Culture

In Caryl Phillips Cambridge, Phillips begins by introducing Emily, a young upper-class white woman, who is sent to the West Indies for three months to inspect her father’s sugar plantation. By constructing the novel into several distinctive voices, he exposes to his readers multiple points of view surrounding the novel’s fictional world. The first section of the novel is in the form of a journal, narrated by Emily herself, and gives readers a sense of Emily’s identity through her depictions of her surroundings. Phillips takes a gendered narrative approach to explore eurocentric influence in the depictions of black womanhood during the African Diaspora and how it has affected the conceptualization of race in the past and present.

Emily often finds the need to express her disgust of the appearances of black women. Setting forth towards her father’s estate, Emily is accompanied by a white gentleman, a negro driver, and a negro woman. Observing the woman, Emily states, “Her toothless gums were visible through her thick and open lips, and her church hat failed to mask her sad, unfeminine baldness” (21). Emily justifies her revulsion of the woman’s appearance based on her skewed perception of femininity.

Because she does not meet eurocentric beauty ideals, her appearance is not seen on her own terms but rather criticized by someone who does not share her culture nor values. Emily uses the terms “toothless” and “bald” to highlight the black woman’s unappealing features and therefore, she reinforces the idea that Black women are less feminine than other women. Such depictions take an immeasurable toll on Black women, who have to constantly challenge the notion that they are less feminine, that their blackness is something curious, or difficult to handle to white standards.

Despite the fact that what is considered to be “feminine” and “beautiful” is constantly changing, it does so in a way that continues to revolve around a Eurocentric standards. Emily’s faulty depictions preserve the idea that white people are superior in many ways to black people, and therefore, they have the right to assert their dominance over other races.

In the past, science was used to justify “white supremacy,” where attributes of European culture were used to create a rationale for European authority. European slave traders used “scientific racism” to justify their preconceived notions that Blacks were not people but property, therefore they lacked basic fundamental rights. Upon arriving at the luncheon, Emily sets eyes on Christiana; unhappy with her presence, she orders the “coal-black, ape-woman” to leave.

Emily suggests that Christiana’s features and mannerisms are similar to those of an ape and that her race is not only inferior but scientifically less evolved. This passage goes above and beyond; it showcases how whites distanced race from the core values of both feminism and humanism, proving that both were based on the systematic ideology of slaveholders and their allies. Phillips shows readers that the idea that all human beings are born with basic human rights was not prevalent to Blacks during this period.

European slave traders used their preconceived notions to justify that Africans served no other purpose but to work as slaves. This was a view of humanity that made life grueling for Black slaves in the Americas. Equating animals to blacks was a malicious and effective instrument of dehumanisation, which historically manifested a powerful weapon that Europeans used to justify the institution of slavery.

Black physical features, especially black women’s bodies and hair, have been devalued for centuries. The idea that blackness exists outside the realm of beauty was imposed by whites who constructed a hierarchy that privileged those with lighter skin, and straighter hair where Blacks could not meat this ideal of femininity. Emily, stopping to observe the black men and women washing clothes with their bare hands, can’t help but comment on the appearance of the women.

“The appearance of the females was truly disgusting to me…one woman, her hair matted with filth, and, I imagine, her flesh host to countless forms of infestation, stood in a condition of total nudity in the centre of the stream..” The standards of white beauty created a barrier for Black women to attain it because it did not apply to most Black women thus, American femininity has existed behind the image of a white women.

When Emily inadequately associates “natural hair” with the her own terms, she sets standards for physical characteristics that represent her race, failing to include anyone that doesn’t meet her skewed notions what constitutes a feminine woman. As a result, for years, Black women have taken part in many practices that attempt to mask their physical features in accordance with socially accepted conventions influenced by Whiteness.

Emily’s negative depictions of Black women stems from conditions of her privilege. Through Emily, Phillips shows readers how White’s responded to black womanhood in the nineteenth century. What constituted a Black woman was directly related to the control that Whites had over them. Racism was at work, reinforcing the conception of whiteness while at the same time, deconstructing blackness.

John Smith, and William Bradford had many stories to tell during their explorations of the new world. Their depictions of the new world were seemingly different and each explorer possessed an ego that worked both as a strength and as a weakness to their determination of exploration. Each explorer seemed to use hyperbole and embellishment to glorify their own accomplishments. Columbus’ letters emotionally differ from the first to the fourth letter in almost a usually depressing manner.

