Reading Response of FanShen Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Reading Response of FanShen - Essay Example It appears off as somehow a culture shock being that he is Chinese - Chinese culture way of writing is more focused on a descriptive style, while often including words like ‘we’ as opposed to ‘I’. When examining Shen’s past experience in writing Chinese, he outlines, the expression ‘I’ to always be associated with another â€Å"unfortunate expression†, â€Å"individualism†, which is regarded as a synonym to the word selfishness in Chinese. China categorically emphasizes on their culture collectively as a whole, and the individualism concept is considered ethically immoral. It is considered immodest and disrespectful to use the expression ‘I’ since that is a labeled word for one person. The culture believes that using ‘we’ means including everyone, while the American culture context emphases intensely and enthusiastically on ‘I’, promote individualism. A claim of solitary expression as o pposed to Chinese collectivity expression. Because of Chinese emphasis on collective expression and modesty in linguistics, can they be branded as a more unified culture than the American society? The concept prompts the question of whether if America upheld her values and cultural morals more, the result would be an awarer and more tolerant nation1. The American culture privileges acknowledgment of â€Å"I† at the level of expression and ideology. The culture views the use of â€Å"I† as a norm. It is used as a way of expressing selfness a view that purposefully promotes individualism. Contrarily, the Chinese culture does not conform to the use of â€Å"I† as a means of self-expression rather views it as individualistic and self-centered. To some extent, it is agreeable that the Chinese perception promotes cohesiveness among cultural members as they tend to identify with each other as a â€Å"We†2. As a younger student, my writing sequence was more based on the fast delivery of critical issues when writing. There was no sequential buildup of ideas rather