Up High, Down Low, What’s in Between, Words Matter
Leaders, Individuals and the Media, the responsibility is shared
Regretting the choice of thermal underwear, a bead of nervous sweat trickled down my spine. I eyed the local minister of propaganda. Minus an upraised eyebrow, an imagined challenge perhaps, he was void of expression. To his left was the organizer, a party member and a poet. Various local officials populated the front of the U-shaped table formation. Flanking both sides were the invited writers and poets, the majority of whom were also party members. I was not. Minus a few, all were Chinese. I was one of the few. As the ‘senior’ writer, I would speak first.
— New World
Upside-down trees swingin’ free,
Busses float and buildings dangle:
Now and then it’s nice to see
The world– — from a different angle.
By Shel Silverstein
When I heard the words, “And now our American friend will share his thoughts,” I swallowed hard. My words carried weight they didn’t deserve. Avoiding the more formal greeting, “Dear leaders and participants,” while not wanting to slight, hoping to reflect my tone and the forthcoming content, I began with, “Dajiahao!”, which simply means, “Hello, everyone!”
I had been invited to join a poetry and writer’s conference held in Yanbian, an autonomous prefecture in chilly Northeastern China, bordering North Korea. To highlight diversity, it was comprised of Korean-Chinese and other ethnic minorities, such as Mongolian and Manchu. While there were three other non-Chinese participants, due to a recent strain in country relations, as the sole American, all eyes and ears were on me. Tasked with comparing Chinese and American poetry, neither of which I was overly familiar with, it was no simple matter. I was a little man, a published writer, but one without reputation or in my opinion any remarkable insight. Matching my ‘size’, I chose to reflect on my own personal knowledge.
“Tucked safely beneath my covers, an imagination entered the wonderful world of Shel Silverstein and Dr. Seuss, extraordinary worlds of silly, off-the-wall poetry they had created. Moments like that, there wasn’t a care in the world. Not that there was much for a ten-year old child.” Make eye contact. Watch your tones. Smile. Be human. Be respectful. Be real.
The organizer, ‘Teacher Zhao’, an official with a literary heart, continued to nod and smile kindly. The minister of propaganda watched with an unreadable face. Hearing my Chinese translated into Korean, seeing grins and nods of recognition, laughter when it was expected, I was encouraged to continue.
Cultural comparison is a sensitive topic. A word misspoken can cause loss of face, emotions to flair, and leave a message lost. The delicate becomes a high wire circus act. Doing so in a second language lets you feel as if you are attempting to cross the void on your tippy toes. The easy way is to simply offer compliments and empty platitudes that may sound soothing, but carry little meaning and are forgotten as soon as they are heard. Sure, it offers a wider safety net, but it didn’t exactly stir the audience. At the same time, this wasn’t a soapbox. I wasn’t there to lecture. I was there to share as were the others. I was an invited guest who felt honored to be present. Yet, at the same time, I had an opportunity to act as a window.
Figurative balancing pole in hand, I navigated across, sharing the core differences in early informal education related to poetry. “At a young age, on average Americans read the curiously and playfully scribed lines for pleasure. A creative mind is fostered, where pushing the boundaries of our imaginations are tested and the joy of reading intensifies.” Perhaps subconsciously hiding from the crowd, eyes on my notes, worried about a Mandarin stumble, I continued, “Reflecting rote-style education, a necessity for learning its complex writing system, Chinese focus on ancient poetry, memorizing words that are beyond a child’s comprehension, but instill discipline, memorization, and respect for history. One allows the freedom to express, where rules can be challenged and a degree of ‘chaos’ is accepted. The other retains a sense of harmony, tying stability to respect and order.”
Words matter. So does respect. Sharing equally so. Finishing my talk, I noticed a minute nod of the head from the minister of propaganda. The clapping crowd confirmed it. I wasn’t a shill. I wasn’t a sell-out. I like to believe they would have agreed with Mr. Silverstein, “it’s nice to see the world from a different angle.”
