First word! And of course it's a complicated one. We couldn't have "wine" or "family"?
When I first started thinking about the word "nomothetic," and the idea of trying to name or describe something in vague, universal terms, I thought about the existence of national identities, and how calling someone "French" or "American" can come with a lot of baggage. Is it possible to name all of the members of a society with one word? When you give a name to a group of people, are you helping to unite them, or is it an oversimplification that allows for too many generalities and prejudices?
Maybe I wouldn't have been better off with "wine" or "family." Calling a jug of fermented grapes "French wine" doesn't say anything about vinticulture, and how can you talk about American families when people like the Duggars or the Kardashians are the most famous families in America?
In any case, the word definitely set something off in me. How do I, as an "American," talk about the "French"?
Nomothetic is the opposite of idiothetic (or idiographic), which is studying or explaining individual events. If I were to make a general, universal statement about French and American identities (Hey! Nomothetic!), I'd say that metropolitan France favors nomothetic statements about national identity, while the United States favors idiographic statements. Being French means being like other French people, and being American is just geographic. In fact, if you ask most Americans where their family is "originally" from, they're proud to tell you every nationality of every ancestor. (Mine were Scottish, Austrian, and Russian, for the record.)
From what I have experienced, the French are proud of their French heritage and culture, and try to preserve their French identity through various means, such as trying to clean up modern French language and funding French artists. If you are an educated French speaker today, you won't have much of a problem reading a 500 year old essay, whereas most American college students need some help reading a work from the same period. As a country founded by immigrants, we value change, and are open to language evolution. The problem today is whether or not this nomothetic French identity will make it through globalization.
Immigration in France today is a loaded topic, and one that most Americans find hard to understand. In one French class I took, the American students had a hard time discussing immigration issues with our French professor. A few French articles we read said that many French people were worried that too many Muslim immigrants would change France into an Islamic state, and that teaching Arabic in schools would put the French language at risk. Arguments for immigration said that the idea of preserving the French identity meant protecting white, Catholic, native French people as the majority.
For American students who are here thanks to immigrants, it's hard to think of immigration ruining a country. We hear some arguments against immigrants in the U.S., but these people are easily written off as ignorant or racist. Being an American is inherently pluralistic, and preserving our American identities means encouraging many cultures to coexist. We suggested that French culture could live alongside new, immigrant cultures, and that laws banning veils in schools or limiting immigration numbers didn't make sense. Our professor said that we didn't understand. We thought that the "French" identity they were trying to protect was nomothetic, exclusionary and archaic, and that identities should be seen as pluralistic and inclusive.
Still not sure if any of us were right.
For American students who are here thanks to immigrants, it's hard to think of immigration ruining a country. We hear some arguments against immigrants in the U.S., but these people are easily written off as ignorant or racist. Being an American is inherently pluralistic, and preserving our American identities means encouraging many cultures to coexist. We suggested that French culture could live alongside new, immigrant cultures, and that laws banning veils in schools or limiting immigration numbers didn't make sense. Our professor said that we didn't understand. We thought that the "French" identity they were trying to protect was nomothetic, exclusionary and archaic, and that identities should be seen as pluralistic and inclusive.
Still not sure if any of us were right.
Sara, you've drawn an interesting contrast between French and American cultures: nomothetic statements about cultural identity are characteristic of the French while Americans put more emphasis on the idea cultural plurality. I agree with you that as an American it is hard to understand the mainstream French attitude towards immigrants (and how apparently acceptable it is to publicly own one's prejudices!) -- particularly towards Muslims -- but I question whether mainstream America really lives up to its ideal of cultural inclusiveness. I suspect that that the real reason Muslim immigration is not a controversial topic in the US is because we do not have nearly the number of Muslim immigrants that Europe does. If you consider the legislation that some US states have enacted in an attempt to curb Hispanic immigration, however, there are comparisons to be made with what's going on in France. How do we account for this similarity given the fact that two countries have such apparently different attitudes towards incorporating other cultures into their own?
ReplyDeleteKate has some good points. The level of immigration by Muslims into France seems to be so high as to "compete" with the culture already present. I feel like we as Americans can't really sympathize with the French on this issue because, despite having a very large immigrant population, our distinctly American culture has uncontested dominance over all others here. It's been my experience that people come to America with the intention to wear Nike shoes, drink coca-cola, and eat McDonalds. Islam, on the other hand, spurns many of the staple elements of French culture such as drinking alcohol and eating certain foods.
ReplyDeleteI love how you brought up the point of how America favors the idiographic statements from geographic relevance. That is very true in America today. Not one general statement can encompass the 320 million people and the 50 states that is America today. As Americans, I believe that we do suffer from our own nomothetic generalizations based on geography in America today. California, New York, Nebraska, Texas, Florida, etc. have their own generalizations based on geography, but it is all of these differences that make us America. Our nation was founded on immigration and from that, even with radical ideas, our ever changing cultural identity is American. We accept this and (for the most part) are open to adapting to an environment where every culture can live together in harmony.
ReplyDeleteI highly doubt that an influx of immigrants can massively change and degrade the French culture. More or less, it will evolve to accommodate for these immigrants, but never fade away. As you said, the French people are a proud culture and even with these changes, they will never lose their identity.
For some reason I can't comment on your blog, so here's my comment-- When we figure out what the problem is I'll move it to your blog.
DeleteIn the second article that you linked, it said that many immigrants want to integrate themselves into the German culture, and not create a "subculture." Do you agree?
Unfortunately I've only been to Germany a handful of times for vacations and touristy things, and not speaking German at all makes me want to avoid any non-touristy areas for fear of embarrassing myself. I know a lot about beer and schnitzel, but besides some weird bars I went to in Berlin, I know next to nothing about 21st century German culture.
I think it depends on the person themselves. Some people would like to integrate into the culture, others would rather not. My view is that if you migrate to a country, the rules of the country need to be followed. A subculture is an interesting view, but then again, I can see many subcultures in America. It seems to me that regardless of where you are, you are drawn to people who share similarities to you. The German people are super nice and as long as you try, they will respect you and treat you well. As long as you are open to learn about culture, that's all that's needed. :)
DeleteSara,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the dilemma you point out in trying to describe the French as a whole, and the issue this raises in relation to our word of the day. I like your idea that being French is being like French people whereas being American is really being multicultural yet belonging to a geographical idea. However, I have to agree with the point Kate brought up. Are the two countries really that different in their views on immigration? I think we may see it differently (depending on how open-minded we are, and our proximity to the issue). We can be sure that there are probably Americans who feel the same way towards immigration as what you've described, and there are French who don't. Overall, it's important to remember what you stated: we can't sum up a people with a vague statement, because there are always exceptions to the rule (just like with French grammar! :)).
Sara,
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I truly enjoyed your opening lines of "First word! And of course it's a complicated one. We couldn't have "wine" or "family"? Beyond that, I can relate with your partial dilemma of how to be an American and comment on thoughts or feelings of the French. Having been overseas on multiple occasions, I have spent time around many Europeans, and although I may have a better understanding of them as a whole, the fact still remains that I am American. I also like what you said about the French being very proud of their culture and their heritage. I would agree with this completely. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed your post and your ideas from it.