Adriane Stoner/Culture Shock

I thoroughly enjoyed Adriane Stoner’s lecture as I have many plans to travel in the future. Her lecture brought up several important aspects of the traveler’s journey. Travelers no longer have to wait long periods of time due to the accessibility of internet and of mobile technology, something I had problems with when I traveled to Canada. Because of the widespread use of this technology and social media, this interrupts with the natural process of culture shock. Culture shock forces the traveler to be uncomfortable, but through this discomfort, better adjusts to their new surroundings.

I personally believe that everyone nowadays is completely overtaken with social media and that no one knows how to hold a normal conversation anymore, so I think it is safe to say that I do think that the use of technology today interferes with culture shock. I think that people allow themselves to be brainwashed and occupied with social media too much, so much as to miss out on important events within their lives. I understand travelling and being in a new setting and being uncomfortable because I have been there. However, if you put yourself in that setting, you have to take out the most that you can and learn and grow as a person.

I can’t truly say that culture shock hit me badly when I travelled to Toronto. I was definitely in the honeymoon phase for the whole trip, which lasted a week. I was extremely excited to be out of the country, as it had been my first time and I was just ecstatic to be seeing so many cool things. I noticed many things like the fact that everyone spoke French and also there was a slower way of life than in the US. Although I had travelled outside of the country, I noticed that I had an even more culture shocking experience when I travelled just three hours south from where I lived.

I grew up in Chicago. Chicago and fast-paced life is pretty much all I know. My friend invited me down to her house for the weekend two weeks ago. She only lives three hours away, but it felt like I was on a whole different planet. She lives in a town of only five hundred people. Driving down, I was most definitely in honeymoon phase as I thought it was adorable and rustic. Then once I met the people, I was very uncomfortable. Everybody was very clique-ish and there were definitely a few stares thrown my way. They made it extremely known to me that I didn’t fit in there. My experience just proves that a traveler to a foreign place doesn’t have to go far or stay long to fully succumb to the effects of culure shock. 

Ashley C.

Prof. Bui

Professor Bui’s lecture focused on a topic that hit very close to home for her. She chose to speak about the role of the Vietnamese woman in culture and the media and what kind of meaning that image creates for people outside of Vietnam. Much of this image was created due to the Vietnamese war and that fact that many women prostituted themselves to American soldiers during that time period. This, unfortunately, is highlighted in the minds of many when Vietnam is discussed. Also, because of this fact, films about the events of the Vietnamese war prior to the 1990s only depicted Vietnamese women as prostitutes or dead bodies. However, Prof. Bui explained that Vietnamese war films after 1990 presented a new role for Vietnamese women.

Women in the new films were given a more central role to the story and not only depicted as sexual objects. Women were now given a “purer” image. Vietnamese women were given a nostalgic role, as to represent pre-war Vietnam. This change in image came at the time that relations between Vietnam and America were beginning to improve. This change in film didn’t necessarily mean a change in the minds of outsiders, as shown by Prof. Bui’s own personal experience. While living in Vietnam, Prof. Bui had been repeatedly approached by travelling American and European businessmen, believing her to be a prostitute. Apparently, the old imagery and thoughts of Vietnamese women stuck around.

Prof. Bui’s experience goes along hand-in-hand with the ideas of framing and perception previously discussed in class. Obviously, for many years, the only idea of a Vietnamese woman that had ever been conveyed to audiences within film was that of a prostitute. Filmmakers clearly had some motive in highlighting this aspect of the war. Although true, Vietnamese women were not only prostitutes. They are human beings with feelings, thoughts, hopes and dreams. Unfortunately, the constant onslaught of films portraying all Vietnamese women as prostitutes for so long almost negates any effort that the new era films tried in changing the image of the Vietnamese woman. Unfortunately, audiences used these older films as their source of information on Vietnamese women and with this information, believing it to be a source of authority, create false perceptions of the Vietnamese woman. These perceptions then get passed along to younger generations, never giving any new information a chance to question old perceptions and opinions. 

Ashley C.

Prof. Barnhurst

Before beginning his lecture, Professor Barnhurst had his audience form pairs and tell each other stories of significant events that occurred recently within their lives. They were to take notes and look for patterns within the structure of their stories. Once the exercise was over, Professor Barnhurst discussed what the students had found. Everyone had similar results. They found that their stories presented their listeners with detailed settings, such as location, people, etc. and that many of the stories told revolved around one main event. An interesting observation that was made during the exercise was that an outsider to a conversation could imply as to what the conversation being told is about just by the narrator’s physical movements. These simple observations by college students, Prof. Barnhurst explains, is what communication theorists have spent much time trying to observe and understand.

