Writers and translators discussed Intercultural Dialogues in literary congress

Writers and Literary Translators’ International Congress ( WALTIC) held in Swedish Capital, Stockholm, from June 29 to July 2, 2008. The Swedish Writers’ Union (SFF) was the organizer of the event. As the union put it WALTIC’s main focus were on “three urgent global issues: Literacy, Intercultural Dialogue and Digitalization”.

“WALTIC is a global arena for collaboration, creating opinion and achieving change... The theme “Intercultural Dialogues” is the most comprehensive of the three themes of the congress; therefore we will dedicate several seminars and round table discussions to literature dealing with movement in the world”, the WALTIC organizers said before the beginning of the congress.

Translators facilitate the relationship between cultures. Translators are important people in conveying knowledge in a globalized world. One of the main topics of the congress was Translation. People in different events of the congress strive to discuss new ways for raising the status of translators. Also the ways of appropriate conveying of experiences between different languages and cultures were discussed.

Digitalization and its rule in literary production was another topic of the congress. The main concern was how writers and translators can utilize new communication technologies like internet to promote intercultural dialogue and human rights. Furthermore, with the rapid expansion of internet, new issues regarding to copyright and freedom of speech have been raised. These new issues alongside with new ways of reinforcing democracy were also discussed.

In the event, Over 600 participant writers and intellectuals from around the world decried censorship. Also President of the Swedish Writers' Union Mats Söderlund criticized the cultural policy of the Swedish Government, which he claimed is more or less blind to the crucial role of literature for social development. Nearly 400 people have signed the WALTIC resolution to increase literacy, safeguard freedom of speech and strengthen authors’ rights.

According to SFF authorities the next WALTIC congress is scheduled for 2010.

Speaking Through Weapon

Dead Man (1996)

Written and Directed By Jim Jarmusch

Cast: Johnny Depp, Gary Farmer, Lance Henriksen, Michael Wincott, Eugene Byrd, Robert Mitchum, Mili Avital, Gabriel Byrne, John Hurt, Alfred Molina

Editing by Jay Rabinowitz

Cinematography: Robby Muller

Music by Neil Young

Running Time: 121 Minutes


“Some Are Born to Endless Night” – William Blake

“Your poetry will be written with blood” – Nobody

Strange is the first thing burst into your mind after watching Jim Jarmusch’s Dead Man. An eccentric western fabulously filmed in black and white.
William Blake (Johnny Depp) is an accountant who is looking for a job in the western town of Machine. When he arrives in Machine he learned that his would-be employer, John Dickinson (Robert Mitchum) has filled the position. Dickinson is the owner of Dickinson Metal Works. He is a man with a gun always stuck in his hands and yelling at a stuffed bear most of the times.
Blake, now without job, money and hope, ends up with a former prostitute, named Thel, in bed. Later Thel’s Former lover, who happens to be Dickinson’s son, came to her house and after some skirmishes, after young Dickinson killed Thel, Blake guns down him and runs away.
Dickinson hires three Savage bounty hunters to bring Blake, dead or alive, back. Meanwhile Blake befriends an Indian named Nobody. From here to the end, the movie shows us the chasing of Blake and Nobody by three bounty hunters.
***
The movie is full of scenes of killing and shooting, still totally different with new violent movies. Jarmusch portrays savagery suffered by Indians in America, but never over-sentimentalized their depiction. Jarmusch’s mirror-like representation of the town of Machine and where Indians live, unlike his story telling, is full of details.
***
At the beginning of the Blake’s journey, where he sits in the train, a man asks him where he is going. He answers “town of Machine”. “That is the end of the line.” replies back the man. Does Jarmusch mean as machines dominates the life of human beings, their lives are coming closer to an end?
Dead Man is the story of a lost innocence. It shows how a simple man who even does not know how to use a gun, learns how to speak through a gun. That’s where bullet replaces tongue, metal replaces humans.
***
Robby Muller’s black and white cinematography is distinctive. Neil Young’s enigmatic score is pleasant and a good companion to the movie. Cast’s, specially Depp’s, performance is impressive.
***
Jarmusch is one of the most notable figures of American independent cinema. Jonathan Rosenbaum, American critic, describes him as a more citizen of the world rather than an ordinary American director. Dead Man is probably his best feature.

Media Ethics

Objectivity and being Unbiased are two characteristics usually attributed to professional journalists. Although when it comes to media the term objectivity seems to be empty. There is invention of new stories (and sometimes in the case of photojournalists, invention of photographs) and there is also false representation of different groups.
Another highly important matter is the privacy of individuals. To what extent journalist are allowed to invade privacy of celebrities and politicians? But there are other questions like should journalists pay informants let’s say in a crime story? Should newspapers publish names or pictures of criminals?
Another issue is the relationship between governments and media. Some governments try o control the flow of information through censorship or manipulations. Their tactics vary from ownership of mainstream media to intimidating and jailing journalists and shutting down the media outlets.
Another ethical issue concerned with media is the depiction of Violence and Se*x and using profane and obscene language in media outlets. Although there are some regulations and rating systems in different countries, but this function of media still makes many people anxious.
Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, in an entry for media ethics also mentions “intercultural dimensions of media ethics”. Under this title it reads “If values differ interculturally, the issue arises of the extent to which behavior should be modified in the light of the values of specific cultures”. Wikipedia mentions “Google's self-censorship in China” and “The Jyllands-Posten Prophet Muhammad cartoons controversy in Denmark, and subsequently worldwide” as two examples of controversy from the field of media ethics.
***

Here regarding to media ethics, let me outline an imaginary (but still possible) scenario. Suppose there was an earthquake in a very large scale somewhere in the world. The damage was substantially great and the human loss was unspeakable. Here the journalist wants to draw world’s attention to the scale of the disaster.
The ethical issue here lies with the refugees and quake-stricken people. Should journalist be allowed to use those disaster-stricken people as the subjects of his work?
Of course there is not any clear consensus of opinion over this question among journalists. Many believe that it is not ethical to use people who are gravely suffering the consequences of a disaster, to bring attention to the story. They argue the story of a quake is such big that does not need any emotional overdose. But others say that if those who are racked with pain does not oppose, journalists can tell their stories.

