What aspects of American culture are often misunderstood? (1 Viewer)

[Jason_Els]

Dutch merely exploited, putting nothing into their colonies infrastructure,

Which illustrates a point. When the British showed-up in New York harbor with war ships they were expecting a major fight against the Dutch for possession of New York. The governor of New York at the time, Peter Stuyvesant, reportedly looked at the ships and decided that war would interfere with the conduct of business so he surrendered the city to the British without a shot fired. Flags didn't matter so much to the Dutch, getting business done did. New York has not changed.

 

[DaveGTP]

I'd been invited a few times but always had images of Irish Spring (a soap that purports to be Irish even though it's made in New Jersey), shillelaghs, shamrocks, leprechauns, jovial clergy, car bombs, and endless pints of warm Guinness at the pub.

Dude, that part was hilarious. Good story though.

 

[Ashley Seymour]

4. The "U.S. way or the highway" attitude.

I have been trying to find what I have always thought was a Woody Hays aphorism that goes in the same vein as the above quote. "It ain't whether you win or loose that counts, but whether you win." On the world stage the U.S. isn't good about sharing toys.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

On the world stage the U.S. isn't good about sharing toys.

I find it funny this statement is said about the country that rebuilt Europe and Japan after WWII asking (to paraphrase Colin Powell) nothing in return except enough land to bury our dead. It just goes to show the diversity of ideals and perceptions within our own society. I'm not saying either statement is entirely true or entirely false, only pointing out that the diversity of opinion exists. That this country is solid and strong with this amount of diversity, it's no wonder the amazement of our enemies when we suddenly stood in lockstep after Pearl Harbor (and, for a short while, 9/11). Sleeping Giant indeed.

 

[Cary_H]

We get all the major US stations so we have access to their evening newscasts.
During the recent war in Iraq, a popular American actress (????) filming in Toronto, with access to our war coverage claimed it offered a refreshing, less American/more worldly a slant.
It made me think of the big difference between Canadian and American Olympic Games TV coverage. If there is any story around an event or athlete that might be of public interest, whether of a Canadian or foreign nature, we'll put it out there. American coverage quite often goes as far as not even bothering to cover events where one of their own isn't in the running for a medal, or focuses on one of their own, almost to the point of relegating the event itself to insignificance.
I know I prefer our take, but who's to say that's what Americans want? I'm reasonably certain their networks have a finger on the pulse of their viewers. They get given what they want.
Reminds me of a great quote by P.J. O'rourke. It went something like this.
"A war in the Middle East (to America) is like getting into an accident in a Cadillac. It's way out there somewhere on the horizon, and it just doesn't matter."

 

[Paul_Sjordal]

Cary_H wrote

I know I prefer our take, but who's to say that's what Americans want? I'm reasonably certain their networks have a finger on the pulse of their viewers.

The networks do not have their finger on the pulse of their viewers. They are hemorrhaging viewers and the best explanation they can come up with is to blame it all on the internet. While that may be partially true, it gives no recognition to the fact that they've pumped out a constrant stream of crap ever since the inception of TV. Do the words "vast wasteland" ring a bell? It's sad that those observations are still true today. "Finger on the pulse"? Which pulse? They're constantly underestimating what we can handle. Remember how Bruce Lee was supposed to star in that TV show Kung Fu? He didn't because the TV executives assumed American would not accept a non-white hero. Given where Bruce's career went after that rejection, we know they were wrong. One can cite numerous other examples, but in every case, the TV executives insult everyone by always tergeting the lowest common denominator (which I'm pretty sure is a racist, undereducated, big-buckled guy named "Earl" living in a remote part of Wyoming). PS—I only wish we got Canadian stations down here, particularly for the Olympics. To me the whole point of the Olympics is to celebrate internationalism (go back and look up the history of the modern Olympics if you don't know what I'm talking about). I don't want to see nothing but American athletes; I can see that on my TV any day of any year. I want to root for the underdogs, regardless of what country they come from.