Within the lecture, he explains that there are different elements to storytelling. Most often, narrators begin their story with an abstract, or basically an introduction. This includes a description of the environment of the story being told. This is very similar to the ideas presented to us in class in regards to reading within the social sciences. The importance of reading the abstract was stressed as it holds a brief summary of the material within the much longer article. However, the idea of the physical actions a story teller makes caught my eye. It made me realize how when I find myself in a social setting that may be loud or busy, the physicality the narrator has sometimes tells the story without me even having to listen to the actual content. The ability to do so comes from the fact that we as listeners use schemas to help us interpret what the narrator is saying and that the narrator uses a combination of non-verbal messages codes and framing to get their interpretation of an event across. Just from prior knowledge, people can pick up on associated gestures and their meanings. Also, their own backgrounds and culture help even further bind certain gestures and meanings. As a listener, by only hearing certain words chosen to help frame a story by the narrator and seeing what non-verbals go along with those words, tells the story a million times better. This is because not only is the listener listening to words, but also seeing a reaction, therefore interpreting feelings of the story teller.

Never for a moment did I ever think there was structure to storytelling or that a narrator and listener played important roles within the event of telling a story. For me as a listener, it was always something that I knew I would either enjoy or dread, just from hearing the first few words. Now, everything makes sense as I now realize I would predict the story from hearing the abstract. 

Prof. McCloskey

Professor McCloskey’s lecture highlighted one very important fact; that all human communication is persuasion. People are always aiming to gain something from their use of language with others, no matter what it may be. Before watching the lecture, I had been aware that persuasion plays a role within our daily communication with others, but just not how large that role was. This idea was presented early on within the lecture when Prof. McCloskey introduced one of her main areas of study, rhetoric. She explained how rhetoric is the study of human interactions and these interactions all possess some form of persuasion.

The idea of rhetoric and persuasion is an interesting one as I think back to class and the origins of rhetoric and human relations. Long ago, citizens of ancient Greece relied upon rhetoric and persuasion to get what they wanted, as they had no modernized media as we do today. The art of persuasion was a basic skill to all the ancient people and today continues to rule all communication. This then led to another interesting point made by Prof. McCloskey. She explained how as technology advances and as we become pursuers of instant gratification, persuasion is one thing that will never fade, just evolve. It will never fall victim to the likes of instant gratification, however, we will have to find new ways of persuading others.

This statement had me thinking about how we all communicate today. Everyone I know is attached to their phones and constantly texting. In addition to this, everyone is involved in the social media scene. Almost every person I meet has a Facebook or a Twitter. It’s becoming the norm of society. Individuals without these outlets are looked upon as the outsiders. It makes me sad that it has come to this because I feel that people don’t really know what it means to communicate face-to-face anymore, or even hold a conversation over the phone. Even though this is a reality I don’t want to accept, there is one constant. People are still trying to persuade others into doing things and getting what they want. Instead of being persuaded through conversation, I’m being persuaded through text messages and through people’s Facebook statuses and tweets. Prof. McCloskey was right, even though our means of communication are changing with the times, the purpose is still to persuade.

In addition to the presence of persuasion within communication, Prof. McCloskey addresses the “Modernistic Dichotomy.” It explains the division between the sciences, which are exact and predictable, and the humanities, which are more focused on history and story-telling. With this knowledge, she points out the fact that economists and scientists like to consider themselves a part of the science world, as they can “predict” events. Prof. McCloskey clearly states that no one can truly predict anything and that they are simply persuaders. They persuade the masses into believing everything they say. I must say that I completely agree with her. How are we to know what’s true and what’s not? We aren’t scientists who dedicate our lives to learning about the earth and the creatures that inhabit it. The majority of one’s science education stops by their senior year in high school, if that. The same goes for economics. It is up to scientists and economists to persuade the people that their findings are correct. Also, because they are usually recognized as people of authority, persuasion becomes easier. I feel as if with persuasion, anything can truly be accomplished. This can be a scary idea because no one truly knows what we have been told to believe. This lecture brought to light just how strong persuasion can be and that it can be used so powerfully, but also that it can be used so carelessly.

 Ashley C.