His first letter shows an explorer filled with an emotional high seeking to gain riches and fame, describing each illustrious detail of his experience as elaborate as possible. Words that seem to sell the newly discovered lands in such a depiction that would make his fame and rewards seem inevitable. This description is far different than his last letter which his words show an aged explorer seeking to save his reputation and seeking to Just ride away in the unset and live peacefully for the remainder of his life.

It seems that he is taking a polite path in which to illustrate to the Monarchs the sacrifices that were made and the lives lost to achieve the goals of seeking the new world. William Bradford writings illustrated a separatist group of great faith and determination to seek new land free from religious persecution. It is apparent that his writings show the strength of the pilgrims’ faith thru despair and perils.

He seems to have an underlying motive that speaks of strong faith amongst his fellow pilgrims that depicts a picture of their key to survival, a sentiment that would have flown in the face of the Church of England. Based on John Smith’s writings, he had somewhat of a different Interpretation and description of his new found experiences. The words he chose to describe the new world seemed to be as Illustrious as the others except when describing Native Americans. His writings of his exploration experiences seemed to have a motive of power and monetary gain.

Angelina Grimke’s public appeal for the institution of the human rights of all moral beings is ultimately superior to Catharine Beecher’s doctrine of female supremacy limited to the domestic sphere. Both women are visionaries of their era offering contrasting views of women’s proper place in society as well as their moral duties. History has proven that Grimke is unwaveringly the contest winner of this debate . Compelling reasons for Grimke’s historical success can be seen in the women’s differing contextual arguments, the effective use of rhetorical mediums, and the personal embodiment of beliefs.

Angelina E. Grimke’s Letters to Catharine Beecher is a contrasting response to Beecher’s Essay on Slavery and Abolitionism, which was addressed to Grimke herself. Specifically, Angelina’s 12th and 13th letters serve as a fervent vehicle for which Grimke meticulously counters Beecher’s affirmations of woman’s societal subordination. Grimke wrote the letters “because of a ‘deep and tender interest’ for the ‘present and eternal welfare’ of ‘Sisters in Chris’ whose eyes were closed to the Law” .

Although Grimke addresses her letters to Beecher, her intended audience includes every American, regardless of gender, race, or social status that may come in contact with her publishing or be touched by it in any manner. By 1837, Grimke had gained significant clout from both the reverence and contempt of her followers and critics. She stood as a dedicated abolitionist who broke down multiple barriers for the advancement of women’s rights and moral social change. Catharine Beecher’s Essay sets out to rationalize women’s submissive role by claiming a rigid, social hierarchy- divinely instituted- placing men above women.

She argues that women should only influence society through the activities of their separate, domestic sphere. Like Grimke, she ultimately sought to benefit American society through moral reform, but through different means. Angelina Grimke gains historical influence in part by her ability to appeal to the emotional intellect of feminine nature through her faithful articulation and egalitarian interpretation of the Bible. Angelina appeals to the intuitive dispositions of her female audience by imploring that they lift their voices to demand their basic human rights as moral creatures.

She effectively argues that, “all humans, through liberation from sin by Christ’s gift of grace, have the same moral nature and, as a result, the same rights in religious and civil life” . It is woman’s sacred duty to exercise a political and public voice. Grimke uses the Bible to respond to Beecher’s claim of man as the superior sex. She writes, “Did Jesus then, give a different rule of action to men and women? ” She quotes Scripture by stating: “said God, I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy…they shall prophesy” .

She calls on women to have faith in their struggles, “the disciples of Jesus were to walk by faith, not by sight. Did Abraham reason as to the probable results of his offering up Isaac? No! ” . She passionately asserts that women suffer from “a violation of human rights…a violent seizure and confiscation of what is sacredly and inalienably hers” . She even effectively addresses the “clash between biology and religion” in the creation story. The formation of woman out of Adam’s rib serves as direct evidence that she is a part of him, made by his side so that she may be his companion and equal, “the last best gift of God to man” .

