My most meaningful takeaway from the Achebe Shared Inquiry Discussion

During the Achebe shared inquiry discussion, we had to discuss our inquiry questions about an interview with Chinua Achebe from The Atlantic in the August 2, 2000. The interview features the writer of Things Fall Apart, discussing the effects of African literature as well as how colonization influenced the messages which writers are expressing to the rest of the world. One of the inquiry questions I had was; What is Achebe's position about the moral obligation of a writer to write about his/her homeland in a certain way?

Throughout the discussion, one point that stood out for me the most was how Achebe shows that through the use of African literature, writers bring to light how people are more similar than different, despite what they like to believe.

"I really had no sense of that. Its meaning for my Igbo people was clear to me, but I didn't know how other people elsewhere would respond to it. Did it have any meaning or resonance for them? I realized that it did when, to give you just one example, the whole class of a girls' college in South Korea wrote to me, and each one expressed an opinion about the book. And then I learned something, which was that they had a history that was similar to the story of Things Fall Apart -- the history of colonization."

This specific section resonated with me the most throughout the interview. This is because within the cultural context, Achebe adresses that many people, non-Igbo people resonated strongly with his novel Things Fall Apart. Despite their different background they shared a mutual feeling of oppression thus showing that all around the world people from different backgrounds subconsiously share many mutualities. Thus this shows how depite our geographical location, people are more similar than they realize. This emphasises how African literature is a powerful tool to connect people together through ideas and feelings, instead of relying on one-sided literature (influenced by European notion). By giving different cultures a voice through literature, it can reach many more people all around the world and allowing them to see the complexity of the world much more clearly since often left-out spots in history and literature are covered. Achebe develops an argument on how literature, in particular African literature, gives a different experience  and -side of the story which often makes it more recognizable and realistic for others to interpret.

This inquiry discussion therefore expanded my appreciation of the cultural context of Achebe's writing since he displays the mutualities such as colonialism within cultures such as the Korean and Igbo people, and how through the use of his novels Achebe evoked resonance within people from very different backgrounds and cultures.

Lupita Nyong’os speech commentary

Passage:

I want to take this opportunity to talk about beauty, Black beauty, dark beauty. I received a letter from a girl and I’d like to share just a small part of it with you: "Dear Lupita," it reads, "I think you're really lucky to be this Black but yet this successful in Hollywood overnight. I was just about to buy Dencia's Whitenicious cream to lighten my skin when you appeared on the world map and saved me."

I remember a time when I too felt unbeautiful. I put on the TV and only saw pale skin, I got teased and taunted about my night-shaded skin. And my one prayer to God, the miracle worker, was that I would wake up lighter skinned. The morning would come, and I would be so excited about seeing my new skin that I would refuse to look down at myself until I was in front of a mirror because I wanted to see my fair face first. And every day, I experienced the same disappointment of being just as dark as I was the day before. I tried to negotiate with God, I told him I would stop stealing sugar cubes at night if he gave me what I wanted, I would listen to my mother's every word and never lose my school sweater again if he just made me a little lighter. But I guess God was unimpressed with my bargaining chips because He never listened.

But a flower couldn't help but bloom inside of me, when I saw Alek [Wek], I inadvertently saw a reflection of myself that I could not deny. Now, I had a spring in my step because I felt more seen, more appreciated by the far-away gatekeepers of beauty. But around me the preference for my skin prevailed, to the courters that I thought mattered, I was still unbeautiful. And my mother again would say to me you can't eat beauty, it doesn't feed you, and these words plagued and bothered me; I didn't really understand them until finally I realized that beauty was not a thing that I could acquire or consume, it was something that I just had to be.

Paper 1 | Commentary

Within this passage of Lupita Nyongo’s speech, she emphasizes through the use of rhetorical- and literary devices how stereotypical pressures are put upon black-skinned women by society. As a result of this passage, the effects of beauty ideals set by society upon dark-skinned women are shown through the perception of her own self-worth. She develops an overarching theme of inner conflict due to the perception of her own beauty, and the ideals set by society, where her changing perspective stresses the effect of this internal struggle which many young black girls are still facing.

Within the first section of the passage, Lupita Nyong’o develops the inner conflict which she faced as a young girl, as a result of a letter she received from a fan. Throughout this section, she emphasizes the absurdity of these stereotypical pressures put on young girls by society.

Lupita evokes an image of the black skin, “beauty, black beauty. Dark beauty” (line 1-2), using amplification to emphasize and evoke the movement of resistance against the stereotypical pressures of fitting in with the ‘white’ beauty ideal. The impression of black inferiority is aroused since ‘black’ seems to be negative. Reading from the letter she received, she re-enforces the staggering effect which these ideals have led to, highlighting the admiring fan who thinks she’s “lucky to be this black but yet this successful in Hollywood” (line 4), with this antithesis establishing the idea that black people cannot be successful (in the entertainment industry) due to their skin color. This highlights the social and political context in which black people are looked down upon for being unsuccessful in contrast to whites who are represented as more successful. Lupita appeals to pathos arousing the emotion of compassion and astonishment when reading that the girl was “about to buy … Whitenicious cream to lighten my skin (until) you appeared on the world map and saved me” (line 6). Stressing the effect that her success was a form of hope for acceptance of the young girl’s black identity, rather than conforming to fit in with society. Conveying the impression of nostalgia, Lupita recalls “a time when I too felt unbeautiful” (line 7), utilizing neologism to mimic the ugliness of not being beautiful. With the metaphor “teased and taunted about my nigh-shaded skin” (line 8) she implies the repulsion towards black skin from her peers. Creating a desperate-like mood, she recalls the memory of “disappointment of being just as dark as I was the day before” (line 14), establishing the idea that her skin color caused her to struggle with her own appearance led her into huge dissatisfaction with herself. She therefore evokes the mood of desperation through her childishly attempts to fit in by becoming white-skinned. Lupita transition the tone further into absurdity, mocking her attempts to “stop stealing sugar cubes” (line 15) and “listen to (her) mother’s every word” (line 16) if “he (god) just made me a little lighter” (line 17). She refers to God as having the ability to change her skin color, thus reinforcing God as the ruler of her faith, and disappointment of her own identity as a younger child. She therefore connotes the sense that her skin color led her into deep self-dissatisfaction with her skin color, thus her identity and appearance which was ruled by her faith of being black.

