急需IN THE LAKE OF THE WOODS的REVIEW

Teaching Rereading

Posted by Michael Arnzen at 12:11 in Praxis and Theory.

In my literary criticism course, we read one title -- Tim O'Brien's fantastic work of metafiction, In the Lake of the Woods -- and then apply a different school of theory to it about every week. The novel lends itself well to this analysis, and while we also study a film after midterms, it serves as the centerpiece of the course, freeing up the student to spend more time on reading criticism itself. I expect that students will reread it from a new perspective each week.

Structured as an "unsolved mystery" the book is so open to multiple interpretations that it was practically written for my course. This is something like the fifth time I've taught this course, and every year I read the entire book again, on top of the numerous readings I performed on the text after I first received it (as a review copy for the Eugene Weekly newspaper back in the 90's). Never mind that the novel has been made into a Lifetime Movie -- it's really one of the best books you'll ever read.

Or reread.

Although I'm happy to reread O'Brien's book again and again (because I always discover something new), I've been thinking about how many time literature teachers must necessarily reread the works they teach. Spending so much time living inside a book is one of the joys, in fact, of teaching lit, but there also comes a point, inevitably, when you resist rereading it for the umpteenth time. Once you've got the book "nailed," it feels like there's no need to hammer at it any more. You can even teach some titles without bothering to reread it at all. But you also always feel a little guilty about doing so and realize that you must try to reread the text you're teaching -- especially if you hope to have meaningful discussions -- no matter how many times you've read it before. The longer you neglect to review your book, the more you'll forget about it, and the more mistakes you might make in lectures or quizzes. Or worse: if you miseducate students based on false assumptions grounded in failed memories.

At the same time, we also need to teach students the value of rereading a work. But I find this notion -- rereading -- extremely difficult to "sell" today's harried and stressed-out students. I beg them to reread pieces, especially if we're going to discuss the same text for more than one period. But so few of them do. The root of this problem lies in consumer culture, of course, which trains us to swallow texts like chocolate bars, bank them in our brains, and move right along. Clearly, the arts don't work that way and literature is not a commodity the way that a Hershey bar is. A student might be able to absorb primary details or even pick up common interpretations of a piece (from something like Sparks Notes) but she'll never truly be reading for meaning if she isn't rereading. The first time we read we react, as though to stimulae. It's the second time through where we are at greater liberty to contemplate, to analyze, to interpret -- in ways that are less under the guidence of the author and more under the guile of the reader.

But there are also pragmatic reasons why students won't reread. Time constraints. And brain constraints. You can only do so much at once. College students who major in English often take three or four lit classes at the same time, which, under some circumstances, can translate into reading up to four novels during the same week of assignments. This is usually an institutional problem, grounded in the way the major curriculum is shaped and when courses are offered. Granted, English professors are partially to blame -- since they feel they must cover a lot of ground in each course, "surveying" breadth as much as "digging" any one of them for depth, they will rarely sacrifice a book (and if you're not a lit teacher, you don't know how hard it is to whittle down to a few select representative choices!). In the process, students must cut corners wherever they can (skipping reading altogether for some classes where they know they won't be quizzed, for example -- to be a literary professor is to become an expert of detecting when students don't read!), and it's hard enough to get a student to read in the first place, let alone reread. Assigning research papers which require mining the text for passages for analysis can accomplish this...but I wonder how much of this process is rereading in the way that I think of it.

On the flip side of the coin, often there are overlaps of material across a student's lifetime that solicit rereading. Like, say, Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter, which many students read in junior high school (when they know absolutely nothing about the adult issues in that book -- adultery at fifteen?), which they later then encounter in American Literature courses in college (where adultery finally means something a little more concrete). Rereading at a later date like this can open up so much of the text that was "missed" the first time through and -- like any book we read several years later -- we discover that as we change, the books change as well.

But sometimes college classes will overlap texts so close together, however, that it's unlikely that the students will really reread the work in question. Even short stories. It's wishful thinking to assume a student who reads "Hills Like White Elephants" in an Introduction to Ficton course will then reread it closely in a 400-level seminar in Hemingway. I think, too, I would be somewhat devestated if another professor on my campus chose to use a book that I am very dependent on -- like In the Lake of the Woods -- in a course before I got the majors as seniors in their Literary Criticism course. And it's frustrating to encounter students who are cocky with set interpretations they picked up from another class -- and it's as if you're arguing with another teacher, through the medium of the student's brain, just to get them to think again about what they assume to be true. To me, reading literature is a way of challenging assumptions. Rereading makes that possible.

One reason why I enjoy teaching popular fiction and film is because more often than not, it involves texts that students think they already know quite well, but haven't yet analyzed or read critically before. They find they want to reread popular texts, but sometimes you run into different problems: resistence to criticism, rather than rereading.

Writing is one of the reasons why I value rereading so much. Writers must reread their own work if they hope to revise it well. Writers have to anticipate and predict multiple responses from various readers to their work, and take care of those potentialities in their revisions. There are also texts that are "retellings" of various earlier texts -- revisions that perform a sort of rereading.

