Andrew's profileAndrew spacePhotosBlogLists Tools Help

Blog


    4/21/2009

    Face in Chinese culture: the idolatry of face

    1. Fearing loss of face
     
    The fear of situations that would cause a loss of face, and the pressure to maintain one's face is a massively significant factor influencing the behaviour of individuals in Eastern societies, particularly those coming form Chinese, Korean and Japanese backgrounds. And face behaviour can even come into play among Asian Christians...

    Given the signifiance of face, it is particularly surprising how little theological reflection there is on the phenomenon of face. I've searched Chinese theological journals in vain for the merest reference to face - let alone a theological critique of face behaviour (if you know of one, let me know).

    2. Face drives behaviour

    Perhaps the most noteworthy thing about face is that it is such a strong driver of behaviour. The loss of face is greatly feared by individuals. People will go to great extremes to maintain their face - then will not think twice to sin in order to preserve their face. People will exert themselves to gain a position in life that will enhance their face. Ho writes that,
    "It is virtually impossible to think of a facet of social life to which the question of face is irrelevant. The desire to gain face, to avoid losing face, and to save face when it is threatened is a powerful social motive."
    Ho, "On the Comcept of Face".
    In a separate artile, Hu suggests what is at stake for the individual when face is lost:
    "The consciuosness that 'loss of lien' means that the confidence of society in his character is impaired, and places him in danger of being despised and isolated, usually acts as a strong deterrent on the individual."
    Hu, "The Chinese Concepts of 'Face'".
    How interesting is it that the concern for face can be so important for people.
     
    3. Face is more important than life

    Not only that, face is so important that loss of face can become so catastrophic for the individual, they would rather die than go on living without face. Ho again:
    "In most instances, face lost can be regained. However, the loss of face may well be permanent in cases where the misconduct is serious and in direct contradiction to role-imperatives and/or taboos. Examples of such cases are a captain found guilty of cowardly abandoning his ship and crew to save his own life, a priest caught in adultery, or a family disgraced by incestuous relationships. Not infrequently, the loss of face has such serious consequences that it leads to suicide."
    Ho, "On the Comcept of Face".
    He concludes that, "indeed, face can be more important than life itself. As Goffman puts it, one's face is 'a sacred thing.'"
     
    4. The idolatry of face
     

    How do we reflect theologically on face? Face becomes a problem when it is an idol. When what we love most of all is our reputation, our dignity and prestige in society, then face becomes an idol to us. Yes, we may be pilars of our church - but our behaviour reveals that our true love is our own face - and not God after all.

    And you can see this when churchgoers know that God desires them to seek forgiveness - but they do not, because they love their face too much. We see this when churchgoers allow lies from respected leaders to spread unchecked - because they are too much in love with their own face to break the rules of face. We see this when churchgoers withold heartfelt appreciation for brothers and sisters - because they must maintain their own face.

    5. A breathtaking disregard for face!

    Contrast this concern for face, with the breathtaking disregard for the opinion of others that you find in the New Testament:

    Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.

    Galatians 1:10 (NIV)

    Instead of needing the approval of men, the apostles concerned themselves with pleasing God alone, regardless of what it will mean for them in society:
    3 For the appeal we make does not spring from error or impure motives, nor are we trying to trick you. 4 On the contrary, we speak as men approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel. We are not trying to please men but God, who tests our hearts. 5 You know we never used flattery, nor did we put on a mask to cover up greed--God is our witness. 6 We were not looking for praise from men, not from you or anyone else.
    1 Thessalonians 2:3-6 (NIV)
    And this freedom from pleasing men liberates Christians to do the socially inappropriate things - to brave being cast out of the synagogue. To bear chains and disgrace. To preach an unpopular message with boldness and clarity!
     
    At this point it's easy to dismiss all of this as western individualism. And to say, "it's all well and good, but things are different in Eastern cultures where family and village are so important." But that argument won't fly: this is not the West, but the Middle East. They are actually all about family and village and community! And what is breathtaking is that despite that background of collectivism, they boldly and singlemindedly follow Jesus.
     
    This is why in Mark 10 Jesus says,
    29 "I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30 will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields--and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life.
    Mark 10:29-30 (NIV)
    This passage can't make any sense unless there is a strong, deep-rooted concern for homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, children. Which the disciples willingly turn their back on, to pursue something greater and more satisfying.
     
    When the gospel came to China in the 1900's, we see the very same thing - Chinese people were willing to lose face, in order to follow Jesus faithfully. In her article, Hu dismisses such Chinese to be 'rice Christians' (that is, they converted so as to receive rice from missionaries). But notice here the characteristic disregard for face that we saw in the New Testament:
    "Mei-yu lien - 'to have no lien' is today used almost interchangeably with pu-yao lien. This is about the most severe condemnation that can be made of a person. For example, people who turned traitors against their country in its hour of greatest need are said to 'have no lien' at all, meaning that they have laid aside all pretensions of being decent human beings. In a similar way, individuals who accept a religion as a step for material advantage and social advancement 'have no lien' in the eys of the public."
    Hu, "The Chinese Concepts of 'Face'".
    And at that last point, Hu has a footnote: "In particular some Chinese Christians in the early part of this century."
     
