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.
Arizona Controversy
So we talked in class on Wednesday about all that is going on in Arizona right now and which novel some of this related too. I feel that this situation is best represented in The Book of Not with Tambu and the other other African girls, but not that she would for this. I feel that if this law was put into place while Tambu and the other African girls were there it would somehow have a reverse affect and end up hurting them more than the white girls. If the law were to be put in place in order to help the discrimination of the African girls, as this novels always tends to go, I think the African girls would end up suffering from it. This would be a law and I law applies to everyone. So if the white girls have to follow it so do the African girls. I can just see Miss Plato lurking around every corner waiting for one of the African girls to say something bad about the whites and then all hell would break loose! As the trend seems to be: the oppressed never get a break. Plus I cannot imagine that if this law was enacted that the white population would he happy about it. Since they think ofthemselves as superior, they would take every chance they could get to turn that law around on the Africans and make them suffer because of it.
Ngugi’s book is easily the most overlooked book of this semester. No Ngugi’s book certainly isn’t fun nor is it light-hearted. The arguments Ngugi makes are difficult to swallow, but his ideas, to me, are brave in the face of towering issues that not a lot of people are clamoring to address. I once again wanted to try and make light of this book with my own lived experience. On page 16 Ngugi says about Colonialism, “Colonialism imposed its control of the social production of wealth through military conquest… But its most important area of domination was the mental universe of the colonized, the control, through culture, of how people perceived themselves and their relationship to the world.” What this brings to mind is my own education in the Texas public school system, especially when it comes to the history of the Alamo. Being a native of San Antonio, the narrative of this conflict between the Mexican Government and those who fought for Texas Independence is dear to our city. But for young Mexican-Americans in Texas, how does the Alamo make us look at ourselves, and our people’s contribution to the state? What kind of effects does it have on the “mental universe” of these young Americans to read about a conflict that occurred in their own state in which they can’t really relate to any its of its heroes? Ngugi asks this very question when it come to African writers and intellectuals. How do they view themselves when they have nothing in common with their heroes? For me the construction of the narrative of the Alamo was used as an “area of domination.” The white men who fought for the side of the Texas republic are made to look like nothing more or less than brave, righteous warriors, the roles played by the Tejanos (Mexican-Texans) in the revolution are downplayed, and the Mexican side and its leader Santa Anna are made to seem like one-dimensional haters of freedom. Now of course if you are able to take a college level course on the Alamo and Texas history, or you able to get your hands on some more recent books, you will get a more complicated and honest picture of what happened. The reality is that for most Mexican-Americans living in Texas, they won’t ever get that chance. I’m not an expert on the Alamo and I’m not going to argue over what happened, I just think to teach kids in elementary (this when I remember my first Texas history lessons which included a trip to the Alamo) this complicated historical event as if its this clear cut battle between good and evil, could definitely affect psyches in ways Ngugi alludes to.
to the end
Snehal brought up a very interesting point (or better yet, reiterated a point that he made in the beginning of the semester); we would be able to look at our own education and being to question the influence that it has had in our lives, and how much we are affected by our education. I thought it was interesting that you can connect it in that way. I mean, obviously, we are not being colonized by an outside force, but education can cause a tension within ourselves.
I know I have most definitely changed since I began my journey into "higher education". Some of my opinions have altered, as well as the way I communicate and the way that I interact with others. And there have been times when I will meet someone that I used to know, and not really know how to interact with them anymore. And as was brought up in class today, is that really because we "outgrow" people, or is that a result of our education? I personally think that we naturally progress as we grow older. But at the same time, education can cause tensions around us and within us. But if we realize that education can cause tension within/around us, isn't that in a way overcoming it?
I know I have most definitely changed since I began my journey into "higher education". Some of my opinions have altered, as well as the way I communicate and the way that I interact with others. And there have been times when I will meet someone that I used to know, and not really know how to interact with them anymore. And as was brought up in class today, is that really because we "outgrow" people, or is that a result of our education? I personally think that we naturally progress as we grow older. But at the same time, education can cause tensions around us and within us. But if we realize that education can cause tension within/around us, isn't that in a way overcoming it?
Joyce vs Gandhi
I find the differences between these two books to be very interesting. One is an actual autobiography, the other is loosely autobiographical. Both Gandhi and Joyce have to experiment with “sin” or experiment with acts that go against the religious/philosophical beliefs held by either themselves or those of their family members. With Joyce’s Stephen Dedalus, we see a young man seeking out prostitutes. Dedalus then throws himself back into Catholicism to the point that he is on the verge of taking orders and joining the priesthood. But then he rejects the priesthood in order to start living the life of an artist, which seems to him to be the only way that truth is really attained. Gandhi, on the other hand, is a vegetarian, but begins to experiment with eating meat. He then rejects meat eating and returns fervently to vegetarianism, which seems to him to be part of living a truthful life.
First off, it’s interesting to see this notion played out in literature that one must experiment with “sin” in order to come out on the other side with some “hidden knowledge” that they lacked before, or some new attitude. Secondly, it’s just crazy how differently these men “experiment”. One turned to meat, the other turned to prostitutes. But they were both on a quest for something to call their ultimate truth. But isn’t truth a relative term? I mean, what is truth to me, may not necessarily be truth to someone else.
First off, it’s interesting to see this notion played out in literature that one must experiment with “sin” in order to come out on the other side with some “hidden knowledge” that they lacked before, or some new attitude. Secondly, it’s just crazy how differently these men “experiment”. One turned to meat, the other turned to prostitutes. But they were both on a quest for something to call their ultimate truth. But isn’t truth a relative term? I mean, what is truth to me, may not necessarily be truth to someone else.
Things Fall Apart
Today we mentioned that Things Fall Apart is now being taught as THE leading multi-cultural novel. I think this is GREAT. As wonderful as Joyce is, and as much as I don't want to downplay the complexity and pain through which Ireland has gone, I think that the younger generation will benefit for reading about Africa as compared to Ireland - bluntly, to break down racial barriers some more. Ireland of course has its own culture and is definitely unique and valuable to any multi-cultural category, but with America's past (and still fairly present) racial problems, the study of Africa, even in fiction/novel form, can only be a good thing. Granted, racism as a whole has improved enormously, but there is still so much prejudice in our societies. Fredericksburg, Tx, for example, has virtually no black families. If the students are mixing with different races in person, at least they can do so in books.
If this came across as rude or anything, I'm sorry. I know it is a touchy subject and we have to be careful with the words we choose, but it's all in good faith and with the best intentions. :-D
If this came across as rude or anything, I'm sorry. I know it is a touchy subject and we have to be careful with the words we choose, but it's all in good faith and with the best intentions. :-D
More Gandhi please
I would like to suggest, first of all, that this class have more Gandhi in the future. His biography is supposed to be a really great work of our time, and I wish we could have read more than just to page 87. I do plan to read more of it this summer and possibly finish it (out of sheer interest and enjoyment), but I thought it was really important that we talked about him during class since he is such a famous figure. I know I wasn't the only one, so this means to me that it's all the more true - reading his biography really opened my eyes to his human-ness. It is well known that Gandhi has been held high on a pedestal. I know that my own vision of him was as a saintly, altogether good person. Reading this broke down those silly generalizations and proved to me that Gandhi was really just a normal guy.
I wanted to mention this in class and was surprised that no one else did - but I was totally reminded of Jesus. If a person has never read the Bible, it is likely that they have this image of Jesus as being a perfect human being, but once the Bible is explored, it is seen that he, too, is only human as can be deducted for all of the mistakes he made in his youth. (Note: I am not religious at all, and I'm sorry for the vagary, but this is generally true, yes?)
I wanted to mention this in class and was surprised that no one else did - but I was totally reminded of Jesus. If a person has never read the Bible, it is likely that they have this image of Jesus as being a perfect human being, but once the Bible is explored, it is seen that he, too, is only human as can be deducted for all of the mistakes he made in his youth. (Note: I am not religious at all, and I'm sorry for the vagary, but this is generally true, yes?)
Final Post, I swear!
I might be crazy but I actually really liked My Life in the Bush of Ghosts by Tutuola. Alyson did make a great point in one of her posts that they are ghosts and the connection experience is weaker than the connection made with other authors, like Desani. Even though Tutuola uses fiction in a ghost word and there was just not enough time to go through each metaphor. With this novel I feel it could reach a wider audience and I would recommend it over some other novels from this semester. Not that they weren’t great, but if certain ones weren’t assigned, like Gandhi, I would never think to read them. I really got absorbed in the ghost world and it was busting through the seams with so many connections to colonialism. I saw he had written The Palm-Wine Drinkard in some of the other book versions. Maybe when this class is back on the market on the course schedule, I think more of Tutuola would be a great addition to the reading load. For me, I am totally going to shell out the green to get that version because I enjoyed Tutuola’s writing.
Universality of Children
One of the things I enjoyed most about Swami and Friends was the universal quality that a lot of the characteristics and actions displayed in the novel have with children across the world. For me personally, I found that a lot of the things Swami did or said were things I myself did or said in my own childhood. In fact, I took them to be Narayan's way of pointing out the similarities in children around the world unencompassed by the idea of race or social status. For example, when we see Swami walking past the younger children's classrooms and trying to feel superior, that idea of wanting to have authority/wanting to feel superior is something I think cuts across the book into the realities of childrens' emotions. Similarly, we might see this universal quality in the group tactics, and the way Swami's friends get upset when he starts following Rajam around so closely.
Thought Provoking End to the Semester
I left the classroom today with my mind stuck on the ways in which we could view our own experiences in education through these novels, especially in terms of how we will view home, our parents, our old friends and ourselves. Like Snehal mentioned, the reality our generation is faced with is that the cost of education doesn’t always equal its benefits. So I don’t necessarily feel I’ve moved on my life in some way that my friends from back home who didn’t go to college haven’t. Not when some of them are now homeowners and I’ve spent the last five years spending 600 dollars a month on rent and piling on student-loan debt. This is not to say that I’d trade spots with any of them, its just to say that when I go home and chill with the old crew and someone says, ‘Your graduating right? That’s awesome!’ in my head thinking, ‘Do you have student-loan debt? No… That’s awesome.’
