Jump to content

In which we discuss culture


kais

Recommended Posts

To answer your question from the previous thread ( @Ernei) yes, in the USA we have to pay for university. Now there are many scholarships available, and generally the more disadvantaged you are the more you can get (for instance, native people would likely never have to pay for a university education). The problem is that the marginalized people who could benefit from these programs either don't know about them or can't access them. Many times the applications are online, and not everyone can afford the internet or a computer or knows how to use a library. So we have many resources to make uni free, but the ones who would benefit the most can't really get to them. It is a troubled system.

I speak German, so I understand where you are coming from with Sie versus du and such. We do have a sliding scale of modifiers in English, but they're much more subtle. My students might call me 'professor' or 'doctor', both of which are appropriate. They may also call me my first name if they know me, which, depending on the person, can be alright or not. What they can not do is call me 'Mrs., Ms., Miss, Mr.', etc, or even ma'am or sir. These are lower titles, and are trumped by my doctor and professor title. So using a lower title is very insulting--even more insulting than just using my first name.

In high school and such we usually just use Ms./Mr. and then the last name. First names would not usually be acceptable in preparatory school. 

 

For my contribution I want to mention that in Ontario (where I used to live), milk comes in bags and I don't think we're allowed to tell anyone why. So if you go to Ontario and you make a comment about bagged milk... watch out. We're coming for you in the night.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's what is I believe called a T/V distinction, I believe after the french form of 'tu' and 'vous'. This is actually a fairly common distinction in indo-European languages; in general the plural form does double duty as the more formal form. English actually used to have this distinction; while we now often read 'thou' as being more formal because of its archaism, in its time it was actually the informal singular. 'You' was the formal/plural form that has in this time become the sole form. If you look back at your Lord of the Rings, this is actually a big part of why the people of Minas Tirith assume Pippin must be royal in his homeland-- he's running around calling everyone 'you' in thus the most formal possible way.

Formality in English is interesting, because it's so often conflated with archaism. This does actually come up a lot with fantasy writing; because contractions are seen as informal, people will often decontract when wishing to appear formal, or they'll use perceived archaic words out of a general sense that in the 'olden days' people spoke more formally. The result generally comes out quite stilted and unnatural; part of this is the constructions actually being unnatural, but also because we're not used to hearing the language framed this way. Either way, it's generally not a good result. Social register in English is actually possible to manage, but it's fairly delicate work, because we don't really currently have a codified divide between 'formal' and 'informal' language. Mostly you have to play it by feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol - I remember milk in bags from my school days - maybe it doesn't mean the same in Ontario. I'm pretty sure it was just for ease of packing large numbers or individual milk portions, and to reduce the volume of the waste.

There is similar in French, which I speak reasonably well, the formal 'vous' versus the informal 'tu' - for the pronoun 'you'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Ernei said:

So I suddenly found myself forced to address my teacher (whom I liked and respected) in a way that I considered impolite and crude. I still sometimes think that it's odd, and I'm afraid that it's much easier to offend somebody you talk with than it is in Polish, so I'm always extra careful (hence my usual "I think", "I believe", "I would...").

Ugh, i know right? Where I live, the native language stresses the importance of respecting your elders, though its a lot more lax than it used to be. Its still hard for me to address my english speaking teachers with 'you', and I always have to add 'Teacher' at the front of a sentence lest i feel like im being disrespectful.

Thing is, my teachers probably find me using the word 'you' as completely normal, cuz no other student seems to mind using it. Its just me really. Somehow, it feels wrong to talk casually with my teachers or any of my elders in english.

Pretty sure im gonna fail my English Oral Test. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ernei said:

Hey @sirchesh, would you mind saying which language is your native? Don't feel obligated to, I'm just being curious :)

Not at all.^_^ It`s Malay. I`m from Malaysia. 

 

10 minutes ago, Ernei said:

Woo... Linguistic is fun :) Btw. anybody ever learned Japanese? Now, they do have a great emphasis on politeness and formality.

I`ve picked up a thing or two from watching anime. They have a bunch of honorifics, that`s for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ernei said:

Woo, I never met anybody from Malaysia :D Would you like to elaborate more on how your language works? I admit, I'm a bit of language nerd, I like comparing various languages to each other.

