Introduction To Our Knowledge Of History And How We Feel

Introduction Our Knowledge Of History And How We Feel About It Are

Our understanding of history and our emotional responses to it are shaped by our cultural backgrounds. In particular, the cultural orientation towards the future prevalent in the United States often leads Americans to overlook historical contexts. This oversight can create hidden barriers in intercultural encounters, as differences rooted in history may be underestimated or ignored. Moreover, many intercultural interactions involve a complex interplay between past and present, which influences communication and understanding. Despite a tendency among European American students to de-emphasize history, a comprehensive understanding of current situations often necessitates knowledge of historical backgrounds. Our perceptions of the past influence our self-identity and attitudes towards others. A dialectical perspective allows us to appreciate how history positions individuals within their cultural contexts, shaping their communication and interpretation of messages.

To deepen our intercultural understanding, it is essential to consider the various histories that contribute to our identities. These include political, intellectual, social, family, national, cultural-group, and other histories. Political histories predominantly focus on documented events and power structures, influencing how history is written and remembered. Intellectual histories trace the development of ideas over time, while social histories record the everyday lives of diverse groups. Absent histories—those that were never recorded or concealed—are equally significant, as acknowledging them requires more complex thinking about the past and its influence on the future. Family histories, often transmitted orally and intertwined with ethnic identities, provide personal perspectives that shape individual identities.

National histories form a collective memory that fosters a sense of identity and nationhood. These histories are often taught in formal settings, shaping perceptions and communication about shared pasts. Meanwhile, cultural-group histories, which may be hidden or marginalized, contribute to group identity and sometimes challenge dominant national narratives. Viewing history as multiple stories rather than a singular linear progression allows us to recognize diverse narratives and understand potential misunderstandings arising from ignorance of different histories.

Power dynamics profoundly influence how history is written and communicated. The dominant culture's power determines which stories are preserved, how they are narrated, and which voices are heard. Textual histories—documented accounts—are accessible in narrative form, but access to these texts is often limited by political, social, or linguistic barriers. Language itself shapes historical understanding, as words carry connotations that influence perception. The 'grand narrative' of a nation often reflects the perspectives of those in power, sometimes marginalizing or erasing alternative histories. Suppressed or neglected histories—such as those of oppressed groups—are increasingly being rewritten and reclaimed, challenging dominant narratives and empowering marginalized voices.

History exerts influence on intercultural interactions by shaping perceptions of power, identity, and positioning. Power is a legacy of past histories that leave certain groups in advantageous or disadvantaged positions, affecting current interactions. Acknowledging these historical influences is crucial for understanding that intercultural encounters are inherently unequal, often perpetuating existing power imbalances, whether consciously or unconsciously.

Paper For Above instruction

Understanding the relationship between history and intercultural communication requires a nuanced appreciation of the multiple layers of history that define identities. Our collective and individual histories form the foundation upon which cultural identities are built, influencing how we communicate, perceive others, and understand ourselves. Recognizing that history is not monolithic but comprises various stories—political, social, familial, ethnic, and others—allows for a richer understanding of intercultural dynamics.

History influences intercultural communication through various mechanisms, including the 'contact hypothesis,' which posits that positive intergroup interactions can be facilitated if certain conditions are met. However, these conditions are strongly mediated by historical contexts; power imbalances rooted in history often influence the success or failure of such interactions. Equal status, voluntary participation, cooperation, and understanding are essential, yet these are often challenged by the legacies of colonialism, racial discrimination, and social stratification.

Negotiating histories dialectically involves recognizing that individuals and groups carry complex, sometimes conflicting, histories that shape their worldview. When engaging across cultures, it is critical to acknowledge both known and hidden histories, as well as how these histories impact identity formation and perceptions. For example, marginalized groups often have histories that challenge existing national narratives, serving as a resource for cultural pride and resistance. Conversely, dominant groups may seek to suppress or forget uncomfortable histories to maintain power.

The role of power in shaping historical narratives is fundamental. Dominant groups control which histories are preserved and how they are interpreted. This influence extends to language and memory, shaping collective consciousness. The availability of political documents, the framing of histories in educational curricula, and the representation of certain groups all reflect and reinforce power dynamics. As societies become more diverse due to globalization and migration, the 'grand narrative' is increasingly questioned. Alternative narratives, including those of oppressed, marginalized, or displaced groups, are gaining prominence, reshaping cultural identities in profound ways.

In intercultural communication, acknowledging these power and historical dynamics enhances dialogue and promotes mutual understanding. It entails recognizing that perceptions of superiority, victimization, or marginalization are rooted in historical contexts and that these perceptions influence current interactions. For example, colonial histories continue to inform postcolonial relationships, affecting diplomacy, economic exchanges, and cultural exchanges. Similarly, the histories of diasporic communities—those displaced by migration, persecution, or war—are vital to understanding their current cultural expressions and social positioning.

Furthermore, understanding history dialectically involves confronting uncomfortable truths about oppression, violence, and inequality. It requires an active effort to re-examine histories that have been marginalized or erased, fostering a more inclusive and comprehensive understanding of the past. This inclusive approach aids in breaking down stereotypes and fosters empathy in intercultural interactions. Engaging with various histories—whether mainstream, nonmainstream, gender, sexual orientation, or diasporic—is essential for cultivating intercultural competence and reducing misunderstandings rooted in ignorance or biased narratives.

In conclusion, history shapes our identities, perceptions, and intercultural interactions in profound and enduring ways. By adopting a dialectical perspective that recognizes the multiplicity and complexity of stories about the past, we can better navigate intercultural encounters with sensitivity and understanding. Embracing diverse histories, acknowledging power relations, and actively engaging with marginalized narratives enable us to foster more authentic and equitable intercultural communication, ultimately contributing to a more inclusive and interconnected world.

References

• Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Blanchot, M. (1986). The writing of the disaster. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
• Steyn, M. (2001). Reconfiguring identities in post-apartheid South Africa. Journal of Social Studies, 23(3), 45-60.
• Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. Sage.
• Hobsbawm, E. J. (1983). The age of empire: 1875-1914. Vintage.
• Hine, G. (2013). History and memory in contemporary intercultural communication. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 42(2), 123-139.
• Nandy, A. (1983). The intimate enemy: Loss and recovery of self under colonialism. Oxford University Press.
• Fanon, F. (1963). The wretched of the earth. Grove Press.
• Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Vintage Books.
• Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalized experience. University of Minnesota Press.