Handing Down of Culture | Chapter 19 | Tomke Lask

Chapter 19 | Tomke Lask

(continued)

I come now to a point that struck me at this colloquium. The most well-informed analyses of bilingualism, it seems to me, came from participants who are bilingual. Only a person who masters more than one language is in a position to evaluate the effect of languages on the building up of one’s identity.⁵ Of course, one can put forward an official translation for the sake of allowing linguistic democracy in a country that has more than one official language. As Michael Dorland demonstrated in his presentation, “if only it were that simple.” A good translation requires a perfect mastery, not only of the two languages, but of the two cultures. Being bilingual is an advantage that makes intermediaries unnecessary. An efficient cultural policy would be a policy which entitles citizens to become perfectly bilingual people. In a country like Canada, bilingualism could become purely and simply its distinctive element of identity.⁶

It would be useful to relativize the idea of a cultural threat through the transnational regrouping of ideas. Transnational elites, which are built up around common interests and/or the consumption of the same commodities, have always existed (Michael S. Cross). The Internet is just an accelerator in the building up of horizontal and international connections. The difference that is experienced is a requirement for understanding our own identity. The more we are induced to accept a life consisting of homogenized cultural habits, the more we have to be conscious of the cultural impoverishment this leads to.

There is a constant equilibrium between movements toward universalism and toward diversification, following the laws of physics, action and reaction. Money, for example, has no culture and in consequence can be internationalized and can globalize markets. On the other hand, cultural elements are not easily “globalizable.” This is why one should not be afraid of seeing commodities and habits from abroad such as the “hamburger culture.” To eat a hamburger does not taint one’s cultural system, even less that of one’s society. We must distinguish: to eat at a McDonald’s in its country of origin is to share a tradition and a way of getting fed. Eating at a McDonald’s in a country other than the USA is a different experience, as it is an exceptional way of nourishing oneself, and the ludic aspect of “chain feeding” oneself can contribute to putting one’s values in their proper place. How can one discover what is a healthy and balanced diet if one doesn’t from time to time do just the contrary? Also, it must be said that eating at “McDo” in Belgium is rather different than at a “McDo” in the USA: the hamburgers have been adapted to local taste and they can be taken with a small beer, whereas alcoholic beverages cannot be found at an American McDonald’s. There is no cultural transfer as such. There is an adjustment to the culture of habits and commodities of other people. We should be more confident in people’s intelligence and the cultural links people of a given culture make. If education at home, in school and in universities values local and national culture, no one should be afraid of having contacts with other cultures and their cultural expressions (Claude Martin, Donna Cardinal). Americans are great exporters of their cultural products, but they do not try to link them with their own cultural behaviour. They leave them open to others for cultural reappropriation. Looked at that way, the cultural threat of huge economic forces can be seen as less of a nightmare.

Mind imitations! The protection of the French culture of Québec as described by John Meisel as an advantage to Francophone Canadians can become a danger. If Québec wants to see its culture survive as strong and independent, it should not try to imitate someone else’s. Even if Québec feels itself culturally close to France, it is not France. An imitation will always remain second rate. It is not a negation of the French origins of Québec traditions, but a lack of pride the Québécois have in their own culture. The fact of looking for support in another culture weakens the authenticity of one’s own. Also, such an attitude can create a relationship of dependency toward France. But, in order to generate a true identity in Québec, France should recognize Québec as an independent culture. If not recognized by others, no country can exist per se.

The distinction between tradition — the past and old-fashioned ways of living — and modernity — the future and progress — cannot be accepted easily. As Fernand Harvey has suggested, there is no breach between them. The present is always nourishing itself from its roots in the past. A clear separation between the two is an “a posteriori” construction. The pluralism of rights that results from the coexistence of different life styles in a given territory is real.

3. the situation on the old continent

Fears of American economic power and its possible effect on “European” culture can be found throughout the European Union. As mentioned before, it is impossible to talk about European culture as an integral entity. The diversity of cultures in Europe — including those of immigrants — is the distinctive mark and exuberance of a political space trying more and more to assert itself on the world of international politics.⁷ T. S. Eliot accepted that heterogeneity was the strength of Europe. Cultural homogenization would mean, according to him, cultural impoverishment and, indirectly, the weakening of the political force of a federal Europe (Eliot, 1948).

Chapter 19, continued >

________________

5. I also am “guilty” of that “sin”: I am German, though I can speak German. I can speak English, French and Portuguese in its Brazilian version, and also some Japanese.

6. A European country where bilingualism is a daily reality is Netherlands. The teaching of English at school and the attitude of the media especially television, to foreign languages, contribute to an almost natural learning of English. Foreign feature films are always subertitled in Dutch, but are shown in their original language. The Great Duchy of Luxemburg is another good example. Teaching in primary schools is always done in German, but in French in secondary schools. One must add to that the fact that the Luxemburgese language is the official language. As the Great Duchy receives a good number of immigrants, there are many people there who speak four languages.

7. I am not talking here of the American branch of multiculturalism. Nobody in Europe wants a patchwork where everyone lives in his own sphere without mingling with others, typical of the way found in the USA. Interactions and exchanges are welcome and, in spite of the problems of racism in Europe, ghettoization is something to be avoided.