Sunday, 16 December 2007

• Battlefield at the dining table

  I attended this BBA-JD talk with my students. It was all about they only wanted the creme and there are only 15 places. The selection of students was mostly based on impression - were they a go-getter? Did they have a passion for the uptown life? Could they deal with stress? And whether they had the aura to be a financial person...
  
  It kind of made me wonder what I would have become had I not gone to Waterloo and become an Artsy. The professors and presenters surely had the confidence and the glamour, but deep down, their goals, their temptation and the sense of arrogance revolted me. If I had chosen the road of society's definition of success, would I have tortured my conscience to death?
  
  They quoted this case of where their students were interviewed for the Rhodes Scholarship (or whatever job interview it was) and they called it the battlefield of the dining table. The students' move were carefully scrutinized, their table manners, their scope of interest, their ability to make small talks, etc. I remember my UWat accounting friend also went through the same ordeal. This is not a test of ability, but a test of breed. How well the interviewees are brought up. Once again, if the student came from a well-off background, they would probably breeze through the interview, those who weren't as lucky to have that silver spoon when they were born, would either have to be socialized purely for the interview, or they would have to acquire it in a different way. I guess it would be that much easier to keep the wealth in a few hands rather than having someone climb the social ladder.
  
  The question is, is mannerism a means or an ends. Was acquiring manners out of respect or out of prospect? The biggest question for the interviewers would be, would they want their children to have manners for the sake of  respect or face?
  
  

  • 8:28 AM
  • 100 Views
  • 2 eProps
  • 1 Comment