Angelina’s open analysis and concise presentation of Scripture is a significant factor in her success. Grimke’s ability to invoke passionate response and appeal to thousands of people is based in the powerful combination of literacy and speech. In her literature, Angelina is very succinct and analytical, using the far-reaching hands of the press to access all of society. Her writings appeal to logical and educated minds, stating accepted foundations for her convictions: the truths of the Bible and the Declaration of Independence.

As David McCants writes, “The principle of absolute human equality, which she believed was a biblical doctrine and with which she challenged the gender doctrine of male and female spheres, is essential” to her effectiveness. Angelina also used her voice to spread her message by making an emotional connection with her audiences. Her followers could relate to her sincerity as well as observe the “unusual religious inspiration in her speaking” . This tool of public speech also aided her cause in the form of visible opposition to her lectures.

By combining the mediums of literacy and speech, Angelina Grimke could not be ignored. These two means of rhetorical persuasion proved to be a powerful language in her commitment to social reform. Another factor of Angelina’s progress is the radical nature of her arguments and the generation of loud opposition. “Success raises up opponents” . Angelina Grimke represented the most radical and controversial themes of her time. Not only was she a female Southern abolitionist and a champion of women’s suffrage, she publically proclaimed her contentious ideas to the masses.

The very idea of “speaking to mixed audiences was a social taboo” . Women did not speak publically, certainly on political issues; these matters were seen to be too far above them. Angelina’s public response to Beecher and various other conservative opponents provoked dismay as she “extended the scope of [her] commentary beyond a simple defense”…and proved it to be “a powerful offensive on woman’s rights” . Her offense may have initiated opponents to “attack her for her radicalism and extremist views” , but the notion of her successful preaching cannot be denied.

Controversy only sustained Angelina’s prophetic conviction. Angelina stands out as a transcendent proponent for social reform because she emphatically integrates her doctrine into her personal life; she entirely exemplifies the principles for which she believes. Born into an esteemed Southern family, Angelina experienced the evils of slavery while growing up on her family’s plantations. Although she legally belonged to a slaveholding estate, she personally always rejected the ownership of slaves.

Grimke left the Episcopalian church to become a Presbyterian in 1826 after experiencing a spiritual awakening and personal revelation of the truths of the gospel. Yet two years later, she converted once again to the Quaker church because in “her mind only Quaker understanding of the doctrine was scriptural” . Angelina responded with conviction to her calling of piteous moral discipline and the search for Christian perfectionism. The conversion to the Quaker called for a more simplistic, modest, and identifiable attire.

The allusions to biblical dress allowed for Grimke to “justify [her] own public activity by likening it to that of loved heroic women of the Bible” . This practice afforded her credibility as well as “some reassure of respect and safety to a space where women’s words could be taken seriously in their movement toward a new place for women” . Another way Grimke lived out her principles was in her courtship and marriage to Theodore Dwight Weld. Weld “knew that Angelina could not fully commit to him until she was convinced that theirs would be a singularly uncommon marriage: a feminist marriage, a union of equals” .

Her strong spiritual, emotional, and intellectual connection with Weld even had the consequences of her disownment from the Quaker church. Still, Angelina did not question her faith or personal convictions. She was unwavering in her private dedication to moral righteousness and the establishment of relationships of equals on purely human terms. On the other side of Angelina Grimke’s success is Catharine Beecher’s ultimate failure to manifest her doctrine in American history. She was unable to effectively advocate her values and gain the support needed for her ideal reformation.

Beecher sends a conflicting message between her notion that women may only act and influence upon their private, domestic sphere and her personal defiance of this proclamation exemplified by her openly published literature. Her platforms of the modernization of women’s role in the home as a professionally trained schoolteacher seem to “carve out what certainly must be considered a “public” niche for herself” and detract from her argument against the visibility of women . The contradiction lies in how Beecher is supposed to publically reject the speaking role of women in an effective and persuasive manner.

The publication of her “private letter” to Grimke does not serve as sound example. Despite her belief that women should remain in the domestic sphere, Catharine’s life was centered outside of the home. She engaged in strong advocacy of greater educational opportunities for women in order to challenge their intellectual abilities. The paradox between her personal life and her view concerning women’s proper role in society is further exaggerated by her unwed status and the professionalism of her literature. Beecher rationalized a feminine teaching body as a lengthening of one’s maternal role.

