jacko Posted January 1, 2003 Report Share Posted January 1, 2003 Lot of bloody fuss over a fish. I struggle to understand this "Loss of face" thing! To a Westerner it seems childish. But it seems to have an underlying way of preventing confict. I think this is a more interesting discussion that a misunderstading about whether one would get part or all of a fish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gummigut Posted January 1, 2003 Report Share Posted January 1, 2003 Understand your fish comment now. Face statement. I still stand behind the fact that you are blowing things way out of proportion. It doesn't enter the picture here. I believe Wall... was poorly treated by management, not the waiter per se. Going on to critique your post. "but face is nonetheless a distinct concept independent from class. " This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin. Face is largely dependent on class. While every class has "face," relative weights are based on many things. One of the major ones being class. Okay, your rebuttle to my chauffer example is to use a manager berating an office worker. POOR refutation. Chauffer's status is just a bit above taxi driver. An office worker's status is way above a Chauffer's. Additionally, an office worker may be of the class as the manager but just younger. Berating someone of your own class in front of others is indeed insulting so wheras one wouldn't think twice to berate a Chauffer or nanny in public, one wouldn't do so to a peer. Your comparison just doesn't hold up and goes to show your understanding of the concept. "There is nothing mystical about it. For an asian person, losing face can be a terrible thing." I didn't say there was anything mystical about it. The mystical part is you injecting face into this when it hardly plays a part. For you to talk about face between the waiter and S&P; waiter and the farang; and the waiter and his family is blowing it all way out of proportion. You remind me of the people in high school who had the asian fetish. Your never going to understand the concept as demonstrated by your posts, atleast we will not agree. Have fun reading "face" into everything and anything. Ooooooh, more and more face. Gahhhhh <<burp>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaiLuk Posted January 1, 2003 Report Share Posted January 1, 2003 Going on to critique your post. "but face is nonetheless a distinct concept independent from class. " This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin. Face is largely dependent on class. In your earlier example you said the employer had to berate his chauffer for stepping on the employer's foot. You than pointed out: "Employer has to say something in case anyone saw ." I agree with you the employer has to say something. Because the employer lost face when this lower class person stepped on him, right? Your example is consistent with your position that face is dependent on class. But you have now given another example: an office worker may be of the class as the manager but just younger. Berating someone of your own class in front of others is indeed insulting so wheras one wouldn't think twice to berate a Chauffer or nanny in public, one wouldn't do so to a peer. You have now made my point and unraveled your own argument. Persons involved in an encounter can lose face regardless of whether they are from a different class or the same class. Face is affected by class but is a distinct concept, and often times face can be lost regardless of the class of the persons involved. >>You remind me of the people in high school who had the asian fetish.<< This is a nonsensical statement. >>Ooooooh, more and more face. Gahhhhh<< More of the same. >>Have fun reading "face" into everything and anything.<< I don't read face into everything and anything, but I'll try to have fun anyway. :: Unrelated note: Last night, New Years Eve in Farangland, met a tattooed japanese girl at the club, way younger than me (maybe 23?) we danced, she wouldn't give me her ph # but asked for mine, and called me at 3:00am to ask for my email address. :: Not yet had a japanese girl. :: So I am having some fun and appeasing my asian fetish at the same time. later :: MaiLuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shit-Spattered Dog Posted January 2, 2003 Report Share Posted January 2, 2003 Says shotover: "feed the leftovers to the elephant outside" Elephants eat fish? Can someone post an answer? Are Elephants vegetarians? " I generally like S&P, but I would give this one mixed reviews. On the one hand, I have seen some of the staff go out of their way to make sure orders are understood when they are dealing with non-Thais. On the other hand, some of the staff here are a bit rude and can have a rather brusque attitude when dealing with any customer, but particularly Farangs. I suspect this happens because when the restaurant is full (which is often the case) the staff must rush to take orders, and if a waitperson?s