"Hey, that's Jesus up there!"

Upon entering school last week, I was greeted by a display of 5 murals by Mexican-American artist, Hector Duarte, exhibited in one of the major stairwells.

Beyond the sheer size of these murals, their image content struck me as well. The largest mural, placed in the center of the stairwell, is a picture of Jesus coming out of a pool of water and headed towards what appears to be the Chicago skyline. The name of the mural is Cristo Migrante.

Initially, I was surprised by the schools decision to put up a picture of Jesus in school, much less one that was nearly 8 feet tall. I was confused, yet appreciative of the schools initiative to bring in a potentially controversial piece of art. In my opinion, a good education challenges you and forces you to question society and yourself.

That night, as I aimlessly scrolled down my Facebook news feed, I stumbled across an interesting status post. It read –
There’s a big Jesus painting over 30ft high in our school. Every heard of separation of church and state?

What ensued for the rest of the night was a cyber-battle consisting of nearly 200 comments from different people’s interpretations on the true meaning of Duarte’s painting. Some argued that Duarte’s painting infringed on personal religious taste, while others reasoned that Huarte’s painting was hardly about religion and rather about the immigrant struggle. For the next few hours phrases like "separation of church and state” and "religious majority" showed up a lot, but soon the comments fizzled out.

However, by the end of it I was still left wondering, what cultural implications does the “separation of church and state” argument have? It seems that the first amendment and the clause of religion is brought up repeatedly in politics and in schools, but at what point does practicing one’s own religion begin to feel like religious intrusion to someone else? Should Duarte's painting be taken as art or does it preach religion?


Readers, I leave it up to you to answer this question.

Restricting the Usage of Language

It’s always surprised me how governments attempt to censor what people say. How can you censor something that is so universal, so common? I mean it’s language! Unless you take my voice-box out or put a padlock over my mouth, I am free to say whatever I like. So, how is it that governments censor what people say? I actually find it quite comical; in reality the government has very little power in restraining language. It seems to me that they are just trying to squeeze out some droplets of authority.

Besides the sheer impossibility of censoring every single word that comes out of every person’s mouth, some governments are still trying to make the feat.

For example, in Pakistan, the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority, has banned certain words from appearing in text messages. The PTA feels that it is preventing “obnoxious communication”; however, among the 1,600 words outlawed are words as simple as ‘tongue’. To view the list of outlawed texting words, click here (some explicit language).

Charles M. Madigan, of the Chicago Tribune, said, “I think it's hilarious that the authorities in Pakistan believe they can restrain the use of language, even using technology to block messages that contain these words”. Frankly, I agree.

In addition, China has begun to censor web material. Chinese authorities feel that as political tensions rise, they want to control what their citizens read and discuss online. It might seem that tech-savvy computer-ites would find ways around these restrictions, but an intricate mix of technology and plain-old intimidation has ensured that citizens remain oppressed.

But what about language censorship in the good ol’ red, white, and blue? Surprisingly,even here, we censor. While our government hasn't taken to extreme measures like China and Pakistan has, if you’ve ever seen a show on MTV you’ll know that many words are bleeped out. In comedian, George Carlin’s speech on the Seven Dirty Words not allowed on television, he explains why television programs bleep certain words out. While there clearly is a difference between bleeping out some words because they are distasteful and completely stopping search engines if the word ‘democracy revolution’ is typed in, they both are still forms of censorship. Mind you, too, that in America, citizens stand firmly to their right to freedom of speech, so if the government tried to pull a stunt like Pakistan or China, I’m sure there would be immense backlash.

In my opinion, language is a beauty and art and culture. Trying to limit that can only lead to cultural deterioration.

Culture as a Metaphor

“A world ends when its metaphor has died” – Archibald MacLeish

Perhaps MacLeish is right; when we lose our metaphors, we lose our stories, our cultural identity, our heritage, our past, and our ties to the land. When we lose our culture, what do we have left? We no longer have ways of communicating ourselves to the rest of the world. As Jinal Shah puts it in her blog, Constant Beta, “[M]etaphors allow us to dip into our values, histories and mythologies to communicate the value of a brand and connect to our audience”.

