WHEN WORLDS COLLIDEoil deal with one of the four thousand Saudi princes. He was
finally able to arrange an interview to fit into the prince's crowded
schedule. It took place in a large ballroom just before a reception.
Eager to make his point, the American started his pitch.
The prince, interested in the project, moved within six inches
of the American's face. But the American was uncomfortable at
this close encounter, and moved back until there was what he
considered a comfortable four feet between them.
The prince moved into the distance at which he felt com-
fortable, six inches, and the American moved back again, un-
aware of what he was doing. In this way, the two men, in the next
fifteen minutes, covered the entire floor of the ballroom while
they talked, the American moving back, and the prince moving
forward.
The prince, however, became increasingly unhappy. The subtext
he was receiving was clear to him: "I don't want to be close to
you. You offend me. I dislike you." The businessman, too, began
to feel uneasy. Why was this man getting so unpleasantly close,
breathing in his face? He could actually smell the food the prince
had eaten. He even felt a disturbing sexual subtext to this closeness,
and he found himself stumbling, reddening, and looking away.
In the end, the deal fell through. No matter how profitable the
collaboration would have been to both men, the subtext of each
annoyed the other.
The different needs and desires for space in Saudi Arabia and
in the U.S. reflect two different cultures. Almost every culture
has its own rules for handling space, and in each a different
subtext is sent out when space is invaded.
In the United States and in England, people prefer a two-foot
bubble of space around them. When two people talk, the "bubbles"
touch, and there is a four-foot distance. This sends out a comfortable