 

[Keith Mickunas]

The major networks' sports coverage sucks in general. They're good at the camera views and technology stuff, but when it comes to talking they got to cover all this "human interest" crap, no matter what sport they are covering. I like the F1 coverage on Speed, there's lots less filler than on American races on the major networks, unfortunately the foreign directors and cameraman typically suck.

But the olympic coverage is by far the worse. Instead of showing sports, they waste so much time showing the athletes histories, and how they had to struggle so hard or overcome an injury or whatever. They just drag that sentimental stuff out way to much. Then they focus on the figure skating and gymnastics during prime time. What a waste.

 

[Vickie_M]

Good story Jason!

Regarding "The Troubles," I think perhaps many Americans have never understood what it was(is) all about. While racism exists here, and yes, there is violence (though far far less than movies and TV would have you believe), for the most part people do get along. When I think of "warring factions" in the US, I think of the Hatfields and the McCoys (a fued that was blown out of porportion by the movies), or more seriously, gangs in NY and LA.

(hijack)
I grew up on a farm in Kansas, where it was highly exotic to see a black person, let alone someone from another country. Now I live in the most ethnic neighborhood in Chicago (really, census data said so). It's a wonderful family neighborhood, populated primarily by Middle Eastern (mostly Persian, Iranian and Syrian), Asian (mainly Korean and Japanese) and Hispanic (Mexican and Central American) families, with a splash of Indian (India Indian), Eastern European, Swedish and more. Within a few block area there are at least two dozen different ethnic markets (within a block from where we are now is a Middle Eastern grocery store, 2 Mexican grocery stores, a Korean grocery store, 2 Persian meat markets and a Turkish meat market). Our favorite "generic" market just outside our back door carries imported food from all over the world (and not in a "special ethnic" section either. Here, the "American" food is in a special small section). I can get hazlenut chocolate spread from Hungary, Basmati rice from Pakistan or Apples direct from New Zealand! And the restaurants...wow. We could eat out every night of the week and eat a different country's cuisine every night, and not go more than a couple of blocks from our house. Thai, Chinese, Korean, Mexican, Persian, Lebanese, Syrian, Bosnian, Greek, Swedish, Italian and more (and yes, "American" if we ever want Kentucky Fried or McD's) are all represented (the only thing we really need is at least one Indian restarant). I shop at the Video and Dollar stores run by Indians, then go across the street to the donut store and drink coffee and talk politics and music with the owner, who's from Iraq (he loves Vietnamese and Hungarian music). There are several stores devoted to nothing but international phone cards (except for the "Phone card/Shoe store" across from the donut shop, where my husband can get 3 pairs of non-bootleg high-quality tennis shoes for $20.00, made by the same people in the same factories that make expensive name brand shoes). This neighborhood (Albany Park) is the melting pot of Chicago, everyone gets along, and we love that most of the signs around here are not in English.

When we have from-the-heartland/white bread relatives and friends visit, they're usually a bit weirded out by it all, but they soon become as comfortable as we are. It isn't only that people in America need to visit other countries, they need to visit neighborhoods like ours in THIS country.

Alas, neighborhoods like ours are being threatened, but not from within. What's threatening this area are yuppies and developers who are trying to buy up buildings and gentrify it, which will destroy the neighborhood. We've already been a victim of that, when our block got bought by the city to build a school (in anticipation of the yupperbabes to come). We had to move, but we only moved 2 blocks away. We'll hang on here until the bitter end (or a dreaded Starbucks opens, whichever comes first).

(/hijack)

Great thread!

 

[andrew markworthy]

Sorry - wrong thread (long story).

 

[Paul_Sjordal]

But the olympic coverage is by far the worse. Instead of showing sports, they waste so much time showing the athletes histories, and how they had to struggle so hard or overcome an injury or whatever. They just drag that sentimental stuff out way to much. Then they focus on the figure skating and gymnastics during prime time. What a waste.

Keith, if you think our Olympic coverage is bad, try watching the network broadcasts of the World Cup sometime. *shudder* The ESPN coverage isn't nearly as bad (they seem to have hired a number of Brits), but I still find myself watching the Mexican broadcasts in spite of not speaking a word of Spanish. If nothing else, the Mexicans don't have all those annoying closeups that interfere with seeing what's actually going on.