I agree with Snehal that maybe what we get out of our education in the humanities is the ability to view our upbringings and those who we may have left behind with more sympathy. I love that I’m from the south side of San Antonio and I cherish all my trips back home and all the friendships I’ve been able to maintain. However, when I left SA for Austin after high school-- Did I feel like I was escaping a place and people I held with some disdain? Sure I did. I think it had something to do with, as Ngugi puts it, viewing my past as “one wasteland of non-achievement” and I desired to distance myself from it. I see things differently now of course; I am a product of all my experiences and wish not to run from my past or the history of my people, but to understand it and embrace it all, good and bad.
I agree with Snehal that maybe what we get out of our education in the humanities is the ability to view our upbringings and those who we may have left behind with more sympathy. I love that I’m from the south side of San Antonio and I cherish all my trips back home and all the friendships I’ve been able to maintain. However, when I left SA for Austin after high school-- Did I feel like I was escaping a place and people I held with some disdain? Sure I did. I think it had something to do with, as Ngugi puts it, viewing my past as “one wasteland of non-achievement” and I desired to distance myself from it. I see things differently now of course; I am a product of all my experiences and wish not to run from my past or the history of my people, but to understand it and embrace it all, good and bad.
I just do not understand this book...
I just really don’t have any idea what to make of this novel. I understand what Dasani was trying to do, and I can even see consistencies in some places between Haterr and some of the other narrators that we have encountered so far, especially those of Soyinka and Joyce, but other than that, I can’t really comment, because, honestly, I was lost the entire way through this novel. There are a few important passages, I suppose, but it was so lost in the nonsensical relating that they either went over, or under, my head, I can’t decide which. I’d love to read some professional’s review of this book, both to help me understand what Desani is talking about, but also to see if I am alone in my lost-ness. I assume that someone must have taken something important out of all this, but I just don’t see it.
I will say that I enjoyed the point he makes about how life is contrast, because I think that’s something we all understand. There is no life without death, no victory without defeat, no love with pain, yadda yadda yadda, but if there are more gems such as these hidden in the ludicrous prose of Desani, I certainly did not find it.
I will say that I enjoyed the point he makes about how life is contrast, because I think that’s something we all understand. There is no life without death, no victory without defeat, no love with pain, yadda yadda yadda, but if there are more gems such as these hidden in the ludicrous prose of Desani, I certainly did not find it.
Post 12
There is no doubt that the schooling that Gandhi received in Law School in England was important to him and to his future as an activist, but just like for everyone who has ever gone to a school, at least as important is the education received outside the classroom. Social rules, new ideas, challenges to convictions and people of different heritages are encounters that we all face as we continue our education. Gandhi learned outside of school that he could defend his convictions (as with his decision to stay a vegetarian despite being surrounded by Hindus who did not prescribe to this) as well as learning that changing other people’s minds can be far more difficult than it may seem. He was heavily influenced by the works of famous British novelists who expounded on civil disobedience, belief in liberty, and religious will as ways to make important changes in life. Upon leaving England Gandhi was a staunch British supporter, as can be understood after a life and education in the nation. This is another aspect of his life that was unlikely to be learned in a classroom, but a trait the he gained as he fell in love with ideas of freedom, innovation of thought, and ruled by consent of the governed that are central to democracies like England’s.
Post 9
As we talked about in class back during the Joyce unit, its obvious that Joyce is one of the most prolific writers in human history. The guy’s writing in this novel is exceptional. He uses, perhaps, too many contemporary allusions, but you can hardly fault a guy for not writing for an audience decades after his novel was published. The writing style of this novel reminded me considerably of both Soyinka and Desani. It is so episodic and stream of consciousness-oriented that you really get a sense that real people, in real places, feel similarly to the characters. I think that is one of the most important aspects of writing in a novel that criticizes an institution. I’m reminded of the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee. Even though Joyce and Lee’s characters aren’t really historical figures, they feel like they are, which makes it far easier for people to get behind them, and take a serious role in activism, which is, of course, the purpose of each of these authors, in one way or another.
Post 8
This novel is all about our fate as people who will not live forever. When the unnamed boy strays out of the mortal world into that of the ghosts, we begin to understand how people in Africa understand their lives, especially with regards to colonialism. The bush is found in a deeeeeeeep forest that is basically impenetrable, even though the colonials have destroyed most it to fuel industrialization and trade. Its easy to see how this is an indictment of the mercantile system, but even more, it is a belief in the idea that there are some things that just cannot be taken from you. I don’t know if that was Tutuola’s. purpose with the location of the bush, but it makes sense to me. In other novels we have read this semester we see the Europeans take different things from the people of their colonies, from their money, to their humanity, to their very lives, but here is a place that is solely African. It gives me some hope that these deep wounds inflicted on the people can somehow, someday, be healed, if not necessarily healed. The first step is to reclaim those things that were lost, from land, to resources, but most importantly culture. Its what makes us who we are. What would American culture be without those things that can’t be taken away? We are lucky to not have to worry about losing our lives or liberties to an unknown aggressor, but imagine if we did. Would we still be us? Its hard to say, but I have to say no.
Post 5
The ending to The Book of Not was strange to me. In Nervous conditions Dangarembga’s purpose seemed like a platform for Tambu's success through hard work and commitment. I don’t know what happened to Darengba between these two novels, or if perhaps it had always been the point to put these two novels together, butTambu’s work ethic doesn’t change, just the fruits of her labor. The injustices that she is forced to endure from start to finish leave you with a bad taste in your mouth. Certainly things were not all peaches and cream in the first novel, but damn, why does it have to be so bad for her now? Nobody wants to see that complete loss that is Tambu at the end of the book of Not, how could you? I suppose that maybe this is a more honest look at the effects of colonialism in regards to the human cost at the individual level, but if so, then what is the purpose of the first novel, that while not perfect, at least gives you hope for the future? Maybe a fairytale endings isn’t what the people of Africa need to see what they need to overcome if they are to be truly free of oppression, and I can understand that, but the differences in plot and theme from prequel to sequel leaves me at a loss to understand the overarching purpose of the novels.
Post 4
Someone please explain to me what the purpose of Nervous Conditions and The Book of Not being related is? I know I’ve already talked about this, but the two novels just don’t flow together at all. It seems to me as though Dangaremba’s purpose was to write two completely different anti-colonial novels, but was influenced to write a sequel to her first hit, and so combined her two novel ideas in The Book of Not. Surely it’s the author’s prerogative to write about whatever they see fit, and if people read it, then hey, they did their job, but really, the messages that I took from these novels are so different, and the tones so strange, that it isn’t something you typically see in a sequel. I know that Snehal loves Harry Potter, so I’ll throw this in: The change in tone from the 4th to 5th books in that series is similar to the change in Dangaremba, and since both shifts center around changing from a child to an adult and moving into an adult world that isn’t always kind, I can see that as a plot point for Dangaremba. But jeez, at least HP had a mostly happy ending. Does Tambu have any hope of the future she dreamed about in her garden? It doesn’t seem likely, which may motivate people to throw off the chains of oppression, but mostly, I think, disheartens the would-be activist far more that it encourages them.
Post 3
An eating disorder such as Nyasha’s can be characterized in a number of ways. It is certainly an affliction that goes against our sensibilities as Americans, because in the world which we live, harming one’s self because of the dangerous realities of the world is not a problem that we are typically confronted with. It brings to mind the question of how to stand up to a force over which you have no control, another aspect of life which can be hard for us to relate. I feel like Nyasha, who at the outset of this story was so strong-willed and in control of her life, has lost her power over the events that shape her life, and as such, turns to something that she can control, like her food intake. Maybe it is a little bit of a stretch to compare this to colonialism, but in the end, I can understand how it is easier for someone to control the things they can, rather than fall into despair over a world that is literally and figuratively collapsing around her.
Perhaps that is a message from this novel, that people have always, and will always, focus on the things over which they have control. Its in some ways similar to Tambu’s garden, her will to better her life through education, and even her reaction to the death of her brother. Focus on the things that you can change, and let God sort out the rest.
Perhaps that is a message from this novel, that people have always, and will always, focus on the things over which they have control. Its in some ways similar to Tambu’s garden, her will to better her life through education, and even her reaction to the death of her brother. Focus on the things that you can change, and let God sort out the rest.
Education and Colonization
I found the topic we spoke of today concerning how the process of education can actually be similar to the process of colonization to be very interesting. It got me thinking about the novels we have read and I found two novels we read this semester to show different sides to this argument. In "Nervous Conditions," Tambu's pursual of a colonial education makes her resent her family as well as herself. She is ashamed of the life she led at the homestead because of the education she has received at Sacred Heart. Gandhi, on the other hand, goes to England for an education and ends up becoming a better Hindu in the process. His experiences in England allow him to better appreciate aspects of his native culture. For example, he ends up being a vegetarian by choice rather than out of duty after he arrives in England. These different reactions to colonization cause me to wonder about the question that was posed in class concerning the effect education has on us. Looking at both Tambu and Gandhi makes me question whether the effects on education are different from one person to another. If education truly does cause one to resent one's old self, then is this the case for everyone? If not, what are the reasons why someone responds differently to education than someone else?
Final Thoughts
It's been a long semester, but I can definitely say I've taken something of worth away from this course. I've learned about the damaging effect that having a foreign power impose its culture on a colonized nation can have on the people native to that region. I have a better understanding of the idea that a person's culture affects the building of their character and colors their values and beliefs. In reading the literature of other nations, I have learned that the things that are of literary importance in my native language are not necessarily the things that are of literary importance in other languages. I've also learned how universal some of the problems that arise from colonization are, regardless of location or culture. However, what I think I will take the most from this class comes from the talks in class we had about the novels we read. For me, one of the most fundamentally important facets of learning in the classroom comes from the differing views of a subject that discourse among peers in class discussion affords you. All in all, I've had a very interesting, enlightening, and entertaining semester, which would not have been possible without all of the other people in the classroom with me. Thanks, guys!
Favorite Novel
Out of all of the books we have read in this class, I have to say Things Fall Apart is probably my favorite. But, it is also the only book I would have read outside of this class for pleasure, because I have heard a lot of things about it and have been meaning to read it. Nonetheless, it was the book that I felt was the most straightforward! It had a simple style, and wasn't trying too hard to be confusing (which is what I feel All About H. Hatterr is doing at times...).
