Having read through the text, it has already given us a wide scope of examples about the interaction between people of the different countries. Since we already have a comprehensive understanding about communication between various nationalities, I will be touching on something different in my blog this time.
One of the characteristic of culture is that they are dynamic in nature. As time goes by, the changes in the economy and technology affects the living condition and behaviors of human kind. Clearly, we often hear youngest mention that they have a ‘generation gap’ between themselves and their elders. The reason behind this gap is to be explained by the different culture we live in. Here, we will explore deeper into two cultures that evolves with time; the modernism and the postmodernism cultures.
The whole idea of modernism and postmodernism revolves around the complexities of literature, philosophy, art, history, architect, music, identity and culture. Here in this post, I will limit the scope of discussion by only commenting on the culture, the way of living, as well as the mindset that governs the thought of the different generations.
Through the application of communication concepts to the two cultures, the modernist culture (where most our parents belong to) is relatively more collectivist while the postmodernist is more individualistic in nature. It could be traced back to our parents’ living conditions in the past. The most visible example is by examining the fact that they live in ‘kampongs’ where the homes of their parents, aunts and uncles, nephew and nieces are of walking distance. Naturally, as they grow up in that environment of high interdependence, they value the fulfillment of others’ needs in order to live in harmony. Different from the postmodernist culture, we live in a nuclear family style where we are often separated miles apart from our relatives. Adapting to this living condition, we start to believe that an individual is the most important social unit where one act on each owns interest. As we develop low dependency, we become less concerned for the needs and feelings of the people around us.
As an individual, we are increasingly capable of striving for advancement when we value speed and accuracy. Undeniably, this efficiency brings our country and economy to greater heights. However, as we enjoy the benefits, being individualistic also brings drawbacks to our society. When we are only concerned about fulfilling the task laid in front of us and the results we would achieve as an individual, we may neglect the fragility of others’ feelings.
Secondly, the modernist culture is high context in which non verbal cues are often interpreted and less importance is placed upon spoken messages. On the other hand, postmodernist culture is relatively low context in nature where we make sense of the context through spoken languages. Since modernist value face-saving and modesty, they are more sensitive to the facial expression and kinesics of the communicator. Belonging to the high context culture, our parent’s value politeness and respect where they believe that not all things must be spelt out for our comprehension. However, for postmodernist like us who grew up in a society of a low context culture, we see speech as a tool to express ourselves. Governed by this mindset, we become more straightforward in our articulation. Although it helps in the clarity of our expression where we minimize miscommunication, sometimes we may become too direct in our enunciation. When this happens, we would be baring the risk of hurting others feelings once again.
A once slow paced life with rich human connection has evolved into a fast paced culture where people become relatively insensitive to interpersonal relationship. If you have a choice, which culture would you prefer to belong to? A Modernist or a Postmodernist?
13 comments:
If given a choice, i would like to be a modernist. Reason could be more likely due to religion influence but i see this is where my value is, as we are a relational being and purpose of our being is to relate, therefore the good values which our parents have should be maintained like collectiveness and respect for one another thru sensitiviy in our speeches.
However, i also do feel that postmodernism has something for us to learn which is to speak up more frankly how we feel but learn to be in a nicer way and not only caring for ourselves.
It is indeed a challenge as we stay in this postmodernist culture, let us face it with wisdom!
this 'generation gap' is a very interesting topic.
people have been inhabiting the earth for thousands of years, but you don't hear the people of yester-centuries complaining about 'generation gaps', do you?
i think the problem stems from the degradation of the human race, where many things are taken over by machines, and we loose the human emotion to feel.
when we loose the ability to feel, we lose the human touch to share with the people around us. as a result, the gap between 2 generations widen, and the problem comes full circle.
In my opinion, there would likely always be a "generation gap" between parents' and their children or basically between people who had lived in different times for that matter. One of the reasons is that the times are always changing as society and culture continually advance.
As technological advancements are made and influences the way we live, such as the revolution of the Internet age and rise of 3rd generation gaming consoles for example, cultures and values inadvertently change. Generally, advancements are being made in almost every aspect of civilisation, from better healtcare, education, comfortable homes, and hybrid cars to name a few. Life is continually becoming more effluent. The point is that as this happens, for better or for worse, it would undoubtly have an impact on societal and family values and culture.
For example, the author mentioned that in the modernist culture, most of them are close knitted and work together to ensure that all their interests are looked out for. This is enhanced further since most families in those days lived together or at least had homes that were within walking distance from each other. As a result, strong community and family bonds and values such as filial piety, trustworthiness, having a greater sense of respect and consideration for others, and a sense of responsibility are formed.
All this is in contrast to the postmodernist culture where one becomes more self-reliant and as mentioned, individualistic, in the modern era. The Internet for example has made communication more convenient in the form of written word, such as chatting with friends on MSN, sending emails and blogging to name a few. Thus, this may cause one to lose the social skills and etiquettes needed in carrying out a proper conversation. I suppose this is the part where one may find oneself having difficulty communicating with one's parents and trying to get one's feelings across. So there must first be some understanding from both parties and the acknowledgement that the times may be different.