Values differ. One nation, freedom its foundation. The other stability. Depending on where you live, one has greater value than the other. Freedom of expression, often in the form of protests, can at times get messy, rioting at its worse, interfering with societal cohesion. But often that’s deemed a worthy price for exercising a Constitutional right. On the other eastern side of the Pacific, where a history of instability has created millions of deaths, sacrificing certain freedoms in the name of stability are seen as acceptable. Collective in nature, where Confucian values place greater stress on the ‘Mandate of Heaven’ and the hierarchy that comes with it, the people accept certain restraints in favor of economic prosperity. That’s okay, too. It would seem arrogant to believe that democracy is a one-fit solution as much as socialism would be. Societies differ. The degrees of many political systems, often of which pick and choose, interpreting varying practices and beliefs, are uniquely different to fit the people, the geography and the period of time. But the terminology applied to any should be careful as anything valued is fragile, and if taken for granted, can be lost.
— The Voice
There is a voice inside of you
that whispers all day long,
‘I feel that this is right for me,
I know that this is wrong.’
No teacher, preacher, parent, friend
or wise man can decide
what’s right for you — just listen to
the voice that speaks inside.
Shel Silverstein
Mr. Silverstein wrote about a voice. Perhaps he meant our conscience, one that keeps us from openly speaking our mind, a filter that gives us a moment to judge if what we want to say needs to be said. It develops, learns to ‘walk’ and ‘talk’ through our own personal experiences and what has shaped us since birth. Mr. Silverstein may have believed that we listen to our conscious, while at the same time consider the greater society around us. I wanted the ‘voice inside’ to be heard. But, I hoped to balance that same voice against arrogance and misperceptions, something that fifteen years of overseas experience has helped to reduce.
Freedom of speech isn’t free from consequence, especially when spoken from the top.
What we’ve heard out of the oval office isn’t entirely new. DC is called “Spin City” for a reason. Politicians twist and turn to bring in the vote, often pitting one side against another. To a degree, it is accepted by society. But when the scales are tilted to the point that the system and society are not nearly bending, but breaking, threatened to flip, it begs a deeper inspection.
The recent assault on America’s capitol building has brought freedom of speech once again to the forefront. Not that it isn’t always close at hand. It is a value I hold dear, but also one that isn’t as concrete as those who often scream it aloud, with seemingly little idea of its nuances or complexities.
Presidents, governors, senators and congressman have a captive audience, a pulpit from which to preach. Their words are heavy and can spur the people to action, no matter positive or negative. This is how populism often works. People look to elected officials for guidance related to policies that will impact their lives. Wanting factual information was once the norm. But, as of late, misinformation has seemingly taken its place. The people’s emotions are targeted, their logic a distant second. Outlandish conspiracy theories have been shared by an ex-president, legitimizing attacks on science, mainstreaming the unsubstantiated and utterly bizarre.
These esteemed positions are held in high regard. Their character and traits bring influence. No matter if the president, an astronaut or even a singer or athlete. Is it wrong to hold them, especially those elected by the people, to greater accountability? What is wrong with wanting our leaders to speak with intelligence and decency? I want them to be better than me. Diplomatically. Educationally. Economically. Logically. Even morally, though that is a bit touchier. They aren’t spiritual leaders and are as human as the next. But they have a duty to try. My frustration with the ex-president often wasn’t as much with his policies, but an inability to show empathy, compassion, nor an understanding of diplomacy, the ability to accept responsibility, and the failure to understand the importance of respecting your fellow man or woman. It seemed there was a preference for bullying and name-calling, alongside a desire to belittle science and intellect. He was often just plain incomprehensible in action and speech. These traits become acceptable when the top makes it so, normalizing it in society. Supporting constituents may excuse poor behavior with, “They’re just saying how it is,” or, “Don’t read into his words…that’s not what he meant.” Clarity is cheapened. Words apparently don’t matter. Others may unfortunately begin to believe, “If its good enough for the president…” Children internalize these negative traits, believing that is what is required for reaching the top. Words apparently do matter.