After that would probably be Nervous Conditions or Gandhi, both of which once again were simple in style and plot. Gandhi was not what I was expecting - which is that it was not boring. No offense, but Gandhi's story has been retold to me hundreds of times, so to see him in a new light was unexpected and very pleasant. His youth is something I don't think many people know or talk about, so to see this part of his life unfold with his own emotions and feelings was pretty interesting. As for Tambu, I think Nervous Conditions was the novel with which we most opened up as a class, because it related closely to our own education in many ways - the bullies, the peer pressure, the pressure to get good grades, the competitive nature of the students, wanting to have the latest clothes/food, etc. The Book of Not, however, I didn't enjoy nearly as much as the Nervous Conditions.
Father Son Relationships - Things Fall Apart
One of the things Achebe stresses from the beginning of his novel is the father-son relationship of Okonkwo and his father, as well as Okonkwo's relationship with his own son, Nwoye. What is interesting to me is how ashamed Okonkwo feels of his father's characteristics, and the extremes he goes to just to avoid being anything like him. He feels this strong anger and hatred towards his father, and is just as angry at Nwoye for not displaying the characteristics he believes men should exhibit. When Okonkwo finally gets the son he wants in Ikemefuna it is especially interesting that Nwoye begins to look up to him, and Ikemefuna is the perfect clansman and man in general. Still, you would think that once Okonkwo was able to have this connection with the son he always wanted he would treat him differently, but he remains restrained and reserved in voicing his appreciation for Ikemefuna, and in the end he manages to find the will to kill him!
Then, once again, Okonkwo finds a way to have a "perfect son" - except this time it is his daughter. Continually he says things that express he wishes she was a son because of how well she would behave as his heir, and he is saddened that since she is a woman she will have to leave the house for another. The one time he truly expresses his feelings for her is when she falls sick, and he goes into a craze of sorts because he doesn't want her to die. Now, of course, we hope that he would react this way for any of his children, but I think Achebe chose to have his daughter fall sick so that he could express the intense emotion Okonkwo feels for her.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Desani as Contrast
“Life is ups and downs, light and shade, sun and cloud, opposites and opposites! Even the van belonging to Our der dam’ Dumb Friends’ League! Hell, the dumb are barking! Damme, you need salt to season salt-water fish! Take anything and you will find the oppoite! Banerrji, imagination boggles at the contrasts I have indexed for reference purposes! Example, man-woman, honesty-dishonesty, day-night, perfume-stink, saints-swine. I have been working very hard old feller. If I cannot leave anything to posterity, I should like to leave the fellers this self-realised medico-philosophical conclusion as to Life. Life is contrast!”
This truly was one of my favorite passages of the novel. A lot of times it does take the negative to illuminate the positive, or the experiencing or exposing of one factor to shed light on the opposing factor. I think this theme can be seen in many instances in the novels which we have read so far in this class, as well as in life in general. For instance, we probably never appreciated the simple or straight-forward writing styles of some of the other authors we have read until our encounter with the complex of Joyce or outright bizarre of Desani.
Also, I think this passage helps to serve as a contrast to much of what is occurring in the majority of the novel. Much of this work does seem nothing more than purely nonsensical, but there are a few select passages, such as this one, with truly interesting and insightful interjections, which we also might not have paid such close attention to or appreciated so much if it weren’t for the remaining rather unintelligible passages serving as contrast.
This truly was one of my favorite passages of the novel. A lot of times it does take the negative to illuminate the positive, or the experiencing or exposing of one factor to shed light on the opposing factor. I think this theme can be seen in many instances in the novels which we have read so far in this class, as well as in life in general. For instance, we probably never appreciated the simple or straight-forward writing styles of some of the other authors we have read until our encounter with the complex of Joyce or outright bizarre of Desani.
Also, I think this passage helps to serve as a contrast to much of what is occurring in the majority of the novel. Much of this work does seem nothing more than purely nonsensical, but there are a few select passages, such as this one, with truly interesting and insightful interjections, which we also might not have paid such close attention to or appreciated so much if it weren’t for the remaining rather unintelligible passages serving as contrast.
Joyce's Waves of Emotion in Hatterr
Amongst the various writers which Desani alludes to in his elusive text, there can be found a couple of Joycian elements as well—as was pointed out in class with the example of the “moo cow.” Another passage of the novel which I actually found to be fairly similar to one from Joyce’s Portrait of the Artist can be found in chapter 3 of Desani’s text, in which he writes:
“I saw, I saw waves and whirls, on her calm expanse. Those movements and commotions seemed to me so much like human emotions, aspirations, feelings, impulses: similarly unstable, ever-changing, perishable, momentary; perhaps not real; perhaps, just a play on the surface; perhaps, just appearance and disappearance on the plane of awareness: but, in reality, perhaps, non-existent, all of no substance; and, though themselves non-existent, yet, perhaps, proof, symptom, shadow, revelation, of a reality, of a truth, of a god or a creator, I thought, He, the one and the only source of all things, of my emotions, aspirations, feelings, and impulses: as well as of the waves and whirls!”
Stephen also experiences his share of “waves” of emotions throughout Portrait of the Artist with his various religious encounters, attempts at finding truth, and revelations of God or the Creator. Joyce pays a great deal of attention to the emotions with Stephen’s fluctuation in them:
“A cold lucid indifference reigned in his soul. At his first violent sin he had felt a wave of vitality pass out of him and had feared to find his body or his soul maimed by the excess. Instead the vital wave had carried him on its bosom out of himself and back again when it receded…”
“I saw, I saw waves and whirls, on her calm expanse. Those movements and commotions seemed to me so much like human emotions, aspirations, feelings, impulses: similarly unstable, ever-changing, perishable, momentary; perhaps not real; perhaps, just a play on the surface; perhaps, just appearance and disappearance on the plane of awareness: but, in reality, perhaps, non-existent, all of no substance; and, though themselves non-existent, yet, perhaps, proof, symptom, shadow, revelation, of a reality, of a truth, of a god or a creator, I thought, He, the one and the only source of all things, of my emotions, aspirations, feelings, and impulses: as well as of the waves and whirls!”
Stephen also experiences his share of “waves” of emotions throughout Portrait of the Artist with his various religious encounters, attempts at finding truth, and revelations of God or the Creator. Joyce pays a great deal of attention to the emotions with Stephen’s fluctuation in them:
“A cold lucid indifference reigned in his soul. At his first violent sin he had felt a wave of vitality pass out of him and had feared to find his body or his soul maimed by the excess. Instead the vital wave had carried him on its bosom out of himself and back again when it receded…”
Swami's Relgious 7-Eleven
I am talking about pages 56-57 in Swami and Friends in which Swami prays over two pebbles that the Gods will turn them into three-paise coins.
I think is a cute story that illustrates the fallacies of the idea of convenience in religion. I think Christianity especially is often portrayed in a way that is easy to mold to your needs... "pray and God will forgive you". What makes someone not do horrible things, and then pray afterwards? I think sinning and forgiveness are so highlighted in the portrayal of Christianity that this is often the message taken, when it really isn't the point at all.
Still I think it's human nature to pray or seek out religion when we need or want something. Here we see the extreme of that... Swami praying for fortune. This scene reminds me of when I was little and prayed to God that our Lotto ticket was the winning ticket. I see how ridiculous that was now of course, but I also understand that sometimes God as well as gods of other religions are portrayed as go-to people, almost a Santa Claus-like figure that if you are good too, will give you things you want.
Swami is getting the same mixed signal of religion in his school; "He also remembered Ebenezar's saying in the class that God would readily help those that prayed to him".
I think this idea is misinterpreted either by Swami who is seeing an easy way to his desires, or Ebenezar who is unaware of the limited knowledge he is putting forwards.
And so wether it is Swami's own fault or not, he ends up with the idea of the god as his own personal 7-eleven store which he can visit whenever he needs something.
He finds a rude awakening when he finds his pebbles untransformed.
I think is a cute story that illustrates the fallacies of the idea of convenience in religion. I think Christianity especially is often portrayed in a way that is easy to mold to your needs... "pray and God will forgive you". What makes someone not do horrible things, and then pray afterwards? I think sinning and forgiveness are so highlighted in the portrayal of Christianity that this is often the message taken, when it really isn't the point at all.
Still I think it's human nature to pray or seek out religion when we need or want something. Here we see the extreme of that... Swami praying for fortune. This scene reminds me of when I was little and prayed to God that our Lotto ticket was the winning ticket. I see how ridiculous that was now of course, but I also understand that sometimes God as well as gods of other religions are portrayed as go-to people, almost a Santa Claus-like figure that if you are good too, will give you things you want.
Swami is getting the same mixed signal of religion in his school; "He also remembered Ebenezar's saying in the class that God would readily help those that prayed to him".
I think this idea is misinterpreted either by Swami who is seeing an easy way to his desires, or Ebenezar who is unaware of the limited knowledge he is putting forwards.
And so wether it is Swami's own fault or not, he ends up with the idea of the god as his own personal 7-eleven store which he can visit whenever he needs something.
He finds a rude awakening when he finds his pebbles untransformed.
Dont be a Hatterr
I dont think this book is garbage, but it's definitely not a gym read. No really, I tried to read it at the gym and was like... uh... what the hell. Reading passages in class clarified some aspects such as the fact that he is somewhat mocking names through the English translations (like Always Happy). I think that once you understand what the hell he's talking about Desani can be accredited as witty and clever. I think is interesting. Desani is using so many allusions to English culture that even members of that culture have trouble making sense of the book. There is the idea that writing in English makes one more knowledgeable and generally thought of as more intelligent than if they wrote the same quality of work in their native languages (Decolonizing the Mind). However Desani goes so far to prove his intelligence that he is, in a sense, outsmarting his audience. But I don't feel like he is really doing this to earn credibility, but rather to poke fun at or mock the idea that you have to look and sound smart to be smart. He contrasts his allusions with wild syntax, format (like Mutual Introduction), and non-words like "wizardcraft". I think there's an underlying message here that you don't have to write in Shakespearean style to be a successful, intelligent author, and you sure as hell don't have to conform to tradition to tell a good story. I think the fact that this book is confusing is due to some of the expectations of intelligent literature of our culture. After all, my English books are just as confusing.