Err...well, i`m probably not the right guy to ask, not being a language nerd myself. Plus, i`m rubbish at explaining things :P Maybe if you have a specific question in mind...?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ernei said:

Btw. anybody ever learned Japanese?

Lol - I picked up a very small amount from watching the mini-series Shogun, with Richard Chamberlain, where his is a sailor washed ashore on Japan and has to learn the language. I always remember, wakarimasu (I understand) and wakarimasen (I don't understand), which I always thought would be useful to know. Also the usual 'please', 'thank you' and that old staple 'four beers and a gin-and-tonic'.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say, I'm not fluent, even conversationally (I can say 'I'm sorry, I don't speak Japanese' which I think is important to know for most languages, lol), and I haven't practiced in years, but a surprising amount of inspiration for the primary culture in my story is derived from politeness quirks in the Japanese language. Particularly, especially even, the fact that a direct 'no' is considered quite rude.

e: this crossed my tumblr dash earlier; it's a bit hard to read up near the top because tumblr is a bad website but it's an interesting discussion of these sorts of issues.

Edited by neongrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ernei said:

Btw. anybody ever learned Japanese?

Yes. I speak a number of languages, and Japanese is by far the most formal. There's that scene in Lost in Translation with Bill Murray where he is shooting the ad and the Japanese director gives like a thirty second speech which the translator turns into about three words. That sums up Japanese in a nutshell. 

Although formal words are a cake walk compared to learning tonal languages. I'd take Japanese, and it's delightful lack of tense, over a tonal language like Chinese or Thai any day. Although Thai is a very simplistic language other than the tonality part, so maybe I shouldn't list it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/23/2016 at 8:37 AM, Ernei said:

Woo, I never met anybody from Malaysia :D Would you like to elaborate more on how your language works? I admit, I'm a bit of language nerd, I like comparing various languages to each other.

Watching anime is tricky, because whereas honorifics are indeed "pickable", anime actually uses less formal language (word choice/grammar) than it's appropriate in real life. I can't tell what exactly these differences are, though, since I never went so advanced in Japanese... Our teacher just warned us against using anime-style Japanese, although she also said that Japanese people are rather understanding, and they won't pick on a foreigner because of this.


Neo Ranga had some excellent translation notes. It mentioned one scene where the two sisters are talking. The raw translation would just come out something like 'Yes, sister,' 'Of course, sister', but because Japanese addresses change depending on your social station, what the younger sister was actually doing was very sarcastic. because she was addressing her older sister with the highly formal form she'd use to address an empress, so it was really more like 'Yes, your eternal worshipfullness'.

Another research source I loved was a magazine called Mangajin. which used manga to point up aspects of Japanese language and how it's used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a better understanding of problematic tropes and race in popular literature, here is a link to a Twitter account that just reviewed a new book with all kinds of racial issues. White Twitter got offended that diverse Twitter didn't like it. White Twitter doesn't like being called racist. White Twitter needs to sit down and listen to PoC.

The book in question is this one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wowza, maybe I should read that book as a 'things not to do' reference guide.

Edit: To be fair, the first time I wanted to describe angular narrow eyes I used the term almond eyes. But, after @neongrey pointed it out I did one quick search and found several great articles on describing characteristics in racially ambiguous ways. I wanted the eye structure, but that was it.

This author probably should have known better and I would have thought a publisher would have seen issue with it. I'm surprised that made it through. 

Edited by TKWade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TKWade said:

I would have thought a publisher would have seen issue with it. I'm surprised that made it through. 

Sadly, I am not. White author + white agent + white editor + white-led publisher = problematic books. Its a perpetual problem in the publishing industry. Likely no one in that chain saw anything wrong with the book. Jumping from one privileged person to another, the issues that affect PoC would not have even registered. This is why having diversity in the field is so desperately important. 

55 minutes ago, Ernei said:

this author really sounded as if she had wanted to make it right.

...and then when she couldn't because the entire premise was a hot racial mess, she dug her heels in and told a WoC her thoughts weren't valid. Nope. That's some twisted stuff right there.