In my creative writing courses, students will sometimes write very entertaining work -- usually humor or adventure narratives -- which are very successful in terms of generating emotional reactions, but which do very little to stimulate the intellect. I usually tell the student that there's nothing really wrong with "fun" fiction or poetry -- with writing for entertainment -- but if the piece "doesn't invite rereading" it probably isn't as good as it could be. For one thing, because rereading is a part of revision, I'm asking the student to spend more time with their own language. But beyond that, I value texts which beg to be reread. A good piece of writing really demands to be read again, because it either creates a world that the reader wants to return to and spend more time inside, or because it raises issues that are worth reconsidering -- or else it simply is open to multivalent interpretations that one can only 'see' upon rereading. The works we treasure tend to be those we want to keep on our bookshelves and reread. Although I'm no salesman for the literary canon, as I get older and more experienced teaching literature, that the canon serves a grand purpose in terms of rereading. The literary "canon" is -- at base -- a group of texts that scholars believe it is important for audiences to return to again and again. Works worth rereading over a lifetime -- or even more than one's own lifetime. Indeed, some scholars commit their whole academic lives to rereading one or a handful of classics by the same author over and over again, teaching and writing about them in hopes of keeping those classics "alive" -- read and reread -- in perpetuity.

So how can we encourage students to reread? One way is to talk about our own pleasures of rereading and have students journal about their own experiences. Another is to craft assignments that require rereading while not making it an act that seems like more work to the student: pull out passages or assign specific chapters with guided interpretive questions. In our freshman composition courses, we use a book called Rereading America, which asks students to rethink assumptions about cultural myths and invites rereading. You can also teach a unit on literary parody, adaptation, or retelling -- there are even textbooks available, like Retellings, which incorporate literary revsionism as an archetecture for the course. And literature teachers can also craft assignments using methods mined from Reader Response Theory; perhaps even teach the criticism itself in upper division courses. (I invite you to share your own methods by leaving a comment below.)

A final point worth considering: How do (or can) online materials invite rereading? Sure, we can bookmark and return to pages, but I bet most people do so for information rather than for rereading a literary work online. (And there's a degree of serialization and deletion to online texts: how often do you reread, say, a blog entry?) There's a good article by Marcel Cornis-Pope and Ann Woodlief

on the University of Virginia Commonwealth site, called "The Rereading/Rewriting Process: Theory and Collaborative, On-line Pedagogy," which you might find of interest if computer mediated teaching is of interest to you.

Teaching Rereading

Posted by Michael Arnzen at 12:11 in Praxis and Theory.

In my literary criticism course, we read one title -- Tim O'Brien's fantastic work of metafiction, In the Lake of the Woods -- and then apply a different school of theory to it about every week. The novel lends itself well to this analysis, and while we also study a film after midterms, it serves as the centerpiece of the course, freeing up the student to spend more time on reading criticism itself. I expect that students will reread it from a new perspective each week.

Structured as an "unsolved mystery" the book is so open to multiple interpretations that it was practically written for my course. This is something like the fifth time I've taught this course, and every year I read the entire book again, on top of the numerous readings I performed on the text after I first received it (as a review copy for the Eugene Weekly newspaper back in the 90's). Never mind that the novel has been made into a Lifetime Movie -- it's really one of the best books you'll ever read.

Or reread.

Although I'm happy to reread O'Brien's book again and again (because I always discover something new), I've been thinking about how many time literature teachers must necessarily reread the works they teach. Spending so much time living inside a book is one of the joys, in fact, of teaching lit, but there also comes a point, inevitably, when you resist rereading it for the umpteenth time. Once you've got the book "nailed," it feels like there's no need to hammer at it any more. You can even teach some titles without bothering to reread it at all. But you also always feel a little guilty about doing so and realize that you must try to reread the text you're teaching -- especially if you hope to have meaningful discussions -- no matter how many times you've read it before. The longer you neglect to review your book, the more you'll forget about it, and the more mistakes you might make in lectures or quizzes. Or worse: if you miseducate students based on false assumptions grounded in failed memories.

At the same time, we also need to teach students the value of rereading a work. But I find this notion -- rereading -- extremely difficult to "sell" today's harried and stressed-out students. I beg them to reread pieces, especially if we're going to discuss the same text for more than one period. But so few of them do. The root of this problem lies in consumer culture, of course, which trains us to swallow texts like chocolate bars, bank them in our brains, and move right along. Clearly, the arts don't work that way and literature is not a commodity the way that a Hershey bar is. A student might be able to absorb primary details or even pick up common interpretations of a piece (from something like Sparks Notes) but she'll never truly be reading for meaning if she isn't rereading. The first time we read we react, as though to stimulae. It's the second time through where we are at greater liberty to contemplate, to analyze, to interpret -- in ways that are less under the guidence of the author and more under the guile of the reader.

But there are also pragmatic reasons why students won't reread. Time constraints. And brain constraints. You can only do so much at once. College students who major in English often take three or four lit classes at the same time, which, under some circumstances, can translate into reading up to four novels during the same week of assignments. This is usually an institutional problem, grounded in the way the major curriculum is shaped and when courses are offered. Granted, English professors are partially to blame -- since they feel they must cover a lot of ground in each course, "surveying" breadth as much as "digging" any one of them for depth, they will rarely sacrifice a book (and if you're not a lit teacher, you don't know how hard it is to whittle down to a few select representative choices!). In the process, students must cut corners wherever they can (skipping reading altogether for some classes where they know they won't be quizzed, for example -- to be a literary professor is to become an expert of detecting when students don't read!), and it's hard enough to get a student to read in the first place, let alone reread. Assigning research papers which require mining the text for passages for analysis can accomplish this...but I wonder how much of this process is rereading in the way that I think of it.

On the flip side of the coin, often there are overlaps of material across a student's lifetime that solicit rereading. Like, say, Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter, which many students read in junior high school (when they know absolutely nothing about the adult issues in that book -- adultery at fifteen?), which they later then encounter in American Literature courses in college (where adultery finally means something a little more concrete). Rereading at a later date like this can open up so much of the text that was "missed" the first time through and -- like any book we read several years later -- we discover that as we change, the books change as well.