    The first Chinese Christians saw the blinding truth of the gospel, and responded in the only way they could. Like the Thessalonians, they "turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God" (1 Thes 1:9). And as they did so they experienced, and willingly bore the hatred and loss of face from their fellow countrymen. They became people who 'have no lien'.
     
    It's natural to have some concern for what people think. And in fact, you do need some of this in order to preach the gospel (Rom 15:2, 1 Cor 10:33, 1 Tim 3:7). But when our concern for what people think becomes an idol, and when it controls and stifles and commands our affections, when it mutes our message - then we have a problem...
     
    But how awesome it would be if, among Chinese Christians today, we also had that radical disregard for the opinion of others. How completely different our churches, our fellowship and meetings would be! And how clearly would our lives reveal that it is God alone that we love and fear; God alone whose opinion we care about! It would almost be like being a totally new person, with new priorities and affections and behaviours. Why - it would almost be like being ... born again!
     
    [ PS: is your face an idol for you? is it an idol for others around you? ]

    4/8/2009

    Face in Chinese culture: what face reveals

    Image from sxc.hu1. The values of a social group

    The concern to maintain face is clearly and important dynamic in Chinese societies - and we'll reflect theologically on the place of face later on. But today, we're going to consider how the face behaviour of a group can reveal important insights into what is held as important by that group...

    In his article, David Ho points out that the things which cause a loss or gain in face are based on "sets of criteria or standards which vary both cross-culturally and over time within a single culture. These standards are rooted ultimately in the value orientations of a given culture at a particular point in time." That is, different social groups have different values that they uphold and prize.

    2. Stated values ... and actual values

    However, those who have worked in the business world will know very well that the stated values of an organisation can be quite different from what is actually valued in that organisation. Your company says it values 'teamwork, openness, customer service' - but at the end of the business year, the ones who get bonuses and promotions don't actually exhibit 'teamwork, openness and customer service' at all. Instead, they could have the very opposite qualities!

    And it's in this area that the study of face can be particularly useful. David Ho writes that "the study of face, therefore, gives us insight into not only the nuances of social interaction but also the kinds of values that are upheld in a given society, particularly those values which are deemed to be prerequisites for all its adult members."

    3. Discerning the true values of a social group

    How does this work? Well, by observing what it is that causes people to gain or lose face in the community, you can get an uncomfortably honest picture of the true values of that community. But it's particularly the ones which cause people to lose face that we should look out for. "The kinds of behaviour judged to be face losing serve as an especially sensitive indicator of the prevailing mores and morality of the times."

    And so a social group (such as a business, or even a church) may claim to value forgiveness, truthfulness and integrity - but is this really the case? The way you can tell is to see what sorts of things cause a loss or gain in face in that group.

    If someone loses face because he is unforgiving, untruthful or lacks integrity, then it can truly be said that these are in fact true values for that particular group. And to a lesser degree, if people are held in high esteem by the group for being forgiving, truthful and acting with integrity, then you can say with some confidence these are in fact true values for that group.

    However if that social group claims to value forgiveness, truthfulness and integrity - but in actual fact those people who are unforgiving, untruthful or lacking in integrity still have face... then it must be questioned if these are in fact the real values of that group.

    Well if it isn't forgiveness, truthfulness and integrity, what then are the things that are found in those who are highly esteemed? Look out for those who have lost face in that social group, and consider carefully: what really was it that they did which caused them to lose face? Was it that they were disloyal to the organisation? did they talk back to older people? did they question the past? If so, what does that suggest? It could mean that the true values of that social group may in fact lie in loyalty, in submission to one's elders, in thinking the same way...

    The thing about face is that the values that control the gaining and losing of face can't be controlled by any one person - like the HR team sending out a memo to all the employees ("our three values are these..."). No, it's out there, deeply ingrained within the members of the social group. And while one or two may deny that these are true values of their social group, the actual behaviour of the whole social group, in discounting the lien of an individual, reveals quite clearly what the true values of that group are.

    4. Face and ministry

    The truth about "the prevailing mores and morality" of your church can be quite shocking and depressing. But if we are bold enough to look at the ugly truth, this can be quite useful for us in ministry.

    Because we want the values of people in our church to be transformed by the gospel. We want people to become forgiving, to be truthful, to have integrity in all their dealings. How wonderful it would be if, in our churches, what caused people to lose face was that they were unforgiving! or untruthful! or lacked integrity in all their dealings! While we may want to ultimately step back from extreme face-consciousness, knowing where your church is at is a good start, and a good indication of your progress - or lack thereof!

    As people become Christians and grow, yes their behaviour may change in certain areas. They may start attending church regularly, they may stop smoking, they may invite people into their homes. And we can (and should) rejoice over such changes. Yet underneath that, old values can continue for many years unexamined, unchallenged, unreformed.

    How do we go about changing the values of a social group? By revolution? evolution? sending out memos? I suspect that this is something individuals have little control over. Not only is it an instinctive reflex from our heart, it's also something that is in many people all at once. But God is sovereign over our hearts - and the hearts of all people. And so as we preach passionately, we must also pray fervently...

    [ PS: what causes loss of face in your family? your company? your church? ]