Eurocentrism (America's schools teaching a curriculum centered around European accomplishments/history) is very real. Think of all the famous paintings you know. What do you have, Sistine Chapel? Mona Lisa? The Scream? Do you know any famous art works from Asia or Africa? (No, visualizing a random Ming vase does not count).
A less obvious expression of Eurocentrism is in our language. When we want to sound elitist, old or funny, we talk in a mix of Old English, Shakespeare, and bible translations. Words like "thou" and "methinks" and "bless-ed is he who..."
This became obvious to me when I tried to explain the concept of "looking at the Buddha's finger". An accepted Asian/fortune cookie way of saying it would be "when the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger". I had thought up "Do not be he who looks at the finger instead of the moon" and "the finger points to the moon, but you are fixated on the finger".
Maybe I'm the only one that sees the difference between these. When I learned about the Buddha's finger, I heard it explained (in English) in a way that seemed very Chinese to me. After reading various English translations of Buddhist/Zen texts, I had started to think of these concepts in a different language style. "Do not be he who..." is a Biblical style of talking and "this does this; but you are doing that." is something an Asian sage would say in an American movie. That's why they felt so wrong when I tried to use them. This translation of "the finger that points to the moon" is in a style that is really familiar and comforting to me.
After reading a lot of bible translations, seeing
"You make a big fuss about all of the different ways and methods of acquiring something that you´ll never be able to gain. Zen Master Huang-po therefore says: "That there is nothing which can be attained is not idle talk; it is the highest truth." You seek something that you´ll never be able to find because you´ve never lost it."
just didn't sound classy enough to me
That's a big problem. The parables from the bible and the Ten Commandments have a very distinct style. Same with Shakespeare and Chaucer. When we hear something that's dogma or classic literature, we expect to hear it in that style. When it's not, it just doesn't seem classy or legitimate (unless you have a lot of experience with other styles of literature - which you won't if you go through the average American curriculum).
Just seems like a good thing to realize.
--
does this make sense to anyone else?
does
"Thou shall not put to waste time spent thinking of ways to obtain that which can not be gained. For it is as the Zen Master Huang-po says: "There is nothing that can be attained on this earth". He speaks not gibberish nor false lies. You who seeks to find something that has never been lost will search until this becomes apparent to you."
sound a lot better? Oh god, you twinkie.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Definitely a good thing to realize. I have been exposed to a decent amount of zen-in-english, which is all of a very distinct style, too - it's not just 'not classy', it's a very particular kind of not classy, and I'm actually predisposed to respect it more than I do typical biblespeak.
ReplyDeleteA few hours ago I was reading about Pentecost, since it came up in Snow Crash. The wikipedia article quotes from the 'contemporary english version' of the bible, which to me sounds more like the 'four year old explaining it to another four year old version'. Try this for not classy:
"On the day of Pentecost all the Lord’s followers were together in one place. Suddenly there was a noise from heaven like the sound of a mighty wind! It filled the house where they were meeting. Then they saw what looked like fiery tongues moving in all directions, and a tongue came and settled on each person there. The Holy Spirit took control of everyone, and they began speaking whatever languages the Spirit let them speak."
Gotta love that exclamation point...
<3
The first paragraph of what Jake said.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with your thesis that the way we use Old/Middle/Shakespearian/Biblical English is evidence of eurocentrism.
~jon.
What I associate 'Biblical English' with is not being able to understand what's being said. This is mostly from when I was younger, but still: the Bible, in the older translations, is full of word choices that make my brain stumble.
ReplyDeleteI mean, back then, the word choices made sense, but now... If somebody has to steep their words in obscure usages to sound impressive, that makes them no better than the (possibly apocryphal?) nerds who used two words when they could have used one, to double their spoken WPM.
(On a side note, I recall mentally mocking a bible excerpt in the English textbook in ninth grade. It used about five indefinite antecedents in a row.)