I still recoil in horror when I recall the early American World Cup broadcasts. They tossed random sportscasters into the booth, none of whom knew anything about soccer. One of them actually said, and swear I'm not making this up, "Uh, he's kicking the ball." This brilliant commentary was preceeded by an uncomfortably long silence.

*smack head*

 

[Cary_H]

When the movie "Bend it like Beckham" was scheduled to be released in the U.S. we found it humourous that promoters proposed it be renamed to something the American public could better to relate to. In their opinion, revenues were apt to suffer since the U.S. audiences in general have little, if any idea who David Beckham is.
Throughout the rest of the world, Beckham is currently among the top ten most recognizable celebrity figures,....and from more than his sporting stardom.
What gives? Is it just public disinterest, or U.S. media shortcomings?

Maybe this Adu kid is just what's needed to raise the level of soccer's popularity in the U.S.?

 

[John_Berger]

What gives? Is it just public disinterest, or U.S. media shortcomings?

Probably apathy by American audiences for anything not American. This is unfortunately somewhat prevalent. Keep in mind that most foreign movies are considered to be "high culture" or "elitist" over here for some bizarre reason.

One of the more obvious indications of this is the fact that the American media actually PAY foreign TV show developers to dub certain shows into American English. Before you think that this is actually strange, the shows that are getting dubbed are from ENGLAND!

Kids shows like "Bob the Builder" and "The Tweenies" are British, yet there is supposedly "market research" (which I highly doubt exists and if it does is most likely representative of the PARENTS and not the KIDS to whom these shows are directed) that shows that American audiences (again, probably the parents to whom the show isn't directed anyway) have less interest in shows with foreign accents in them. So, American cable channels actually pay organizations like the BBC and HiT Entertainment to get rid of the British accents!

With attitudes like this, can you be surprised that most Americans don't know who David Beckham is?

 

[Julian Lalor]

One of the more obvious indications of this is the fact that the American media actually PAY foreign TV show developers to dub certain shows into American English. Before you think that this is actually strange, the shows that are getting dubbed are from ENGLAND!

It's not only animated shows where this has occurred; rent Mad Max for a positively surreal "dubbed" soundtrack of an English language movie.

 

[Philip_G]

One of the more obvious indications of this is the fact that the American media actually PAY foreign TV show developers to dub certain shows into American English. Before you think that this is actually strange, the shows that are getting dubbed are from ENGLAND!

I think you're making huge assumptions about their motivations. Ever speak with someone from scotland? some parts of the uk are the same way, their accent can be very difficult to understand. I speak to germans that are easier to understand, even in broken english. Then again I've been told that my "american accent" is tough to understand also by a gent from the uk. English is not always English to me.

 

[Mike Broadman]

I see the world differently from many Americans - I see it as a globe, not a continent.

One can choose to see the world anyone way he/she wishes. Cable is so common and access to "niche" media so easy these days that it's no different than going to the old standards.

But for anything and everything I value- relatively reliable news, good music, stimulating entertainment, culture, fine cuisine- I need to put in a little effort. And what's wrong with that? It makes the enjoyment that much sweeter.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Indeed, the Rugby World Cup is in Australia next month - even the US is fielding a team (I assume fielded by the Ivy League colleges).

I thought about posting the travel necessary for ccricket, rugby and the like, but decided that if someone thought that traveling within the U.S. was more taxing than the Aussies or Kiwis going anywhere, their geography was sadly lacking.

Actually we were in invited to the last Rugby World Cup (in the UK). Most decent teams ran up three-figure scores against the U.S.

 

[Keith Mickunas]

spoilt children or don't insist on travelling in their own private jets everywhere

That's Formula 1. American teams travel together. Those guys may have private jets, but they don't use them to travel to the games.

Tell me this, how often do the Australian rubgy teams go over seas? How many games do they play every year? American baseball teams play 162 regular season games every year, half on the road, if they started traveling overseas that would seriously affect their schedule. Hockey and basketball teams play 80+ games each year. Football is 16, playing only once a week. Some of these teams play occasional exhibition games overseas, but with approximately 30 teams in the leagues how do you balance out the schedules to handle the excessive travel time?

