Write a response about your reaction to the Intercultural workshop by Sophia Stepf. What did you learn about yourself? What did you learn about the other symposium participants? How does this or will this new knowledge influence your future design work?
posts
Sticks + Stones Berlin 2010 Participants
Bilkent University
Ankara, TurkeyGüclü Aydogdu
Sera Cakiroglu
Basak GokceNortheastern University
Boston, Massachusetts USAChristie O’Laughlin
Kate TerradoAnn McDonald
Shandong University of Art and Design
Ji’nan, Shandong Province, P.R. ChinaKang Kai
Sun Lu
Li Lingjun
Xu Yichen
Ma Wen
Liu Mengdie
Yang Shuai
Li Yang
Liu Xinkun
Zhang XiaoShi Zengquan
Hou Liping
Wang Xiaofeng
Zhang XiaojuanUniversität der Künste
Berlin, GermanyAnna Cairns
James Ellison
Karolina Hałatek
Catherine Kirk
Rotem Peleg
Philipp Tögel
Xingzheng Jin
Thomas ZimmermannUlrich Schwarz
Charlotte DriessenUniversity of Maryland
College Park, Maryland USABrittany Atkinson
Katie Friedgen
Shai Goller
Talia Hillman
Christie Liberatore
Jaimie Mertz
Todd Nelson
Joanna Shieh
Anna Tulchinskaya
Jessy Weiss
Lilian YuAudra Buck-Coleman
Weber State University
Ogden, Utah USACrissy Barney
Sam DeMastrie
Jennifer Hadley
Britni Howe
Chanel Lich eld
Jeff MadsenMark Biddle
supporters
The Sticks + Stones faculty and students recognize the generous support of the following:
Bilkent University
Nancy H. Clarvit
Elliott-Hall
DAAD German Academic Exchange Service
Northeastern University Undergraduate Research Fund
Shandong University of Art and Design
Universität der Kunste Berlin
University of Maryland College of Arts & Humanities
University of Maryland Center for Teaching & Excellence
Weber State University College of Arts and Humanitiesadditional contributors
Lisette Berndt
Teresa Besser
Wilfried Beuster
Melanie Bossert
Eugen Bräunig
Vinzent Britz
Vladimir Llovet Casademont
Lisa Bukall
Sujin Choi
Benjamin Courtault
Gökçen Demiragli
Simone van Eldik
Maria Fountoukis
Marius Förster
Vera Garben
Irina Gertmann
Branka Hanisch
Florian Hardwig
Philipp Hoffmann
Stefan Höderath
Soo-Im Jung
Julia Lingertat
Antonia Aravena Llanca
Jens Ludewig
Matthias Maercks
Lena Marbacher
Benjamin Maus
Markus Mrugalla
Naomi Mulla
Donnie O’Sullivan
Gulnara Petzold
Robert Preusse
Next Interkulturelle Projekte
Nina Ritter
Serge Rompza
Marie-France Ryder
Ilka Schaumberg
Leon Schmid
Timo Schmitt
Sophia Stepf
Carla Streckwall
Stefan Stubbe
Lena Teuber
Philipp Tögel
Wanja Toselli
Rafael B. Varona
Julia Volkmar
Dominik Wagner
Peter Winkles
Felix Worseck
Yang Liu
25 Comments
To be honest I was not initially enthusiastic about participating in Sophia’s exercises- maybe it was just the pig, I don’t know. I found the first exercise to be a little corny but I tried to be more open to the activities and have a positive attitude after that. After opening up a little, I thought the exercises were incredibly important and relevant to our program and what we are trying to accomplish with sticks + stones- especially when it came to communicating and interacting with the Chinese students. It was really nice to be able to interact with them, even if there was a language barrier; I’m glad we got to at least know their names and one thing that they like. After the “name game,” I also really enjoyed the portion where we compared our cultures and values. It was interesting to see that despite our contrasting cultures, lifestyles, and languages, we were able to have fun with one another, get along, and learn things about someone else (or what we might even have in common) despite them being half way across the world.
I’m not so sure that I learned anything profound about myself through these exercises, but I think it made me more aware of our American culture and our values. In terms of influencing my future design work, it will make me more aware of how other cultures will perceive it. But, I don’t know that it will change it drastically in terms of overall style or aesthetic. I will be more aware of stereotypes in my work, as well as make me more conscious of language barriers. I think I am much more likely now to ask “will someone who can’t speak english be able to understand what this piece is trying to communicate?” or “does this piece require text/words?” and questions more along those lines.
Overall, I’d say that Sophia’s workshop was beneficial to the program, if not only because we were able to learn all the names of the Chinese students in our group. I do, however, would have liked there to be a more direct connection to graphic design- maybe if we could have seen examples of culture in design or something along those lines….
