Something that I have been getting familiar with more recently in my life is the difference between communication styles from one culture to the next. I began to see how my style differed from those around me and how it doesn’t always sit well with the receiver, but I didn’t understand why.
21@7 Cath Unfiltered, Issue #17
Cath delves into the different styles of communication between the Frisian and English cultures and how this has evolved. She’s also created a free kid’s worksheet to guide kids in a simple way to recognize their own voice and understand others.
Image: Penned words 21@7 Cath Unfiltered with the title: A Character’s Cultural Voice (Standalone) and a photo of Catharina Steel sitting on a log in a forest looking contemplatively outward.
Through research, I now understand that my style leans toward the Frisian culture—my mother’s culture. I also have a touch of Dutch, my father’s culture, and a little Aussie, my place of birth. Because of my Australian accent, most people expect me to communicate in the more typical English style because my Frisian and Dutch background is a hidden truth—other than my unusual six-foot height for a female, there is not much about me to indicate that my culture is anything other than English. But this is far from the truth.
Because of this, however, people are blind to the reason my communication style differs from their own. Add to this, most people aren’t even aware of the Frisian people, nor do they consider that my communication style is a reflection of my cultural background.
Character voices and cultural reflection
Many people perceive directness to be blunt, but this misses a subtlety that is tied to the approach in the Frisian culture. The words chosen must consider the receiver. It is said in a kind way to provide guidance, help, or support. Bluntness tends to refer to something being stated without regard for how the receiver will be impacted by the words. There is no caring behind it.
As such, the directness of my characters in Vanishings reflects a legitimate cultural communication style that differs fundamentally from the English conventions many readers expect. Some may see indirectness as politeness, but from a Frisian perspective, it isn’t. Hinting at what we hope the receiver will pick-up puts a heavy mental load on them. I experience that as mind games because of my Frisian background. It has never felt polite to me. I used to find it stressful; now I simply don’t spend energy guessing what someone may have meant.
The English politeness filter and the Frisian direct communication styles
To understand this, we need to step back and look at how different cultures actually communicate.
English communication, particularly in Australian and British contexts, is traditionally rooted in what linguists call negative politeness—the desire not to intrude, not to impose, not to make demands on someone’s attention or time. This shows up as hedging: “Would you mind terribly if . . .?” “I’m sorry to bother you, but . . .” “Perhaps you might consider . . .” The form of the interaction—the softening, the indirectness—is valued almost as much as the content itself.
Frisian communication, by contrast, operates on a principle often expressed in Dutch as “Recht door zee”—straight through the sea. Directness is seen as honesty and respect for the other person’s time. If there’s a problem, you name it. If action is needed, you state it. The directness itself is the respect. The caring about how the words used land on the other person, the kindness.
When these two styles collide, including in fiction, readers trained in English politeness conventions often interpret Frisian directness as aggression, coldness, or talking down. But the character is communicating in their native style.
The honor versus the dignity cultures historically
There’s another layer to this. Communication styles don’t exist in a vacuum—they’re shaped by historical and cultural contexts that have evolved over centuries.
In the 1700s, communication in many European communities, including the English, was governed by what we might call an honor culture. If someone woke you at 3 am with noise, the social response was immediate and public. Direct assertion of your rights wasn’t labeled aggressive—it was understood as the necessary protection of your household and your peace. The directness was the communication.
However, some present-day researchers describe a shift in many English-speaking contexts toward what they call dignity culture. In practice, this means a reliance on softened language, where the speaker prioritizes their own comfort over clear communication. The result is that the listener carries the mental load of working out what was meant. That is why I no longer waste energy trying to decode what someone hasn’t plainly stated.
What this looks like in a character’s voice
In Vanishings, characters speak with clarity. They don’t soften their statements with apologies for existing. They don’t hedge their observations. If something is wrong, they say so. If someone has crossed a line, they name it.
This reflects the communication style of their cultural background—prioritizing truth over managing everyone’s comfort.
For young readers—and for the adults guiding them—encountering this style of speech can be disorienting. We’re trained to read directness in fiction as a marker of villainy, coldness, condescension, or worse—bad dialogue. But directness is a marker of honesty, of respect for the listener’s intelligence, and of a cultural tradition that values clarity.
Why this matters for young readers
Parents, teachers, and librarians often worry that characters who speak directly are modeling disrespect or rudeness. But what if we reframed this? What if we used it as an opportunity to help young readers understand that there are multiple legitimate ways to communicate—that different cultures have different communication styles, that directness isn’t aggression, and that clarity isn’t the same as cruelty?
Young people who encounter characters from different cultural backgrounds—or who themselves come from cultures that value directness—need to see their communication styles reflected in literature as normal, as valid, as something other than a character flaw.
My characters in Vanishings reflect a cultural and historical tradition that says: speak the truth. Respect people’s time. Say what needs saying. Say it in a way that’s kind. That this is also a respectful way to communicate that differs from the typical English style, and isn’t rude or blunt—it’s simply direct.
Note to readers: I’m Frisian direct, not blunt—because blunt implies a disregard for the listener or reader, and that is not true to my cultural background. I’m also kind. The topics I write about come from lived experience and hard-earned understanding, things I would far rather not have had to earn through pain. I write plainly because I value clarity, truth, and respect for the reader’s or listener’s time.
Free What’s My Cultural Voice worksheet for kids aged 8 to 12
Help children explore how communication styles are shaped by home, family, and culture. What’s My Cultural Voice gives kids a simple way to recognize their own voice, understand others, and build confidence in social situations.
With 10 clear examples of cultural voice, this worksheet helps children identify different communication styles and see that directness, warmth, and formality can all reflect different backgrounds. It also gives adults a practical tool for supporting respectful conversation and reducing misunderstanding.
By downloading this resource, you’re giving the children in your care a thoughtful, easy-to-use guide for self-expression, empathy, and cultural understanding.
Next month
I have a several topic ideas to select from, but I will see what seems relevant at the time I come to writing it.
To read my previous 21@7 post about the Publishing Industry’s Gatekeeping and AI Environmental Impacts, click here.
To read my previous 7@7 post about Bringing Wythic Wood to Life with Character Creation, click here.
To read my posts on Substack, go to: Substack