum up my very first proper conference experience.  It was the first time that I was presenting instead of organizing, like with the PhD and Phil Taylor conferences.  I was extremely nervous and didn't know quite what to expect.  It was going to be my first time in Germany, too.  Despite having a BA in European Studies and being the German II student of the year in 2004, I really didn't know that much about Germany (apart from the cliches of WWI and WWII, efficiency and order, bratwurst and beer).  The night before the conference, I walked around the city centre and saw the Rathaus, and looked around a grocery store for an hour or so (always one of my favorite things to do as a tourist).  Back in the room, I went over my presentation notes and watched 'South Park' in German.  By dubbing his voice, they've managed to make the character Butters creepy rather than adorable...

I didn't sleep well and was really nervous, but calmed down once I actually arrived at the conference.  Everyone was friendly and interested in my project--and surprised that I was American, since they had seen that I was at Leeds on the programme.  "It's usually the other way around, with Europeans going to the States."  The conference was smaller than I'd expected--just 20-some people and half of them were presenting.  After chatting with some of the other presenters about their conference experiences, though, I think a small crowd was probably the best environment for my first presentation.

They were all historians, and most of the other presentations were WWI-era.  It was great to have feedback from a non-communications perspective--I've always felt that my research doesn't fit with communications, but now I know that it doesn't quite fit with history either.  They were interested in the ICT angle that I had just briefly mentioned at the end of my talk, when discussing future research directions--the idea that the student experience is different now in the modern communications environment (the ability to communicate with friends/family back home and transmit culture learning back home more rapidly--even concurrently!), and that students' study abroad blogs could be used as texts to learn about their experiences. They sparked a lot of ideas and gave me useful advice, and I have a long list of recommended reading now.

The main thing I got from the whole experience, though, was confidence.  I often feel like my research isn't worthy of a PhD, that I need to write something amazingly original and groundbreaking in order to prove myself.  The thirst to prove myself has always been a thing for me--from a psych perspective, I was much younger than my siblings (7 yrs and 12 yrs) and I always wanted to catch-up to them.  But it also has to do with defying people's expectations.  As an American, they don't expect me to be interested in international affairs, to be living abroad--or to even hold a passport.  As a woman, they don't expect me to be doing a PhD, and they don't expect me to actually use it to work in academia (or if I do, then I must be single and childless for life).  

(the Google search, my favourite way of measuring commonly held attitudes:  worrying about how the PhD will impact one's chances of getting married is a more popular search than scholarships for women are...ugh.)

But now, after chatting with professors about my work and being treated as an equal, I'm feeling much more confident and my research seems much more PhD-worthy now.  I'm more confident in my presenting skills, too--the powerpoint was a good balance of images and minimal text, and they laughed at the right bits, which is so encouraging.  I'm feeling better about my writing, too--after months of struggling, I actually wrote some sentences that I loved in this conference paper.  I haven't had that feeling in ages, and it's reassuring.  It makes me feel like I'm doing what I'm supposed to be doing with my life, and that feeling is seriously underrated.

Kazakhstan and Borat

This morning I read about how the movie 'Borat' boosted tourism to Kazakhstan (posted on John Brown's blog) and had to share it on Facebook--my friends and I loved 'Borat', and it's a great twist in the story.

Back when the film came out in 2006, Kazakh officials were famously upset about the film's depiction of Kazakhstan as antisemitic, sexist, impoverished, technologically backwards, etc.  I actually took a Central Asian Studies class the following year and on the first day of class our professor mentioned 'Borat'...it was the only thing that most people in the room knew about Kazakhstan, for better or worse.

Now, apparently, the government is grateful that 'Borat' has sparked an interest in Kazakhstan.  Tourism has increased tenfold (the article doesn't give actual figures, but even if it meant 2 visas/year has become 20, that's a significant jump).  You can even take a 'Borat-themed tour':

"One travel company even boasts that a Borat-themed tour to Kazakhstan is 'coming soon' on its website. 'Who is the real Borat from Kazakhstan? What is Borat Sagdiyev's country really like?? There are different opinions. Join us and we will discover together!!!' the Oriental Express Central Asia company promises."

The tour is sure to disappoint fans of Borat--the real Kazakhstan is not what was portrayed in the film.  Quite literally, it wasn't--the shots of Kazakhstan were actually filmed about 3,000 miles away in Romania (villagers there were offended by the film, too).  And it really goes without saying that the other aspects of Borat's village are not going to be found in the real Kazakhstan--the backwardness, the anti-semitism, etc.  Although, why would you want to go to the 'Borat' version of Kazakhstan, with all of those negative qualities?

At any rate, I think the tenfold increase in tourism is a brilliant unintended consequence, and it just reaffirms the idea that there's no such thing as bad publicity.

The trouble with working from home...

I think I need to write at Starbucks today.