Der Deutsch-Franzoser

Not long ago. In a café, talking with a German graduate student interested in doing project work for me. He is intelligent, polite, listening carefully. At the table next to us another guy, same age, drinking tea, eating cake, typing into this laptop, headphones on, on his head a thin woolen cap. It‘s late November. After an hour or so our neighbor pays his bill, packs up his laptop, stands up then turns to me and says: Wissen Sie, es ist sehr unhöflich auf Menschen mit dem Zeigefinger zu deuten.

I was not aware that during my talk with the grad student that I had pointed to him with my index finger. But, wait! Who is this guy to interrupt our conversation and correct my behavior? I was shocked, but then again not surprised. I turned to the grad student – we were discussing differences between cultures – and smiled, saying softly: “There you are. Germans giving unsolicited advice.”

Hardly had I gotten that statement out and my friendly neighbor – not yet finished gathering his things – turned to me again and said: Ich bin Deutschfranzoser. He‘s bicultural, German and French. It wasn‘t worth my time to engage in a debate with him about the matter. It made me wonder, though, if the French also give unsolicited advice.

“Don’t walk around“

Several years ago. Atlanta. A management seminar. One of my first. I have the habit of walking around the room while I talk or listen. Two straight days of sitting is not healthy. And I tend to be wound up.

Day two, just after breakfast, I head to the seminar room to prepare a few flipcharts. Coming down the hall is one of the participants. German. He stops me, clearly angry with me. Sie sollten nicht die ganze Zeit im Seminar aufstehen und herumgehen. Das ist unprofessionell und stört. I should not stand up and walk around the room during the seminar. It is unprofessional. My reaction? Oh, ok. How nice to get such friendly advice.

Golf Swing next to Pool

Twenty laps done. I decided to jump out of the pool and simulate my golf swing. I had played a few rounds in the U.S., bought some used clubs, and decided to get back into it. Lap swimming builds shoulder muscles. Good to stretch a bit then swim some more. As I’m swiveling from right to left, swinging my imaginary golf club, I hear from lane two: Sie müssen die Hüfte stärker schwenken.

Had I heard that right? I needed to swing my hips a bit more? Oh no, I thought. Here we go again. I immediately knew that I had a choice to make. Get angry at him, wait for him to come out of the pool then tell him to keep his opinions to himself or not get angry.

I opted to react positively, looking at him with question marks in my eyes. He repeated himself, with a smile. I smiled back. After my swim I bumped into him in the locker room. Later, sitting outside we talked for well over an hour. He was a delightful gentleman who had simply looked for a way to strike up a conversation with me. I’m glad he did.

Bike Helmet

End of a workday. 6:30 pm. Winter. Dark. Raining lightly. I hop on my bike and head home. Turning into my street I ride along the sidewalk on the left hand side of the road. Slowly. Don‘t want the bike to slide out from under me. I also want to be respectful of pedestrians.

I see a woman about twenty-five meters ahead of me. Just before I pass her she suddenly sticks out her left arm like a pole to block me. It works. I brake suddenly, jump off and confront her. “Are you crazy? I could have fallen from my bike and injured myself.”

She stands her ground, looks me in the eye and says very calmly: Sie fahren auf dem Bürgersteig, auf der linken Seite der Strasse und ohne Licht. I was riding on the sidewalk as an adult, on the left hand side of the street and without a bicycle light on.

In Germany, all against the law. I was flabbergasted, not so much at the laws, which make perfect sense, but at the audacity of this woman to play enforcer of the law. I could hardly contain myself. Upon arriving at home I described the scene to my German wife. Her response? Sie hat recht. The woman was right. The marriage didn’t last.

“I won’t accept this prize“

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.

