Local exposure: 3 Unclese interactions

Every day the canteen is filled with Unclese robots, their noses buried in textbooks, muttering lines in foreign languages.

OK the most hilarious thing just happened to me.

A Unclese student stopped me on the street and said, “tong xue, tu shu guan zai nar?” (“fellow student, where is the library?”) Hilarious because it’s a dialogue STRAIGHT OUT OF MY TEXT BOOK. Miraculously I managed to string together an almost perfect answer, which just goes to show maybe these classes are paying off after all.

Talking of run-ins with locals, today I had lunch with a Brotheringer girl who had responded to my poster! (Nice segue, right?) Apparently I was the first foreigner she had EVER had a meal with. And as I come from a city filled with foreigners, I found this a little incredible.

We discussed a little about the separation between us foreigners and them locals. Was it condescension on the side of the foreigners? Was it only natural that people stick to their own kind? Was it possible for foreigners to be friends with locals, or was there too big a cultural divide?

According to her, the question of whether Uncle is becoming “Westernised” is very prevalent today among the Unclese people. I put forward my theory, that much of what we call “Westernisation” is actually just “Modernisation.”

Perhaps it’s only natural that once a country fulfills its basic needs, and becomes more and more rich, the people suddenly find they don’t have to be constantly working to the bone. They have more than enough to cover healthcare, retirement, insurance and buying a house, so instead of scrimping and saving every penny, they can (so-called) “enjoy life”. They become interested in satisfying/ plumping up the ego: buying status items like nice clothes, gadgets, and cars, go to splashy restaurants and bars, and define/ express/ differentiate themselves through pop culture and subcultures.

Sure, maybe that process happened in the West first – but I don’t think it’s a singularly Western response, or that the West has a monopoly over such things. I think it’s probably a Universal response (one best enunciated in Maslow’s Heirachy of Needs) to transitioning from a developing country to a developed one.

Or maybe I’m wrong. I need to learn more.

Talking of which (again, another perfect segue), this afternoon a friend from class told me of this lecture a visiting American professor was holding called, “Identity Theories, Intercultural Communication, and the Election of Barack Obama.” It’s almost like the gods heard my prayers (see my previous post.) It was a talk for Unclese students, but a few of us decided to gatecrash it, especially considering it was going to be in English.

In ironic contrast to this slide, the lecturer has spent the last 8 years in the country but cannot speak Motherin.

And I really enjoyed it. It could have come straight out of a subject from my university degree (in fact I bet Comms. at UTS has a talk titled just that.) The lecturer, Michael Prosser, touched briefly in his introduction on the idea of a ‘Universal Audience’ and ‘Global Village’ – constituted of rational men and women, who know how to think critically, and who work towards a “multiculturality of purpose”.

More and more, I’m thinking there are certain aspects of globalisation which I appreciate. Does global citizenry not stand in opposition to tribalism/ nationalism? Does it not unite us, erase our differences, and allow us to see truth over indulging in comforting but ultimately destructive delusions?

At the end of the lecture, a Unclese student stood up and said defiantly, “I don’t think Obama deserved the Nobel Prize. I think if anyone deserves it it’s our President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao.” A tiny titter went through the room – I can only assume expressing amusement, not necessarily support.

I don’t want to cast this as your typical Unclese student – but at the same time, you’re more likely to find that level of nationalistic fever (tinged with definite defensiveness) here there many other countries!