America has a population of over 250 million people. The sports teams are set up to serve the major metropolitan areas. In addition to the major sports, we have indoor and outdoor soccer, arena footbal, college basketball and football which have huge followings, as well as other minor league teams and lesser known sports. Most people have local teams that they support, and with the amount of games to follow they aren't going to get too excited about following a national team.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Tell me this, how often do the Australian rubgy teams go over seas? How many games do they play every year?

Rugby is comparable to football in the number of games played and their frequency. Basically they play once a week during the season (this may have changed a bit from when I lived down under). The top league in the Southern Hemisphere has teams from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, so there is a reasonable amount of travel. The travel varies, just as it does for American sports. Canberra might play a team in Sydney one week (you could drive in a couple of hours), Brisbane the next (couple of hour flight), Christchurch the next (several hour flight) and Cape Town the next (a really long flight).

Unlike American sports, there are also international matches where (what we would consider all star) national teams compete against each other—these games come at the end of the competition described above. Australia and New Zealand will have a home and away series and (IIRC) they each also play South Africa, home and away on alternate years (may be every year).

Occasionally the Southern Hemisphere national teams tour the Northern Hemisphere (England and France) and there are matches against the secondary teams such as Argentina from time-to-time. So there are a lot of matches involving a lot of travel.

Cricket is the sport most comparable to baseball and it too involves a lot of travel, although of a different kind than baseball. International cricket teams ‘tour’ other countries, so they tend to travel less frequently than baseball teams, but for much longer times when they do tour. For example the most famous series in cricket is The Ashes, which matches the two oldest cricket nations (England and Australia) against each other. When Australia tours England, they will go in England’s summer (of course) or their winter (or off-season). They will play five or six tests, plus two or three matches against English County teams (professional, but not as good as their national side). While this does not seem like many matches, a test match may last five days, with six hours of play each day, plus an hour and a half for breaks. Now this works out to probably 25 days of play or maybe 150 hours of play, or about 50 baseball games (nearly 1/3 of a season). They will also several one-day matches (about seven hours of play) during the tour..

The tour will take probably 2 ½ months, which is a reasonably long time to be on the road. Plus each test and one-day will be played in a different venue, so when the team gets to England they are not done with their travel.

Then, beginning in October, Australia will play a couple of touring teams in Australia. This will be another five or six tests, and while it might seem that they won’t have to travel, the tests will be in from Sydney to Perth (NYC to LA) and from Brisbane to Hobart (Boston to Miami). Players will only get to live at home when the tour hits their city.

Then there will be a one-day series that will be another dozen games.

Probably Australia will go to New Zealand, South Africa or elsewhere after they have finished at home and play some more.

So you can easily see that the rigors of travel while different are much the same—and perhaps even more demanding.

 

[Keith Mickunas]

But Lew, without that travel, how much demand would there be for their events? In America, there is enough demand, and so much money to be made here, it's not worthwhile for them to travel overseas. It's not about arrogance or anything like that, it's about where the demand is. While there is some touring for international meets, Olympics, World Cup, etc., athletes in American professional sports have to be careful how much of that they do. If they get injured in a game like that and it ends their careers, they could lose millions of dollars.

America is one of the few, if not the only, countries to have the economy and population to support such a large amount of professional sports locally. I wouldn't be suprised if other countries did they same thing if they could. But for most other countries it's more beneficial to draw from an international market.

 

[John_Berger]

I think you're making huge assumptions about their motivations. Ever speak with someone from scotland? some parts of the uk are the same way, their accent can be very difficult to understand.

The original accents seem to be from the southern England area, not more difficult to understand than "Monty Python". Since it's proven that kids are far more adept at differing languages and accents than adults, that only more solidifies my belief that the said "market study" either does not exist or was in reference to the parents, not the children.

Yes, "The Full Monty" was difficult to follow every now and then - the first time. The second time was much easier.