This peculiar mode of “gaining influence and of exercising power” to be secluded in the domestic sphere calls for the intellectual, moral, and religious education of the nation’s children . She asserts that the rise and fall of the nation depends on the virtues, intelligence, and piety of the female sex . Yet the nature of higher education and expansion of knowledge calls for public rhetoric. Beecher suggests that females are inherently and fundamentally responsible for the collective success or failure of society through their instructive influence on the private sphere.

This disheartening conclusion leaves no wonder why women were not compelled to support this propaganda. Catharine limits the scope of her own influence by binding women to one sphere in society. In doing so, she subsequently devalues female intellect and limits their potential. The seclusion of female action in the domestic sphere contests the influence of the early female Christian martyrs, the sanctity of Biblical women in public stations, and the benevolence of the former female ascetics who served as public ministers.

Beecher’s concurrence with the early nineteenth-century social attitudes ordering male and female roles according to spheres and virtues limits women’s charitable endeavors, cultural influence, and creative knowledge. They are instructed to perfect society, but are given inadequate resources to do so. In order for her work to become as universal and historic as Angelina Grimke’s, Beecher must to appeal to the aspirations of women and inspire unification toward a common purpose.

In this regard, among others, Angelina Grimke’s call for an egalitarian forum in which new ideas are celebrated and social barriers are eliminated wins out at the forefront of nineteenth-century social and political reform. Although Grimke and Beecher represent opposing ideals in terms of women’s rights and societal reformation, they share some common ground. Both women were concerned with the well being of mankind and the desire for American women to be distinguished by their intelligence and influence on the interests of society.

They both recognize the importance of supportive female networks and the promotion of their creativity. This mission encourages women helping each other overcome the conflict between individual aspirations and cultural imperatives. As visionary enthusiasts of their time, both used a public platform to petition support and gain recognition for their causes. Although Beecher does appeals to a portion of society, her arguments, rhetoric, and personal conviction leave much to be desired.

Grimke’s unerring standard of equality on the grounds of human existence effectively challenged opposition, gained considerable recognition through her credibility and inspiration, and touched the hearts of a nation in desperate need of a radical social awakening. Works Cited Beecher, Catharine. Essay on Slavery and Abolitionism with Reference to the duty of American Females. Salem: Ayer Company, Publishers, Inc. , 1988. Beecher, Catharine, Margaret Fuller, and M. Carey Thomas. The Educated Woman in America. New York: Teachers College Press, 1965.

Grimke, Sarah and Angelina Grimke. The Public Years of Sarah and Angelina Grimke: Selected Writings 1835-1839. New York: Columbia University Press, 1989. Hobbs, Catherine. “Untitled. ” Review of Angelina Grimke: Rhetoric, Identity, and the Radical Imagination by Stephen Howard. Rhetoric Review, 2001. Isenberg, Nancy. “Untitled. ” Review of Strangers and Pilgrims: Female Preaching in America, 1740-1845 by Catherine A. Brekus. Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, 2000. Lerner, Gerda. “The Grimke Sisters and the Struggle Against Race Prejudice. The Journal of Negro History, Vol. 48, No. 4 (Oct. , 1963), http://www. jstor. org/stable/2716330. Mattingly, Carol. “Friendly Dress: A Disciplined Use. ” Rhetoric Society Quarterly Vol. 29, No. 2 (1999), http://www. jstor. org/stable/3886084. McCants, David A. “Evangelicalism and Nineteenth-Century Woman’s Rights: A Case Study of Angelina E. Grimke. ” Perspectives in Religious Studies 14 no. 1 (1987), http://ezp. lndlibrary. org/login? url=http://search. ebscohost. com/login. aspx? direct=true=rfh=ATLA0000973238=ehost-live. Nelson, Robert K. ‘The Forgetfulness of Sex’: Devotion and Desire in the Courtship Letters of Angelina Grimke and Theodore Dwight Weld. ” Journal of Social History, Vol. 37, No. 3 (2004), http://www. jstor. org/stable/3790158. Phipps, William E. Adam’s Rib: Bone of Contention. ” Theology Today 33 no. 3 (1976), http://ezp. lndlibrary. org/login? url=http://search. ebscohost. com/login. aspx? direct=true=rfh=ATLA0000757237=ehost-live. Sicherman, Barbara. “Review Essay: American History. ” Signs Vol. 1, No. 2 (1975), http://www. jstor. org/stable/3173057.