Study, or else
" 'Why are you so nervous about my examination?'
'Suppose you fail?'
'I won't'
'Of course you won't if you study hard and answer well... Suppose you fail and all your class-mates go up, leaving you behind? You can start doing just what you like on the very day your examination closes.'
Swaminathan reflected: suppose the Pea, Mani, Rajam, and Sankar deserted him and occupied Second A? His father was right. And then his father drove home the point. 'Suppose all your juniors in the Fifth Standard become your class-mates?'
Swaminathan sat at decimals for half and hour. " (Swami and Friends pg 42)
This section of the novel is not only amusing, but gives insight into Swami's character. Swami is afraid of being alone. When he originally invited Rajam over to his house, he is obsessed with appearing wealthy and successful and winning over his friend's affection and respect. This passage highlights Swami's need to feel accepted and have his friends. It certainly foreshadows the tense departure of Rajam at the end of the novel, and accentuates how big of a deal that departure actually is.
Here Swami is embracing colonial education simply because he wants to be with his friends. For Swami, and many kids today, school is a place of socialization. He is willing to accept the discrimination and forcefulness of the religious proctor simply for the chance to be with his buddies. He is even regretful at the beginning of the novel that his father wrote a letter to the principal. Swami seems willing to put up with crap for this opportunity.
He's also willing to fit that mold of a successful colonial man as we see through his attempts with Rajam. We see no real sense of pleasure radiating from Rajam due to his wealth or status except for the same one Swami seeks, popularity. Rajam delights in his social power, which is shown through his efforts to reunite his bickering friends and giving them some of his possessions in return. In this way, Rajam symbolizes colonialism which offers resources that people may need, and the social power and influence over people that comes along with it.
Swami, is trying to be like Rajam, but he is different because he appears to really want the emotional part of friendship rather than notability.
'Suppose you fail?'
'I won't'
'Of course you won't if you study hard and answer well... Suppose you fail and all your class-mates go up, leaving you behind? You can start doing just what you like on the very day your examination closes.'
Swaminathan reflected: suppose the Pea, Mani, Rajam, and Sankar deserted him and occupied Second A? His father was right. And then his father drove home the point. 'Suppose all your juniors in the Fifth Standard become your class-mates?'
Swaminathan sat at decimals for half and hour. " (Swami and Friends pg 42)
This section of the novel is not only amusing, but gives insight into Swami's character. Swami is afraid of being alone. When he originally invited Rajam over to his house, he is obsessed with appearing wealthy and successful and winning over his friend's affection and respect. This passage highlights Swami's need to feel accepted and have his friends. It certainly foreshadows the tense departure of Rajam at the end of the novel, and accentuates how big of a deal that departure actually is.
Here Swami is embracing colonial education simply because he wants to be with his friends. For Swami, and many kids today, school is a place of socialization. He is willing to accept the discrimination and forcefulness of the religious proctor simply for the chance to be with his buddies. He is even regretful at the beginning of the novel that his father wrote a letter to the principal. Swami seems willing to put up with crap for this opportunity.
He's also willing to fit that mold of a successful colonial man as we see through his attempts with Rajam. We see no real sense of pleasure radiating from Rajam due to his wealth or status except for the same one Swami seeks, popularity. Rajam delights in his social power, which is shown through his efforts to reunite his bickering friends and giving them some of his possessions in return. In this way, Rajam symbolizes colonialism which offers resources that people may need, and the social power and influence over people that comes along with it.
Swami, is trying to be like Rajam, but he is different because he appears to really want the emotional part of friendship rather than notability.
Fiery Language
We talked about the repititon of words portraying heat, burning, and fire in The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. But upon rereading parts of My Life in the Bush of Ghosts for my essay, I realized the image holds true in this novel as well.
"It was these eyes which were bringing out splashes of fire all the time and were used to bring out fire on the firewood whenever she wanted to cook food and the flash of fire of these eyes was so strong that it would catch the firewood at the same moment like petrol or other inflammable spirit or gunpowder, and also use it at night as a flood of light in lighting the whole town as electricity lights, so by that, they were not using other lights except the flash fire of her eyes" (pg 99)
In the passage above, the narrator is describing the power of the flash-eyed mother. Here we see this excessive repetition of heat and fire and if we associate that with the connotation of suffering and Hell, we can see that Tutuola is drawing a connection between this ghost town and its obsession with Hell. I think he is commenting on the excessive nature of Christianity of describing sin and the inevitable punishment associated. Like Stephen, this narrator is frightened by the idea of the fires of Hell and punishment for sin, but I think this narrator is more of an observer than an activist. Stephen blatantly referred to religion and made a conscious effort to save his soul (ex. praying in the cold). Here, though, we so no quick religious turn around, and it is easy to read past this Hellish illusion.
I think it is also worth noticing that this flash-eyed mother, the political leader, holds so much power that she is described as an element of nature. Perhaps Tutuola is commenting on the power of colonial leaders through this metaphor and is explaining the punishment of defying them (sinning and Hell). This is what is being taught, anyways.
"It was these eyes which were bringing out splashes of fire all the time and were used to bring out fire on the firewood whenever she wanted to cook food and the flash of fire of these eyes was so strong that it would catch the firewood at the same moment like petrol or other inflammable spirit or gunpowder, and also use it at night as a flood of light in lighting the whole town as electricity lights, so by that, they were not using other lights except the flash fire of her eyes" (pg 99)
In the passage above, the narrator is describing the power of the flash-eyed mother. Here we see this excessive repetition of heat and fire and if we associate that with the connotation of suffering and Hell, we can see that Tutuola is drawing a connection between this ghost town and its obsession with Hell. I think he is commenting on the excessive nature of Christianity of describing sin and the inevitable punishment associated. Like Stephen, this narrator is frightened by the idea of the fires of Hell and punishment for sin, but I think this narrator is more of an observer than an activist. Stephen blatantly referred to religion and made a conscious effort to save his soul (ex. praying in the cold). Here, though, we so no quick religious turn around, and it is easy to read past this Hellish illusion.
I think it is also worth noticing that this flash-eyed mother, the political leader, holds so much power that she is described as an element of nature. Perhaps Tutuola is commenting on the power of colonial leaders through this metaphor and is explaining the punishment of defying them (sinning and Hell). This is what is being taught, anyways.
Bush of Colonials
I think the ghostland metaphor in My Life in the Bush of Ghosts is very interesting.
We talked in class about the implications of comparing Colonialism to a ghost world. While it is never stated directly, I think that it fair to say that the main character's confusion and dwindling sense of self is relatable. The main character is constantly distressed, confused and is trying to find a way home at the beginning of the novel. Then he meets new ghosts and even participates in their societal practices. The quest for home is mentioned less and less often, as if it is placed on the side burner. I think this mimics the initial rejection of something being imposed and desire for the old way of things. When someone is overwhelmed by new information and a new way of life (colonialism) it is their reaction to suffer. They become confused and look for familiar things. But I think the point Tutuola is trying to make is that while it may seem like a nightmare, colonialism does offer some important things, like education. It is easy to get caught up with resources like nice clothes and bed sheets and lose sight of what was originally yearned for.
I don't think Tutuola is either defending or negating colonialism, but simply talking about adjustment to change. Being too negative can make one miss out on the benefits, but being too positive may keep one from their native identity. I think he is also making the point that the colonized culture can never completely return to its original state, just as this character can not really return to his childhood.
We talked in class about the implications of comparing Colonialism to a ghost world. While it is never stated directly, I think that it fair to say that the main character's confusion and dwindling sense of self is relatable. The main character is constantly distressed, confused and is trying to find a way home at the beginning of the novel. Then he meets new ghosts and even participates in their societal practices. The quest for home is mentioned less and less often, as if it is placed on the side burner. I think this mimics the initial rejection of something being imposed and desire for the old way of things. When someone is overwhelmed by new information and a new way of life (colonialism) it is their reaction to suffer. They become confused and look for familiar things. But I think the point Tutuola is trying to make is that while it may seem like a nightmare, colonialism does offer some important things, like education. It is easy to get caught up with resources like nice clothes and bed sheets and lose sight of what was originally yearned for.
I don't think Tutuola is either defending or negating colonialism, but simply talking about adjustment to change. Being too negative can make one miss out on the benefits, but being too positive may keep one from their native identity. I think he is also making the point that the colonized culture can never completely return to its original state, just as this character can not really return to his childhood.
Badassness
While other novels, such as My Life In The Bush of Ghosts play with form and rebel against style taught through colonial education, none do so as bluntly as All About H Hatterr.
In the novel the narrator states, "I write rigmarole English, staining your goodly godly tongue, maybe: but, friend, I forsook my Form, Schol and Head, while you stuck to yours, learning reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic" (pg 37).
In this line, H. Hatterr blatantly addresses the reader to mock the pretentious attention to grammar and style within the English language, and pretty much says "screw that, I'm writing how I want". No other book makes such a claim nor actually addresses the reader as part of the offending culture (in this case, "you"). By including us in this oppressive education system, it seems as if H. Hatterr is against us as readers even, and then ironically turns around to call as "friend". Wether or not we trust that we are indeed his "friends", this jump illustrates his point perfectly. He is not concerned with the standard images, transition, or style of English, but intends to make it his own and craft it into his needs.
I think this is an interesting concept- a kind of hybrid language. Ngugi discusses authors who choose to write in their native language and lose some credibility and fame, versus those who write in English and lose meaning. Well, here Desani is achieving both. He is complying to the need of writing in English but is refusing to utilize Colonial English. He wants to make it his own language and personalize it.
I think its cool how blunt he is about it all, and open to mocking us and our rules of language. I think it makes the book more controversial, and admittedly funny.
In the novel the narrator states, "I write rigmarole English, staining your goodly godly tongue, maybe: but, friend, I forsook my Form, Schol and Head, while you stuck to yours, learning reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic" (pg 37).
In this line, H. Hatterr blatantly addresses the reader to mock the pretentious attention to grammar and style within the English language, and pretty much says "screw that, I'm writing how I want". No other book makes such a claim nor actually addresses the reader as part of the offending culture (in this case, "you"). By including us in this oppressive education system, it seems as if H. Hatterr is against us as readers even, and then ironically turns around to call as "friend". Wether or not we trust that we are indeed his "friends", this jump illustrates his point perfectly. He is not concerned with the standard images, transition, or style of English, but intends to make it his own and craft it into his needs.
