After writing my essay, I am beginning to notice something about Swami and Friends. It's one of those books that you know is about something deeper than what you originally read, but on the surface is just an entertaining read. It was hard for me to think about what the deeper meaning was behind this novel, until I picked a passage and read it closely. Now I am convinced that Narayan more than any other author we have read utilized punctuation, pace, syntax, and careful word choice to emphasize his subtle underlying points.
In an early post I made a comment regarding the idea that Swami's main interest in school comes from his main interest in his friendships, and now I think there's more to it. Not only is friendship what is driving Swami, it is also what is driving him away from colonial education. He tolerates it simply because he can see his friends at school but starts to rebel by going to M.C.C. practice instead of school. I think this decision defines him. At first he is torn by what his father wants for him and what he wants for himself. Similar to his participation in the protests, this is one of the few times Swami really shows his independence.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Hatterr and Friend(lessness)
One interesting aspect of the H. Hatterr novel is the small number of recurrent characters. We have Hatterr and Bannerji, and a little bit of info from the background character "Kiss-Curl," - okay, and the dog Jenkins - but otherwise, characters come and go with each chapter. The panorama that readers get from Hatterr's mind is pretty narrow: there is an influx of people, things, circumstances, propositions, but there are few actually persisting elements.
If there were more consistent elements, I think we might be able to track patterns, and build real ideas or theories about life itself according to Hatterr.
Instead of developing thematic patterns based on lessons or instructions, he seems to simply prove other people wrong, and then attribute the drama to "Life!"
It's late in the game, but what say you? Two propositions here - 1, that we come to few great instructions, and 2, that part of this is the result of having unstable and inconsistent relations with other developing, scrutinizing people.
If there were more consistent elements, I think we might be able to track patterns, and build real ideas or theories about life itself according to Hatterr.
Instead of developing thematic patterns based on lessons or instructions, he seems to simply prove other people wrong, and then attribute the drama to "Life!"
It's late in the game, but what say you? Two propositions here - 1, that we come to few great instructions, and 2, that part of this is the result of having unstable and inconsistent relations with other developing, scrutinizing people.
Friday, May 7, 2010
My Education
Looking back on my education through out the two years I have been in college I have noticed some major changes. The more classes I take and the more studying I do, I have a acquired more knowledge, but its what I have done with that knowledge that has affected me the most. Especially since coming to UT my opinion on a lot of things has changed. I feel like my eyes have been opened to the "real world" since I'm not attached to mommy and daddy anymore and I have also gained a new confidence in my opinions. The only problem with that is sometimes I tend to forget that I am not always right. It's as if ever since I came to college and acquired this new found education I feel like a know so much!! But in reality I have only hit the tip of the iceberg on what i have to learn. So my question is: Does education make you cocky? Or confident? Because I know that there are many other people out there that far exceed my intelligence level, so why do I feel superior sometimes? Is that because of my education? I can't help but wonder if somehow our education is giving us only part of the information and we are just left without luck to find the other half. Or are we like Gandhi, where the rest of our education does not come from a school, it has to be experienced. I just thought it was interesting to think about.
Gandhi
For the second half of the semester, Gandhi was surprisingly my favorite. I loved learning more about Gandhi than I had know before just for the simple fact of knowing more about his life. But I think the best part about reading Gandhi was the fact that our entire class was devoted to talking about education and colonization and when I read Gandhi I found myself, at first, wondering how it related to anything we were talking about. Of course, as I kept reading I was enlightened by his perspective. The thing that struck me the most about Gandhi was how his education had absolutely nothing to do with school. He rarely talked about his actual classroom time at all in the section of his autobiography that we read. And although I know the point of reading Gandhi was to take a look at colonization from his perspective, but I just found it extremely profound that he did not consider education something you could get from school. His experiences and true "life moments" were what gave him his education
I also loved reading about Gandhi's trials with vegetarianism. We have talked all semester about "you are what you eat" and in Gandhi's case it was definitely true. I just loved that by being a vegetarian he took a stand on being an Indian man and that is what people saw him as, of course to them it was a negative thing. But what he was labeled as, because of what he ate (or didn't eat, I guess) was exactly what he ended up wanted to be labeled as in the first place. Everything that has had to do with food in this course I have just found to be extremely interesting.
I also loved reading about Gandhi's trials with vegetarianism. We have talked all semester about "you are what you eat" and in Gandhi's case it was definitely true. I just loved that by being a vegetarian he took a stand on being an Indian man and that is what people saw him as, of course to them it was a negative thing. But what he was labeled as, because of what he ate (or didn't eat, I guess) was exactly what he ended up wanted to be labeled as in the first place. Everything that has had to do with food in this course I have just found to be extremely interesting.
Education
I think it's an interesting idea that education changes us. This may sound silly but one of the things that changed for me is my taste in music. When I first came to college, I like a lot of rock type music. I took a couple music classes and did a lot of independent listening and checking out CDs from the fine arts library, and now I listen extensively to jazz and classical recordings. I don't dislike the other kinds of music that used to dominate my life, but when I go back home my friends are always surprised that I listen to different things. I'm constantly labeled a snob and don't know all the words to top 40 type songs or the latest rap and hip hop (the last rap album i got was kanye west's graduation... so yeah it's been a while). So it's an interesting question as to if education changed my tastes, or let me discover something about myself through exposure to different things. either way, it makes for awkward Christmas gift giving moments. Your parents try to give you cds to bands you were into 4 years ago and stuff... weird.