But sometimes college classes will overlap texts so close together, however, that it's unlikely that the students will really reread the work in question. Even short stories. It's wishful thinking to assume a student who reads "Hills Like White Elephants" in an Introduction to Ficton course will then reread it closely in a 400-level seminar in Hemingway. I think, too, I would be somewhat devestated if another professor on my campus chose to use a book that I am very dependent on -- like In the Lake of the Woods -- in a course before I got the majors as seniors in their Literary Criticism course. And it's frustrating to encounter students who are cocky with set interpretations they picked up from another class -- and it's as if you're arguing with another teacher, through the medium of the student's brain, just to get them to think again about what they assume to be true. To me, reading literature is a way of challenging assumptions. Rereading makes that possible.

One reason why I enjoy teaching popular fiction and film is because more often than not, it involves texts that students think they already know quite well, but haven't yet analyzed or read critically before. They find they want to reread popular texts, but sometimes you run into different problems: resistence to criticism, rather than rereading.

Writing is one of the reasons why I value rereading so much. Writers must reread their own work if they hope to revise it well. Writers have to anticipate and predict multiple responses from various readers to their work, and take care of those potentialities in their revisions. There are also texts that are "retellings" of various earlier texts -- revisions that perform a sort of rereading.

In my creative writing courses, students will sometimes write very entertaining work -- usually humor or adventure narratives -- which are very successful in terms of generating emotional reactions, but which do very little to stimulate the intellect. I usually tell the student that there's nothing really wrong with "fun" fiction or poetry -- with writing for entertainment -- but if the piece "doesn't invite rereading" it probably isn't as good as it could be. For one thing, because rereading is a part of revision, I'm asking the student to spend more time with their own language. But beyond that, I value texts which beg to be reread. A good piece of writing really demands to be read again, because it either creates a world that the reader wants to return to and spend more time inside, or because it raises issues that are worth reconsidering -- or else it simply is open to multivalent interpretations that one can only 'see' upon rereading. The works we treasure tend to be those we want to keep on our bookshelves and reread. Although I'm no salesman for the literary canon, as I get older and more experienced teaching literature, that the canon serves a grand purpose in terms of rereading. The literary "canon" is -- at base -- a group of texts that scholars believe it is important for audiences to return to again and again. Works worth rereading over a lifetime -- or even more than one's own lifetime. Indeed, some scholars commit their whole academic lives to rereading one or a handful of classics by the same author over and over again, teaching and writing about them in hopes of keeping those classics "alive" -- read and reread -- in perpetuity.

求老人與海的英文背景資料

The Old Man and the Sea is a novella (just over 100 pages in length) by Ernest Hemingway, written in Cuba in 1951 and published in 1952. It was the last major work of fiction to be produced by Hemingway and published in his lifetime. One of his most famous works, it centers upon Santiago, an aging Cuban fisherman who struggles with a giant marlin far out in the Gulf Stream.It is noteworthy in twentieth century fiction, reaffirming Hemingway's worldwide literary prominence as well as being a significant factor in his selection for the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1954.

Background and publication：Most people maintain that the years following Hemingway's publication of For Whom the Bell Tolls in 1940 until 1952 were the bleakest in his literary career. The novel Across the River and Into the Trees (1950) was almost unanimously disparaged by critics as self-parody. Evidently his participation as an Allied correspondent in World War II did not yield fruits equivalent to those wrought of his experiences in World War I (A Farewell to Arms, 1929) or the Spanish Civil War (For Whom the Bell Tolls).

Inspiration for character：Gregorio Fuentes is one possible model for Hemingway's eponymous "Old Man".While Hemingway was living in Cuba beginning in 1940 with his third wife Martha Gellhorn, one of his favorite pastimes was to sail and fish in his boat, named the Pilar. General biographical consensus holds that the model for Santiago in The Old Man and the Sea was, at least in part, the Cuban fisherman Gregorio Fuentes.

Fuentes, also known as Goyo to his friends, was born in 1897 on Lanzarote in the Canary Islands, migrated to Cuba when he was six years old and met Hemingway there in 1928. In the 1930s, Hemingway hired him to look after his boat. During Hemingway's Cuban years a strong friendship formed between Hemingway and Fuentes. For almost thirty years, Fuentes served as the captain of the Pilar; this included time during which Hemingway did not live in Cuba.

Fuentes at times would admit that the story was not exactly about him. He related that the true inspiration of the old man and the boy did exist but they never knew who they were. The story goes that in the late 1940s, upon return from an early morning fishing trip, Fuentes and Hemingway saw a small rowboat 10 miles out to sea. Hemingway asked Fuentes to approach the vessel to see if they needed help. Inside the boat was an old man and a boy. As the vessels closed in the old man began yelling at them with insults including telling them to go to hell, indicating that they had scared away the fish. According to Fuentes, he and Hemingway looked at each other in surprise. Just the same, Hemingway asked Fuentes to lower them some food and drinks while the old man and boy glared at them. Without another word exchanged, the two boats parted ways. According to Fuentes, Hemingway began immediately to write in his notebook and later asked him to find the old man. According to Fuentes, he never was able to find the fisherman that had made such an impression on Hemingway. Fuentes recounts that this was the real origin of the lore. A few years after The Old Man and the Sea was published, residents of Cojimar believed that the old fisherman that Fuentes and Hemingway ran into at sea was a humble local fisherman they called el viejo Miguel; some described his physical appearance as a wiry Spencer Tracy.

Fuentes, suffering from cancer, died in 2002; he was 104 years old. Prior to his death, he donated Hemingway's Pilar to the Cuban government.