A few weeks ago in my English class, we talked about the importance of metaphors, and the role they play in culture. The article, “Metaphors We Live by” by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson explains how metaphors are more than just embedded in language - “Metaphor is typically viewed as characteristic of language alone, a matter of words rather than thought or action…We have found, on the contrary, that metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature”. Lakoff and Johnson suggest that metaphors influence our everyday functioning.

But why the need for metaphors? Can’t we just explain things in literal terms? I thought about this, and realized how difficult it is to think non-metaphorically. Lakoff and Johnson use the example of an argument as war, to show just how often we use metaphors. This metaphor is revealed in a variety of expressions:

- I’ve never won an argument with him
- They just shot down all of my inputs.
- They’ll wipe you out if they think your strategy is flawed.
- They attacked every weak point I had in my speech.

We don’t just talk about arguments like this; the very things we do in an argument are controlled by the concept of war. The concept of an argument, the activity of an argument, and the language of an argument revolve around the war metaphor.

Metaphors can also be used to understand frame of minds and perspectives. Consider the war in Iraq. Americans understand the war from a western-ideology standpoint that emphasizes political, military and economic interest. On the other hand, Muslims understand the war from a religious and national pride position. The employment of different metaphors in understanding the war could be the reason why neither side understands the other. In this article, by Zoltan Kovecses, he states, “the application of very different frames to the same situation results in incompatible evaluations and actions”.

In addition, metaphors reflect a nation’s values and ethics. We use metaphors to reflect our ideals. This article states, “the variations in solutions to creating a metaphor for culture are related to the complexity of the concept”. The way we communicate ourselves to the larger world audience is done by metaphor. The metaphor that is used often reflects these underlying values of the culture. As Lily I-wen Su puts it, in this article, “Recent studies on metaphor have proved it to be an important language device that reflects the cognitive source of human thinking. These experientialists claimed that metaphors in our languages mirror our ordinary conceptual system”.

Metaphors play a large role in intercultural communication, and help us and reveal ourselves to the international melting pot we know as the world.

Peace through Music: A profile of Daniel Barenboim

"Music is the universal language of mankind" ~Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Daniel Barenboim, an Israeli-Palestinian pianist and conductor, has taken Longfellow's words as a way of fostering peace in the Middle East. He has served as a music director in many orchestras and has made numerous recordings. In this article he said, “…I believe that the destinies of the Israeli people and the Palestinian people are inextricably linked," Barenboim said. "We are blessed - or cursed - to live with each other. And I prefer the first."

Barenboim has conducted countless concerts in the West Bank, and in 2007, he was scheduled to play a baroque concert in war-stricken Gaza. Although he received permission from Israeli authorities, he was denied entrance into Gaza at the border, and was told he needed individual permission to enter. A year later, after performing in Ramallah, Barenboim accepted honorary Palestinian citizenship, making him the first Jewish-Israeli citizen to be granted Palestinian citizenship. He hoped his acceptance of citizenship would serve as a model for peace.

Needless to say, Barenboim is revered by many, but loathed by others. I can’t help but think he’s one of the bravest musicians of all time.

After receiving Palestinian citizenship, Barenboim returned to Gaza. According to this post, he gave a speech to the audience about his dual-citizenship, saying “So you see it is possible to be both." He described the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as one "of two peoples who are convinced they have the right to live in the same little piece of land. Therefore, our destinies are linked”.

Barenboim also recently traveled to Imjingak near Korea’s Demilitarized Zone on the country’s Independence Day. In this video, he said he hoped his efforts would encourage “understanding, patience, courage and curiosity to listen to one another”.

When so many diplomats debate the same topics over and over again around a big oval table, Barenboim has been able to take something that we all understand -music- to promote peace. He has chosen to show the common humanity of all people, even if they are in a war, and remind them of the possibilities if peace is achieved.

The medium that Barenboim has choose is a universal language, and while some still prefer negotiation over noisy cell-phone chatter or fighting over laws and bills, Barenboim remains confident of music’s ability to act as a unifying force. It’s inspiring to see people using different methods of translating reconciliation, whether that is through music or art or humor. When we can find things that we all mutually agree on and enjoy, the idea of peace becomes less distant.

Sure the idea of ‘world peace’ is far-reaching, and although Barenboim’s music isn’t going to stop the wars or end the violence, he represents the voices who want to forge the bridges, not burn them.