Last thoughts on Colonial education
I particularly enjoyed our class this semester. As discussed in class today, I really appreciated the arch of the novels over the course of the semester. The exploration of the dilemma education and language was a heavy one, at times seemingly incomprehensible, but the question is well put.
“Is it right that a man should abandon his mother tongue for someone else’s?”
Is the only way to educate a culture on its impact on another, to communicate in the language of the oppressor? Or is this the most poignant? If one takes up another’s tongue is it betrayal to one’s own culture? What happens when your only avenue for advancement is the proverbial sell out? What becomes most important?
This answer was addressed in many ways, over the course of our semester. In Achebe we saw colonization and first contact. We saw generational disputes and divides, the old wanting to hold on to tradition, and youthful rebellion as is generally the case with the younger generations. Nhamo, the young artist Dedalus, Tambu, Swami, and Wole all struggled with the question of the dual identity. They questioned their environments, their conflicting loyalties, and observed their rebellions in their own ways. Though many of us cannot relate to the external struggle of fitting in, in a colonized society, we can identify with the struggle with sense of self, and the questioning of one’s surroundings which comes with age, growing into maturity, and education.
“It looks like betrayal and produces a guilty feeling” …
“But for me there is no other choice” (does this sound like Joyce) “I have been given a language and I intend on using it”
Perhaps there is a fatalistic logic to this.
We live now in a world of ever diminishing vastness. Cultures have always collided, but I sense it used to be the under the job description of conquistadores, orientalists, social scientists and magistrates. Now language and cultures cross bounds, take on new forms, and the propensity for hybridization is consistently increasing. If Achebe never wrote in Igbo then it would be betrayal, but casting multiple nets would provide more opportunity for more minds to grasp the problem. I know Achebe was critical of Conrad, but Conrad did speak three languages, so perhaps in that they could share a commonality. Writers express, and problems have a funny way of crossing languages.
“Is it right that a man should abandon his mother tongue for someone else’s?”
Is the only way to educate a culture on its impact on another, to communicate in the language of the oppressor? Or is this the most poignant? If one takes up another’s tongue is it betrayal to one’s own culture? What happens when your only avenue for advancement is the proverbial sell out? What becomes most important?
This answer was addressed in many ways, over the course of our semester. In Achebe we saw colonization and first contact. We saw generational disputes and divides, the old wanting to hold on to tradition, and youthful rebellion as is generally the case with the younger generations. Nhamo, the young artist Dedalus, Tambu, Swami, and Wole all struggled with the question of the dual identity. They questioned their environments, their conflicting loyalties, and observed their rebellions in their own ways. Though many of us cannot relate to the external struggle of fitting in, in a colonized society, we can identify with the struggle with sense of self, and the questioning of one’s surroundings which comes with age, growing into maturity, and education.
“It looks like betrayal and produces a guilty feeling” …
“But for me there is no other choice” (does this sound like Joyce) “I have been given a language and I intend on using it”
Perhaps there is a fatalistic logic to this.
We live now in a world of ever diminishing vastness. Cultures have always collided, but I sense it used to be the under the job description of conquistadores, orientalists, social scientists and magistrates. Now language and cultures cross bounds, take on new forms, and the propensity for hybridization is consistently increasing. If Achebe never wrote in Igbo then it would be betrayal, but casting multiple nets would provide more opportunity for more minds to grasp the problem. I know Achebe was critical of Conrad, but Conrad did speak three languages, so perhaps in that they could share a commonality. Writers express, and problems have a funny way of crossing languages.
Reverting Back to Joyce
I want to revert back to Joyce for a moment. As we have continued to discuss the class as a whole, and take a look at how all of these novels are interconnected I had a thought about Portrait of a Young Man as an Artist. The whole time we read Joyce I understood why it tied into the themes of the course but I felt that it stood out a little more than the others because it focused a lot more on religion Stephen is a rebel. In another class of mine we have been talking a lot about rebellion and it started me thinking about Joyce. Stephen fully throws himself into religion and does everything he is suppose to in order to be a devout Catholic. However, in the end, Stephen turns away from religion and realizes that the indulgence of sin is the only way to be an artist. I find it ironic that Joyce's story line is the same, but the complete opposite opinion as King Solomon in the bible. King Solomon turns from God and lives a life of complete sin, indulging in anything and everything he can. This is much like what Stephen does when he tries to train his body in order to think nothing but pure thoughts. But in the end King Solomon realizes that all the sin in the world is not as satisfactory as a life that devoted to God, the exact opposite as Stephen. I found it extremely ironic that Joyce is voices his opinions about religion and he does so by turning a well known biblical story around and using against the church. Of that doesn't tell you how he feels about the Catholic church Odontoceti know what does.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)