I just shared a positive anecdote about surrender in a culture shock situation, but it can also be a liability. A traveler has to be willing to push boundaries, to grin and bear the uncomfortable situation. However, especially during the early phases of adaptation, this flexibility makes her vulnerable, too.
The subtle culture shocks – tremors, as I called them – can define a culture in contrast. You don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone. And sometimes “it” is something as minor as a healthy selection of peanut butter.
Likewise, a person can be defined in contrast – you are marked by your limits, notable for what you do not do. Let’s add a moral element to the food, and say that a vegetarian may identify as someone who does not bloody their mouth with the inhumane slaughter of animals. But what if the vegetarian’s host family slaughters a goat in celebration of her arrival? If she ate it, it would be a sign of respect to the family, and certainly reflects a willingness to push her boundaries. But at what point does she violate her own beliefs? And, if they are constantly in negotiation, how will she know?
I tended to know when the line is crossed – rampant sexism always gets my goat – but I had trouble knowing when to keep that goat as a pet, or when to slaughter it in public (I think this feeling of disgust means the metaphor is officially exhausted).
My question is: How and when did you learn to set boundaries when you were traveling? Which of your convictions – culturally transmitted, personal, religious, etc. – are nonnegotiable, and how do you react appropriately in situations where they are threatened? Where, and how, do you draw the line?
In high school, my favorite teacher, Miss Reynolds, once told our class that F. Scott Fitzgerald was famous for writing “the perfect sentence.” I knew immediately what she meant. While some authors are masters of the paragraph, and others shine most strongly with a single phrase, Fitzgerald’s majesty lay between two periods. He has the rare ability to capture an image – or a feeling – completely within these bounds of punctuation. Unlike Hemingway, Fitzgerald’s writing tends more towards prolix than terse, yet it is possible to get a real feel for his writing by reading just one of his immaculately-crafted sentences.
Spring has sprung, and with it, my wanderlust has returned. Not satisfied with the budding beauty of the Cambridge spring, I have begun to look abroad for inspiration. Itching for summer, I wonder what the air feels like in Greece, Turkey, or Morocco. I realize I’m impatient, but all the subtle greenery makes me crave is the heat of summer and the rush of hot air.
We’ve entered an era where much of our correspondence occurs over e-mail and cellphones; we are not without words, but our words are generally without object. The things we write to one and other are disembodied, floating on screens, written with light rather than ink. While the modern methods of communication have allowed for some wonderful things – our thoughts have never been able to travel so freely, and so quickly, across oceans and continents – I still occasionally mourn the loss of the most old-fashioned form of transmission: the letter.
ad change the very way we read? It certainly seems possible. 