Linkage Between Diversity and Business Practices

I read a compelling article describing different ways a business can adapt itself to accommodate marketplace diversity (read the article here). Part of the reason why I was so intrigued was because I just finished one of my college essays, where I talked about the global nature of today’s business world. The business world is no longer local – it’s international. Thanks to technology, border lines cease to exist.

Another interesting part of the article was its focus on adapting a business to fit the new international theme. In the past, I saw making a few adjustments to a business as to reach more foreign investors reasonable, but this post took that to the extreme. It suggested completely re-vamping the traditional styles and structure of business companies, as to accommodate the quickening pace of the global society.

Another article, in USA Today, says that change for business to adapt to the global world is a must. “Today, though, as more multinationals race into the global economy, they're tailoring their diversity policies and practices to the new cultural and business order to a greater degree than ever before.”

Both of these articles made me ask the question, “What is cultural adaptation?” Beyond the business side, do we adapt ourselves, in everyday life, to better accommodate the new global world? My answer to this is yes. I belong to a program called the Academy at my high school, which was founded on fostering a global education and an understanding of the ever-widening global community. In our everyday studies, we incorporate the lessons from other cultures. I think it's important to recognize and understand that the world today is a mix of hundreds of different cultures.

For decades, philanthropists have suggested models on how the world community shifts and changes. One philosopher, Francis Fukuyama has foreseen the world moving towards one international community. In this article, Fukuyama explains his theory of the “homogenization of human culture”. This theory describes the world culture as moving towards one standardized state.

It’s interesting – the measures businesses are taking to accommodate this growing global society. I’m thinking of how I’ve tailored my own life to develop cross-border networking. As Fukuyama said, “it is culture that drives economics”. Perhaps Fukayama would make the best business-man of all.

3 Ways to Immerse Yourself in a Foreign Culture

1.) Become
Don’t hold onto pre-conceived notions, stereotypes, biases, labels or anything else about a culture. Chances are those assumptions aren’t true, and they prevent you from really plunging into the culture. For example, don’t go to France expecting everyone to be snobby and smelly – I’ve been there, it’s not true. The other day, my history teacher brought up one of his previous students, Connor, who had recently visited Vietnam. He talked about Connor’s unique approach to learning and his method of foreign immersion. He had simply gone to Vietnam and became Vietnamese. He didn’t go there as an American traveling to Vietnam, he went there as a blank slate, and returned with a Vietnamese identity. Follow Connor’s take on learning and you’ll find yourself experiencing the real culture, not just the touristic one. Break through the status barrier.

2.)Learn the Language
The saying “lost in translation” really holds some meaning here. In many culture’s, the meaning of one word often doesn’t translate perfectly into another language. Part of the beauty of the language is lost in translation, too - the way certain vowels sound, the rhythm of the words, how phrases roll of the tongue. It’s what I like to call phrase-ology. Can you imagine translating Shakespeare’s “to be or not to be” into Spanish? It’d be “ser o no ser”. It just doesn’t give the same effect, so let’s stick with English on that one. Thus, if you really want to immerse yourself into the linguistic aspect of a culture, learn the language.

3.) Go There
You can flip through pictures and read travel guides all you want, but it’s not nearly the same as actually going there and seeing it for yourself. There’s a certain something that surrounds you when you go to that foreign place. You can try to duct tape pictures all around your bedroom, but I know (I tried to do this with Disney World photos when I was five) that it’s just not the same thing. A lot of the times, it’s connecting with the land and the people that draw you closer to the culture- two things you can’t get from reading books or looking at photos. So duct tape all you want, but you have to go there to get the real thing.

The only way to really see another culture is to immerse yourself in it. Otherwise, the similarities and differences you find between your own culture and another one may just be superficial.

Amanda Knox – United States’ vs. Italy’s reaction

Plastered all over the media this week was the Amanda Knox case outcome. For those of you who don’t know about the case…

In 2007, Amanda Knox was charged with murdering her roommate, Meredith Kercher, in Italy during a study-abroad program. Knox, as well as her ex-boyfriend Rafaelle Sollecito, were convicted in the Italian courts and sentenced to over 25 years in jail. However, their cases were up for retrial this month, and after a highly media-tized hearing, Knox’s conviction was reversed and she added immediately returned to the US.

