Through American Eyes: Thats Dutch Part II/ Thats American Part II

moo.

Continued from “Why it is Hard to Write”

This means, unfortunately, that you are missing out on all the summaries of the great conversations I have about cultural comparisons. As soon as post an observation about what is “Dutch,” I am at the risk of offending my gracious hosts.  But what I learned is, over many coffees, beers, and dinners, and car and train rides, that you must draw the distinction between the person and the culture.  I learned this from two perspectives: (Prepare yourself for a long drawn out deductive argument.)

I often steer many conversations I have into political theory. From these conversations, I have derived the hypothesis that it is easier to govern the Netherlands because it is easier to generalize its people. (Hold your retort!) From what I see:  The area is much smaller, you can cross the country top to bottom in a few hours by train, and there is much less geographic variation. Therefore issues that the people face as far as climate, land, resources, and immigration have less variation. The media consumption also has little variation. Most broadcast media can reach all parts of the country.

There are also strong vertical and horizontal interconnectivity among the people.  The vertical ties are through time. The majority of people living here can be traced back to the same 41,818 sq km for a number of generations that an American cannot conceive of.  Due to a strongly social culture, the people have strong horizontal ties to one another. I have seen this by the willingness to talk to complete strangers or their complete lack of fear of each other outside the big city centers. 

So my initial conclusion was that the people, place and perspective are so homogeneous here that it makes it easier to make statements about the whole of Holland. The problem is that when I express these things that seem to me to be self evident, they insist that I don’t know what I am talking about that what I say is not true. (and yes, it is a curse to think of everything in these terms)

 Now, let’s look at the other side of the coin.

To illustrate my point I recall being asked the question, “Is America like the sitcoms we see on TV?” Immediately I replied “Nooo. Well, yes, but no…Wait, yeah” 

“Nooo.” - Sitcoms are designed and written by people to appeal to segments of people to fill space between advertisements directed at those segments.  They are designed to keep people’s attention and they do this by creating a world where people are pretty and their lives are funny, nice, and dramatic but resolvable in 30 minutes. Is this what America is like? No, definitely not.

“Well, yes,” – I take a second look at what I see on TV. Are there people on sitcoms that crazy in America? Yes. Do people live in big houses and drive two big cars? Yes. Are the issues that arise in sitcoms the same as the ones that Americans care about? Yes. Do they really have the freedom to be and do all these things? Yes. So the claims that the people here make about everything in America being big (including the people) and some people being crazy are true.

“but no”- I’ll be dammed if I am represented by characters from CSI, Friends, or How I Met Your Mother. My friends and I are healthy and educated. We are active and aware. We have worldly perspectives and we know and respect culture and diversity. I am different.

“Wait, yeah”- Being, realistic, many people are more concerned with income and possessions than anything else. There are people who watch these shows, laugh at them, absorb them, and relive them. These sitcoms are glorified American life in hi-def or else no one would watch them. We watch them and we buy into them. They mirror our lives and we mirror our shows. Despite the great geographic size, cultural diversity, freedom of choice, action, and expression, we are homogenized. They affect many of us more than, our religion, our parents, and our roots.

So am I a happy that the people who hear me speaking English in the town see me as being molded from the same lump of material that is “American?” No. Is it accurate? Yes and No. Is it fair for me to make a claim about what is Dutch? No. Is it funny? Yes and No.

So in conclusion, the devil is in the details. The Dutch are few but have political parties that are formed on everything from animal rights to religious fundamentalism whereas our great diversity is masked by two political parties. In nearly every town in America there is a McDonalds but you can also choose from at least four different regional or ethnic restaurants. The Dutch have conquered half the world but you can only buy about four spices in an Aldi. I know this kind of conclusion is lame but I think it is also important to state. It is easy to sit from afar and pass judgments as I had done with my conclusion about the Dutch but when I see the same conclusions are made about Americans I find that the defense is natural. In America the diversities are so big they are evident. In Holland the diversities are much more subtle but carry the same weight. While Every American should be proud to be American and the same is true for the Dutch, no person is defined by their country just as no person can define their country.