Personally, I would like to be somewhere in between a modernist and postmodernist because there are just some values that I feel must be carried on through the times to prevent the human race from regressing into an undesirable state. However, it is also important to move with the times and to adapt to the changing world for our survival. Anyway, the rationale would also be that, if we're a hybrid, we would be able to mix and appreciate the views of the modernist and postmodernist, which could be a good thing.
Undeniably, there are distinct differences between people of the modern and postmodern eras. However, I would not necessarily agree that these changes are for the worse.
The author mentioned that compared to the modern era, people of the postmodern era are more individualistic. This, I believe, is the direct result of the increasing pressure society places on us in order to remain competent in a progressively competitive world. As much as we would like to dwell in the slow-paced, relaxed climate of the previous era, advancement in society waits for no one and is almost merciless to those who cannot keep up. Striving for the highest possible educational qualification becomes essential in securing a “bright future” and a decent standard of living in an increasingly affluent environment. This phenomenon is clearly manifested amongst students in our country, in which the individual’s performance is compared with the rest of his/her cohort and ranked accordingly. In other words, the more of your classmates you manage to out-perform, the better your reflected academic achievement. This naturally leads to students striving for a competitive advantage over their classmates at the expense of their friendship. I believe the same can be said for people of the working world. It is also this intense competitiveness that spurs people to reach greater heights and improve themselves from time to time.
The second difference emphasized by the author involves the “high context” of the modern era and “low context” of the postmodern era. From my interpretation of the author’s views, communication among people of the modern era largely involves the unsaid whereas among people of the postmodern era, the tendency for over-expression leads to the potential of hurting others’ feelings. I would like to bring out the point that for both types of communications, there are pros and cons; neither of which is better than the other. Since people of the modern era are more conservative and less willing to express themselves openly, they risk occurrences of misunderstandings because of the lack of clarification. In addition, the conservativeness places taboos on certain topics such as love and sex, which results in parents of children in the current postmodern era feeling awkward when conversations revolving such topics are bridged. In the postmodern era, openness of discussion regarding topics which were previously abstained from allows for the younger generation to have an accurate understanding of these topics, and a suitable platform to voice their concerns and clarify their doubts. In addition, the increased expressiveness of love and affection exhibited between spouses may also strengthen their relationship.
In conclusion, the “rich human connection” which the author feels was evident in the modern era has not necessarily been gone for good in our postmodern era. As much as we blame worsening interpersonal relationships on the individualistic and selfish mindset of people nowadays as a result of societal pressure, I believe that ultimately, if one sees the value of building good personal relationship with others, he/she will invest much time and effort in order to do so. It’s a matter of where the heart is. (:
As the world changes with every single tick of the time, people will definitely change. Since the way people behave defines the culture at that point in time, this results in a change in culture. Both the modern and post modern cultures have their good traits. I guess people in the postmodernism era would be used to the characteristics such as being straightforward. Residents of the postmodern era will not be as hurt as people of the modern era if they both face the same situation of experiencing others being very straight forth with their words. As such, the impact would not be as serious.
However, no matter how much we evolve, we are still humans, animals with feelings. We should always strife to maintain the equilibrium between the two extremes of being too straightforward and beating around the bush. This trait is also largely dependent on one’s character.
It is indeed true that postmodernism have seen people as individuals rather than collectives. The world seemingly revolves around us and our focal point is pivoted on ourselves. There is high emphasis on efficiency and, in the increasing materialistic world, wealth. Many now perceive success as being wealthy. However, many either miss the point or stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that the greed for money is the root of all evils. However, truth be known, the world needs materialistic people to drive up sales and spur economic growths.
There are always two sides to a coin. It is subjective to whether the positive impacts Is on the upper or lower end of a see-saw.
Hi beattie. It seems like the modernist and post-modernist society have their pros and cons, so the post-modernist societymay bring us greater opportunities but also cause other problems at the same time. However, if i was given a chan, i would still choose the status quos.
It's enjoyable to read your comments, friends!
There are people who choose to be a modernist(silbell), one who choose to be a postmodernist(wendy), and one who want to be a little of the both culture(simon). And 2 of you (loved by god and belinda)has commented on the advantages and drawback of both cultures that they have their values that we should keep and some that are inevitable.
Indeed,we are all living in an ever changing society where we need to adapt to the technology and economy that revolves around us.
Naturally we would be developing certain characteristics that we used to adapt to our surroundings. However, i feel that even though we reside in an individualistic society, we should still make an effort to be sensitive to the feelings of people around us.
In this way, we would be able to maintain the close relationship that the modernist has while enjoying the benefits of a growing and progressing economy!