Hemingway had initially planned to use Santiago's story, which became The Old Man and the Sea, as part of a random intimacy between mother and son and also the fact of relationships that cover most of the book relate to the Bible, which he referred to as "The Sea Book." (He also referred to the Bible as the "Sea of Knowledge" and other such things.) Some aspects of it did appear in the posthumously published Islands in the Stream. Positive feedback he received for On the Blue Water (Esquire, April 1936) led him to rewrite it as an independent work. The book is a novella because it has no chapters or parts and is slightly longer than a short story.

The novella first appeared, in its 26,500-word entirety, as part of the September 1, 1952 edition of Life magazine. 5.3 million copies of that issue were sold within two days. The majority of concurrent criticism was positive, although some dissenting criticism has since emerged. The title was misprinted on the cover of an early edition as The Old Men and the Sea

[edit] Plot summary

The Old Man and the Sea recounts an epic battle between an old, experienced fisherman and a giant marlin said to be the largest catch of his life. It opens by explaining that the fisherman, who is named Santiago, has gone 84 days without catching any fish at all. He is apparently so unlucky that his young apprentice, Manolin, has been forbidden by his parents to sail with the old man and been ordered to fish with more successful fishermen. Still dedicated to the old man, however, the boy visits Santiago's shack each night, hauling back his fishing gear, feeding him and discussing American baseball — most notably Santiago's idol, Joe DiMaggio. Santiago tells Manolin that on the next day, he will venture far out into the Gulf to fish, confident that his unlucky streak is near its end.

Thus on the eighty-fifth day, Santiago sets out alone, taking his skiff far into the Gulf. He sets his lines and, by noon of the first day, a big fish that he is sure is a marlin takes his bait. Unable to pull in the great marlin, Santiago instead finds the fish pulling his skiff. Two days and two nights pass in this manner, during which the old man bears the tension of the line with his body. Though he is wounded by the struggle and in pain, Santiago expresses a compassionate appreciation for his adversary, often referring to him as a brother. He also determines that because of the fish's great dignity, no one will be worthy of eating the marlin.

On the third day of the ordeal, the fish begins to circle the skiff, indicating his tiredness to the old man. Santiago, now completely worn out and almost in delirium, uses all the strength he has left in him to pull the fish onto its side and stab the marlin with a harpoon, thereby ending the long battle between the old man and the tenacious fish.

Santiago straps the marlin to his skiff and heads home, thinking about the high price the fish will bring him at the market and how many people he will feed.

While Santiago continues his journey back to the shore, sharks are attracted to the trail of blood left by the marlin in the water. The first, a great mako shark, Santiago kills with his harpoon, losing that weapon in the process. He makes a new harpoon by strapping his knife to the end of an oar to help ward off the next line of sharks; in total, five sharks are slain and many others are driven away. But by night, the sharks have almost devoured the marlin's entire carcass, leaving a skeleton consisting mostly of its backbone, its tail and its head, the latter still bearing the giant spear. The old man castigates himself for sacrificing the marlin. Finally reaching the shore before dawn on the next day, he struggles on the way to his shack, carrying the heavy mast on his shoulder. Once home, he slumps onto his bed and enters a very deep sleep.

A group of fishermen gathers the next day around the boat where the fish's skeleton is still attached. One of the fishermen measures it to be eighteen feet from nose to tail. Tourists at the nearby café mistakenly take it for a shark. Manolin, worried during the old man's endeavor, cries upon finding him safe asleep. The boy brings him newspapers and coffee. When the old man wakes, they promise to fish together once again. Upon his return to sleep, Santiago dreams of lions on the African beach.

British business culture

跟你個(gè)文獻(xiàn)看看

British Business Culture. It is already clear that any reliance on socio-cultural explanations for Britain’s ... In particular, Chandler and Lazonick were. only too ready to reinforce the claims that the British business culture lacked ...

－－－－－－

還有對(duì)比：

"The British are much more formal than the Dutch – they would never ever utter direct criticism but would graciously package their comments," says Edwin Welman, a Dutch banker working for ABN-AMRO in London, who also worked for several years in the US. "Dutch people just tell you what they think and would never opt for polite phrases to explain a situation."

Margaret Moes, Managing Director of LSS Relocation Limited, who is also Dutch, observes, "the biggest difference in doing business with the Brits compared to doing business with Dutch people is the total lack of directness with the Brits. We are in the UK now for 24 years and the Dutch straightforward mentality is completely opposite to the refined, considerate, and well-mannered way of doing business here in the UK. In business dealings the Brits refuse to commit themselves right away. In fact they are quite inscrutable."

The Japanese of Europe?

Are the British the Japanese of the North? Not many Dutch people would argue they do not understand the Brits, but maybe that is one of the problems, as Moes explains.

It can take quite a long time to actually reach an agreement. However, decisions are always well-considered.

"I've seen many Dutch people making the mistake of assuming they understand the English language. Many however seem to forget that most of their familiarity with the English language is American-based.

"If a British person says 'very interesting', they mean in fact the opposite. For a Dutch person this is very confusing as we are not used to playing with language in such a manner," says Moes.

To help you understand the real meaning behind some statements commonly used by the Brits, refer to our quick reference guide table within this article.

British humour

The British sense of humour is another striking difference and humour is very evident in all areas of life, on every level and at every occasion. It is not considered flippant or disrespectful to use biting humour in a business situation.

In fact, humour may be used more or less constantly. As an outsider you do not have to take part in this, but you should not be surprised either when jokes seem to land on you.

Hierarchy

Although British companies are becoming less hierarchical, the power clearly lies with the board of directors, and compared to the Dutch organisational structure the British organisational structure is a traditional pyramid, consisting of many layers and a strong vertical hierarchy.

