Yesterday I attended dinner for a visiting American who has been in town for two days.  Over dinner, he asked why Thais, who customarily use only a fork and large spoon as the table silverware, don’t use knives.

Pausing to consider the question, I responded that they didn’t use knives because they don’t have a need to.  For example, like in many cultures in Asia, the food is cut into smaller pieces before cooking.

“That’s not a good answer,” he responded.

Pausing again to re-consider (maybe it wasn’t a good answer?), I once again reached the conclusion that a fork and spoon were totally sufficient to eat Thai food.  A fellow diner, a native Thai, demonstrated for the guest by holding a larger piece of sweet, ripe mango with his fork and then sliced off a smaller portion with the edge of his spoon to eat with a bite of sticky rice.

“That’s still not a good answer,” he emphatically repeated.

[sigh…]

I suppose it is a good awareness-raising opportunity for me.  There seems to be a Western approach to conversation, particularly questioning, that comes across more as didactic rather than inquisitive.  For example, it seemed that the guest’s underlying message (based on where the conversation led) was that he saw  the use of only a fork and spoon as a deficiency that should be corrected, rather than just another funtional way of eating.

The more time I spend in Thailand, the more I appreciate why many people in non-Western cultures find the Western approach to conversation to be quite confrontational.

Later in the evening, as is often the case, I thought of how I could have responded to his repeated assertion that my answer was not a good one:

“Perhaps the reason that Thais don’t put knives on the table is so they aren’t tempted to use them when farang criticize the way they eat.”