Compare and contrast

Duden, the famous German dictionary, defines kontrovers: entgegengesetzt (opposite, contrary), strittig (contestable, debatable), umstritten (contended, contentious). Synonyms are: gegensätzlich (opposed, antithetic), in sich uneins (in disagreement), widersprüchlich (contradictory), zwiespältig (conflicting, ambivalent), anfechtbar (challengable), angreifbar (attackable, vulnerable), kritisierbar (open to criticism), disputabel (disputable). From the Latin controversus: facing or standing against; contra: against and versus.

Entgegen. Gegen. Wider. All meaning against. Germans like clarity. Not black and white, but take a position. This or that. In many ways the German people defines itself by comparing itself over and against other peoples, in how they think, act, work, live.

“Klappe halten“

Germans believe that if a person does not have anything valuable to offer in a given discussion then it is better that they say nothing at all – die Klappe halten.

Klappe is a cover, lid, flap. Halten is to hold or keep shut. Germans do not consider it to be impolite if in a discussion one or more people say little or nothing. Seldom do they ask, prompt or summon those who are silent to participate.

To talk about the weather in the German context means to talk about nothing of importance, to have a meaningless conversation, to be superficial. It is a signal to both parties that they have nothing to say to each other. It‘s embarrassing for both.

„Only fools criticize“

In his book How to Win Friends and Influence People (published in 1936 with more than fifteen million copies) the famous American businessman Dale Carnegie made the following statements which have been taken to heart by generations of Americans:

“Criticism is dangerous, because it wounds a person’s precious pride, hurts his sense of importance and arouses resentment.”

“Any fool can criticize, complain, and condemn—and most fools do. But it takes character and self-control to be understanding and forgiving.”

“If you argue and rankle and contradict, you may achieve a victory sometimes; but it will be an empty victory because you will never get your opponent’s good will.”

“You can’t win an argument. You can’t because if you lose it, you lose it; and if you win it, you lose it.”

“I have come to the conclusion that there is only one way under high heaven to get the best of an argument — and that is to avoid it. Avoid it as you would avoid rattlesnakes and earthquakes.”

“By fighting you never get enough, but by yielding you get more than you expected.”

Reputations ruined

One reason why Americans take criticism so personally is the importance they place on public perception. Reputation, especially in business, is a very sensitive issue. It can be damaged quickly, and often irreparably, by criticism.

The public relations sector has been thriving in the American economy for generations. And in the digital age companies such as reputation(dot)com focus solely on helping companies (and individuals) to protect their reputations.

Warren Buffett, called the Wizard of Omaha and the Oracle of Omaha, and considered the greatest American investor, once said “It takes twenty years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it.”

Roger Boisjoly, an engineer at NASA during the Challenger space shuttle disaster, suspected that the explosion would occur. He tried to warn his superiors, but was ignored. During the investigation he was very forthcoming about what went wrong and whose fault it was, damaging many the reputation of many colleagues and superiors.

Even though he had fought to keep the disaster from happening, by ruining those reputations he damaged his own. Boisjoly received such horrible treatment at work that he eventually quit. Because he had a reputation as a reputation destroyer he couldn’t find another engineering position. Instead, he worked as a speaker on workplace ethics, teaching Americans how to avoid his mistakes and point out problems in a work environment without hurting reputations.

Gothic horror author Anne Rice

Just as Germans are inclined to have more respect for the reviewer if there are some critical remarks posted under an overall good review, there are some Americans who simply cannot handle the criticism even when it is in their own interest to do so.

For example, gothic horror author Anne Rice has never been one to take criticism lightly. Although her Novel Blood Canticle received a five-star review on Amazon.com, which could only encourage readers to buy it, she lashed out at all of the negative comments posted below it by individual readers in a 1,200-word diatribe post.

Her claims were that her readers were “interrogating [the book] from the wrong perspective.” Aside from calling them “arrogant and stupid,” she also took time to personally target specific reviewers who had made harsher statements such as:

“Anne, you really should have an editor” (In fact, the book does contain a few grammatical errors). Then, she provided a spoiler description of the novel along with a commentary on exactly how brilliant it really was.