Meetings with extensive agendas are an essential management tool

Often the hierarchy is based on which meetings you are invited to attend and less on your job title. The British seem to be fond of committees and commissions and prefer working with a group of people they know, and can rely on and identify with.

They do not seem to like taking individual initiative or to be tied down when they are not sure if the group supports them. This implies a strong sense of duty and personal dedication to the group and there is little automatic respect for authority. Consensus is important, and if you try to achieve it you will be respected.

My home is my castle

Be aware that the British are masters in recognising someone's social status. Foreigners have to keep in mind that there are large perceived differences between social classes in the UK.

British people observe status in nuances, such as the way someone talks, someone's manners and the way someone dresses. The school someone has attended still remains important in British business and social life. School and university form the basis of networks that often sustain people through their working lives.

Moes remarks, "Although the Brits are very open and friendly to foreigners, we are still 'from abroad' after 24 years in this country!"

Welman adds, "There is a clear distinction between work and private life – 'my home is my castle' makes it for foreigners difficult to become part of the British way of life. British people are standoffish."

British Heidi Philippart-Alcock and Annie Cox, who together run a bi-lingual kindergarten in Amsterdam, confirm this impression. "Brits seek out Brits. An English-speaking environment abroad is essential for many British people. That's why we started several years ago with Two Voices, a school for young children from families where two languages are spoken.

"And let's be clear about this; Britain remains an island with not too many foreign languages around you, so it is not strange for British people to look for people that understand their language."

When asked for a clear distinction between doing business between British and Dutch people both Philippart-Alcock, who has been in the Netherlands for 11 years and Cox for 13 years, refer to the difference in work ethic.

It is not considered flippant or disrespectful to use biting humour in a business situation.

"When a Dutch person is not feeling well they will not show up—the Brits will come in even when feeling really sick. The Dutch are so aware of their rights— maybe also due to the good social system—that they sometimes forget about their obligations," say Philippart-Alcock and Cox.

"We see the differences in our teachers; the British teachers are more responsive to unexpected events, whereas the Dutch are more bureaucratic; a 30-minute break is a 30-minute break."

Moes agrees that she was surprised by the way the Dutch handle part-time working. "If someone works three days in the Netherlands, there is no one that takes over the tasks - you just have to wait in getting an answer till that person is back in the office again," she says.

Decision making

History is very important to the British, both in terms of the myths and the reality. Because of this, the British business culture is sometimes seen as being rooted in the past and disliking change and risk.

If you want to initiate change, be prepared to be patient and attend a lot of meetings. Meetings are the essential and yet time-consuming management instrument.

All somewhat important decisions and instructions will be brought up, negotiated, approved, passed through and to some extent implemented during the meeting.

Meetings are not experienced as an interruption of the real work. Most meetings are set long in advance and there is an extensive agenda.

The Netherlands

They may speak English, but it's not your English

Comparing British and German management styles

Planned meetings are altered with meetings planned on a short term in which specific business is handled. However, the decision-making authority lies with the board of directors.

Even decisions that can be made at a lower level need the approval of the entire board of directors. It can take quite a long time to actually reach an agreement. However, decisions are always well considered.

The concept of time

At meetings the British are always on time, but they have also formalised being too late in a social sense. It is almost impolite to be dead on time!

People are often up to ten minutes late for work, lunch and so forth. But never later than around ten minutes. Appointments and meetings are set well in advance. Because people are regularly not in their offices due to the high number of meetings, email memos are frequently used. The British seem to prefer using the phone than meeting up face-to-face.

－－－－－－

英國(guó)商業(yè)禮儀文化內(nèi)涵

慧聰網(wǎng) 2004年12月23日8時(shí)6分 信息來(lái)源：亞商

隨著我國(guó)進(jìn)入世貿(mào)組織步伐的加快和對(duì)外經(jīng)貿(mào)事業(yè)不斷蓬勃發(fā)展，全方位的對(duì)外開(kāi)放格局已在逐步形成。我國(guó)各類(lèi)經(jīng)貿(mào)組織、協(xié)會(huì)、機(jī)構(gòu)、公司和企業(yè)都將有機(jī)會(huì)在當(dāng)前和未來(lái)與英國(guó)商業(yè)人士進(jìn)行面對(duì)面直接交往。但因中英兩國(guó)的商業(yè)文化和禮儀不同，我國(guó)又是具有禮儀之邦美譽(yù)的國(guó)度，重視和掌握英國(guó)商業(yè)文化對(duì)開(kāi)展和建立雙方良好的經(jīng)貿(mào)合作關(guān)系是十分重要的一環(huán)。本文將就最基本的12個(gè)方面淺析英國(guó)商業(yè)文化內(nèi)涵。