The Media
All forms of media are coming under greater scrutiny, from cable to social. Fox News is currently fighting litigation for slander and falsehoods. CNN maybe considering less opinion pieces, reducing sensationalism. Twitter began to issue warnings about false or misleading content after years of public outcry. Facebook received backlash when it stated it didn’t want to get involved. Policies related to what is acceptable are being established, attempting to define the limits of freedom of speech, especially when hate through misinformation or perhaps better stated as disinformation is taking place. As a private platform that acts in the public sphere for sharing information, they have a responsibility to manage. The threat of legal ramifications, such as possibly amending Section 230’s Communications Decency Act, could make these platforms financially liable if they do not take action. An action that can be seen as an attack on freedom of expression, is a slippery slope, but one that shouldn’t be ignored. The information age offers and requires introspection.
That very word, information, and its current digital form, has brought extraordinary advances to the world, allowing instant access to billions. Yet, it also has led to greater confusion, and dare I say, a need for monitoring it. Misinformation due to unknowingly misunderstanding an issue isn’t nefarious in itself. The ability to decipher is becoming a valued skill, one that is sorely lacking. Disinformation, weaponizing it to espouse fear and hate is. Virtual platforms allow dissemination and manipulation at lightning speed, with an unmeasurable reach via bots, trolls and general paranoia. One side is played against another. Social Justice Warriors and its “Cancel Culture”. Extreme Right and its “Conservative Values”. Republican and democrat. Fascist or communist. Goose-stepping nazis or tree-hugging hippies. Freedom fighters or terrorists. Words said with little thought behind the terminology used does nothing more than dehumanize and vilify the other side. It increases the distance, while diminishing the argument. We are reduced to simple pronouns: ‘us’ against ‘them’
Ethically speaking, these platforms, no matter CNN, Fox News, Facebook or Twitter, have an obligation to report factual information. Opinions are worth listening to as well. But there is a clear distinction between the two, concepts we learn in the second grade. This article is too long. Opinion, though more than likely accurate. This article contains 3,126 words. Fact. Overwhelmed with panels of talking heads, some espousing ‘alternative facts’, platforms, both cable and internet based, it is often hard to know where facts end and opinions begin. Media must take responsibility and act, or lawmakers will.
Echo Chambers are Cozy, but Constricting
Any argument should be multifaceted. Can’t people have multiple positions on an issue? While standing for an athlete’s right to kneel, can’t the same person also stand by police while calling for reform? Can a person who believes in religious freedom also believe that there should be separation of religion and state? Gun laws don’t necessarily mean stripping an individual of their right to defend, do they? Does a path to legal immigration have to translate as ‘open borders’? Why can’t our arguments be complex, at times even conflicting? When as black and white as no and yes, there is no room for middle ground. The dueling pronouns, “Us” vs. “Them” are back again.
– Every Thing on It
The Yesees said yes to anything
That anyone suggested.
The Noees said no to everything
Unless it was proven and tested.
So the Yesees all died of much too much
And the Noees all died of fright,
But somehow I think the Thinkforyourselfees
All came out all right.
Shel Silverstein
Insulated by those who act and look like us, what is emulated is what we know. Little to no exterior interferences allow for distortion. We create echo chambers to sustain beliefs that perhaps would crack beneath exterior insight.
Analytical interpretation or critical thinking is not innate. In fact, we are cognitively handicapped by a confirmation bias or “my side” bias, where our individual psyche automatically attempts to lead our brains in the direction of information that confirms existing beliefs. Simultaneously, it discounts any evidence that may deviate from those beliefs and the hypothesis that originally supported them.
Beyond the comfort zone, where our norms and views are challenged, the mechanics behind change gradually whirl into action. Though, depending on our background, the gears and pistons that act as the driving force may be rusty from inactive use. Hearing that which we’ve held stock in our entire life may be incorrect, rejection is instinctive. It is a form of self-protection. But if even a drop of critical thinking beads itself into a mental lubricant, the machine may begin to rotate. Gears and teeth connecting, we start to wonder, “Wait a second, is it possible that my views are not correct, or at the very least, theirs may hold an equal amount of water?” Perhaps by listening to others, we may fear a little less what we don’t know.