I think this is an interesting concept- a kind of hybrid language. Ngugi discusses authors who choose to write in their native language and lose some credibility and fame, versus those who write in English and lose meaning. Well, here Desani is achieving both. He is complying to the need of writing in English but is refusing to utilize Colonial English. He wants to make it his own language and personalize it.
I think its cool how blunt he is about it all, and open to mocking us and our rules of language. I think it makes the book more controversial, and admittedly funny.
Childhood
Narayan’s complete acceptance of life and its happenings is something that children accept in their world. Swami seems to be the antithesis of an average kid, not too stupid or too intelligent, animated or boring, a goody-goody or a bully. Every page is significant in respect for the character; nothing is arbitrary for in some way it will all help shape Swami as an adolescent, especially his relationship with his parents. Unlike other novels we’ve read, Swami’s mother does not seem as large a figure in his life as I would of expected. A strong, willful matriarch seems to be a caveat for books on colonialism. Also, Swami’s relationship with his father, who leaves little to be desired, shows the disjointedness displayed when an adult is not on the same playing field as a kid or vice versa. Lastly, childhood friendships mean the world to Swami. Even though Swami is being raised in India during the 1930s, his likes/dislikes, daily challenges and indecisive nature are very similar to a majority of children. At least for me, I can remember when things spoken beyond my neighborhood seemed to so foreign and I never gave a second thought about when I was hanging out with my friends. It is interesting now that I am older to see where my friendships broke off and of unfulfilled promises to keep in touch was lost. I don’t think that I cared all that much after a few days without them, I simply moved on. Contrast with today, I make more of an effort to keep what few good friendships maintained.
T.S. Eliot ain’t got nothin’ on Desani
Desani’s writing may not be the same style as Joyce, who held back from the overuse of exclamation points, I would still consider All About a highly modern novel. While much of the flimflam, irony, and culture-clash are rampant in the novel, Hatterr has a relatable personality for all of his life encounters. It would seem at this point in the course the character of H.H. marks a 180 degree turn from the time where we wanted to slip Tambu a chill pill in her damme Nesquik.
Banerrji may have poked his nose in Tambu’s Shakespeare book, but he enjoys displaying his obsession to H. H. and not caring so much for accuracy. At times this Anglicized Indian proves to frustrate Hatterr for his emphasis more on the experience at the sacrifice of maintaining the facts. Desani’s inclusion of this character as a display of how relevant having ridiculousness can be in one’s life. For instance, while colonialism did happen and the effects are difficult to reverse, what you do with the influx of English/Western culture, which in some respects may be bizarre, can be made to be relevant for all those peculiar moments in life.
Narayan
Hey guys, for any of you who enjoyed Narayan, you should check out some of his other works! As a kid I read quite a few of them, and here are a couple you might want to check out.
The English Teacher, from what I remember, is supposed to be kind of autobiographical of Narayan's own life. It all about this English teacher trying to find the path to happiness and learning how to be a proper provider and husband for his family, etc.
The Emerald Route is another one of his books, but this one is non-fiction. From what I remember it is kind of like a travelogue of the state of Karnataka in India, which I remember having to read because that is where all of my family is from. It's not as entertaining as the fictional works, but it contains a lot of neat things about the history and culture of Karnataka if you guys are interested!
The Talkative Man is pretty short, but pretty good. Its about this man who sets up camp in the town of Malgudi, and his rapport with a local unemployed journalist. The whole situation is comical and interesting, and talks a lot about marriage, because the stranger to Malgudi is this womanizing guy.
Anyways, hope this was informative, helpful, or at least entertaining. Enjoy Narayan!
Rituals in Things Fall Apart
One of the things I found most interesting about Things Fall Apart from the very start of the novel was the emphasis Achebe placed on tradition and rituals. It was something I could relate to, and helped me understand why Okonkwo was so rigid about things. At times he almost seemed OCD about the way he ate his food and the way he ran his household, but by giving us a background into the Umuofian culture Achebe displaces the rigidity of Okonkwo and explicates it as pretty common.
In particular, I was interested in the way that people greeted each other/visited each other's households. The kola nut was one of those methods that caught my attention, as it appeared in almost every important ritual - from simple decisions, to gatherings, to weddings. After looking it up online, I found that kola is a stimulant of sorts, and as commonplace to the Umuofian culture as tea or coffee is to us. Knowing this helped me visualize, and fully understand certain aspects of their daily life, and I wish Achebe had explained some of the rituals in more depth. I realize that by NOT explaining and simply showing Achebe threw us head first into the culture, and we had to figure out our way around the rituals ourselves, but some explanations to things like the kola or the marriage traditions would have been helpful to me personally.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
The Mad HATTERR's Dreams
Chapter four is titled "Apropos Supernatural Agent" which in reality should be titled "My Dreams which are realities" only due to his experiences making the reader question their ability to interpret his writing. I did enjoy this chapter because it made sense me whether or not I understood whether it was reality or a dream but I understood why the chapter has its title. The scene of Harrow voo being possessed is one of those supernatural events that you do not think of. As we discussed in class, this is something that happened but it doesn't seem like that too me just because I am trying to associate it with something and not read it like he wants it read. Desani's writing is a big promoter of class discussion for things are not understood on your own. On another note, after making it through the book reading more of words than understanding context fully, I understood his love for language and thinking of words to "misspell or use in a wrong way" which compels the reader to think of why he used the word or why he switches from French back to English. I also enjoyed Desani's speech on life contrasts which is very true. You have life and death, sweet and sour, cartoon kid friendly mad hatter and H. Hatterr. This book was very much a contrast of the typical things we have read as English in terms of how it is written but I learned it is very similar to some of the greats of our time who we do not give as a hard time.
Hatterr and Soyinka
As I mentioned in class today, I found Soyinka and Hatterr were placed in similar circumstances but handled them differently. Soyinka had parents of two different religions and Hatterr had parents of two different cultures, so both of them were hybrids. Yet, Soyinka chose to accept both Christian and pagan beliefs whereas Hatterr chose to ridicule both Hindu and Western ideas. In my opinion, Soyinka's approach is preferable over the Desani's. I find it possible to believe that there can be a pleasant compromise between both colonial and native influences which is what Soyinka is trying to show. However, I have a tough time understanding what the purpose of Desani's approach is. While I find it interesting that Desani makes fun of both the greed of Hindu mystics and the pretentiousness of people who claim to enjoy works by Shakespeare and Joyce, I find it difficult to understand why he would do this. What is Desani's take on colonization? Does he think that if you're born between a clash of two cultures, it can result in you becoming an overly enthusiastic, slightly insane character like Hatterr? Most importantly, what would Desani gain by mocking both Western society and Hindu traditions? After reading most of this novel, I feel like Desani's purpose may be to show that crazy world experiences that Hatterr has because of the different cultures he's exposed to result in him learning more about Life.
Sympathy for Hatterr
I find it completely hilarious that Hatterr, who is repeatedly hoodwinked, learns absolutely nothing time and time again. Interestingly, none of these conditions are as tragic as that of which he cries for his mother. In his cry, "I haven't had my mother to love me... I have no relations, don't you see? I am afraid, can't you see?" (p. 223) I think this paragraph is significant, or is included in the novel, because it begs sympathy from readers. Someone who is starved of affection, we are inevitably obligated to understand where his insecurities originate from.
He also mentions that he suffered an injury to his head and may "develop mental disorders" (p. 222) - the reason for him carrying a list of doctors' phone numbers at all time in the case an accident should ever occur. That illustrates such an obsessive-compulsive person, but if Hatterr successfully gains our sympathy, does that make his journey that much more respectable? Do we respect him more because he's willing to undergo these experiences post-head injury? Personally, for those very reasons, I felt more obligated to sympathize with him when he failed time and time again. Note, that does not mean that I admire his character whatsoever.
I believe that, for those very reasons, the quest becomes more respectable (almost endearing) because his quest is to search for Truth (i.e., a hope to one day reunite with his mum). It was also bittersweet to read because, even though being orphaned, he hopes God continues to watch over his mother. I was just surprised that he didn't hate his mother for orphaning him off.
In his search for truth, Hatterr truly feels he has learned from the school of life. The greatest truth he learns is what we've already discussed in class: the truth that "Life is contrast" (p. 166). The philosophy to accept 'contrast' is truly important, something Hatterr emphasizes, because it's almost a kind of motivation that allows Hatterr to hold onto this faith to continue on with his quest - to gain more experience, to add to the contrast of life.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Swami's Quest for Self
First of all I wanted to say how much I thoroughly enjoyed Narayan's chapter on Swami's exams. I found it really easy to relate to - I myself many a time have finished an exam too quickly, and then tried to stall by looking over things. Eventually, I found I had nothing more to write, and nervously left the place thinking I either was only given half of the test, I either bombed it or rocked it. I think it is a very average thing to go through when it comes to education, which places Swami in that exact realm as a student - average. He obviously cares enough about his exams to want to do well, regardless of whether that his all his own doing or his father's strict expectations. Plus, I was really amused when Swami lied to his friends about how much he wrote down to make himself feel better. I mean come on, who here hasn't done that!?
In any case, in my presentation I discussed Swami's need for constant approval by the people around him, from Rajam to his father. I see this as his quest to figure himself out, and his place in the world. This was especially explicit when he wasted time on his test to write the following on his paper:
Tamil Tamil
W.S. Swaminathan
1st Form A Section
Albert Mission School
Malgudi
South India
Asia
I kind of viewed this obsession with titles and locations and geography as a metaphor for Swami's personal search to figuring out his place in the world, or at least his own community and friends. Too much of a stretch?
Swami's Feelings Towards Education
I found it particularly interesting that Swami was so different than Tambu, and kept making comparisons between the two novels in my head as we read. Even the opening of the novel begins with a description of Swami's reluctance to go to school, and to do his homework. Tambu was all about discipline and what she needed to do to get her education - she placed it above a lot of other things. I imagine if Tambu and Swami ever talked she would chide him for his lack of understanding at the importance of the opportunity he has been given! Also, when Swami later is easily caught up in the protests, he reminds me more of Tambu's younger sister, who also became politically involved while Tambu focused on her education. Now it is a little different, because I don't think Swami did it for these grandiose, patriotic reasons as Tambu's younger sister might have, but nonetheless Tambu would not have put her education in jeopardy for much of anything, let alone an opportunity to knock out some windows with stones.