English isn?t strong, he is more likely to screw up an order if he is dealing with someone who doesn?t speak Thai. This has not happened to me, but I have seen it happen to other Farangs eating there several times " The last time me and my gf went to buy some Dvd's there I wanted a bottle of Carlsburg to sip while my order was being pirat...er..filled. The booth I was waiting at had cartons of Singa under the booth but nether I or my Gf like Singa(SP?) very much so I when into S&P to pick up a bottle. I spoke to a waiter and explained that I wanted to buy a bottle of beer to drink while I was waiting and that I didn't want to sit down at a table. It took a couple of trys but he produce a likeable brand and I paid for it at the cashier. I saw the waiter arguing with a couple of other employees during the monents while he was fetching my beer. They were also closing in a few minutes so it seems that not eveyone who works there is on the same page. Shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelgianBoy Posted January 2, 2003 Report Share Posted January 2, 2003 Racha, Yep, gave the short version of the story, and the material was indeed defective......... It ended with his word against my word, and having the owner confronting me with 5 other Thais I wisely decided to pay the lousy 200 Bt, thats all....... Cheers ! PS to Wallets : yep, indeed boneless fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gummigut Posted January 2, 2003 Report Share Posted January 2, 2003 I have not made your point. My arguments are consistent. My point is that you are blowing the face concept all out of proportion. You can read face into this and into that. It's like you can read the "hand of god" into this and that. My whole thing is that you blow it way out of proportion. Using my chauffer example, I NEVER said there was not a loss of face. It's just that it is largely irrelevant. As you said, the chauffer cannot retaliate. Asian society is very practical. If he's not in a position to retaliate, not EXPECTED to retaliate, than the loss of face is minimal if at all. Getting back to the waiter: The waiter (assuming he gets docked) relating his experience to his wife would not lose face. The waiter has no recourse. Also, assuming my version of the story it is the Farang who could be seen scamming the restaurant (sorry Wallets, just that it is a feasible way for a Thai to look at it) thus it would be the Farang who "loses face" by dealing dishonestly. Getting back to my chauffer example, if the stations were extreme, the chauffer would expect to be reprimanded. Not being reprimanded could be deemed a loss of face for the employer. blah blah blah My arguments are consistent. It is yours that are inconsistent and shifting. "but face is nonetheless a distinct concept independent from class." and "Face is affected by class but is a distinct concept." Your statements are inconsistent.. My whole argument is that you, like the asian fetish yahoos in high school, blow the face thing all out of proportion and read it into situations where it really doesn't have merit and/or is not relevant. <<burp>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racha Posted January 2, 2003 Report Share Posted January 2, 2003 Thanks BB , Thought you would have a logical explanation, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaiLuk Posted January 5, 2003 Report Share Posted January 5, 2003 you are blowing the face concept all out of proportion. You have stated this many times. My post that got this debate going simply said the waiter has alot at stake because he has to pay 400 baht and will lose face. Maybe you are reading too much into what I said. it is the Farang who could be seen scamming the restaurant Agreed. Some farang are always trying to get over on someone (I don't mean the original poster) and Thais in the farang scene know this. the chauffer cannot retaliate. Asian society is very practical. If he's not in a position to retaliate, not EXPECTED to retaliate, than the loss of face is minimal if at all. I wouldn't say being berated in public is a 'minimal' loss of face , but I agree with your point that it is less because of the class differences. you, like the asian fetish yahoos in high school... We're back to this again. :: :: :: I would probably be lying if I claimed I didn't have some sort of asian fetish, why else would I travel all the way to Asia for sanuk? :hubba: But I don't see how it affects the merits of the face issue. Sayanora MaiLuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaiLuk Posted January 5, 2003 Report Share Posted January 5, 2003 Can someone post an answer? Are Elephants vegetarians? Depends on the elephant. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gummigut Posted January 7, 2003 Report Share Posted January 7, 2003 Merits of the face issue is that it is really a non-issue in this case. If it is irrelevant, why mention it? <<burp>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.