We spent five hours of our day playing games with other students in our group. Sophia Stepf proctored the activities. We learned each others’ names and hobbies. It was difficult to remember some of the Chinese students’ names, just as they had some trouble pronouncing our names. Some of the activities helped us to learn how to communicate through visuals and gestures rather than via words and language. We had to make people understand our directions by not speaking or pointing to what we wanted them to do. We had to engage each other while awkward social cues were in play, like avoidance techniques of stepping backwards, looking away while speaking, etc. I learned that I am very patient when trying to help others understand me and vice versa. I learned that some people can get frustrated while they do not understand, and while their partners did not understand them. I learned that it’s not always an easy thing to communicate to others on a level beyond language; it is just like art: people can interpret symbols and gestures in many different ways. As a designer, I think that this could possibly help me in the future when designing info graphics and while creating compositions to be seen in public. For example, let’s say I have a light bulb in a composition; some people may think “idea”, some may think “sustainability”, “electricity”, “light”, “Thomas Edison”… etc. So how can I get my point across as what I intended it to be? How can I reach audiences equally among different cultures and languages? It helps me think about a broader audience and their needs as viewers of art. In my future work I will try to make my point clear (at least in the pieces that I want to be straight – forward, as sometimes mystery and self reflection can be my intended form of communication).
Also I learned I should not make assumptions about my audiences, as some people try to envision the demographic of people they see and meet – whether or not they are true. I will consider this in making my art, which should be inclusive to all my viewers. I enjoyed being able to look into the lives of my classmates and learn a little bit about them. I enjoyed getting to know them and interacting with them. I learned about their cultures as well. It made interacting with them on my own much easier and more enjoyable.
Last edited by Brittany_Atkinson on June 10, 2010 at 1:15 am
The workshop with Sophia Steph was kinda fun. The most effective part for me, was the name game. Every time I see Joanna, I think, “My name is Joanna and I like to smile.” It also helped eliminate that slightly uncomfortable aspect of talking to someone that you have seen before, maybe even talked to before, but didn’t catch or remember their name. Instead of speaking to “hey you, the person in my group that I can physically describe, but can’t remember your name,” I am speaking to Joanna, who likes to smile (which the latter part could be included in the physical description mentioned earlier).
The workshop almost proved a general consensus that we, no matter from what walk of life you are from, have similarities with everyone else. Everyone basically, except for me, who not necessarily doesn’t like anything, just am too laid back to invest the effort of liking something. I think the take home message from the workshop is we all belong to the culture of the Human Species. And there are similarities that lie within us from life and its experiences.
I’m not sure if I really learned anything in the workshop about myself. I had a pretty good concept of who I was before it, along with a comparison of where I fit into society compared with others (I really don’t). I have never really care about feeling like I belong to practically anything. A long time ago, I used to feel insecure about my life. Now I try to live outside my comfort zone, which makes it so I am used to awkward situations. I guess you could say I am comfortable being uncomfortable.
I discovered, however, that I only felt as if I belonged to a few select groups. And most of them, not many of my peers belonged to. I was the only one, for example, who had children. I did however fit into the generic groups which brought us all together; artist, traveler, student, having a family, etc. Me not fitting into what my peers like is not due to me being afraid of things, disliking them, or not trying them, as I will try practically anything twice. It’s probably due to me not caring enough to make the effort to like them.
I’m not sure if I feel that this was an overall waste of time, or if I found much value in it. I am sure this workshop was more beneficial to others than it was to me.
Last edited by Chrissy_Barney on June 11, 2010 at 6:35 am
The workshop by Sophia Stepf was an interesting experience for me. The most important point to me was having a chance to know people around better. However during the name game, I felt like I was a kid. It was just like the games we used to play when we were at that age. Learning Chinese names was a real challenge for me–and I guess it’s the same for most of us–as they’re really different than others. Also my name is different, everyone preferred to use my nickname, Lola. It was also interesting for me that I could guess a lot of things about Todd, just looking at him sitting in front of me and he was quite good on his guesses as well. He tried to find out the genre of music I like, looking at my shoe laces. That sounds weird but to me it’s a good way of understanding that. I would use the same way.
While trying to translate Turkish proverbs into English, I again realized that culture has a huge impact on language. There was tones of words which couldn’t be translated directly in English and proverbs sound strange when they are translated. However basically we all have the same proverbs.
During the talking game, I realized that body language is really important. Namely, sometimes I text my friends when I’m talking to somebody, I won’t do it again. It’s probably so annoying. I was trying to talk to Jeff and he was just looking somewhere else as I was trying to talk, I just felt so bad about that.
Last edited by Basak_Gokce on June 10, 2010 at 8:26 pm
Form the beginning of the Sticks+Stones projects I realised that breaking down my ingrained ideas about immigration and migrants would be tough. There are many different ways we can think about what culture is a how we attach meaning to ourselves. There are also many different ways we could have tackled the idea of immigration, most of these options would lead to conflict or misunderstanding and I think Frau Stef uses a technique where the participants can think about there ideas without the need for justification.
It can often be very challenging to realise that these definitions are more open that at first glance. Sophia Stepf’s workshops, exercises and discussion were an excellent step towards realising the true extent of what we mean when we discuss community and migration, as well as general topics such as culture, language and communication. It fitted well with the overall syllabus of the Sticks+Stones project and helped break barriers between the different sub-groups and cultures within the Sticks+Stones team itself, she helped me to get to know my peers in a less formal way.
This made me able to relate better with the ways I define myself and the communities I belong to, as well as the ways I understand others. I think in any design project, first we have to understand ourselves before we can understand how we feel about others. Then from there we can begin to communicate. This is especially key in this project as there is a lot of tension and rhetoric around how to discuss the topic of migration. Outside of Sticks+Stones the truth seems to be that people take extremely reactionary stances when they talk about the passage of people around the world.
This workshop helped me to realise how to talk about these issues without disagreement. And helped further my understanding about what the world we be like without this movement of people from one place to another. It certainly would be entirely different from the world we live in today.