Getting into their shoes
As I have a few times in class, this book intensely reminds me of Joyce's work (Ulysses more than Portrait). Since we only read Portrait though, I shall try to base my comparison on that alone.
With Portrait, we follow Stephen's thought process down every rabbit trail it goes. Whether he is daydreaming about his name in the Greek form or being a horny teenager and spying on a girl in the water, we are taken with him down the road of his associations and rationalizations, along with his reactions and opinions.
H. Hatterr does a lot of the same thing. When he is in the dark with the lion, his mind goes off into visualizing his own death and funeral. We hear his thoughts about the beautiful man he encounters, Always-Happy. We are given insight into his observations at great detail. When he meets the sage who makes him strip, we know the awe he experiences because of his thorough description of it. When Stephen goes into the bishop's office, we are also faced with detailed and minute observations.
These methods of inner thoughts and monologues are notable because of how accurately they portray the process of any person's internal thinking. Joyce and Desani do a great job of exposing the inner workings of their main characters.
With Portrait, we follow Stephen's thought process down every rabbit trail it goes. Whether he is daydreaming about his name in the Greek form or being a horny teenager and spying on a girl in the water, we are taken with him down the road of his associations and rationalizations, along with his reactions and opinions.
H. Hatterr does a lot of the same thing. When he is in the dark with the lion, his mind goes off into visualizing his own death and funeral. We hear his thoughts about the beautiful man he encounters, Always-Happy. We are given insight into his observations at great detail. When he meets the sage who makes him strip, we know the awe he experiences because of his thorough description of it. When Stephen goes into the bishop's office, we are also faced with detailed and minute observations.
These methods of inner thoughts and monologues are notable because of how accurately they portray the process of any person's internal thinking. Joyce and Desani do a great job of exposing the inner workings of their main characters.
Monday, May 3, 2010
First Contrast
Alas! And Ee Gads! Betwixt blotto and bajanxed my fella men of Manx, upon a quandary I have stumbled and blessed be the meek for they shall inherited the earth. I smell a rat in Denmark, and I haven’t yet been to Paris. The telescreen is spouting again and the Pixie’s dust has left me aloft of the second star and on to mourning. Where is my mind? With my feet on my head and my head on the ground, compounding my interest in this lost generation is the fleeting feeling that my percent of the cut might be quite miniscule. A Piece of the Action, please. Zut Zut Zephrame Cochrane, speed my soul to the final frontier for this northern exposure has left me in a winter of my discontent. The crudely cut coupons I cajoled off the back of my can o’coca cola has since expired and I am sadly stuck in post colonial Williamsburg with past due postage. Judge Judy has rendered her final verdict and the Blair-ian nightmare of this modern post world must continue its reach and cspan over all the airways. No anti—trust fellas, no anti-trust, for in faith and the farthing we till till fallow. There is no Gap in my genes, for I am in truth a truly anatomically modern homo-sapien, and the flame in my souls smithy withstanding, I too will forge a head.
POST: M.I.A. – in 3rd world democracy. Yeah. I Got more records than the KGB. So NO funny business.
Between the fraud Freud and the blasphemer Blake, the dichotomy of my taxonomy leaves me to question my constant state of ambiguity. The telescreen is shouting again and the Kalishnokovs have taken to clashing, Bernie made off with all my money honey, and the God of Reason is Treason. So says my radio, my head agrees. A great schism in my consciousness has produced this call for culling. This town ain’t big enough for the two of us, so despite bull or bear, either a merger or a split. A house cannot stand divided, and 50/50 ain’t 100. The ol’ factory has stunk up the joint, and I adore the essence of mustard gas in the pale sunrise. But alas, I am remiss. Auto didactic, response synaptic, lost in a labyrinth of my own short comings, e.e. (typo – editor – make note, i.e.), with no hope of escapism. I am a soul sundered. Forged in twain, marked from my very inception dualistic.
POST: M.I.A. – in 3rd world democracy. Yeah. I Got more records than the KGB. So NO funny business.
Between the fraud Freud and the blasphemer Blake, the dichotomy of my taxonomy leaves me to question my constant state of ambiguity. The telescreen is shouting again and the Kalishnokovs have taken to clashing, Bernie made off with all my money honey, and the God of Reason is Treason. So says my radio, my head agrees. A great schism in my consciousness has produced this call for culling. This town ain’t big enough for the two of us, so despite bull or bear, either a merger or a split. A house cannot stand divided, and 50/50 ain’t 100. The ol’ factory has stunk up the joint, and I adore the essence of mustard gas in the pale sunrise. But alas, I am remiss. Auto didactic, response synaptic, lost in a labyrinth of my own short comings, e.e. (typo – editor – make note, i.e.), with no hope of escapism. I am a soul sundered. Forged in twain, marked from my very inception dualistic.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Language in Hatterr
Sometimes during this book I felt a little bit lost. Its hilarious at parts, and its so bizarre at times that you can't help but love it, but All About H. Hatterr is definitely out in left field most of the time. H. Hatterr's mixed heritage is the catalyst for his story, which is his search for enlightenment with the sages he visits. Its such a strange book topic, especially when you consider how its written, that most of the time I just didn't know what to make of it. Its funny to think that someone actually sat down and put this together, then sent it to an editor. Even the opening of the book makes a point to say that the language is not correct, but still perfect in its own way. “it is the language that makes the book. . .. It is not pure English; it is like Shakespeare, Joyce, and Kipling, gloriously impure.”
After reading a book by Joyce, I can understand how you can draw similarities between the two authors, even though the books are separated by a long time period and thousands of miles, the ideas are very similar. They're both all about a guy who doesn't know what hes supposed to do with his life, on a road to revelation that they never really seem to find. I think that's a fear that most people our age can relate to.
After reading a book by Joyce, I can understand how you can draw similarities between the two authors, even though the books are separated by a long time period and thousands of miles, the ideas are very similar. They're both all about a guy who doesn't know what hes supposed to do with his life, on a road to revelation that they never really seem to find. I think that's a fear that most people our age can relate to.
Gloriously Impure Language
There was one thing that managed to catch my attention in my stupor from an all-nighter was how not only job titles are a Western identity of status, but also speech. I, like most of the class, struggle with the vernacular. That being said, the speech whether it is high flatulent or chuck full o’ accents is very indicative of a person and their culture. A lot of writers reflect regional dialects through how they write a character’s dialogue. As a result, this technique purposefully slows down the reader’s pace in order for him/her to understand the character. What happens at an unconscious level is the reader will make judgments about this character as either intelligent or dull-witted. As people, we socially interact and we make decisions from our first impressions. We do this ALL the time and the same judgments are made about us when we converse with other people.
In class, I underlined a line on page 95 that just jumped out at me and it states, “But I tell you, man, I have seen more Life than that feller Shakespeare! Things happen to me with accents on ‘em.” I was struck by this line because it was so passionate in its fightin’ words against the guru of English literature, Shakespeare. This is one thing I like about this book is it undermines all of our hang-ups on being thoroughly knowledgeable on pieces of “greatness,” which let’s face it are 9 times out of 10 only comprehensible when you have a professor taking you through each passage and what it means and why it’s so important. Oh, and of course, handy-dandy Sparknotes. From the way Desani writes, he shows how we, the readers, see how provincial it is when someone puts on airs. I see Haterr falling prey to this phenomenon for his inserts of French language, which was the language of high end British society for a time.
However frustrating it may be, I like how Desani is so acutely in tune to the human condition and he realizes how unreasonable it is to quantify one person’s credentials to a single standardized criteria. It’s not so much what is more commendable, book smarts versus street smarts, but Desani is sneaky in how he contorts the reader’s expectations for this book. For me at least, I have to consciously put aside my own biases to know what Desani is communicating to me and for me to find the method in his madness.
Language of a Mad Hatter
Of all the literature that we have whole heartedly consumed this semester, I believe this particular piece emphasizes the language of colonization more perhaps than any other of the works we have digested. The books we have covered have all had a similar theme of hybridity in characterization, as most of our protagonists have found themselves caught between two worlds and struggling to grasp onto an identity. In Hatterr, we find a character in a similar situation but now the hybridity has manifested itself stylistically in our protagonist’s strange and curious diction. The faux-pidgin superfluous pseudo Victorian (yall like that, yeah I made that up) speech employed by our mad hatter is conceivably a direct representation of this hybridization. In societies where colonial oppression supplants indigenous culture and in the case of India, where the colonizer has set up English as a means to social mobility, it would seem acceptable that our perhaps not so educated protagonist would pick up these English words and idioms as a way to foray into the upper stratospheres of society. If Hatterr, like Gandhi, places emphasis on ‘experience’ , then this lay accumulation of seemingly exaggeratedly and false ‘educational’ speech would serve this con artist in a dual sense. Though the words are of an educated nature, his application and usage of this knowledge oft comes in a ‘real life’ setting. I place real life in quotations because obviously the fancifulness of his misadventures is meant as allegory and metaphor and not meant to be taken literally, but this book is not about a scholar who studied away in the hallowed halls of the Etons, or Shattuck St. Mary’s of our world, but the focus is rather on his accumulation of experiences and how they shape his world view around him. I like Hatterr, I think Desani does good by playing with the syntax and diction, and the cacophony of intellectual vomit pouring forth from H. Hatterrs mouth is quite amusing and correspondingly poignant given the trope of the piece.
A Cry Against Conventionality
As was mentioned today in class, Desani’s H. Hatterr did seem to harbor quite an amount of resentment or disdain towards some of the more notable figures in the literary and even general world. Mostly, he really seemed rather perturbed that these figures were able to attain such a vast amount of recognition when (he believed) they did not even truly possess what should be constituted as knowledge. He speaks of himself as having a knowledge of “life,” or maybe even similar to the knowledge which Gandhi describes his father as having—that of experience.