一、邁出商務(wù)聯(lián)系的第一步

當(dāng)中國(guó)公司、企業(yè)、商務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)計(jì)劃與英國(guó)商界、公司、企業(yè)建立貿(mào)易關(guān)系時(shí)，我方采取的第一步工作應(yīng)以書(shū)信、傳真、電子郵件的文字形式或寄送公司、企業(yè)、機(jī)構(gòu)的宣傳小冊(cè)子作為商務(wù)聯(lián)系的起點(diǎn)；而且應(yīng)盡可能以對(duì)方個(gè)人姓名收最為恰當(dāng)。其原因是英國(guó)商人很喜歡突出個(gè)人聲譽(yù)，同時(shí)收件人會(huì)對(duì)收件很負(fù)責(zé)、并進(jìn)行恰當(dāng)?shù)奶幚怼．?dāng)然，一般情況下我方公司、企業(yè)、機(jī)構(gòu)很可能不知道英方公司、企業(yè)、商務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)中具體人員姓名，但可以打電話詢問(wèn)英方公司、企業(yè)、商務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)應(yīng)與何人聯(lián)系最為合適。當(dāng)我方發(fā)出書(shū)面信息后，不要等待對(duì)方答復(fù)，過(guò)幾天便可以給對(duì)方以電話形式做自我介紹，并同時(shí)提議與對(duì)方見(jiàn)面。按一般常規(guī)，對(duì)方會(huì)容易接受建議，安排會(huì)見(jiàn)日期、地點(diǎn)。第一次商業(yè)性會(huì)見(jiàn)，我方一定不能建議在機(jī)場(chǎng)候機(jī)室、火車(chē)站，或者要使對(duì)方作出帶有旅途性質(zhì)的見(jiàn)面地點(diǎn)，除非對(duì)方提議在上述地點(diǎn)見(jiàn)面。我應(yīng)主動(dòng)提出到對(duì)方辦公室拜會(huì)較為恰當(dāng)。其含義是我方第一次與對(duì)方見(jiàn)面，如邀對(duì)方出來(lái)見(jiàn)面英國(guó)商人認(rèn)為有失他的商業(yè)信譽(yù)的含義，引伸講，他感情上不易接受這種方式。英國(guó)商界人士?jī)?nèi)有句諺語(yǔ)：“The first step of proper behaviour is half business done.”即第一次舉止得當(dāng)會(huì)見(jiàn)乃是商業(yè)成功的一半。由此可見(jiàn)，在建立貿(mào)易關(guān)系中，我方邁出開(kāi)始第一步做法得當(dāng)對(duì)英國(guó)商人來(lái)說(shuō)是至關(guān)重要的。當(dāng)然，這對(duì)我從商人員來(lái)說(shuō)可能是言過(guò)其實(shí)，但是，我們起碼我們應(yīng)該從中可以得到一點(diǎn)警示：要仔細(xì)周到的考慮與英國(guó)商人打交道的第一步，從而展示我經(jīng)貿(mào)人員的風(fēng)度和商業(yè)文化素養(yǎng)。

二、會(huì)見(jiàn)與問(wèn)候

如果我方經(jīng)貿(mào)人員到英國(guó)訪問(wèn)英國(guó)商人，不要期待或強(qiáng)行要求對(duì)方到機(jī)場(chǎng)去迎接。如果與您會(huì)見(jiàn)的英國(guó)商人詢問(wèn)您如何到達(dá)所議定的會(huì)見(jiàn)地點(diǎn)時(shí)，除非對(duì)方主動(dòng)提出到機(jī)場(chǎng)、車(chē)站等迎接外（我方也不要過(guò)分推辭），一般情況下，都是由您自己負(fù)責(zé)準(zhǔn)時(shí)到達(dá)預(yù)約聚會(huì)地點(diǎn)。近年來(lái)，英國(guó)商業(yè)文化也有所變化，不再局限第一次商業(yè)見(jiàn)面在辦公地點(diǎn)，可以經(jīng)雙方協(xié)商第一次商業(yè)聚會(huì)地可以選擇在某某俱樂(lè)部、傳統(tǒng)酒吧或者飯店。

第一次與英國(guó)男士或者女士商人見(jiàn)面時(shí)，可以以問(wèn)候和握手同時(shí)進(jìn)行，也可以先問(wèn)候后握手。而后直接提及拜會(huì)的目的。

三、選擇商業(yè)活動(dòng)住地

一般情況下應(yīng)該選擇較好一點(diǎn)旅館并在出入旅館時(shí)注意個(gè)人的著裝，按英國(guó)商業(yè)文化的習(xí)慣，我方應(yīng)著黑色西服套裝、領(lǐng)帶（顏色不限）和黑色皮鞋。不要選擇機(jī)場(chǎng)附近的旅館，避免招引英國(guó)商人在與我方進(jìn)行商務(wù)交往中對(duì)我方的承諾不負(fù)責(zé)任以及我方?jīng)]有建立長(zhǎng)期業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系之嫌。

四、稱呼

當(dāng)今，英國(guó)商界對(duì)姓與名的稱呼已經(jīng)不太十分介意，可以說(shuō)已經(jīng)處于北美國(guó)家習(xí)慣稱呼對(duì)方的名字和歐洲國(guó)家稱姓的稱呼之間。但為保險(xiǎn)起見(jiàn)，第一次與英國(guó)商人見(jiàn)面時(shí)還是稱對(duì)方姓或者聯(lián)姓帶名為好。隨著業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系深入發(fā)展，逐步稱對(duì)方名字更為普遍。

值得注意的是，英國(guó)是一個(gè)非常著重禮節(jié)、儀式的國(guó)家，特別在商業(yè)圈內(nèi)，依然對(duì)著裝取人是非常普遍。所以出席商業(yè)圈的任何活動(dòng)都要裝束職業(yè)或高貴典雅服裝是非常必要的。

五、重業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系，輕人際關(guān)系

在英國(guó)的商業(yè)圈中，正經(jīng)的商人不愿意接受浪漫的動(dòng)作和姿態(tài)以及帶有任何指手劃腳的講話方式，尤其是剛剛開(kāi)始的業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系時(shí)，這對(duì)以后的業(yè)務(wù)發(fā)展是非常重要的。如果按我們中國(guó)人的話說(shuō)，不管貴公司與英國(guó)商人的業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系“多鐵”，千萬(wàn)不要期待和要求英國(guó)商人邀請(qǐng)您到英國(guó)商人家里去作客。英國(guó)商人著重并喜歡愿意和外國(guó)商人建立的是商業(yè)業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系，而非是人際關(guān)系。

六、守時(shí)