Last edited by James_Ellison on June 10, 2010 at 9:57 pm
For the first couple of days of Sticks + Stones in Berlin, I was afraid that English-speakers and the Chinese students wouldn’t be able to interact at all. After the Immigration workshop with Sophia Stepf, I no longer have any doubts about our ability to work together as a group. I really appreciated that the Immigration workshop forced us all to learn each others’ names. That was rather difficult at first, especially when it came to learning all of the Chinese students’ names, but it was well worth it. I felt that this was the first time that we behaved as a cohesive group. One of the best moments was when we were able to connect with the Chinese students through talking about the card game played in the “Inglorious Basterds” movie. I love globalization!
One thing I found very interesting was how us American students found it very difficult to remember the Chinese students’ names up until the point when we “Americanized” the sounds. For example, I believe that one girl’s name is Liu Xinkun, but we started pronouncing her name as “Quinn.” Even names are getting lost in translation! Then again, perhaps it was better to mispronounce someone’s name than to never know them at all.
I wouldn’t say that I’ve gained any introspective insights after the workshop. I think that I expected to be challenged by the discussions, and perhaps I would have been if there were any subjective topics to discuss. I also expected to learn more about German, Turkish, and Chinese cultures. The sharing of proverbs was an excellent activity, yet it was the only one that got even remotely close to what I expected. Because of this, I also feel as if I didn’t really learn anything vital about the other members of the group. Yes, we did share some facts about ourselves and we did examine our differences and similarities, but everything we learned about each other remained on a very shallow, surface level. Nonetheless, the workshop was priceless in its ability to bring the Sticks + Stones group together across cultural and language boundaries.
An important tool in communicating across language boundaries turned out to be the ability to write down words instead of relying on oral communication. Visuals (I categorize type as a visual in this instance) proved to be much more comprehensive than oral communication. In a way, concrete lines and shapes such as those found in recognizable letters take away the subjectivity and variation present in the fluctuations and intonations of voices, and thus facilitate communication. To me, the experience with communicating through script highlighted the importance of familiar images across cultures, and further emphasized the importance of readability in typography. When designing for a global audience, type must serve the function of communicating in a way that allows letters to be as recognizable as possible, and function takes priority over aesthetics. We’ve been taught to limit our uses of decorative fonts, yet firsthand experience with global interpretations teaches that lesson better than ever.
Last edited by Anna_Tulchinskaya on June 10, 2010 at 9:47 pm
I agree with Anna’s feeling that the Sophia Stef activities brought the group together, but only on a very superficial level. We learned very basic facts about each other such as: names, hobbies and interests. However, this seemingly superficial and very surface level of acquaintance did not disappoint me. The activity made expedited the process of group bonding. Prior to the activity, there was a clear line of division between all the respective schools. There was minimal effort to bridge the language barriers. My bunkmate was Chinese and we had only said hello and she had only expressed that she knew very little English. We needed to know at least a few superficial facts in order to grow as a group. After the workshop at least I could identify every student by name and one fact about them. The workshop also gave an opportunity to expose every individual’s personality. Even though we could not speak Chinese, I could tell that Kankai, a Chinese student, played the role of the funny, entertaining kid, within his group. It was an opportunity to break into the respective groups and gain insight into their interests and their personalities.
Anna mentioned that she was expecting a deeper discussion explaining the differences between cultures. I agree and think that we could have jumped into a discussion on stereotypes. It would have been interesting to share stereotypes that each country placed on the different nationalities in the group. Then, each group should have been given a chance to respond. The activity in which we looked at Yang Liu’s book contrasting China with Germany, was my favorite activity. It gave insight into two cultures I was meeting face-to-face for the first time. The most interesting difference that Yang Liu pointed out was the contrasting attitudes towards communalism versus individualism. In China, a community spirit is highly valued. This was extremely apparent throughout the trip. The Chinese students were always together. When they ventured out to meet others they went in groups. My first impression was that this was a simply a product of the language barrier. They were isolated without English and perhaps were a bit shy. I still believe that this was a contributing factor, but, it fell within the context of a much greater cultural tendency. Having learned this fact about communalism in China, I noticed it more and more. The Chinese students informed us that they were only allowed to travel in groups, and if they asked permission to go out, they had to be accompanied by a male. This was yet another extension of the communal spirit that is so engrained into their daily lives. It would have been fun to create our own versions, and contrast the differences we observed within our entire group. It would have been interesting to complete a more in depth examination of the differences between Turkey and Germany, and Germany and the U.S. and all the options in between.
My name is Sophia and I like to swim.
My name is Jenny and I like to play the piano.
My name is Brittney and I like karate.
Yes, this was my Wednesday morning, Repeating over and over the names of my group members and their interests, but that wasn’t the end of it. No- we would proceed to make more circles and declare more things about ourselves: “I like coffee and Tim Burton movies!” It seemed like a childish exercise to be playing with 20+ year olds, but that’s what was going on.
The real gold of workshop was actually in the conversation afterward. While this program is about an international concept, this workshop tried to unite us on a local level. Because Sticks and Stones is a union of different countries, this workshop showed us the similarities we shared even though we come from places around the world. Despite differences in language – we eventually got across our similarities.