Social Distance

Emory S. Bogardus is one of the first scholars to create a scale for measuring social distance among different groups. He defined social distance as “the degree of sympathetic understanding that functions between person and person, between person and group, and between groups”.
His scale comprises of seven items ranging from total acceptance of an out-group to absolute rejection. The first one is determined with acceptance of marriage of a close relative to a member of an out-group, and the last is indicated with request of exclusion of an out-group member.
Lawrence Bobo, American sociologist observes intermarriage as the “last taboo” in race relations (Weaver, 2008).
But Bogardus scale also received some criticisms. Some believe that Bogardus Scale measure psychological distance, not social one. They argue that there are people that like each other very much, but still there is a significant social distance among them.
Another argument by Bogardus is that social distance among different social groups in the United States decreased in the course of 20th century. This argument supported by some other scholars. Recently Weaver (2008) in an essay titled “Social Distance as a Measure of Prejudice among Ethnic Groups in the United States” observed “another decade of decreasing prejudice among ethnic groups”. But he also discussed “despite strong evidence that prejudice has decreased slowly [in the United States], the findings of large and significant differences between almost all of these groups suggest that considerable ethnic prejudice still exists”.
He argues that still different ethnic groups in the US stick to significant differences among themselves. I.e. in a Bogardus scale they usually rank themselves as the most favorable in desirability of ethnic groups as neighbors and acceptability of ethnic groups as marriage partners (Weaver, 2008).
Finally he quotes Smith’s conclusion that the “recognition of the mass of prejudice, discrimination, and inequality that persists [in the US] is sobering and discouraging”.

References

Weaver, Charles N. (2008). Social Distance as a Measure of Prejudice Among Ethnic Groups in the United States. Journal of Applied Social Psychology.38(3). pp. 779-795.

Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions

“Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are a nuisance at best and often a disaster." Prof. Geert Hofstede, Emeritus Professor, Maastricht University.

Geert Hofstede, Dutch anthropologist, conducted a research in international subsidiaries of IBM between 1967 to 1973. Primarily he wanted to find out the work attitudes of international employees. He used a questioner for his survey.

He published his results in 1980 in a book that titled “cultures consequences”. Hofstede believes that world cultures differ in five dimensions. And those dimensions are power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, femininity vs. masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long- vs. short-term orientation.

Power distance, refers to the unequal distribution of power in a society. He argues that countries like Malaysia, Guatemala and Mexico are high power distance countries, i.e. older generations are respected in a traditional way.

Individualism vs. collectivism, Hofstede claims that individualistic societies like the US and Australia value personal achievement whereas in collective societies like Panama and Ecuador people in exchange of their royalty to a group receive protection.

Femininity vs. masculinity, in Hofstede view masculine cultures, like Japan and Italy, emphasize on traditional distinction between gender roles and perceptions, while feminine cultures such as Norway and Sweden, women are valued as to the same extent as men.

Uncertainty avoidance, refers to the extent people tend to avoid ambiguity and uncertainty. Hofstede says that countries like Greece and Portugal are high in uncertainty avoidance and tend to choose more formal rules and regulations while countries such as Jamaica and Singapore which are low in uncertainty avoidance are vise versa.

Finally Hostage’s fifth dimension is long/short term orientation. In an excerpt of his ideas, Hofstede in his personal homepage says: “this fifth dimension was found in a study among students in 23 countries around the world, using a questionnaire designed by Chinese scholars. Values associated with Long Term Orientation are thrift and perseverance; values associated with Short Term Orientation are respect for tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and protecting one's 'face' ”.

Hofstede theory of cultural dimensions also came under some harsh criticisms. Some argued that his methodology was not valid. Some questioned the validity of his data and others said that we can not generalize the results that extracted from a survey on a company level to a nation or culture.

But Brendan McSweeney –who is a full professor and Director of Research at the Department of Accounting, Finance and Management, University of Essex, England - was one of the scholars that challenged Hofstede theory seriously. In an article titled “Hostage’s Model of National Cultural Differences and Their Consequences: A triumph of faith - A failure of analysis”, McSweeney questioned Hostage’s assumptions. He said that IBM Company as a micro-location is not typical of a nation. Also employees of a company are not representatives of a country. Furthermore he discussed that the main dimensions of culture can not be identified by a questionnaire.

In his response to McSweeney, Hofstede accepted that nations are not the best units of studying cultures but said that researchers do not have any other choice as boundaries of different cultures can not easily be determined. He also said that he intended to measure differences between national cultures and any set of samples from national populations can provide information about such differences.

References

Callahan, Ewa (2006).Cultural similarities ad differences in the design of university web sites. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication.239-273.

Hofstede,Geert(2008).A summary of my ideas about national culture differences. Available from: http://feweb.uvt.nl/center/hofstede/index.htm retrieved May 3rd 2008.

McSweeney, B. (2002). Hostage’s model of national cultural differences and consequences: A triumph of faith - a failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55, 89–118.