英國(guó)人做事情已經(jīng)習(xí)慣於程序化，特別在商界就更為重要。在英國(guó)商人的心目中，守時(shí)與否直接聯(lián)系到您在將來(lái)與其業(yè)務(wù)的信譽(yù)和承諾兌現(xiàn)的問(wèn)題。但近年來(lái)由于交通帶來(lái)的麻煩，似乎人們對(duì)守時(shí)都持諒解的態(tài)度。但作為從商者來(lái)說(shuō)，自我要求不能放松，盡力在約定的時(shí)間前提早幾分鐘到達(dá)會(huì)見(jiàn)地點(diǎn)；萬(wàn)一遲到，應(yīng)表示道歉。一般來(lái)講，英國(guó)商人對(duì)于議定的時(shí)間、地點(diǎn)、人員很少有隨意性。

七、一般商業(yè)會(huì)見(jiàn)開(kāi)始時(shí)所談?wù)摰脑掝}

和英國(guó)商人第一次接觸時(shí)，為減輕雙方緊張，談話題目往往是以談?wù)撎鞖忾_(kāi)始，進(jìn)而談?wù)撃矚g到英國(guó)訪問(wèn)感受程度如何等等，而后進(jìn)入正式會(huì)見(jiàn)話題。一般講，在預(yù)約的時(shí)間內(nèi)結(jié)束會(huì)談，不要過(guò)多延遲時(shí)間，特別是第一次商業(yè)性會(huì)見(jiàn)就更應(yīng)掌握好時(shí)間；但也不能在會(huì)談中總看手表，以免引起對(duì)方對(duì)您的來(lái)訪產(chǎn)生輕率、來(lái)去匆匆，不具發(fā)展長(zhǎng)期業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系的疑慮。

八、做好商業(yè)演講

一般英國(guó)商界人士很有禮貌并保持安靜出席商業(yè)演講，不要期待英國(guó)商人對(duì)演講人和演講內(nèi)容中的建議、貴公司的產(chǎn)品等表現(xiàn)出極大熱情。即使他們可能對(duì)您的演講、建議、產(chǎn)品等非常喜歡，他們依然傾向把這種個(gè)人情感保持在內(nèi)心，同樣如果對(duì)您的演講、建議、產(chǎn)品不喜歡也不易言表，或者很可能表現(xiàn)出正在思考之中。假如您所演講的是商品專利技術(shù)，可以直接要求簽署秘密協(xié)議。

九、商業(yè)談判

在比較與英、美兩國(guó)商人交往中，英國(guó)商人性格會(huì)更具多一點(diǎn)保留和膽怯的色彩，這種英國(guó)商業(yè)文化個(gè)性和情調(diào)會(huì)更容易在商業(yè)性業(yè)務(wù)談判中得以體現(xiàn)，其含義可以說(shuō)，主導(dǎo)商業(yè)談判的情調(diào)是平靜和多具保留的走向，一般不會(huì)出現(xiàn)生硬頂撞的場(chǎng)面。

在與英國(guó)商人開(kāi)始進(jìn)行商業(yè)交往時(shí)，應(yīng)該對(duì)來(lái)自英國(guó)商人的反面意見(jiàn)有所準(zhǔn)備。事實(shí)上，直到今天英國(guó)社會(huì)依然是比較保守和傳統(tǒng)思維社會(huì)形態(tài)。比如，您向英國(guó)的潛在客戶推銷(xiāo)產(chǎn)品時(shí)，英國(guó)商人對(duì)您的產(chǎn)品第一反應(yīng)可能是：我公司已與該類(lèi)產(chǎn)品的其他供應(yīng)商有150年的業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系，您將如何能使我們公司與您建立供求業(yè)務(wù)呢？處在這種情況下不能就此罷休，您必須給予對(duì)方耐心的解釋，對(duì)您的產(chǎn)品新、優(yōu)、特等方面作出耐心介紹等。英國(guó)商人也同樣會(huì)非常耐心聆聽(tīng)您的講解，當(dāng)對(duì)方信服您的產(chǎn)品的確具有新、特、優(yōu)等特點(diǎn)時(shí)，他們會(huì)很高興表現(xiàn)出愿意與貴公司達(dá)成交易；因?yàn)橛?guó)商人十分精明并善于捕捉每一個(gè)商業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)。

在英國(guó)，對(duì)于商業(yè)活動(dòng)中看來(lái)似乎不重要的小事而造成商業(yè)失敗將難以容忍，因此，英國(guó)商業(yè)圈內(nèi)強(qiáng)調(diào)責(zé)任感（或負(fù)責(zé)）是英國(guó)商業(yè)文化中非常重要的；如果在整個(gè)商業(yè)活動(dòng)的交往過(guò)程中，出現(xiàn)任何一點(diǎn)差錯(cuò)都要追究公司、企業(yè)執(zhí)行總裁的責(zé)任。從這一點(diǎn)考慮，英國(guó)的各類(lèi)企業(yè)、公司總裁們?cè)谧鞒鼋灰讻Q定之前都要花費(fèi)很多時(shí)間對(duì)每個(gè)商業(yè)細(xì)節(jié)進(jìn)行研究、直到全部弄懂為止。他們?cè)谏虡I(yè)交往中有時(shí)寧愿回避一宗交易，也不可能匆忙草率處理商業(yè)業(yè)務(wù)?？偛脗?cè)谧鞒鰶Q定之前，他們會(huì)就交易的實(shí)質(zhì)問(wèn)題要向同事、企業(yè)和公司董事會(huì)或咨詢公司征求意見(jiàn)，中方公司、企業(yè)、機(jī)構(gòu)等對(duì)于總裁們這些活動(dòng)和過(guò)程不要認(rèn)為是不禮貌的行為。當(dāng)雙方談判進(jìn)入準(zhǔn)備簽署書(shū)面合同的地步時(shí)，這在英國(guó)商業(yè)的活動(dòng)中是極為重要的貿(mào)易環(huán)節(jié)；對(duì)于合同條款中的文字含義不能使用含糊不清、模棱兩可的語(yǔ)言，若有任何不清楚的文字含義都應(yīng)該在簽字前詢問(wèn)清楚，或加以說(shuō)明。與英國(guó)商人進(jìn)行商業(yè)談判中，不管出現(xiàn)多大的問(wèn)題，只要中方公司、企業(yè)保持耐心，能維持著雙方有繼續(xù)談判的可能，一般情況下，都能會(huì)有好的商業(yè)談判結(jié)果。因?yàn)橛?guó)商業(yè)文化奠定和培育了英國(guó)商人超過(guò)任何其他國(guó)家商人對(duì)商業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)的忍耐性。