Last edited by Catherine_Kirk on June 11, 2010 at 7:57 am
Sophia Stepf’s workshop made me seriously consider how the structure of culture has changed as the world has become increasingly globalized. She presented the notion that culture is always changing, and I think that not only is this true, but the way culture is distributed is also constantly shifting. More specifically, I believe that in the past, cultures were more disparate, and drawn along national, if not geographical or state lines, but as we experience advances in communications technology, like skype; information technology, like the international news cycle of the internet; and transportation technology, like increasingly accessible international flights, cultures are necessarily arranged more by the individual than by the group. When everyone has access to everyone else, you become less like the people directly surrounding you.
At this point, people could be said to have individual cultures. What is the culture of Kreuzberg?” Stepf asked. In a group so varied, can the culture actually be this variation? I can’t decide whether it’s a paradox to say that the rise of individualism is homogenizing. When we did the exercise where we all named groups we belonged to in order to see who else at the workshop belonged to them, there was very little correlation between these commonalities and our more conventionally defined “cultures.” For example, I expected taste in music or even religion to be pretty tightly grouped based on school group, but when I said that I was a Catholic, I was joined by Karolina, from Poland, Philipp, from German, and only Katie from Maryland.
One of the definitions of culture that we explored at the symposium was G. Hofstede’s declaration that “culture is the collective programming of the mind,” and I do agree that there is definitely still programming of the mind, but maybe it’s more difficult when we’re not so collective. I learned as we did our personal maps of the cultures that we belong to that we all actually even define culture in different ways. Most people put their families down, but I was focused on friend groups, and things like my school, while someone else identified one of their cultures as “horse-lovers.” The notion that culture is defined by interest really changes the way we divide ourselves; by his reckoning, culture is self-selected.
This obviously presents new challenges for designers. Visual communication cannot be as codified if there aren’t such clear prototypes for us to target. I think this is a positive change, though, because it forces you to be clearer, and say what you actually mean, instead of tailoring your message to what you think someone wants to hear, or putting it in a way that could appeal to them, because it’s getting impossible to know what a whole group would want to hear.
Last edited by Jaimie_Mertz on June 11, 2010 at 6:08 pm
The intercultural workshop today was very informative, Sophia Steph was very knowledgeable about many cultures and showed clearly the differences cultures have. I think understanding not only what people in other cultures think, but why they think that way is very interesting to learn about. I find it very helpful to know a little more about how the German, Chinese, and Turkish minds think in order to design for the needs of that culture. Also knowing these facts about cultures helps to react better in situations where you may otherwise be offended or uncomfortable. Learning each others names I think was also a very good use of our time. Having to repeat names I cannot pronounce helped me a lot to remember them and pronounce them correctly. I also think reducing the proverbs of each country down to a single word was very interesting and gave great insight into the values and beliefs of the different cultures represented. Realizing too that the values of large groups of people never represents the exact same set of values the individual members of the group have. Something I found very interesting during the workshop was the way he handled the language barrier. Sophia would speak first in english, then german to Jin, who would translate to chinese. It reminded me of a game we used to play in elementary school called telephone. With a large group of people one person starts with a phrase or “secret”, and whispers it to the person next to them, who whispers it to the next person and so on. Once it reaches the last person, they say what they heard aloud for everyone to hear and then everyone figures out how close the message stayed to the original. The fun part of this game is hearing how just slight changes and how they get so exaggerated so much over time. I feel like this is probably happening with our language barriers constantly, but there is not much we can do about it. I think its so great that everyone is doing what they can to reduce this problem, and I wish I could contribute to helping reduce the barrier. Although I do not think I will be very fluent in german or chinese by the time I leave for home.
I think the workshop was a very good opportunity to make everyone in the room, regardless of nation or language, experience cultural barriers first-hand. I never felt surprised about the final outcome and conclusion of the games we played that adressed stereotyping, communiation problems and different behaviour customs. However, in that particular moment it made me feel personally the frustration of sometimes not being able to understand another person if he or she doesn’t speak your language at all, and vice versa. I think that, as English speakers, we take it for granted being understood almost always and in every part of the world, and we hardly ever get to feel being in another position. It gave me respect for the Chinese part of our group because for them, it’s much more difficult to understand and communicate in English language.
Speaking of which, there was one thing that actually shocked me a little, and which I think wouldn’t have been that clear if we hadn’t done this workshop together. Playing the name game, for the first time we were forced to interact in a bigger group and speak one after the other. It turned out that the Chinese students had a very hard time just understanding the task, and I wondered how difficult it must be for them to participate generally in the symposium since the overall level of linguistical complexity is pretty high in comparison. I think this is an issue that everyone sees but hesitates to adress. What do the Chinese students think? Are we – again – taking the ability to speak English too much for granted? Or is it something we have to presume in order to be able to work efficiently? It’s an interesting question because it expresses an immediate and acute intercultural issue as opposed to all the theoretical, abstract topics we’ve been discussing. I think that in a way, the international composition of this year’s Sticks and Stones group is an experiment that shows us a) how well the interaction works, b) which solutions we have to find, c) what this teaches everyone of us about the reality of these issues and d) if there is anything we would do differently next time, or not.
Going back to speaking of the workshop, I must say that I expected something a little different. Apart from appreciating the experience gathered by the exercises, it didn’t satisfy the interest I had when hearing about it. At some times, for example when talking about the definition of culture, I would have preferred her actually telling us something from a professional’s point of view. One very important thing is the discussion, but in my opinion it shouldn’t be the only source. Talking to other students, they often felt like they indeed have their own opinions, but not having immersed themselves intellectually beforehand they didn’t feel competent enough to sufficiently and satisfyingly discuss the topic.