After gain such Insight Into back grounds I believe that It Is detrimental for every man that was to govern or shepherd a flock to be well equipped in the area of biblical back grounds. Although It Is not a sufficient, It Is very necessary to gain the understanding that comes from the text. Background is also another crucial hermeneutical tool. That can give us proper insight to the true understanding ot what the author was trying to say to the readers of that day. And if the readers in this modern day can get the real message that the original author was trying to convey to the modern day audience.

I believe that pastors and teachers should get the highest level of back ground although history is not the only way to interpret the passages of In scripture but the background trom non-canonlcal and socio-cultural standpoints can give the readers a better way to look at how and why the scriptures were constructed and format of the passages These studies of backgrounds Just show us why these passages were spoken to the speclflc passages and then allow the teachers to correctly apply it to their flock.

But first pastors/ teacher need to have the most hollstlc meaning before they can deliver a message ot scripture because It Is God holy and divine word and they have to be careful on what they are trying to say because If they do not understand what the author is trying to say to the specific audience then the message cannot be properly deliver to Gods intended audience, and then because false teaching and sends the followers of Christ astray because they did not have the proper meaning because there was no broad study of why this passage was written and why it was constructed and formatted in that fashion. . There are many ways that the Backgrounds can help and assist teaching and pastoring ministries. This mostly helps with the leaders getting a better understand f the overall meaning in the passages of the bible. And the only way is use hermeneutical methods. A hermeneutical tool can be backgrounds and background is not just the historical even but it’s also talking about the culture at the time and the perception ot the culture to the event and how they reacted to events. These different uses and aspects of background can Just make it easier to grasp the meaning of the author in the passage.

If the leaders of the teaching and pastoral mlnlstrles want to give what God was trying to tell HIS people then they must do the research and focus on the background and help shape the meaning of the book or assage. And then they will Interpret the context ot which the passage was written and why they needed to hear the passage. And then the ministries can contextualize the passage in the proper manner and make it applicable to this day in age This helps because readers normally contemporize the bible and forget that there was an original audience that were not living in the same type of culture we live into today.

God knows what He wants to say but It Is our job to tind who He Is saying to, why He is saying it, and how it can be applied toour modern life. And that is why it so Important for the interpretation, that the ministries know why the passage Is written and that they apply It correctly and they do not allegorize the passage and then they w ge tne proper meaning ana tnen tnls study can nelp tnem. 3. Background Is a very important and vital to our u comprehension of the bible.

However, since we know that it is necessary, we also need to be aware that it is not sufficient and it will not get us to the meaning by itself. This is a way that this can hurt the background study because they can possibly hold the background to highly ranked in the interpretation process and use this tool as the only tool. But if they do they can get too caught up in the event and culture and then totally ignore the text.

This practice shows that the implications and applications of the text are not significant because the readers are only looking at the distinct even that text mentions. The text most of the time does not even focus on the event, and those who put the backgrounds higher on the totem pole will normally try to find the significance of the background even though text may not even refer to the specific even but because it highlights that event they will dig deeper and forget what the message of the text is trying to onvey to the readers in this day and the time that it was written.

But if they use the backgrounds as a secondary tool to help interpret the text then it is a helpful took and then the translation of the meaning will not be lost and then the background study is helpful and no longer hurting their understanding of the passage. 4. The theological ontology of scripture should speak to the application of the readers as a correct model to perform a hermeneutic. Although, backgrounds is not the only way to go about reading and looking for interpretation it can be starting point.

It is very ecessary to help comprehend what the author was saying and why he was saying that, and this is very beneficial to the readers and researchers today. Because this is the correct theoretical way of getting information from the passages of scripture. Although, background focuses on the events and culture, we can still see as readers the spiritual impact that Jesus had in the Old and New Testament on the events, political fgures, and cultures of the day. The theological implications in the backgrounds can help us define what we are looking for to use to better understand the scriptures provided to us.

