Ins Gesicht sagen — to say to the face. Offen aussprechen — to speak out openly. Kein Blatt vor den Mund nehmen — to take no leaf before the mouth, meaning to speak without covering.
And the opposite: hintenherum, behind-around, and hinter dem Rücken, behind the back. Both are accusations.
The German objection is not to being criticised in front of others. It is to being criticised where you cannot answer.
Das muss auf den Tisch — that has to go on the table. Said in German when something is being handled quietly that ought to be handled in front of everyone. The image is of a table with people sitting around it. Putting something on it is making it visible to all of them simultaneously, which is the point rather than a side effect.
German law requires the works council to convene a works meeting of all employees once every calendar quarter and report on its activities. At least once a year the employer must report to that meeting on staffing, the financial position and trends of the establishment, and environmental protection.
Where the employer or a quarter of the eligible employees request it, the works council must convene a meeting and put the requested matter on the agenda.
A statutory forum exists in which the workforce assembles, the employer accounts for himself, and anyone may put a subject on the table.
Dienst ist Dienst und Schnaps ist Schnaps – literally: Work is work. Schnaps is schnaps (alcoholic beverage) – is a very well-known German figure of speech underlining the strict separation between work and play. A similar figures of speech conveys German thinking: Erst die Arbeit, dann das Vergnügen – first work, then enjoyment.
In 2008 leading literary pundit Marcel Reich-Ranicki was supposed to receive the German television award for his life’s work. Reich-Ranicki also came to the awards show and listened to the laudation by Thomas Gottschalk. However, in his thank-you address he had little thanks left for the award that he a just been presented with.
Instead, he explained, that he had already received many important prizes in his life, and that it had never been difficult for him to say thank you. But today, he was “in a very horrible situation“, as he was forced to “somehow react” to the prize which he had received, and was asked to be “not too harsh”.
“I don’t want to offend anyone. No, I don‘t want to do that. But I would just like to come out and say that I will not accept this prize. If the prize had come with money I would have given the money back, but it didn’t come with money. I can only fling this object […] away from me, or throw it at someone’s feet. I cannot accept it! And I also found it terrible to have to suffer this event for five hours.”
Reich-Ranicki’s speech left his audience perplexed. During his speech the cameras continued to capture shocked expressions amongst the members of the audience, here and there and embarrassed grin, a few laughs. Reich-Raniki was bold enough to call the German Television award, which many of the attending actors and producers used to sing their own praises, ‘rubbish’. Freely and without restraint. Controversial. Typical Reich-Ranicki.
With the recent popularity of YouTube and other amateur video websites, people have been staging scenarios and filming people’s reactions to them. This is particularly popular in the U.S., where, in addition to amateur reaction videos, in 2008 ABC created a television show called What Would You Do?
In the show, actors and actresses pretend to be in situations in which they would benefit from unsolicited advice (domestic abuse, drugged beverages, etc.), and the show collects statistics on how many people offer advice or warnings.
Typically, most Americans who witness these situations don’t get involved. In one episode, in which a caregiver in a park berates the elderly man for whom he’s supposed to be caring, and refuses to take the elderly man home when asked, only one-quarter of the people who witnessed the interaction intervened. Other episodes typically have similar statistics of intervention.
There are hundreds of American advice-givers on the web. Let’s read what they write about unsolicited advice:
“Your opinion is valuable, your advice even more precious. So, save it. Keep it for yourself. Odds are, you need it more than I do. So, please don’t give that sh*t away, certainly not without even being asked.”
“Have a nice day,” said the mom to her teenage daughter; to which the daughter replied, `Motherrrr, will you pulleeeeze stop telling me what to do!´ I empathize with both parties in this old joke. Sometimes we get so overrun by unsolicited advice that even the most innocuous, benevolent advice becomes intolerable.”
“Unsolicited Advice: We’ve all received it at some point in our lives and we’ve all given it as well. In some few cases, if we didn’t know enough about the circumstance to ask for advice then we are appreciative if someone tells us – but those moments are few and far between. The majority of the time we feel that the other person is trying to take our own power away. We feel as if they believe that we are not capable of taking care of ourselves and knowing what we need.”
“Four tips on how to give unsolicited advice: 1. Rephrase your advice as your own personal experience. 2. To repeat: Keep your stories short and relevant. Most people’s attention span is a lot shorter than your speaking ability! 3. If you must give direct advice disguise it as “How I did it” or “How someone else did it”. 4. Accept that the recipient will reject or act on your advice at their own will and allow them their self motivation.”
Good Bye, Lenin! (2003). Context: A son tries to protect his fragile mother from the truth about the fall of the Berlin Wall. Illustration: Although the film is comedic and emotional, scenes involving hospital staff, government officials, and bureaucrats consistently show feedback and communication that is formal, factual, and impersonal, especially in professional contexts.
Joachim Sauer is a quantum- and physio-chemist. He is a professor of physical and theoretical chemistry at the Humboldt University of Berlin. He is also the husband of Germany’s chancellor, Angela Merkel.
The election of his wife to the most powerful governmental position in all of Germany had no impact on his career. They seldom appear together in public. He declines to answer any interview questions that do not have to do with his own research. In federal elections his part is irrelevant.
Public life is clearly separated from private life. The home-life scene is irrelevant in determining political success. This same pattern can also be seen in the careers of Joschka Fischer (former German Foreign Minister) and Gerhard Schröder (Merkel’s predecessor as Chancellor). Both were married several times.
In 2010 the online-career portal monster.de conducted a study regarding German behavior in social online networks. 61% of people said that they are not friends with their colleagues via social media.
Only 27% indicated that they talk to their colleagues on Facebook. 12% of the survey participants are friends with their colleagues on Facebook. However, most have different profile settings for colleagues. The survey results suggest that Germans separate their private life and their professional life.