The name game was a bit of a challenge in dealing with the Chinese names. At first I really had no idea how it was going to play out. Unexpectedly though, I think all learned the Chinese names and actions really well by the end. This is because a) they all stood by each other, and most importantly (b), they were at the beginning of the circle. This meant that pretty much everybody had an opportunity to recite their names and actions. I think it probably worked equally well across both languages too.
I often wonder what the Chinese students are doing or thinking during the lectures. I can’t imagine that they understand enough of what is ever being said to comprehend any of the lectures. They must simply rely on the visual components and a few translations here and there. It must be very difficult and frustrating. I would think it is very boring as well. I can’t honestly say that I would jump at the opportunity to study in an international project if it was taught in a language foreign to my own.
Anna seems to be a little disappointed in the workshop. She said that the talk about it from other students made it sound a lot more interesting than it actually was. I have to agree. I think that the experience of the games was kinda fun. It was exciting and funny. It wasn’t at all what I expected though. I didn’t know it was going to be so silly and childlike. I realize that was kinda the point of them, or, if not, at least that was a natural occurrence for the game objectives. I would have preferred a more substantial lecture from a professional standpoint.
The workshop with Sophia was very interesting and so helpful. The first couple of exercises helped to build conversation, closeness, an see the other person’s point of view. It also helped me to learn so much about myself by the questions we asked each other and how we asked it. Our behavior was very easily read just by body language and how we chose to enunciate each word. At first, when we all realized how much of a language barrier we had with the Chinese group, I was beyond frustrated. Not because they weren’t fluent, but that we were told English would be the primary language and what we got was the total opposite. But later, after talking amongst others, it was just something to accept. Instead of being frustrated and unhelpful, we decided to embrace it. If we can’t communicate in English, we should communicate visually. We are all artists whether we are graphic designers or film makers. We are visual people and there should be a visual solution.
There is also the fact that our exhibit is on immigration and we are immigrants here in Germany. Can you imagine how frustrated German people are when we come walking into a store or shop saying “English”? And how difficult for the Chinese when they come here to Germany and they can’t communicate with us in English and can’t speak any German either? I feel that the exercises that Sophia put us through definitely helped us in communicating with the Chinese. First of all, we learned their names! It might have been painful and oh so very hard with all the diphthongs, but we got it! I had noticed through the first exercise of learning names through motions, we could see a little bit of everyone’s personality. I also noticed that the Chinese could definitely understand us so much better when we wrote things out for them because no matter how much we slow down our words, it will still sound like gibberish to them. I could see how hard and how eager they are trying to communicate with us. We might have to speak in broken English from time to time to communicate but at least we are communicating! I feel that this is the whole “push and pull” relationship we have with immigrants from different countries. We are so immersed in the “American” state of mind that we do not open up to helping people learn our language. With every bit of encouragement, we can start breaking down those barriers.
Although, it was unexpected that we would have this language barrier with them, I think it will help us throughout our planning of the exhibit because it will help us to see if our visual graphic solutions are read universally. I think that simplicity is key when trying to get a message across and definitely for those who are not fluent in English. The knowledge of how we are perceived by others and how we perceive ourselves, will definitely influence my own personal work. I feel that it will be a challenge for everyone of us to create visual solutions where we can communicate globally and not be hindered by language. As artists, our main language is visual graphics. Without this, we are not artists.
Sophia’s Wicked Workship!
In Sophia’s workshop I saw a bunch of different people from different backgrounds put in a room and pretty much forced to learn about one another. I believed the experience was amazing. Because of that day, I felt it brought most of us closer. We got to learn about other’s likes, dislikes, and lifestyles. When we had to sit with someone and make judgments about them just by looking at them, this allowed us to get to know one another on a more personal level. Really, what it came down to was having interaction with people who we don’t know and made to invade their personal space.
We started out learning each others names and I believe this was the ice breaker. The students from China really couldn’t understand what was going on, but the interaction that we were having brought everyone closer, and I feel it made it more comfortable for the Chinese Students to not be shy or afraid to participate. After this particular exercise I think we all let go of that awkward tension that was building up between the different countries from which we come from.
Other than learning the students names and interests, one important thing that I leaned from them was how much we have in common. Seeing how most of us are into the Arts a lot of us do have the same interests, even though we come from different places on the map, we all have the passion to create art in some way shape or form. I don’t know if I learned anything about myself. Interacting with the other students on my behalf went really well, but I normally get a lot with most people. I never found myself feeling uncomfortable doing most of the exercises in the workshop, because I had such a great time.
There was some in my workshop who felt that this was boring, but I think it was very necessary, and it was a great way for all of us to let go and get loose to help us let our guard down from the people from other countries who were complete strangers. This was a great Idea and I wish we could have done more exercises within the workshop. Sophia also was patient for those who couldn’t speak English, and definitely knew what she was doing. If I could do it again, I would in a heartbeat.
Last edited by Todd_Nelson on June 13, 2010 at 12:57 am
Culture Games
Out of the two days, culture games were my favorite. The discussion of different cultures is much more interesting when you have many different cultures discussing it together. What has made our discussions unique is that we are able to bring points of view from all parts of the world with different customs, traditions, political views, religions and walks of life. This is more valuable than say a classroom in Utah, which has little diversity.
