| This
is my second semester at Eastern and the eighth
month in America, and I’ve been challenged
with the constant doubts upon what I used to hold
true --- things that I used to take for granted.
For example, writing has become a struggling for
me now in the sense that I make conscious
efforts, (which can be painfully explicit at
times), to adapt to American writing styles,
including accepting new definitions of the
function, form and audience of writing. However,
I must say that all these changes and adaptations
are worthwhile, since not only have I been
rendered insights into a new culture through
fresh perspectives, but I am able to have a
better chance to understand my own writing style,
and discover the micro-culture that I represent.
With this bicultural experience, now it’s
easier for me to extend this understanding to
other cultures, which assists me in recognizing,
accepting and appreciating their cultural
differences. When I was a
freshman at college, a woman from Britain taught
us writing class, which is basically like the
English 1001 here. Frankly speaking, I
didn’t like her teaching style then. As I
recall, she would ask a whole bunch of
"nonsense" questions, such as "why
do you think so?" "Why do you use this
word here?" "What is your purpose in
this sentence" so on and so forth. (I just
realize how I ask the same questions now to
prompt tutees in the Writing Center.) But
at that time, I reject the way of thinking she
suggested to us in the writing process. I even
wrote in my journal telling her that she treated
us like primary school pupils. Not only me, some
other students also share the same feeling: we
know how to write, so please teach us some
profound western classics, and don’t waste
time on such minor details like paragraphing,
opening sentence, and clarifying the meaning of
pronoun "it" each time we use.
Today, looking back on that, I regret missing the
chance of expressing my gratitude to this
teacher. She did her way to enable us to be aware
of the variation between two different styles of
writing, behind which hide the two fundamentally
different cultures, though in a way that is not
likely to be appreciated in the first place. It
probably works well in a western classroom, but
some adaptations to the local culture have to be
made on her part as well. However, knowing the
truth that I could have learned more from her but
didn’t, I should examine myself.
Subconsciously, I thought then that the writing
style we adopt, if there was any, is the right
one. I didn’t realize that there are
different requirements and standards set for
writers outside of my place and my culture. What
we were taught in the Chinese writing classes
before entering college is The Norm. And with
this idea deep-rooted in my mind, I failed to
incorporate a different system of knowledge when
it was offered.
In
his book Toward Multiculturalism, Jaimes S.
Wurzel define such built-in barriers in accepting
the society as multicultural as
"ethnocentrism". According to Wurzel,
ethnocentrism is "the technical term for the
world view which hold that one’s group lies
at the center of everything, and that all other
groups are scaled and rated with reference to
one’s own" (Wurzel 6). (By the way, the
name of China in Chinese literally means the
"central kingdom") Ethnocentrism is
inevitable since nobody can escape from his own
cultural experience. However, it’s
dangerous. Opposite to the tolerant multiculturalism,
ethnocentrism discourages communication and thus
foster cultural conflicts. In my case, it was
shown as an unwillingness to change my writing
style which resulted an unnatural way of
writing---the hybrid of English words and Chinese
writing style.
In
private, I consider myself an active writer, I
keep journals and enjoy writing. When I was in
high school, I did quite well writing in Chinese.
My compositions were read in the class as model
writing --- quite an unforgettable compliment.
However, the conflict between what I want to say
and how I am supposed to say started manifest
itself when I entered college as an English
major, and it has been intensified as I go
further in my graduate study. Frequently, as a
non-native English writer, I am not sure of the
way I write. Sometimes I assume the voice of a
critic, sometimes a theorist, (a green one, I
know), with none of whose vocabulary, languages
and styles I feel naturally comfortable, nor
could I fit in well. As for the writing style, I
consciously follow the American standard, digging
into every intelligent corner of my skull to come
up with a thesis statement at the very beginning
instead of in the end, or to take side in a
strenuously conceived argument. I find it
particularly hard to have an argument, partly
because it involves too many underlying different
assumptions between the two cultures. Taking a
multicultural approach, I have a better chance to
figure out what on earth influenced my writing.
While on the one hand, in our class, we are
concerned with the philosophical role of writing
as a means capable of searching truth; on the
other hand, what I was instilled from my culture
is the magnified pragmatic function of writing,
with the practical success as its major
measurement. As a Chinese saying goes,
"white cat, black cat, the one who catches
mouse is the good cat". In my culture, I had
also been expected to write anything that is
didactic, that teaches people good from wrong,
and often times in the absolute sense. I was not
reminded of paying attention to the concept of
audience, since I presume that my audience would
understand what I write as I do. Regarding this
issue, I believe different perceptions of
audience may achieve different ends. As the
western conception of audience as being passively
persuaded, it is the writer’s task and
responsibility to narrate thoroughly and develop
his argument logically. Whereas in Chinese
culture, where a writer treats his audience as
intellectual and emotional beings, their
comprehension ability is supposedly as high as
the writer’s. As a result, the writer
won’t bother to give his readers every clue
to let them follow his reasoning. It is the
readers’ responsibility to figure out the
meaning of writing.
All
of these phenomenon reflect cultural values. On
the other hand, it’s the same that when I
came to America, I was amazed at the emphasis
attached to writers’ freedom and right in
writing, not to mention the completely strange
idea of violence in the classroom imposed by
teachers on student writers. The writer’s
individuality is given first priority. What I
used to be informed was that teacher teaches
students norms, formulas, styles, and principles
to follow. And I believe that no Chinese critics
would entitle such teaching method as violence,
but rather emulation of the good model, which to
a certain extent, reveals the Chinese value of
respecting the superior in age and in position.
As the authors of Multicultural Literacy Barbara
J. Diamond and Margaret A. Moore point out,
the
writing process, which involves thinking,
feeling, and communication is a dynamic,
complex process. …that writing is a
discovery process as writers expand and
master inner speech. While writers are
actively constructing meaning, they use their
knowledge and experiences to generate ideas
in order to create meaning. As they transform
their experiences and knowledge into written
language, they make judgements about
idealized readers’ background; they make
decisions about ways to express their ideas
so that readers think or act in a certain
fashion. (Diamond and Moore 133)
We
live in a multicultural world. Different
worldviews often lead us to different perceptions
of the reality. Adopting a multicultural point of
view will help us realize that everyone has
his/her own cognition and interpretation of their
own culture. Bearing that in mind, we may
understand that there is no universally valid way
of perceiving and thinking. Through a
multicultural point of view, we are also
encouraged to learn more about ourselves, as we
try to understand the culture of others. This can
let us "learn to tolerate the uncertainty of
knowledge… for convictions and certainties
are too often the concomitants of ignorance"
(Wurzel 8).
Works Cited
Wurzel, S. Jaimes. Toward
Multiculturalism: A Reader in Multicultural
Education. Yartmouth: Intercultural, 1988.
Diamond,
J. Barbara, and Moore, A. Margaret. Multicultural
Literacy: Mirroring the Reallity of the Classroom.
White Plains, NY: Longman, 1995.
|
