ELA 5/10

“Stumbling Blocks in Intercultural Communication” by LaRay M.Barna was an article that I enjoyed reading very much. In fact, I found it more intriguing than the Meiland article, probably because it touched on matters that I have been contemplating for a long time. Although I lived in Canada until I was five, I do not clearly remember anything, so I experienced quite a cultural shock when I went for the second time when I was 10. There was one American student in the article who said that his Peruvian friend was offended when he did not side with his Peruvian friend. While I was an elementary student in Japan, I always agreed or sided with my friends because I thought it was rude to disagree with them, even if I secretly did not agree with them. I simply thought that that was polite. However, when I came to Canada I was surprised to find that my closest friends would outright disagree with my opinion and confidently state reasons why they do not agree with me. At first, I was hurt and considered them heartless but for them, I soon realized that it is normal to freely express their own opinions. Seen from their perspectives, I was probably a hypocrite who sided with anyone whether I agreed with the person or not. I personally think that to do everything that Barna mentions in the conclusion is not easy at all, and only achievable if done mutually. For example, if an American tries to understand the cultural differences between U.S. and Japan, but the Japanese person defensively detaches him/herself from American culture, the intercultural communication will not work out smoothly. I say this because where I lived, I sometimes did not feel the mutual cooperation. I lived in a place called Nova Scotia (so far in ICU, I haven’t found anyone who knows this place!) which was in the suburbs, and I always felt that it was my duty to assimilate into the culture instead of both sides trying to understand each other. Of course, there were some people who tried to understand my culture; however, I felt that most expected immigrants to adjust, which made intercultural communication difficult. When I felt that I could not quite adjust to their culture, I felt as if I was not trying hard enough to be like the native Canadians. Because of this, I had always believed that intercultural communication meant immigrants assimilating into the host country, so Barna’s article gave me a whole new perspective on the concept of intercultural communication.

Rab showed us four videos, and watching “How to eat at a Sushi bar” and “Wayne Rooney vs Dirty Sanchez” made me clearly see that the level of understanding humour depends on your cultural background. I found the Sushi bar one comical because it was an “inside joke” about Japanese culture; however, the one about kicking soccer balls at people’s butts or faces was just weird to me. After that, we watched the video of the Japanese endurance game show. There are still shows similar to that where comedians are forced to do insane things. For example, I saw one show where a comedian had to strip down to his underwear in the North Pole and was told to stand in the cold, which seemed a little ridiculous to me. I think the difference between the endurance game show and the present-day shows is that comedians today are made to do these ridiculous things, and the viewers are supposed to find the whining and suffering of comedians funny while before, it was purely the immature acts and their ridiculous enthusiasm that were funny. Considering that fashion changes through time, I suppose it is quite normal that the sense of humour changes through time as well.