57 minutes ago, Ernei said:

for this kind of things

There are hundreds. Pick your sub-genre. You after racial issues, sexuality issues, gender issues, general diversity issues, women's issues...? I'm sure there are some for 'publishing isn't what is used to be and now it's hard for white men to get published' ones too, although I'll only link to those if we all understand that it is in jest.

1 hour ago, Ernei said:

And I understand the complaint, but she was actually stated to be Celtic

I think you're confused here. The character was whitewashed because the character is Asian and was played by a white actress. Doesn't matter what flavor of white the actress was. It's still take one of the very, very few Asian characters in mainstream cinema and handing the role to a white actress. In @neongrey's words, that vile.

1 hour ago, Ernei said:

I would really love to see a Pole in popculture

Well my books are far from pop culture, but Yor is Polish, if that helps at all. 

1 hour ago, Ernei said:

I believe there are some living in USA

One of the professors in my academic unit is from Poland. They're certainly over here.

1 hour ago, Ernei said:

But for PoC such a character apparently wouldn't be making for diverse cast, because they would be white - the same way how Celtic character didn't count as diversity. It's pretty depressing.

This is a really inflammatory statement to make in the USA, so I want to unpack it for you. I understand that Poland may not necessarily have the same race issues that the USA has, so I want to try to explain this to someone who isn't part of the culture they are critiquing.

Marvel is a US company. It makes films in the USA, generally for US audiences. As such, we as US people hold them accountable to accurately represent the diversity that makes up our country. Here in the USA, white is privilege. It doesn't matter if you are Italian-white, Irish-white, Polish-white, etc, your whiteness gives you advantages. Diversity here is not about what country you came from, it's about not whitewashing or trampling down cultures that are overlooked (the way black culture is completely dismissed) or forcibly erased (Native cultures). It's about admitting our current and past problems with non-white peoples and actively working to fix them.

White culture of all countries is celebrated in the USA. People are proud of their ethnic heritage and hold to their old ways in many families. None of these people need be afraid to discuss their culture, or their heritage, or where they came from. These are celebrated, mainstream parts of white culture in the USA.

Because of this, Celtic isn't diversity. Polish isn't diversity. Groups in the privileged white majority claiming they are underrepresented is offensive. It is offensive to groups that truly are underrepresented, or not represented at all. Arguing to have another white character of any nationality when there are already ten white characters and maybe one black OR one Asian (cause usually you don't get both at the same time) is not alright. In the USA we have too long a history of minority suppression and too many problems with racism to let Marvel, a company that influences young people's minds, get away with telling our youth that it's okay to make an Asian character white. We, as a country, are not going to move past our racial past and present with this kind of attitude. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, kaisa said:
4 hours ago, TKWade said:

I would have thought a publisher would have seen issue with it. I'm surprised that made it through. 

Sadly, I am not. White author + white agent + white editor + white-led publisher = problematic books. Its a perpetual problem in the publishing industry. Likely no one in that chain saw anything wrong with the book. Jumping from one privileged person to another, the issues that affect PoC would not have even registered. This is why having diversity in the field is so desperately important.

 
 

I get that. I still think, even with people of privilege throughout the process, they should be able to catch stuff like this. There should be systems or practices in place to catch it. If race is an obvious theme in the book it would make sense for PoC review the content before it's published. I don't know if that's the best way or not, or if there is a better way. Being an individual of the most privileged probably doesn't make me a great judge of the overall process either. It's just sad.
 

Edited by TKWade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TKWade said:

I get that. I still think, even with people of privilege throughout the process, they should be able to catch stuff like this. There should be systems or practices in place to catch it. If race is an obvious theme in the book it would make sense for PoC review the content before it's published. I don't know if that's the best way or not, or if there is a better way. Being an individual of the most privileged probably doesn't make me a great judge of the overall process either. It's just sad.

I believe authors, publishers, agents and editors asking for PoC's opinions should be an indispensable part of the review process when dealing with race themes in a book (or stories in any other medium). However, actually putting in place a system to ensure that it happens is straying a bit too close to censorship for my peace of mind.

It sucks that books with (subconscious or otherwise) racist messages still get written and published, but from my (admittedly white middle class) perspective, forbidding them from being published* would be even worse on principle.

