Cross Cultural communication

This is most interesting.

Here is a video clip that caused a great big furore on the internet.



You can see the reactions of the Singaporeans from the comments, enough said. We're all very upset that these guys ran away without paying, and sat 3 people on trishaws that were only designed for 2. Singaporeans were upset because:

1. These people were rowdy, drunk and by sitting 3 to a trishaw, were bullying a helpless old man who couldn't keep up with them.

2. They called it a taxi when it was clear to us that trishaws are never used as transportation in Singapore, but novelty rides for tourists.

3. They didn't pay up for the trishaw ride.

The comments got so vociferous that it even made it to the newspapers, like the front page of the New Paper. And I personally wanted them to die of AIDS.

Then there was a big discussion on the internet, and much to my surprise, many of the British posters argued that:

1. The trishaw driver was providing a service. If the trishaw drivers in UK are too slow, they could opt not to pay up.

2. The old man was looking at the tourist's wallets and was being an asshole.

3. The old man shouldn't have agreed to take on the 3 people.

Well I thought at first that it was a deliberate ploy on their part to treat the trishaw as a form of transportation, a totally false argument in Singapore's context. But some of their arguments were so consistent with each other that I begun wondering if there wasn't some big misunderstanding at work. And I remember one of the 3 guys saying that he didn't really think it was that big a deal, and that the comments were an "eye opener". (He didn't say he was upset at the comments but it was an "eye opener"). What's going on?

I came to realise that:

1. Trishaws are actually used in London, and are used for transportation!
Now this is surprising because you couldn't imagine that happening here with our wide boulevards. But London is full of nooks and crannies because it's an ancient city, imagine that the whole city looked like our Arab St - a bit like what London is like. This makes it more ideal for trishaws to be used. They can also weave around traffic and are actually faster than cars in a traffic jam.

2. In London, trishaws are driven by fit young people. Because they are a form of transportation, the value of the ride is in getting from point A to point B.

3. Trishaws in London can seat 3 passengers. And therefore they weren't completely wrong in thinking that it was the same here.

Whereas in Singapore:

1. Trishaws are a symbol of our national past. The old man represents the coolie, a potent symbol of Singapore's early days. They are very closely associated with the suffering of our forefathers.

2. Ang mohs are always the bad guys in movies.

3. You treat old people with respect.

4. The only reason why old people drive trishaws is that they're meant to be joyrides, and that there is absolutely no time pressure on them to get your tourist around from point A to B. It is hard work, but not backbreaking work, and may not even be as bad as being a hawker's assistant.

Now if you saw it from our point of view, these 3 factors are explosive. There is racism, xenophobia, lack of respect for the elderly, nationalism, all sorts of emotions involved. The rage at the inequality in the world.

But if you see it from the other perspective, it could be a genuine misunderstanding. Sure, those guys were very obnoxious, and made a lot of snide remarks about how crappy and slow the trishaw was. But if you're drunk and loaded you could make the mistake of thinking that the trishaw is a form of transport. We treat the old with respect but why are so many old people still working and not on welfare?

And if you see the end of the video, they hopped onto a cab. This doesn't forgive them for not paying, but it supports the view that what they really wanted was to get to another place. What was the distance? They started at the junction of River Valley and Hill St, which is where the trishaw riders wait. Then they got off where? Before Funan centre. They had travelled the length of the MICA building. The brits were right. It was barely 100m. $10 is a little expensive for 100m. Would you be reluctant to pay up? I know I would. When they took out the wallet, were they taunting him, or were they seriously considering how much to pay?

The old man was upset. He said that his average takings are $30 a night and he probably had a right to feel robbed. But he didn't think that much about it later on and he was probably puzzled about why this video clip raised so much media attention. And when you know the facts, the only real thing he had to complain about was not being paid.

They were laughing, sure. But when you're drunk, anything is funny. And if you know all the facts, maybe it's a little funny.

That guy Bo Davis wanted to say was that a big misunderstanding had taken place. It's much less sinful if it was a misunderstanding.

I don't want to defend them too much because they're plainly assholes. But I think that the legions of Singaporeans who flamed them on the net did so based on first impressions and disregarding a lot of plausible alternative explanations for some of the things they said.

There's this other thing you have to consider. What is the vocation of a man? Why would an old and weak person drive a trishaw around when there are taxis and buses which do the job better? There are only 3 reasons: transport, entertainment (as in the novelty of the experience of riding an old quaint method of transport) and begging (as in the old woman selling you overpriced tissues is not really retail, but it's more respectable than begging). Let's not contemplate the transportation (because that's ridiculous) or the begging (because that's disrespectful). Therefore his real job is to be an entertainer and a tour guide.

And what's an entertainer and a tour guide to do but make tourists happy? If a tourist out for a good time and comes across a beggar, what's he to do? If he keeps on making merry he's insensitive. If he wants to be respectful, he's just spoilt his mood. Now laughing and being merry is of course different from mocking a person in his face, but the line is very fuzzy. In that video, I couldn't definitely say it was the latter and not the former. And with the old man casting a disapproving eye on the rowdy youngsters and grouchily intoning "very happy, very happy ah..." I'm sorry but there is something genuinely funny about it.

What is a guy like that doing at Clarke Quay? But he has every right to be at Clarke Quay. In physical resemblance, he looks perfectly the part of those coolies who used to carry rice sacks at Clarke Quay 50 years ago. But now it's a watering hole. Big big difference. I think this encounter has to be seen in its big context, which is the clash of cultures between the rice sack Clarke Quay and the watering hole Clarke Quay.

I've seen boorish behaviour as bad as this, in the old town square of Prague, where a gang of yobs were shouting out "USA! USA!" I was embarrassed to have been living in the United aSSholes of America for 4 years. Then this other time when some yankees were taunting some old busker, asking him if he knew how to play Charlie Parker (for non-Jazz folks, Charlie Parker was an immature fool who make a total mess of his life, died young, and was also the greatest jazz musician of all time.) In the end, they didn't pay up, and the busker angrily launched into an impromptu rendition of ABBA's "Money Money Money".

Shit like that happens all over the world, I guess.