The most difficult but fun part of the culture games was learning people’s names. But I think it was a very valuable experience because it forced us out of our comfort zones, and to learn everyone’s names and also learn a little about who they are and what they like to do. Some people are very shy, and some people when forced into a situation can very articulate and funny, when otherwise come off very quiet.
Our second activity was social behaviors that make us uncomfortable around each other when conversing. We had assignments with out our comrades knowing like standing too close, not allowing others to get close to us, Staring at the ground, staring above their head. All things designed to make a totally “normal” situation uncomfortable. It was interesting to see that when we break social norms how self conscious, anxious or upset we can get. Questions start to race through our heads; Do they like me? Do they hate me? Do they even care what I saying? What is wrong with you!?! I thought this was particularly interesting because of human “normal” behavior is something we are conditioned to do. We subconsciously follow these norms and when we break them it becomes a red flag, and instantly people can tell something is wrong.
The final game had an opportunity to categorize ourselves into groups we felt that we belong to. Some groups with lots of people belonging, and some groups with not many at all, and sometimes only ourselves belonged to the group. To get a sense of acceptance and belonging and then to feel like a complete outsider in a span of 15 minutes was a bit of a shock.
Last edited by Jeff_Madsen on June 12, 2010 at 10:03 pm
Immigrant workshop with Sophia
Honestly at first I was a little disappointed with the immigration workshop. I initially thought it was something you would do at a freshman year retreat, especially when in reality I really wanted to explore Berlin and have a first hand experience learning about a foreign culture with my group. As the day progressed with Sophia, I was thankful that I had gotten to know the names of my group members and one thing they liked, as well as a glimpse into their personality. I just wish this communication with the group members could have happened either earlier in the trip or while we were exploring the city. But at the workshop, I learned that I cannot pronounce Chinese diphthongs very well and it’s A LOT harder than one might think. I also realized that the Chinese have tried a lot harder with communication than I have. The immigration workshop concluded with Sophia handing out sheets of Yang Liu’s design work from her book “East Meets West”, which I really enjoyed viewing. I thought this work was very creative and simple. It’s one of those things where you think to yourself “why didn’t I think of that?” because it’s seems so simple but it does not mean it was easy to come up with visually. It was very interesting. Something that can communicate to a vast audience without any words is very hard and Yang Liu did it perfectly. The workshop provided some new knowledge on all sorts of ends. I think learning about and viewing Yang Liu’s work shown by Sophia could help give me more ideas with being creative, clear, simple in an info graphic.
Last edited by Christie_Liberatore on June 12, 2010 at 9:48 pm
It’s interesting that Christie would say that she didn’t get much out of Sophia Stepf’s workshop, because I feel like she was kind of the only reason I did get anything out of it. I agree that a lot of the activities were kind of ice-breaker-y, but I do think that she had an ultimate point, and I suspect that maybe Christie didn’t benefit that much from it because she got it before the whole thing even started. At first, I thought there was no way the exercise could be as formative and valuable for me as the Kreuzberg trip was, because seeing that environment really forced me to think, and I had originally assumed that all of my responses for this assignment would regard that experience, but less than an hour into Sophia Stepf’s symposium, I changed my mind as we were trying to name elements that define culture. At first we were coming up with traditional things like food and dress, and the Chinese even added calligraphy, but then Christie goes, “isn’t culture kind of just individual?” and it was like what Oprah calls an “aha moment” for me. It seemed to be obvious to Christie, but I’d never thought to frame it that way; culture doesn’t have to be a group. It’s just one’s societal programming, and this is so specialized today that everyone has an individual social programming.
Stepf actually got us to the point in her workshop where the bigger question was not even defining culture, but “what is not culture?” She explained that the word culture originally came from the word for agriculture, because it’s created; it’s not from nature, but people make it. I think this gets to the heart of why culture can be individual. We’re not inherently going to form homogenous groups. If we make a conscious choice to define ourselves along different lines, we can create those. There’s nothing natural, or inevitable, about culture, so we aren’t forced to remain in the former divisions of ethnic or geographic groups, for example.
It’s interesting that Yang Liu’s work really appealed to you, because I feel like this idea appeals to me for the same reason: It’s simple, but not easy to come up with. The idea that culture is individual also encourages the same kind of design that Yang Liu does, with an emphasis on universality. So I agree that it makes me want to work on expressing ideas creatively, clearly, and simply, in a universal, not targeted way.
I have to agree with Christie on a lot of things. I honestly loved Sophie, I thought she was very entertaining and she made a lot of valuable points. But at the same time a lot of the things we did in the workshop, I thought was a lot of common sense. It also felt like it was something that would normally be done at some kind of orientation or something. I would have liked it if we had done this on our first day, rather than meeting up with our partners. It would have been the perfect icebreaker for everyone. I also feel it would have been beneficial to hear this information about conversations and such before we were put into the “uncomfortable” situation of having to meet someone new. I also was thankful for the chance to learn half of the groups names, even more since we learned them in a fun way. A lot of stuff associating with the conversation topic, such as the space of communication and looking at someone in the eye to let them know you are listening was something that I have learned while growing up, this is the reason I feel that it is common sense. Maybe others haven’t learned this while growing up but I remember very clearly that for a long time I hated looking anyone in the eye because I was shy. I finally stepped away from this feeling and the quality of my conversations improved substantially.