Just some random thoughts! I do immediately recognise the postmodernist in me when I was reading your article. As I was going through the differences, though acknowledging numerous a times to myself that the modernists simply have too much to offer (but unfortunately get sidelined in the postmodernist context), I must admit I couldn’t help but dichotomise the characteristics of the modernists into distinct pros & cons. Pros being advantages that I can perhaps integrate into the present postmodernist context to further benefit the culture. Cons being reasons to do away with their culture??!! All these shameful thoughts taking place instead of perhaps thinking how I can integrate both cultures harmoniously and striking a balance in between. Such is the postmodernist in me at times!
The advancements and technology that were supposed to bridge human connections gave rise to entertainment and ways that negated the need for "face-to-face" communication, perhaps accounting partly for a higher context kind of communication culture where less emphasis is placed on kinesics of the communicator. Then came the emoicons that some of us often use in SMS, online communication. An unconscious subtle expression of the modernists in us? =)
Recently I got a chance to witness a predominantly modernist culture at another country where the present day advancements have not taken their roots in the hearts of residents. For two months, I gave myself a rare treat of living among modernists and witnessing an entire different race of people at work where residents place human relationships above almost everything else. They communicate in such low context that sometimes the postmodernist in me simply cannot understand or will be put to shame when I reflect on how I handle my own relationships. What came though was that it was a simple pure joy to experience firsthand for myself how a modernist lives: to be not so worried about being faster or better & letting your focuses simply wander among where it should be: the richness of human relationships!
Given a second chance, I would seriously consider exchanging my position for one that allows me to thrive in a population that value relationships more than is allowed in our predominantly postmodernist culture. =)
Hey thanks kx for your sharing of experience in a modernist society.
If I'm not wrong,I suppose you are sharing experiences about your 1 month student exchange at Africa? Indeed, I'm sure it is a rich experience for a postmodernist to reside in a modernist culture! What a relaxing and eye-opening interaction with inhabitants who enjoy the human connections in their community!
Hi beattie! I realised that when I was typing my comment for this post you commented on my blog almost at the same time haha! ((:
I like this post of yours as you have clearly demonstrated and analysed what various cultures are like. Also, the use of the comic strip is cool! If I were to choose which type of a culture I would like to belong to, it would be a good mix of both the Modernist and Postmodernist. This is because there are certain charateristics of the Modernist culture that I prefer. For instance I feel that harmony and modesty are crucial characteristics to honor. It is important in the world today to achieve harmony especially when we live in a global village where we come into contact with people of various races and cultures.
What I feel is good about a Postmodernist culture is that it allows the individual to value integrity and freedom. Freedom of speech is also more valued in this type of culture as people learn to respect what others have to say and become more open-minded about issues revolving around them.
Thus, I feel accepting and practicing certain values that any culture honors, with a balance, is usually better than having an extreme view or practice of any culture.
Hello Everyone!!!
An interesting discussion we have here indeed… I hate kick up a brouhaha, but there are just some gnawing questions in my mind that I really want to post. Forgive my ignorance.
1.How do we draw the line between modernism and post-modernism? Is it defined by the turn of a century? Some momentous event like World War 2? Or are we talking about the difference between generations, and if so, from which generation to which generation? Or are we defining these 2 themes by a difference in their stereotyped-lifestyle? Are we being too engrossed in the dichotomy that we fail to embrace the whole spectrum of people who fall in between the 2 extremes of the traits of each? I’m just wondering… if we were to say that we live in the ‘post-modern’ era, would we also in the same breath relegate our counterparts in the less-developed countries (like Kx’s escapade to Africa) as trailing behind in the ‘modern’ era?
2.Going along with the discussion now… I can’t help but to wonder if my curiosity about the reason behind the difference in modernism and post-modernism lifestyles happens to be shared with anyone else in the forum. I stumbled across several potential candidates in the discussion above, (internet, convenience in travel etc), that might just be the reason behind the attitudinal frame-shift, but I think it’s hard to subscribe to this school of thought in entirety. Is it really technology and wealth that has driven a wedge between the post-modern and the modern? If so, are we therefore simply talking about differences in lifestyles between the affluent and the ‘effluent’?
Hm… still pondering these things… anyone offering to iron these things out for us all? Would greatly appreciate it!
hi jonathan, thanks for your questions.
For the 1st one about the distinction about the 2 cultures, i've checked it over the internet and have gotten this conclusion that the 2 cultures are marked with certain characteristics. If you are looking at the time frame, Modernism era is during the Enlightenment period around 1750s to 1945, while Postmodernism period is Post WWII era, especially after 1968. Certainly,there are other characteristic of the differences in literature, philosophy, art, history, architect, music, identity and culture. For more information, check out this website: http://nmc.loyola.edu/intro/postmod/table.htm
As for your second question, the reason for why the discussions focused on certain issue is because in my post, i've limited the scope of discussion. The discussion of the distinction between these 2 cultures are much profound and is beyond the scope of our study. But to answer your question, you are right in saying that it is beyond the reason of technology and wealth, but also about other factors like those mentioned in the website above.
Hope i answered your questions! Thanks for asking!
even though factors/cause are given in ur post, i still dont understand why people from the older generataion cant understand what we are thinking. Since they been there b4.
perhaps they are being over protective?
Post a Comment