What makes this case different is the polar opposite reactions of the US and of Italy.

The United States has portrayed Knox as a young American teen, who was caught in a web of confusing testimonials and unreliable evidence that loosely found that she committed murder. She’s been portrayed as a victim and countless interviews from her family sets the response tone as sympathetic and apologetic. Its articles like this that put Knox in that light. US newspapers and magazines have harnessed onto the cliché idea of a young girl separated from her family. Conversely, the Italian response to the Knox case has been anything but positive, especially after she was set free.

American media portrayed Knox as the victim of the unkempt Italian judicial system

On the other hand, Italy sees Knox as a sex-crazed demon who brutally murdered her roommate in an act of rage. How Italian’s really saw Knox was most prevalent when she was released from her re-trial, after being found not-guilty. After she was freed, Italians and news crews stood outside the court room shouting “Vergogna! Vergogna!” (“Shame! Shame!”). Many Italian newspapers have equated Knox to satan.

Italian Media represented Knox as an outspoken, satanist murderer

One thing I find interesting is the role the media has played in the case. It’s all up to the media on how Knox is portrayed and it largely influences how the general public reacts. The US media set the case in one light, while the Italian one did in another.

Conversely, the central issue here may not be the legal case; it’s the difference in cultural priorities and ethics. “In the end, it was the trial of a different culture, a clash of cultures more than a legal case,” said Vittorio Zucconi in La Repubblica. The Knox case represented a larger problem; a clash between Italy and the US. A New York Times article said how Italian's were questioning how Americans perceived them and their justice system. In addition, on an Italian radio station, Il Sole 24 Ore Radio, callers complained how the US media was portraying Italy’s sentencing of Knox in such a harsh negative light, especially since the US has the death penalty.
The Knox case is a prime example of a cultural clash – two cultures seeing the same event through two completely different lenses. Whether these lenses are media-driven, or driven by some other factor, the way in which these two cultures see the case, and see one another has caused a rift.

Why you're here

I used to look at the world, and at history, as a progression towards one ultimate showdown; one battle royal that would decide the fate of the world. Perhaps I had played one-too many apocalyptical video games or perhaps I thought societal differences kept people from ever working together.

However, at the start of high school, I revisited my relatively negative view of human interactions. I discovered that among conflicts were also compromises and cooperation and collaboration. That’s why I’ve decided to write this blog on the ways different societies come together and the ways they grow apart. I’m taking the idea of the ‘melting pot’ and analyzing the interactions between cultures while they are per-say ‘mixing’.

I’d like to formally introduce myself to you now. I’m Victoria, and a senior in high school. I’ve grown up in a relatively sheltered, affluent community and I live with my twin brother and single mom. I have a I’ve always been interested in international relations and the effects communities on each other, which is one of the reasons I’m writing this blog. After high school I hope to study international business in college.

My interest in international relations really began after I participated in a two-week inter-faith summer camp called Hands of Peace. During the program, 15 kids from Israel and 15 kids from Palestine are brought to the United States, where they discuss, with American teens, the conflict back at home. The moment that stands out best in my mind was the last day of the program, when we sat down with our facilitator and he told us to create a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. At first his request was met with laughs, honestly, how could he want us, a group of teenagers, to come up with a solution that had been debated for nearly 200 years? After realizing he wasn’t kidding, we began the process. Torn pieces of paper, yelling, crying, frustration, confusion, and passion ensued for the next 3 hours, but by the end we had a tangible solution on the board. Being together for 2 weeks, nearly 24 hours every day, the participants in Hands of Peace had truly become a family. We had been able to put our differences aside and it was at this moment I saw how human understanding and communication could bring peace and resolution.

I hope this blog serves you, my readers, as well. My blog lens is really about the ways different societies see the same event, comparing and contrasting their opinions and the actions that arise from that. In an age of technology, the world moves closer and closer together every day, and the world is prone to more cultural interaction. I’ll be looking at these interactions, the way in which people choose to communicate their opinions and the implications of them. I hope you gain a perspective that you might not be able to gain from just watching the news or reading a magazine. Whether you want to learn about someone else’s side or learn more about your own, here is the place to be.

The world’s mixing out there, let’s go see it.