Hatterr, though clearly not quite as well-known as those such as Shakespeare, Milton, or Marlow, it would seem, clearly thought he had just as much of a right to be—believing himself to be just as knowledgeable (due to the great amount of knowledge which he found them all to be lacking in) and probably even deserving of all of the numerous titles which he illustrates as being shown forth on his idealized tombstone. Overall, I think Hatterr (or Desani) truly did, to a degree, respect all of these forerunning literary geniuses, but would simply refuse to completely accept them as such out of the resentment and possibly slight jealousy which he felt towards them. It seems as though he is trying to illustrate how the these writers ultimately came to be so widely acknowledge due to their mere following of conventions. As Hatterr does in fact illustrate with this novel, he clearly is capable of just as much genius in his own way. He simply refuses to follow the conventions which the majority of the populace seems to find fit, finding it dire to be exceptional more in an amount of uniqueness rather than molding to the proper means of exposing such intellect. With this novel he seems to me to be trying to show just how much he truly is capable of, if people would only allow themselves to stray from acceptance solely of the conventional and veer out in experience and appreciation of something starkly unique and new.
Hatterr, though clearly not quite as well-known as those such as Shakespeare, Milton, or Marlow, it would seem, clearly thought he had just as much of a right to be—believing himself to be just as knowledgeable (due to the great amount of knowledge which he found them all to be lacking in) and probably even deserving of all of the numerous titles which he illustrates as being shown forth on his idealized tombstone. Overall, I think Hatterr (or Desani) truly did, to a degree, respect all of these forerunning literary geniuses, but would simply refuse to completely accept them as such out of the resentment and possibly slight jealousy which he felt towards them. It seems as though he is trying to illustrate how the these writers ultimately came to be so widely acknowledge due to their mere following of conventions. As Hatterr does in fact illustrate with this novel, he clearly is capable of just as much genius in his own way. He simply refuses to follow the conventions which the majority of the populace seems to find fit, finding it dire to be exceptional more in an amount of uniqueness rather than molding to the proper means of exposing such intellect. With this novel he seems to me to be trying to show just how much he truly is capable of, if people would only allow themselves to stray from acceptance solely of the conventional and veer out in experience and appreciation of something starkly unique and new.
Obi Wan and All About H. Hatterr
I like this book. A lot. I don't get all of it, but most of what i do get is hilarious.
this book makes fun of everything. shakespeare? he lived way long ago. and maybe he wasnt shakespeare, but bacon. the wasteland? the man is talking to a dog, whom he identifies as himself. The most important book of the last 100 years (Joyce) starts out with "once upon a time and a very good time it was there was a moo cow..."
The scary thing about H. Hatterr is for all its ridiculousness, it adheres to the old Obi-Wan mantra: "What I told you was true, from a certian point of view"
Now a lot of Hatterr is so utterly ridiculous as to be incomprehensible, but for me it serves as a kind of outlet for all those irreverent thoughts we have about the literature we read in English classes. Hatterr says all the things you want to blurt out in English class, but just cant. He takes Freud's theories and seeks to implement them in the most carnal and unacademic way possible. Joyce takes words seriously. Language is a weighty matter. Desani looks for the absurdaties in words. Why is the word for a useless organ in your body the same an additional section in a book (appendix)? Desani seems to be poking fun at these notions by creating a world where words are taken to the extreme and define reality. This book is a lot of fun once you start laughing with desani... if you arent, he is probably laughing at you!
this book makes fun of everything. shakespeare? he lived way long ago. and maybe he wasnt shakespeare, but bacon. the wasteland? the man is talking to a dog, whom he identifies as himself. The most important book of the last 100 years (Joyce) starts out with "once upon a time and a very good time it was there was a moo cow..."
The scary thing about H. Hatterr is for all its ridiculousness, it adheres to the old Obi-Wan mantra: "What I told you was true, from a certian point of view"
Now a lot of Hatterr is so utterly ridiculous as to be incomprehensible, but for me it serves as a kind of outlet for all those irreverent thoughts we have about the literature we read in English classes. Hatterr says all the things you want to blurt out in English class, but just cant. He takes Freud's theories and seeks to implement them in the most carnal and unacademic way possible. Joyce takes words seriously. Language is a weighty matter. Desani looks for the absurdaties in words. Why is the word for a useless organ in your body the same an additional section in a book (appendix)? Desani seems to be poking fun at these notions by creating a world where words are taken to the extreme and define reality. This book is a lot of fun once you start laughing with desani... if you arent, he is probably laughing at you!
different critiques of religion
I agree that Hatterr is a challenge to read. Even after we were given the different elements to be on the look out for, it is still hard to understand. One of the things that I do like about the book is that it is written in a way that forces you to slow down and as it was stated in class today “sound it out”. I know at times, people (myself included) are tempted to gloss over the text, and just pick up on the “key” or “important” elements that get you whatever information you need. But that really isn’t feasible with this book.
I think another interesting thing to look at is the way that Hatterr is critiquing religion versus the way that Tutola critiqued religion in My Life in the Bush of Ghosts. In Hatterr, when the reader encounters religious figures, they are doing things that one wouldn’t associate with a “truly” religious person. The religious/mystical people the Hatterr encounter are con-artists and swindle people. If you take a look at My Life…the religious people that are encountered are acting badly, but they stick true to certain religious mythology. If I remember right, the demon baptizes him with scalding water, even though he doesn’t want it. Tutuola doesn’t say that a priest, using a visage of righteousness, does this bad thing to him. This leaves me wondering which critique is more effective. Is it more effective to use a critique that Hatter did, which highlights hypocrisy does exist in the religious world, or is better to critique it the way that Tutuola did?
I think another interesting thing to look at is the way that Hatterr is critiquing religion versus the way that Tutola critiqued religion in My Life in the Bush of Ghosts. In Hatterr, when the reader encounters religious figures, they are doing things that one wouldn’t associate with a “truly” religious person. The religious/mystical people the Hatterr encounter are con-artists and swindle people. If you take a look at My Life…the religious people that are encountered are acting badly, but they stick true to certain religious mythology. If I remember right, the demon baptizes him with scalding water, even though he doesn’t want it. Tutuola doesn’t say that a priest, using a visage of righteousness, does this bad thing to him. This leaves me wondering which critique is more effective. Is it more effective to use a critique that Hatter did, which highlights hypocrisy does exist in the religious world, or is better to critique it the way that Tutuola did?
Titles
As discussed in class today, we read about the titles on the coffin. I will say, I have been extremely confused throughout this entire novel, and I don't feel like I have much to add because I am not pulling the same meaning out of the passages as everyone else. However, I thought the passage with all of the titles was interesting. Throughout every novel we have read titles are an extremely important, as well as clothing, food etc. They all show a symbol of status and, I believe, a certain amount of respect. I found this play of titles was pretty amusing honestly. When you start reading a huge list like that you tend to just skip over it and move on, at least I did, and doesn't seem to matter. However, when we took a closer look at the passage I realized how ridiculous it seemed to have all of that on a coffin! I mean can you imagine walking into a cemetery and someone having to headstones with all of their titles and accomplishments? I mean, that would be the most ridiculous thing ever! So it made me think, why does this matter? Well it does in so many ways because, if you really think about, we all want the credibility that comes with the titles. As we said, that's why we choose UT over ACC. In another class of mine we were talking about Jonas Salk, who discovered the vaccine for Polio, and his wife's parents would not let them get married until he got his degree, that way the invitations could read "Dr. Jonas Salk". He could be the crappiest doctor in the world, but as long as he had the title that's all that mattered. I think Desani had a great point, you acquire all of theses titles, true or untrue, and that's all that people look at.
Boo ya H. Hatterr, how ya like me now?? A little pent up aggression.
What I’ve come to realize in this book are the infinite amounts of allusions to other works. I’m an English major, as many of you also are, and have a hoooorible time trying to understand the works that are almost force fed to me in this latest book. I find myself discouraged most of the time when reading a book who’s allusions I cannot understand, but this book takes that feeling and acts like a crack hording mother who beats her children (obviously with us, the reader, being those crack addicted babies). I’m not sure how to get through this book without throwing it in disgust, but I’ve strangely found a fascination with it. It’s almost built a game for me, ‘find something you do know’ would be the title of it-unfortunately, I’m losing right now, with no real hope of recovery. It’s as if I want to throw the book down Dane Cook style, scream ‘you don’t know me’ and call it some ‘mind ninja’ or say I’ll ‘punch it in the throat.’ It’s absurd, I know, but the shining light from all this is the emphasis I’ve come to realize on words over anything else (mostly because, well, my comprehension is less than those cool Joycian writers who seem to know more than God and can fart Hamlet in their sleep). At some points in the book, I had to stop and realize what absolute beautiful imagery H.Hatterr has in it. For this, I say, H. Hatterr isn’t a complete labyrinth or waste on those with lesser knowledge than gaseous filled 20th century men of old. Ha. At least they’d see some pretty colors, and human organs, imagine what he could mean by libido, and wonder if he’s stupid, smart, or just an enigma.
All About H. Hatterr
I don't think I've ever read anything as puzzling and complex as All About H. Hatter. I think Desani intended his writing to be interpreted as "Life" that Hatterr narrates he is in quest of. Instead of attending school or college, Hatterr dedicates his whole to searching for Life and learning from the "school of Life" (p. 33). Therefore, the author and/or narrator is deliberately vague about almost everything we read for that very purpose - learning of life.