The slogan in the Tango advert is: “You know when you’ve been Tangoed” This has a double meaning, firstly, that you will know when you have been “Tangoed” (slapped in the face) and secondly, that Tango is such a refreshing and delicious drink that you will recognise its taste over other “inferior” drinks. This slogan was so successful that “Tangoed” actually became a colloquial verb. Interestingly, there are no famous people in any of the adverts I have used, however the actors used are still vital to the advert.

In the Guinness advert the actor who plays the main surfer is important because he is not a gorgeous “plastic” model but “real” surfer who does not have the perfect body, but who looks as if he is just there for the surf and not to show off his suntan and impress girls. This tells the audience that Guinness is a “genuine” drink for genuine people. There are two main actors in the Tango advert: the “tango man” who hits the person, and the Tango drinker who gets hit. The most important thing about the Tango man is the way he runs, because this is the humour in the advert. The tango drinker adds to the comedy of the advert by reacting in such a “dopey” way to getting hit.

The actor in the R.Whites advert is also important because he has to dance like Elvis and also be able to impersonate Elvis’ singing voice well in order to convey the song lyrics effectively. All of these adverts use contradiction and two use humour in order to make them entertaining. It is vitally important that television adverts are entertaining as this adds to their appeal. There is no humour in the Guinness advert because Guinness is a “serious” drink. However, there is some contradiction in that instead of the stereotypical gorgeous, toned, suntanned surfer, you have a very “normal” person who you would expect to see just wondering down the street, not surfing forty foot waves.

The humour in the Tango advert is very slapstick, and quite ridiculous as even the idea of a man painted entirely orange running up the street, slapping a man in the face and no one else noticing is absolutely ludicrous and therefore quite hilarious. The contradiction in this advert is that usually in an advert when you see a replay of somebody having a drink you see flowers bloom and passionate music plays, but here all the Tango drinker gets is a slap in the face.

There is no contradiction in the R.Whites advert, but there is an aspect of humour in the way that a fully-grown man would actually dance around his kitchen in the middle of the night, singing and using a lemonade bottle as a microphone. Also, there is an amusing moment at the end of the advert when the person whom we assume to be the mans’ wife comes into the kitchen and catches him doing this and he gulps and displays a humours and embarrassed reaction. Only one of these adverts uses aspiration and this is the Guinness advert, where it fills the void created by the lack of humour. The aspiration is that you want to be like the surfer in the advert, and you want to be able to surf that well and experience the stirring emotions that he feels.

The other thing unique to the Guinness advert is the use of black and white, not only does this represent the way that Guinness itself looks black and white when it has settled but it also gives the advert a timeless, classical an intelligent feel. This tells you that Guinness is a classy drink, drunk by intelligent people, and that it will never go out of fashion.The final aspect I am going to look at is something that is used in both the Guinness and Tango adverts very successfully, which is the use of a voice over. In the Guinness advert the voiceover is speaking some very moving prose and this gives the advert an almost poetic feel. The voice is also deep and authoritative and therefore ties in with the beat of the drum, which I mentioned earlier to give the advert a felling of deep, overpowering emotion.

In the Tango advert, there are two voiceovers used. The main voice over is that of two football – style commentators. The first time you see the man drink the Tango you do not see the orange man slap him, you just see a man drink a drink and look very surprised. Seeing that this Tango drinker looks so shocked, the commentators call for a replay, and you see the scene rewound and replayed, and as the commentators do a humorous running commentary, you see the man get hit in the face. Without the commentary the advert would not be as effective or as amusing.

The second voice over is at the end of the advert and reads out the slogan that I mentioned earlier, which is printed on the back of the orange mans head. Like the orange man himself, the voice is a little bit serious and sinister, but funny at the same time. I do not think that it would be possible for me to choose a favourite advert as the way in which each advert carefully blends together all the aspects I have mentioned makes for truly wonderful television viewing.

In my opinion, all of the videos that I watched was very informative and helpful for a person like me who is still not fully confident when speaking in public, engaging in arguments and when presenting a thesis or a report. Honestly, It’s hard to maintain confidence but hearing those strategies on how to face and communicate with people helps me to challenge myself more because I believe that if it doesn’t challenge me, it won’t change me. In other words, if it doesn’t challenge me, it won’t improve me.

The TEDtallk videos are very inspiring, most of them helped me realize that every one of us is a teacher. Whoever we meet/met has something to do in our lives that can teach and put a big impact on us, especially with those people who are more experienced, with those people who started as an ordinary people to embracing their uniqueness as an individual.