*in the form the authors envisaged them

Edited by Eagle of the Forest Path
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Eagle of the Forest Path said:

I believe authors, publishers, agents and editors asking for PoC's opinions should be an indispensable part of the review process when dealing with race themes in a book (or stories in any other medium). However, actually putting in place a system to ensure that it happens is straying a bit too close to censorship for my peace of mind.

It sucks that books with (subconscious or otherwise) racist messages still get written and published, but from my (admittedly white middle class) perspective, forbidding them from being published* would be even worse on principle.

*in the form the authors envisaged them

I'm of a similar mind. I guess what I'm trying to say is, if what the author is trying to say is lost in the way it has been articulated then it could be caught with this type of review process. If the author meant to write it that way then, w/e. I can disagree with them vehemently and decide not to read their material.

I'm not a fan of what I consider social justice censorship because it sets a dangerous precedent with freedom of speech. That being said, if a company doesn't want to associate themselves by misrepresenting marginalized groups then they need to take proper precautions or suffer the consequential social backlash.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, TKWade said:

I'm not a fan of what I consider social justice censorship because it sets a dangerous precedent with freedom of speech. That being said, if a company doesn't want to associate themselves by misrepresenting marginalized groups then they need to take proper precautions or suffer the consequential social backlash.

I'm always baffled by what Americans consider censorship, because a commercial publisher being unwilling to provide a platform for literally any reason is hardly censorship. Does TOR censor cozy contemporary mystery writers by not publishing cozy contemporary mysteries? Is Harlequin censoring the writers of military thrillers by not publishing military thrillers? How about a publisher rejecting a story because it's hackneyed and trite? And you can say it's not the same thing, but from the corproate side, how is it different? If something is undesirable for their business model, why would they publish it?

Freedom of speech-- even by the American definition-- doesn't guarantee a platform, and it doesn't guarantee an audience, and in the modern environment, there's no shortage of platform availability even if you rule out, say, all of the big five publishers.

'We're not going to help you say that' is a huge difference, both morally and legally, from 'you can't say that', or even 'you shouldn't say it'.

Also, I'm going to ask you to consider the implications of what you're saying here. Racists don't struggle for a voice. Misogynists don't struggle for a voice. V*x D*y has his own personal publishing house and still manages to influence, for example, Hugo ballots, even if he gets shut down when it comes to the voting. You know who does  get systematically denied a voice? People of colour. Transgender and non-binary people. Et cetera.

And you get well-intentioned people who think, in the abstract, that it's bad that this happens, but when push comes to shove, they think it's more important that the people who would do harm to marginalized people retain an entrenched platform because of a nebulous concept of censorship rather than speak out-- just speak-- against the systematic denial of voice. Who would ultimately rather step up to bat for the racists (etc) than the people they harm.

Edited by neongrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ernei said:

So I think I do have a right to be angry when they try to portray Poland in the 80's and they fail just so miserably.

Oh certainly! I didn't mean to imply you shouldn't be angry that your country was misrepresented. It sort of ties in to the overarching problem of the USA trying to include diversity but not understand it enough to do it well. 

Will get back to you on blogs, @Ernei Let me get a list put together.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, neongrey said:

I'm always baffled by what Americans consider censorship, because a commercial publisher being unwilling to provide a platform for literally any reason is hardly censorship. Does TOR censor cozy contemporary mystery writers by not publishing cozy contemporary mysteries? Is Harlequin censoring the writers of military thrillers by not publishing military thrillers? How about a publisher rejecting a story because it's hackneyed and trite? And you can say it's not the same thing, but from the corproate side, how is it different? If something is undesirable for their business model, why would they publish it?

 
 

@neongrey Sorry neongrey, I think may have given the wrong impression by my poorly worded statement. Let me try to clarify.

I think you're absolutely right in this paragraph and I misspoke.

I think publishers should be publishing w/e fiction content they want to publish. I was speaking more in terms of social justice censorship through policy/intimidation in the public sector. The Continent is an awful book obviously and the publisher is going to suffer the social and economic ramifications of publishing it under their brand, that's capitalism.