I also was intrigued by the glimpse of the book by Yang Liu. It did have simple images but they were very expressive in their own unique way. This whole program has opened up my eyes to the simplicity that communication needs to take in order to be really effective. The concept of less is more is important when it comes to visual communications It was also cool to hear different responses from the different heritages. The Chinese students did not agree with all of the images and the Turkish students said that some of the visuals also represented their culture. It was interesting to hear both sides and to hear personal perspectives on the matter. I enjoyed the workshop, I feel that Sophie couldn’t have done a better job, I do just wish we would have done it on our first day of being here:)
I came into this program expecting diversity and looking forward to interaction with an international range of students. However, when we all came together we realized that the ability to cross language barriers would be a more difficult process than expected. At first, I will admit, I felt frustrated. The experience was conflicting with my expectations. I looked forward to long, deep conversations with the Chinese, German and Turkish students about stereotypes and their perception of WWII in Germany and Nazi propaganda. However, it is clear that not everyone in the group is a fluent English speaker. I was concerned because initially it seemed impossible to create a collaborative exhibit without communicating in English. I emailed such concerns to my mom last evening. Today, I woke up to an e-mail saying, “well. It looks like you are just going to have to learn Chinese.” My mother, a Danish immigrant to the United States, has always had a wonderful understanding of language and culture. This simple sentence has inspired me the whole day. I’ve taken notice of how hard the Chinese students are working to translate our words, they can read and write well. But when a mind is processing a foreign language it needs the speaker to slow down. They may have a broad vocabulary, but at our rate of speech, everything blurs together and sounds the same. I am trying to learn a few words in Chinese, and hope that by the end of the trip I can hold a short conversation and understand a few design terms in Chinese as well.
However, the culture activities with Sophia showed us how much can be communicated with little use of language. As design students, we have a common appreciation of imagery. We should be able to do this successfully. It gives even greater insight into our exhibit. An exhibit that we hope to open internationally. If we plan to do that, we have to face the reality of language barriers. We have to use our design skills to represent facts and statistics with minimal language use and maximal imagery.
Also, it is only appropriate that we are attempting to cross these language boundaries as we are creating an exhibit about immigration. In a sense, we are getting a taste of the daily life of an immigrant. They move to a new area and on a daily basis decide how much effort they are going to put into learning the language of the new country. I am only here for two weeks, but everyday, I make a choice whether to learn a new German word, or whether to rely on the fact that most Germans know English. The Chinese students are having a similar to other immigrants who might feel the frustration directed towards them, just because they have not yet learned English.
In our activities, I began to really see the personalities of the other students. We have to make a list of communities we belonged too. Everyone then went around the circle and mentioned a community they thought others would also belong too. With single words and a simple action we learned our common interests. The other favorite activity, was comparing the Chinese and Western culture. The book by Yang Liu used images to communicate fundamental differences between the two cultures. This was such an engaging activity because it got to the core of info-graphics and design, in which images can replace words and inspire and communicate to the viewer.
Last edited by Talia_Hillman on June 12, 2010 at 5:57 pm
I had a lot of fun during Sophia’s workshop. It was interesting to see the different directions conversations can take just because of something like standing way to close or not even looking at the person you are having a conversation with. I had fun doing the activity of trying to communicate without actual words or common hand & head notions. It was hard to get used to wiggling ear instead of nodding my head up and down when I was trying to say yes. My partner and I resorted to pretty much writing stuff down on a paper. The experience was similar to trying to communicate with someone who does not speak your language and in reality it would be even harder to try and write something down when their is a language barrier anyway.
I really enjoyed the games she had us do. It was hard to try and memorize everyone’s name when we stood in a circle and learned everyone’s name but it was easier to associate a physical motion with their name.
I wasn’t aware of the many possibilities of interpretations of the actual word culture. I felt like this lecture was significant and meaningful. It was interesting to hear everyone’s perspective on what they feel culture is. Before the workshop I had based a lot of culture just on location but after listening to her, I had come to the conclusion that it isn’t all about location. It is about your personal history, values, surroundings, & community.
I thought Sophie was very entertaining and we had a lot of fun with her. One of the last games she had us do was where we wrote groups that we felt like we belong to on a piece of paper. We then went through the circle and said one group that we felt would most likely be apart of others in the circle. If the individuals were apart of that group then they would walk towards the person who said it. We then did the same thing for a group that we felt like no one else would belong to. It was nice to have a feeling of similarities with others. It was also cool to see how others belong in different groups. Everyone is unique in their own way, we all had our differences but we are also very similar too. This workshop was beneficial in pointing out the components of culture.
Last edited by Chanel_Lichfield on June 12, 2010 at 5:13 pm
Sophia’s workshop at the school was interesting to say the least. I really had no idea what to expect. I had heard we were playing games about learning each other’s names and things like that. It turned out to be pretty strange, but hilarious. We addressed several issues about body languages, learning people’s names, and knowing how to make someone feel comfortable. The game where we all stood in a circle and said our name and what we liked to do (“My name is Sam and I like to skateboard”), was a lot of fun. It’s games like that that really have to ability to make me feel uncomfortable, and it did. However, more so than that, it was a really useful tool to learn everyone’s names. I could probably recite everyone’s names and their action just because we had to do it so many times, especially since I was near the end.