I know I’m not the only one who thinks that people who gives advices are the people who fall all over again, life knocked them down so many times but they decided to get up and believes that they must scare their own fears. Why? Because we are bigger than our fears. Look at them, standing in stage, speaking in front of thousands of people because they carry so much lessons that life taught them.

This is not from TEDtalk videos but he is one of the best examples on how to embrace our own identity and individuality, his name is Norman King an aeta who graduated from University of the Philippines Manila. I carry some of his words of wisdom in my daily life because I find it powerful and it enlightens me every day, that when you connect to his words you will feel and find the soul of dedicated and a hard-working man who have nothing to lose and who keeps fighting for their rights even though some of aetas have disregarded their culture.

Start-ups are the norm today. Anyone with a decent amount of capital, a bright idea and the drive to be successful seems ready to start-up a business of their own. While all that’s great, with the large number of start-ups springing up, competition is on the rise as well. The pressure to make your start-up a success and preventing it from meeting its doom is high. So, what makes your start-up successful? Happy employees are the crux of any successful organization but how can you ensure that your employees are happy?

While starting up at the right place, at the right time and with the right product is an obvious necessity, it is not enough. The opportunity to create your own start-up culture allows you to get things right from the start. The culture within your start-up is an important, though not an overtly apparent, determinant of happiness at work. Your organizational culture is the DNA of your start-up and makes you who you are. Your culture is what lets people know whether you’re an up-start or a startup!

Before you jump at a great idea and start-up, maybe you should slow down a little and plan on your start-up culture. There might not be any “perfect” recipe for cooking up a start-up culture where your employees are happy, but this might help:

Ingredients:

• A handful of bright, hard-working and talented People,
• One good dollop of Passion,
• A bunch of strong Values,
• A dash of Ideas,
• A sprinkle of the right Attitude,
• Lots of Patience,
• A pinch of fresh Perspective and
• Practice.

Serves One passionate, dedicated, happy start-up.

• Step 1: Value your values. Your corporate values are not meant to be high-sounding words that look good on and remain limited to the confines of your “About the company” page. These should be values that you believe in, that you feel your employees can relate to and your organization can live by and benefit from. Your values should be in keeping with your end goal. Having a small workforce when you’re starting out can be an advantage as you get to involve more people in the process of developing a value system that will form the backbone of your culture. Your employees are bound to be happier when they can relate to the values that they are to live by. Happyness Quotient, powered by Never Grow Up, is a tool that helps you measure happiness while also giving you the option to assign weightages, auto-pilot deployment and track what matters to your company.
• Step 2: Hire right and acknowledge differences. People make up your organization and so you need to choose the right ones. This is not to be interpreted as the need to hire exactly the same type of people, unless you want to end up with a workforce like Willy Wonka’s identical Oompa Loompas (though they were a lot of fun!). Diversity adds an essentially holistic note to any workplace. At the same time, it is necessary to imbibe your values and culture into your recruitment process so that you attract and retain talent who echo your organizational culture. Having to choose between efficiency and culture might be a difficult call but it is better to retain an average employee who fits into your culture rather than a star-performer who is toxic for your culture. Moreover, since every employee is different, make sure to not have a one-size-fits-all approach.
• Step 3: Work through the levels. You need to weave your culture into every process of your organization and create a culture all your employees can relate too. As a tool, it could prove to be even more powerful than strategy. Your culture should be flexible but within limits. Flexibility will help your organization to maintain its culture even as it starts growing and has to incorporate changes over time. In a start-up, the main responsibility of the culture rests on the shoulders of the founder. It becomes your responsibility to create an environment that is conducive to the culture you want everyone to adopt.

There you have it! Your start-up culture is ready to be served and to make yours a happier workplace. The best thing though is that you can be as creative as you want and not stick to the recipe. You can keep adding more ingredients into it while you let is simmer over time and (if you’ve done the right mis en place) it will just get better!

Starting up your own organization gives you an opportunity to start working on your culture early. Grab this opportunity and work at it right. You have the power to set the tone for your organization; the power to steer your start-up through the challenges of low morale, high employee attrition and damaged client relationships towards higher productivity, happiness at work, satisfied clients, success and happiness!