— Fear
Barnabus Browning
Was scared of drowning,
So he never would swim
Or get into a boat
Or take a bath
Or cross a moat.
He just sat day and night
With his door locked tight
And the windows nailed down,
Shaking with fear
That a wave might appear,
And cried so many tears
That they filled up the room
And he drowned.
Shel Silverstein
Fear Turns to Hate, brought about by ignorance
“Aren’t you afraid? There are foreigners everywhere!” Following her screams at the checkout counter, as if she caught wind of an alien presence, the paranoid shopper turned in my direction. While a mask covered her face, the horror was apparent. Arm stretched forward, finger wagging accusingly, a fifties-something Chinese aunty began to shout a warning to others, “Look at him, a foreigner! Aren’t you afraid? You should be!”
In April of last year, regular stories ran about COVID-19 making its return to China’s mainland from beyond its borders. It didn’t matter that ninety percent of the cases were returning university students. The people heard imported. The masses translate that to foreign. It created an impressive spike in fear of anything ‘alien’.
The narrative has not changed. It is an imported problem. There are regular reports in the media of imported frozen goods having trace-levels of the COVID-19 virus. Foreign is bad. Domestic is good. As a ‘foreign import’, I feel the impact. Escorted off an airplane from an internal flight and placed on a special bus and taken to an isolated terminal for no other reason than being a passport holder. Unintentional VIP treatment? On a full flight, seats to both sides of me left open, providing ample elbow-space, I couldn’t help but wonder, is there such a thing as positive discrimination? People have leapt back when seeing that I’m a foreigner; quickly moving seats on the subway when discovering that I’m a few seats over. Hotels have stated point blank, “No foreigners allowed.” Entire towns have said the same. It doesn’t matter that I haven’t left the country for over a year, or that I am following the rules as everyone else — I’m a foreigner. The media reports it as a foreign import. I’m the problem. Words matter.
Back home, there are continued attacks against Asian Americans. They are scapegoated out of fear and ignorance. It is dangerous. People are being hurt.. Hearing names such as the ‘Kung Flu’ from America’s highest position of power only elevated the hate, offering a misdirected outlet when none should have been provided. It is ugly. It is disgusting. I have experienced it overseas, where I’m a foreigner. I cannot imagine how hard it is for citizens of their own country to receive it from their supposed ‘fellow-countrymen.’
— New World
Upside-down trees swingin’ free,
Busses float and buildings dangle:
Now and then it’s nice to see
The world– — from a different angle.
Shel Silverstein
Once upon a time, the nursery rhyme, “sticks and stones may break my bones, but names may never hurt me,” made sense. Be the bigger person. Don’t let others get under your skin. Yet, when combined with misinformation, disinformation, hate, and fear, the names that ‘may never hurt’ begin to sting, impacting not just the person, but society as a whole. Words become actions. People have been attacked. People have died.
With technology increasing our ability to reach an ever-increasing audience, our thoughts, our opinions, are both helpful and damaging. More than ever, we have a responsibility to watch what we say, and not for wanting to match political correctness, but simple respect. This may be dismissed as the ramblings of a ‘snowflake’, easily triggered, fragile and wanting to melt. That’s easy enough. But it shouldn’t be.
Its not simply, light-hearted fluff,
Made of soft, syrupy marshmallowy stuff;
Wanting to make us all warm and gooey,
So don’t dismiss this as simply fooey.
Respecting, expecting, wanting the same,
Purely, surely, that’s not so lame.
We’d no longer feel battered, tattered, our emotions scattered,
Up high, down low, whats in between, if only words mattered.
— Ations
If we argue, scream and fight,
That’s an altercation.
If later we apologize,
That’s reconciliation.
If we help each other home,
That’s a cooperation.
And all these actions added up
Make Civilization.
Shel Silverstein