We also talked in class about Hatterr's hybridity - I thought back to his name and the link we made between Hatterr and the Mad Hatter (Alice in Wonderland). Mad Hatter's preoccupation with time finds an echo in H. Hatterr's failure to fulfil his quest because time works in such a different manner between the fantasy (Mad Hatter) and the reality (Hatterr). This hybridity propels logic to the relation between language and reality. Like Alice, Hatterr is caught in a world he does not understand but attempts to learn of it, we are forced to recognize that language creates its own reality and identity is undetermined. In this way, Desani's departure from standard English, simple and to the point, becomes his way of articulating the reality of the local. Therefore, I think Desani's play on words (i.e., extraordinary rather than extraordinarily) is his way of experimenting with language - presenting the versatality of the local, the colloquial, and the masterful. Since we're told not to read for content, to focus on words, it's quite fascinating to see the words he chooses. If you read word for word, Desani definitely knows how to manipulate words.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
The Mad Hatterr!!! ( It does make you mad)
As discussed in class, the book is a difficult read. I found it a little easier when we were given a "map" of what to read for. I do however realize it is difficult to get through his writing. Desani writes in a clever way to cause critical thinking. As English majors, we are use to correcting things when we see them as wrong. For example the sentence that contained extraordinary, we wanted to change it to the adverb extraordinarily and that is not what Desani wanted. As the reader, it is hard for me to get over the fact of just reading words and not getting content but at the same time the book is teaching me to pay attention to words that I otherwise skim over and do not give much thought. The book contains many ideas even though they are all over the place but it reminds me of our daily thoughts of our minds running from one spectrum to the other. I can appreciate the fact that gives questions in the beginning for thought even though they may not all be answered. I am not saying this is my favorite book but it reinforces the idea of research. We need to research for our own understanding of what to make up of concepts or ideas that may be jumbled like this book. In order for me to read this book, I have to remind myself of the cleverness of the writing and figure out other ways it can benefit me.
hating hatterr
Alright, so the title is a little harsh, but I think that on some level everyone can agree. Trying to read this book is painful, and as I stated in class the other day, I am not finding content, which is hard to get past since everything we learn as English majors is about content and finding the underlying meaning. Although, this book does have a lot of underlying meaning, it's hard to grasp unless you know exactly what Desani is poking fun at. While I do find this book difficult to read, and hard to understand, after going through some passages in class, I am finding the book to be a little more beautiful and humorous. I think that Desani was a very smart man and that his book gets overlooked because it is so difficult.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Gandhi and Religion
Gandhi says earlier in the novel how he was raised to be tolerant of other religions. However, he found that "Christianity was at the time an exception." He didn't like the missionaries abusing Hindu gods and so it makes sense that he would dislike Christianity. It must be noted though that Gandhi did say "at the time." We say that later in the novel, Gandhi becomes more tolerant of the religion and actually begins to compare the teachings of the "Gita" to the New Testament's Sermon on the Mount. This shows that Gandhi was interested in learning about other religions and achieving tolerance for other beliefs. This is one more admirable quality that can be added to Gandhi's nature. To me, it seemed like Gandhi wasn't so much against the essential teachings of Christianity (belief in Jesus, One God, etc), but more against some of its practices like "eating beef and drinking liquor." However, after meeting "good" Christians in England, he is willing to reform the opinion that Christianity is bad. Gandhi finds similarities between a verse from the New Testament “But I say unto you, that ye not resist evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also” and Shamal Bhatt’s “For a bowl of water, give a goodly meal.” He finds that these two teachings have commonalities so he is not completely against mixing some Christian beliefs with Indian teachings.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Education
Ghandi's experiences in London are particularly interesting because of the wide variety of things he is assailed with. He finds himself swimming in a foreign culture often times at odds with his own values. Ghandi finds himself reading a variety of things for the first time- both his own sacred hindu texts as well as being introduced to the Bible by his friends. For Ghandi, the institutionalized education he receives is less helpful to him because he is forced to adjust himself to the system. Ghandi's informal education that he receives is largely of his own devising; he joins groups, seeks out vegetarian diners, etc. Whereas law school introduces a series of external facts and cases, Ghandi is always intensely interested in the inward journey. In his informal education, Ghandi is his own teacher, sets his own syllabus of study, and ultimately learns about the world by examining himself instead of the other way around.
Good fortune versus Merit
One thing I noticed and appreciated was Ganghi's stating that much of success was due more to good fortune than to his merit. He says, regarding two scholarships he received, "an achievement for which I have to thank good luck more than my merit. For the scholarships were not open to all, but reserved for the best boys amongst those coming from the Sorath Division of Kathiawad" (pg. 14).
By him admitting that he didn't actually earn the rewards through hard work, but merely by coincidence, we are shown that Gandhi really is modest and truthful. Some people would maybe acknowledge the same thing, but they might also also prefer to tell themselves and others that it was well-earned also.
Gandhi's revealing to the reader of the reason for the rewards is self-less and honest and to be admired. I feel that in today's day and age, people are to quick to take credit for things that they don't really warrant.
By him admitting that he didn't actually earn the rewards through hard work, but merely by coincidence, we are shown that Gandhi really is modest and truthful. Some people would maybe acknowledge the same thing, but they might also also prefer to tell themselves and others that it was well-earned also.
Gandhi's revealing to the reader of the reason for the rewards is self-less and honest and to be admired. I feel that in today's day and age, people are to quick to take credit for things that they don't really warrant.
Gandhi's Humility
While I was aware that one of the most common conceptions about Ghandi was that he was a very humble man, I didn't realize the extent to which he went in order to maintain his humility. I thought it was very interesting that he came from an affluent background and consciously made a decision to remain in poverty, which is a sharp contrast to some of the other protagonists in other stories we have read who go to great lengths in order to escape their impoverished conditions. Gandhi's manner in which he tries to live a sinless lifestyle is also very interesting. It seems that Ghandi serves as a sort of polar opposite to Stephen Dedalus from Portrait of the Artist: While Dedalus fully embraces the life of sin and vice, Gandhi fully rejects it, and yet the two both seem to have a similar understanding of the nature of sin itself.
The Informal Education topples the Formal Education
Gandhi's view of an education is not the outlook we have in our western civilization. We are taught that the formal education is what is most important for us to grow in society. For Gandhi, his reading of the vegetarian books taught him the value of his food and benefited him. I think Gandhi benefited in his opinion when it was not taught in the classroom. When developing his theory on living a simpler life, he had come from a sort of prosperous family but he did not get the "finance" education we are taught today in school. I admire that Gandhi stuck with whatever he vowed to do even though he had many temptations from peers that he chose to hang out with. Gandhi was a mediocre student but he was a good learner. What he learned, he applied. Gandhi truly appreciated his culture and stuck with the teachings and values of culture. He did try to branch out by eating meat(vowed to mother to never eat it), he tried to be a English gentleman and realized that was not for him. For him learning is trial and error, he realized what made his education for personal growth.
Establishing His Absolute Truths
I found the manner in which Gandhi seemed to regard himself to be particularly interesting—his fear of other students and being picked on throughout his earlier childhood, his general tendency to accept what others would prefer for him to do over his own preferences, and his extreme and rather perplexing fear of public speaking.
In class it was brought up how odd it seemed that Gandhi would receive extremely harsh criticism from elders (which would totally ruin any positive self-image he might hold), yet he always took everything which elders would relay to him as absolute truth and adjust his own truths consequentially to fit. And, following such criticism, he would still regard the elders with just as much respect or affection as before. He did not allow the harsh words to affect the views he held of any such individuals, and took everything which they would tell him as opportunity to be provided with a broader perspective of himself which he might have otherwise been oblivious to. This would also correlate with the remaining aspects of his overall character and his ability to take the bad of every opportunity as a learning experience, or further aid in his experiments with truth.
In class it was brought up how odd it seemed that Gandhi would receive extremely harsh criticism from elders (which would totally ruin any positive self-image he might hold), yet he always took everything which elders would relay to him as absolute truth and adjust his own truths consequentially to fit. And, following such criticism, he would still regard the elders with just as much respect or affection as before. He did not allow the harsh words to affect the views he held of any such individuals, and took everything which they would tell him as opportunity to be provided with a broader perspective of himself which he might have otherwise been oblivious to. This would also correlate with the remaining aspects of his overall character and his ability to take the bad of every opportunity as a learning experience, or further aid in his experiments with truth.
P.E.
Growing up, the misery of my existence always came out during obligatory physical education known better by its established acronym, P.E. I certainly would not want Gandhi for my spokesperson against the evils and embarrassments that come from the daily 50-60 minute torture, which scarred my otherwise happy-go-lucky youth. Yet, like most adults, one can see the positive effects of physical training. Even Gandhi states how “gymnastics and cricket [were] compulsory for boys of the upper standards” and he disliked both (15).
Unlike gym and cricket, Gandhi seems to emphasize physical enlightenment as equal in importance as mental exercise by controlling one’s own body you gain a better sense of yourself in the space of your surroundings. This could be analogous to how Indians compare themselves with the English whether it is race, physique, money, and/or power.
While Gandhi may not fit the criteria of a P.E. teacher, i.e. a fairly obese coach who simply enjoys the power of commanding weakling children, he teaches the same basic principles. Developing self-discipline through dietary constraints and the limitations brought on by poverty. All this is needed to gain a closer understanding and speaking truthfully.
Handwriting
After class today, I wanted to say more about the importance Gandhi places on handwriting. Lisa mentioned that she learned to draw before she learned to write and that it greatly benefitted the quality of her handwriting. While I know that Gandhi means this example to be literal, and I agree, I also want to look at the metaphorical stance.
Observe before you do. We should teach our kids to observe flowers, birds, etc. from nature and learn to draw them. Then we should teach them to write. Drawing takes a great amount of interpretation. You look at the object, interpret it, and project your interpretation of the object. Gandhi wants to emphasize this skill. If we pay attention to the specifics and aesthetics of something, we are able to interpret it much better and produce a better product.
I just think the implication of this is wonderful. We should teach our kids not the product (the handwriting) but the skill needed (observation and interpretation). These skills are not as concrete as being able to craft letters into calligraphy, and apply to life as a whole.
I think Gandhi learns that he must observe before he can do, and I think the amount of observation he becomes able to make is shown through his careful evaluation of the school system, and even of his life in general as represented in his autobiography.
Observe before you do. We should teach our kids to observe flowers, birds, etc. from nature and learn to draw them. Then we should teach them to write. Drawing takes a great amount of interpretation. You look at the object, interpret it, and project your interpretation of the object. Gandhi wants to emphasize this skill. If we pay attention to the specifics and aesthetics of something, we are able to interpret it much better and produce a better product.
I just think the implication of this is wonderful. We should teach our kids not the product (the handwriting) but the skill needed (observation and interpretation). These skills are not as concrete as being able to craft letters into calligraphy, and apply to life as a whole.
I think Gandhi learns that he must observe before he can do, and I think the amount of observation he becomes able to make is shown through his careful evaluation of the school system, and even of his life in general as represented in his autobiography.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)