We played another game where the group was split into two groups. Group A attempted to converse with Group B. Group B was told to do any number of things to make their partner in Group A feel uncomfortable. My task was to avoid contact with whoever was trying to talk to me by looking at the floor. I think that the point was to try and make the other person feel uncomfortable so that we would be aware of how to make good, comfortable conversation with strangers. However, I think I ended up being much more uncomfortable than those who were trying to talk to me. It turned out to be extremely difficult to keep my eyes on the floor. I desperately wanted to look up into the person’s face and let them know that I really did want to talk to them. From their perspective, my actions just made them feel like I didn’t care about them, or that I was being rude.
One of the last games we played also split our group into two groups, the hosts and the guests. I was a host. Our task was to follow some instructions on a piece of paper and try to make the other person do them. The thing is, we were not allowed to speak, or point with our hands. It was difficult to say the least. As a host I had to get the guest wash their hands, take off their shoes, and rub my back. Little did I know my guest also had objectives to accomplish. Whenever she tried to get me to do things, I never knew what she was doing. It was a very interesting exploration of nonverbal communication. This made me realize how important body language is to one on one communication.
Last edited by Sam_DeMastrie on June 12, 2010 at 9:22 am
I learnt a number of things about myself through the culture workshop with Sophia Steph. I learned that I look like I’m “definitely Christian.” I learned that I appear to be fairly friendly and that it seems like I would have many friends upon a first impression. Another comment that was made was that I probably play a lot of sports.
After discussion with some of my classmates throughout the trip I learned a couple things further. Another friend told me she didn’t think I was friendly when we first met, and still doesn’t but that I seemed worldly and so had some characteristics of someone who was friendly. Yet another friend told me she thought I seemed conceited when she first met me.
What is interesting to me is all the different notions you can give off about yourself without even trying. Some of the things people think are good but other things I am less comfortable with. It doesn’t offend me at all if people think that I look Christian. It doesn’t bother me if people think I seem friendly or not. What does bother me slightly is if people think I seem conceited.
Something I learned about others is that, like me, they are all interested in having conversation flow smoothly and in getting to know each other and me. Everyone wants to feel connected to others. Some ways you can be connected are through similar defining characteristics like sharing a religion or a hobby. Another way, is by conversing and sharing an interest in learning about the differences between us.
I recall a number of occasions when conversation has turned solely to, “Oh, that’s so interesting that you do things like that. This is how we do things…” It becomes almost like a bartering exchange where all parties end up somewhat satisfied with the new knowledge they acquire about the other.
The specific notion that inter-cultural interaction is sort of like a bartering system helped me to understand a suggestion for the exhibit by a member of my track. He thought we should a station where there would be an ongoing exchange of objects from different cultures. You would bring an object that is meaningful to you from a cultural perspective and you would leave it there in exchange for the object that someone else had left there. That object is culturally significant now to both parties.
From Sticks + Stones
The intercultural workshop helped me to easily understand the different cultures in our group. Sophia had a unique way of forcing us to come up with our own definitions of culture and what forms our individual cultures.
Through what seemed like childish games in the beginning I was able to get to know others in my group and things about them that I probably would not have asked them myself or would not have felt comfortable talking to them because of a language barrier.
I feel like the games brought us together even though there were many cultural barriers including language. We used our body language to communicate and also used our minds to memorize and learn more about each other.
As adults I think we get into a comfortable way of life and create this bubble of comfort around us in and through our personal cultures that we enjoy. Through games and talking, we are able to break that bubble and create the confidence in ourselves to learn about others. We were all in the same situation with communication and feeling out of our comfort zone to begin with. When I saw the Chinese interacting so well, that’s when I decided that it was okay to interact also. When others are trying so hard I feel like I need to contribute.
Though we spent a lot of time in the workshop, time seemed to go by fast as we learned about culture and different ways we were all connected to each other through our different cultures.
I believe we can do more when we know more about each other and that through this workshop we were able to do that. We can now move forward knowing some strengths and weaknesses that can help us to move forward and solve problems as we work on this exhibit.
It is exciting to see the many differences in our group but that we can all feel connected and belong in a group of people who live on the other side of the world.
I should confess that I first felt like we were playing some childish games. It was amazing to notice how the little tricks in those games made each of us realize that we were actually having a different kind of interaction with a lot of people we just met. The first game implied looking in the eyes of the others, reminding us how important it was to look at people in order to communicate properly and of course showing how hard it can become when it is something that we “have to do”. I should definetly say that my favorite exercise was when we were asked to
write about ourselves and first tell the category that we think will be common with the other and then the one we think that is only valid for us. It was funny to see that almost none of these categories was only valid for one person. We all had things in common, no matter which nationality. I personally thought that this whole workshop was like a kind of social experiment on us, but of course a funny and enjoying one. It has definitely been useful for us to know each other better.
About Yang Li’s book, I thought it was a very funny exercise because the visuals themselves were already stereotypes, and we were trying to understand what they were about, again through our stereotypes. Another interesting practice was the one implying the personal space experiment. I was part of the team that was asked to make communication harder, and I was suppose to get too close to people, not letting them any personal space. I still believe the effect of this workshop would be different if we were really doing it with total strangers. The reason why I think this way is that although we are from various countries, we are still a very homogeneous team of design students we are all around the same age and we all received similar education. The more important, we are all very open‐minded..! =) Thanks Sophia!