此外，在商業(yè)談判中，中方出席談判的人員一定要確定一個(gè)主談人，其他人員盡量保持沉默、聆聽(tīng)和記錄，始終保持談判的主旋律，禁止七嘴八舌，沖淡談判的實(shí)質(zhì)內(nèi)容和引起對(duì)方對(duì)中方工作沒(méi)有步驟及雜亂無(wú)章的猜疑。

一旦貿(mào)易雙方簽署完合同，英國(guó)商人會(huì)對(duì)貿(mào)易伙伴采取非常信任和完全依照合同條款辦事，而且對(duì)簽署完的合同不在會(huì)有半點(diǎn)疑慮。因?yàn)橛?guó)人深知不履行合同條款所帶來(lái)的法律責(zé)任將是非常嚴(yán)重的后果。

十、飲酒與款待

英國(guó)商人習(xí)慣在酒吧或飯店中進(jìn)行商務(wù)磋商、會(huì)談活動(dòng)。特別是有些部門(mén)、公司、企業(yè)都是通過(guò)飲酒而完成某項(xiàng)商業(yè)交易。有些商人更喜歡把貿(mào)易伙伴邀請(qǐng)到他所加入的某某俱樂(lè)部作客，以此炫耀自己的紳士派頭，這也是當(dāng)今英國(guó)商界內(nèi)最流行的會(huì)見(jiàn)商業(yè)伙伴的形式。在英國(guó)商人的心目中，對(duì)于款待中是重飲輕吃（一般英國(guó)男女商人都可飲葡萄酒），與我國(guó)的款待習(xí)慣有所不同。從這一點(diǎn)考慮，筆者認(rèn)為我國(guó)涉外企業(yè)、公司和機(jī)構(gòu)應(yīng)該向西方，特別是英國(guó)商人學(xué)習(xí)；做到既體面，又不落俗套，同時(shí)可以節(jié)約大筆外事費(fèi)用的開(kāi)支。

十一、贈(zèng)送禮品

在英國(guó)商業(yè)文化中沒(méi)有必要必須贈(zèng)送禮品，更不必贈(zèng)送昂貴的禮品。但一般交易成功可以考慮贈(zèng)送對(duì)方一些有意義的小禮品也就足矣（如一枝筆、小胸牌等）。如果在商業(yè)活動(dòng)過(guò)程中向英國(guó)商人贈(zèng)送昂貴禮品，他們會(huì)對(duì)贈(zèng)送昂貴禮品表示驚訝和茫然，而且可能引起對(duì)所從事商業(yè)活動(dòng)帶來(lái)有收受賄賂之疑；因此對(duì)下一步商業(yè)活動(dòng)不但不會(huì)帶來(lái)益處，有可能起到負(fù)面作用。

十二、英國(guó)商人與政府和官員的關(guān)系

一般來(lái)說(shuō)，英國(guó)商界人士不愿與政府或官員有過(guò)密的人際關(guān)系，更不為政府標(biāo)榜某個(gè)企業(yè)、公司所動(dòng)。在英國(guó)商業(yè)圈內(nèi)人士心目中，無(wú)論是那個(gè)政黨的官員都是政客，經(jīng)商與從政完全是兩股道上跑的車(chē)。因此，英國(guó)商人不愿意與政府官員有什么個(gè)人的人際瓜葛，政府官員的舉止無(wú)非在國(guó)際貿(mào)易活動(dòng)中起到只是一個(gè)禮儀的作用。

總之，上述英國(guó)商業(yè)文化及內(nèi)涵對(duì)我多年從事對(duì)外貿(mào)易的人士看似都是小事，并對(duì)此這些文化內(nèi)涵有深入了解；但在實(shí)際交往的活動(dòng)中可能已經(jīng)麻木不仁，而影響著中英雙方經(jīng)貿(mào)業(yè)務(wù)的深入發(fā)展，造成因小失大的結(jié)果。對(duì)于剛剛與英國(guó)商人有交往和聯(lián)系的外經(jīng)貿(mào)企業(yè)、公司、機(jī)構(gòu)人員就更應(yīng)該對(duì)此深入了解，會(huì)有利在今后與英國(guó)商人交往中作為規(guī)范自身舉止，充分表現(xiàn)出中國(guó)乃是禮儀之邦，同時(shí)又是尊重異邦商業(yè)文化的國(guó)家

求一篇英語(yǔ)作文，要代寫(xiě)的reading habits of british students作文題目，好的追加懸賞啊，謝謝

we should do reading comprehension, and speak a lot in class.before that ,we should form the habit of reciting words and phrases.listening to english every day is very important.of course, it is necessary for us to write a composition every week!