As it occurs with the important events in my life, the first thing I remember is that it took me some time to assimilate the fact that I had to go to Europe to present a paper. Perhaps I only completely realized the consequences of that when I landed in Paris. It really felt like if up to that moment I had lived inside a capsule: seeing such a completely different world, very different people speaking all kinds of languages, felt like a strong yet gentle slap in my (innocent and skeptical) Colombian face. Indeed, only then I realized that a different reality ---a better one, from many points of view--- was truly possible for me. Only realizing that was illuminating.
Just as in the first trip, this time I stayed in a town outside Paris, in the south (Orsay). Since the airport (CDG) is located out in the north of Paris, you should take a train (called RER) that completely crosses Paris and connects it to neighboring towns. I remember my first RER trip by having a strange mix of surprise, jet-lag and eagerness to absorb as many things as possible. It was almost a childish feeling. This time, while in the RER, I tried to recall that feeling: I discovered that my eagerness prevented me from seeing things calmly. Put another way, I realized that being in Europe (well, Italy) for a while was useful to look beyond the childish novelty and surprise, and start appreciating some fine details. This also has to do with the different standpoints a tourist and a non-tourist have about the same place: where the former only sees possibilities for discovering attractive spots, the latter only sees an unsurprising (yet only partially understood) reality.
One of my motivations for my first trip to Paris was to find out whether doing a PhD in France, in some topic I was interested at that time, was possible. Back in 2005 I had some doubts and great expectation on the idea of doing a PhD. It's amazing to see how things have changed! While in 2005 doing a PhD in Italy was not in my plans at all, it is now my reality. Now I have great doubts and some expectations on the idea of finishing the PhD. It is curious (frightening could be a more suitable word) how the level of uncertainty regarding things has only increased: I have gone from a naive "will I find a nice place abroad to do a PhD?" to a more realistic "how will life be after the PhD? will i find a job?" While in 2005 I discovered that my wishes about to do a PhD in France were a bit difficult to do, now I don't discard France as a possible place to go after the PhD.
(Do not get me wrong: feel lost or frustrated is the normal status for a PhD student. After all, it's well known that with every PhD degree an extra degree on frustration management is awarded.)
To conclude, some words on my perception of French people. It hasn't changed too much in three years, although I admit it is less radical now. (In general, my opinions are more moderate now than, say, 5 years ago.) Few interactions with French people are enough to realize they're more distant than Colombians. In my first trip I learned that it's not they are mean by default (of course, there are some of them that are really mean) but it's also that we Colombians are too nice to each other. Even with people who they haven't seen in their lives. (People who know me know that I am not the warmest person in the world, but even I am warmer than an average European.) It is my impression that people in France (and apparently everywhere in the world but South America) is really individualist, and of course this has pros and cons. On the one hand, in our countries is perhaps easier to fit in: you get new friends very easily, for instance. On the other hand, the extremely individualist character people have in European countries endows societies a distant, cold atmosphere: you feel you have to hang around for a long while before fitting in. We should not forget that we're talking about societies that differ on a lot of aspects, especially in age. Societies in south american countries behave like young, immature teenagers, who have yet a lot to learn and go through. European societies are like those adults that are so self-confident that disregard younger friends, especially if they come from distant, unknown places. Young south american societies make stupid mistakes that the uptight European societies do not always manage to understand.
Apart from individualism, another thing I recognize in French people is how direct they can be. This is also a great contrast with the standard latin personality. In Colombia a critique is usually taken personally, and there's no way a big discussion doesn't end up in a real fight. In fact, before my first trip I thought I was a rather direct person. Being surrounded by people who are as or more direct than you is certainly an enriching experience. To illustrate this point (and to conclude the post), I take a story that occurred to my Colombian advisor in France. He and his wife went to some place to eat some fine cheese. They chose a cheese that had a smell that was so strong, that my advisor's wife had to complain to the waiter. He replied:
"madame, if you want to eat something with a nice smell, you should eat a soap."
3 comments:
A comment to your comment:
"It is my impression that people in France (and apparently everywhere in the world but South America) is really individualist, and of course this has pros and cons." It is my impression that many countries in Asia (and perhaps Africa as well), e.g. China, are less individualistic than most countries in South America. I'll give you that Western Europeans and North Americans are very individualistic, though. But to include Africa and Asia under Europe in this sense seems wrong to me.
The "soap comment" is very French, yes. A common prejudice against the French is that they're arrogant and think that they are more sophisticated than the rest of the world. This might be true in some cases, but you have to admit that their cuisine really is good. :-)
thanks jorge for your post. Nevertheless I have to disagree with your comment about young and old societies. What I see in these clashes is a matter of protocol more than wisdom or ignorance reflected when establishing relationships.
I'd say that we (southamericans) are more cheeky, even with strangers...and that naive behaviour sometimes put us in troubling situations. There´s also other thing about it, and is that the ¨open and calid behaviour¨ also comes with a double moral and hypocrite behaviour. However, that doesn´t mean that southamericans act as confused youngsters, but is also a matter of survivance: When you don´t have the ability to survive just by yourself it is easy to conform groups and act towards a common interest, and is by far less intimidating starting a conversation (and probably entering into share a social interests) when someone is smiling at you than in any other situation.
Don´t get me wrong, I´m not saying that europeans don´t smile at others because they don´t need others to towards their self-realization; but for me is true that better social systems provide you more independence from groups than before.
Here groups conform a crucial part of the society, but they act in different ways, and are much more serious on their rules. Rarely groups intersect in different ways (you just don't invite your friends from hockey with your wife's knit-club). This can be seen as cold by us, as our smile is not the only tool we have to use to make us an space. However, once one fits in one of these schemes, and accept the difference in approaches, it is much probable that the relations created in this schemes will last longer than others, as you weight more here than just a wonderful smile.
Cheers,
Guga: Thanks for your comments. Yes, I was way too general (or simplistic, if you want) when saying "everywhere in the world but South America", especially considering the small part of the world I have visited. (I have only visited two continents, after all...)
As for the "common prejudice" I agree on their arrogance, but here I tend to think that sometimes it's a case of well developed self-confidence, something that a southamerican mind can only interpret as arrogance. For instance, in the "soap incident" it's not that the waiter was a completely asshole, but it was that one of his finest cheeses was being questioned. He couldn't accept that, and reacted accordingly.
hugazo: Thanks for you comment, very interesting. I think you're confusing something, though. When I mentioned "societies' age" I was referring to the fact that southamerican societies are very young: even if start counting from 1492, that's nothing when compared to the "age" of, say, nordic countries. They have lived as a society for a much longer time, and many concepts (notably, the treatment of individual liberties ---the independence you mention in your comment) are much more evolved there that in our countries. What I think you got wrong is the fact that southamerican people behave like youngsters. I didn't mean that. And yes, we're too cool and sometimes we smile too much, which is not always seen in a positive way.
In any case, by mentioning "circles" you partially touched on something what I call the "circles of trust", which is something very strong here in Italy. Shortly, the idea is that a person moves around a number of social circles during his life. No surprise there. The really different thing I see is that "Italian circles of trust" are really really closed for an outsider (let alone a foreigner). These are circles that rarely intersect to each other. This is to be contrasted with the southamerican circles, which are flexible, they shrink and expand as you wish :)
Post a Comment