What I meant by censorship doesn't really apply to the corporate world.

Here's an example poll that demonstrates the sort of ideas that I'm talking about: 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190451/college-students-oppose-restrictions-political-speech.aspx

The stat I'm looking at is  Expressing political views that are upsetting or offensive to certain groups at 27% saying such political views should be censored.

That's the type of social justice censorship that I think kills individual growth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're not following the colossal racist firestorm that I posted about earlier, you might have missed this delightful development. Someone was so upset that the Twitter user called out the racism in public instead of politely keeping her thoughts to herself that they e-mailed her editor... to complain about the unprofessional conduct of someone calling out racism publicly

Sometimes I just can't with publishing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's an awful poll question because it's so nebulous. Upsetting or offensive to certain groups-- that can mean literally anything. Hate speech is upsetting and offensive to certain groups, and I categorically, 100000% support anti-hate-speech laws. Allowing hate speech to prosper kills individual growth, it inhibits the ability of those targeted by hate speech to themselves speak freely-- or even to live safely. Hate speech is directly correllated with hate crimes, it is the language of oppressors, it is a language used to promulgate fear. On the other hand, for example, the very notion that black lives matter has also been shown, over and over again to be upsetting or offensive to certain groups.

So I mean it's a manipulative question specifically written to produce the result that it has-- ie, to paint 72% of respondents into saying 'of course they shouldn't be able to do that'. Because phrased as it is, it's very difficult to disagree with.

Flat-out, the racists (and I'm focusing on race here because of the book that started this off) have a voice. They're the voice of the status quo. They use this voice to suppress others; they're shouting over people to keep them from speaking. So I don't really have much patience for someone who would defend them over the people they work to silence. Because that's wrong. Deeply morally wrong. 

Look, I'm way too white for this to ring out personally from me. I'm never going to know what it's like to see my culture commodified but not credited, to live in fear that my next encounter with law enforcement will result in my death, to hear people say that it's more important that the people who want me dead be allowed to speak than I do. But I've got to do what I can to not perpetuate this sort of thing, as best I can, and part of that's not letting it pass when I see it.

8 minutes ago, kaisa said:

If you're not following the colossal racist firestorm that I posted about earlier, you might have missed this delightful development. Someone was so upset that the Twitter user called out the racism in public instead of politely keeping her thoughts to herself that they e-mailed her editor... to complain about the unprofessional conduct of someone calling out racism publicly

Sometimes I just can't with publishing.

Oh for... yeah, see. Yeah. Stop the world, I want to get off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, neongrey said:

Well, that's an awful poll question because it's so nebulous. Upsetting or offensive to certain groups-- that can mean literally anything. Hate speech is upsetting and offensive to certain groups, and I categorically, 100000% support anti-hate-speech laws. Allowing hate speech to prosper kills individual growth, it inhibits the ability of those targeted by hate speech to themselves speak freely-- or even to live safely. Hate speech is directly correllated with hate crimes, it is the language of oppressors, it is a language used to promulgate fear. On the other hand, for example, the very notion that black lives matter has also been shown, over and over again to be upsetting or offensive to certain groups.

1

Actually, if you look at the other questions, that was part of the poll, but it was unrelated to what I was talking about specifically.

Using slurs and other language on campus that is intentionally offensive to certain groups 69% for restriction and 31% against.

 I'm not talking about hate speech. I'm talking specifically about rational discussion of uncomfortable, upsetting, polarizing, or offensive ideas. There are small groups that do want to censor those types of discussion. That's what I was highlighting. I think we're just getting our wires crossed.

7 minutes ago, neongrey said:

But I've got to do what I can to not perpetuate this sort of thing, as best I can, and part of that's not letting it pass when I see it.

I absolutely agree with the sentiment and I don't want you to think I'm saying or promoting otherwise.

 

23 minutes ago, kaisa said:

If you're not following the colossal racist firestorm that I posted about earlier, you might have missed this delightful development. Someone was so upset that the Twitter user called out the racism in public instead of politely keeping her thoughts to herself that they e-mailed her editor... to complain about the unprofessional conduct of someone calling out racism publicly

Sometimes I just can't with publishing.

 

That's nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...