Following the sense of absurdity and mock towards Lupita’s inner struggle as a young black girl, she transitions the mood in the second section to rather optimistic. Using a few rhetorical devices and recalling previous experiences, Lupita develops the movement of hope.

Lupita evokes a tone of optimism, with figurative language used to denote the way “a flower couldn’t help but bloom inside of me” (line 24), meaning that hope and resilience sparked in her life, contrasting to the depressing tone which Lupita’s struggles created. Parallel to the young girl who wrote her, Lupita finds herself as a young girl looking up to “Alek [Wek]” (line 24). Using the allusion of Alek Wek, Lupita familiarizes the audience with the impact that Wek had made to Lupita’s perception of her own beauty. She implies that Wek had aroused “as spring in my (Lupita’s) step” (line 26), imagery for the emotion of revitalization of her own self-perception of beauty. Thus, stressing the effect of a successful icon who looked similar to her, namely she was dark skinned. As an effect of this change of perception, Lupita commenced to have “felt more seen, more appreciated by the far-away gatekeepers of beauty” (line 27). The metaphorical representation of gatekeepers of beauty refers to the stereotypical standards and ideals set by a white society, suggesting the idea that now black women were also being accepted more for their talents despite their skin color. This is a very contrasting scene to the first section of the passage, where Lupita seemed to create a rather pessimistic mood around her own self-perception of beauty, in contrast to her transitioning perception of her own beauty. Lupita uncovers using an anticlimax that she “was still unbeautiful” (line 29), the negative neologism still is used to describe her own Beauty, however Lupita coveys the impression that “unbeautiful” is not as negative as given the impression in the previous section. As a conclusion Lupita states she “finally realized beauty was not a thing that [she] could acquire or consume, it was something that I just had to be.” (line 31-3). This epiphany suggests the idea that ‘black’ can be beautiful if you perceive it to be so, and that one cannot use cosmetics or other products to conform to a beauty ideal, but that one has to change their perception of beauty in order to be satisfied with their (black) skin.

Concluding from this passage, Lupita Nyong’o highlights through the use of rhetorical- and literary devices how stereotypical pressures and beauty ideals affects black-skinned women. How the need to conform to a specific beauty (or racial) ideal is suppressed upon young women, implying how the social context of this passage reveals the mechanism of beauty expectations in the society we live in. And how through the experiences of her own adversity, Lupita came to reveal that one has to adapt her perception of beauty in order to find satisfaction with their own beauty. In conclusion Lupita stressed this overarching theme of beauty and self-appreciation to empower black women struggling with their self-perception due to the ideals and expectations set by society, and how to overcome this by maintaining their true selves and changing their perception of beauty instead of changing themselves.

Characterisation of Coriolanus

Analytical Response

Throughout the play, the characterisation of Caius Martius Coriolanus not only bring to light that he is the tragic hero in Shakespeare’s play, but also emphasizes the gap between the Patrician and the Plebeians. 

The play, written around 1605 by Shakespeare, is considered a political play. Therefore the play intertwines political motives, such as the tension between the Patricians and the Plebeians. In the first scene of the play, we encounter the plebeians revolting against the Patricians, since the grain isn’t distributed equally resulting in a famine amongst the Plebeians. Thus, they are blaming the Patricians for the famine. They agree to proceed especially against Coriolanus, as he is described as “a very dog to commonality” (Act I, Scene I). Thus Coriolanus is represented as the rigorous opponent, as he is a Patrician. 

Despite Menenius’ attempt to soothe the revolt of the Plebeians, Coriolanus shows a despising behavior towards the Plebeians, fueling their hatred towards Coriolanus and the Patricians even more “We have ever your good word” (Act I, Scene I). This not only highlights the hierarchy of classes during the Roman times, but also the effect that it has on the Roman society as a whole--dissatisfaction and revolt. Shakespeare therefore shows the audience how this class system impact the proceedings of the characters in the play.

The neglecting attitude of Coriolanus, a patrician, emphasizes the gap and conflicts between these two groups; the Plebeians and the Patricians. It is clear that the Patricians look down upon the Plebeians, based on Coriolanus’ attitude towards them “you dissentious rogues, That , rubbing the poor itch of your opinion, Make yourselves scabs?” (Act I, Scene I). As shown, Coriolanus, a Patricians, does not shows any respect towards the Plebeians’ opinion, as they are seen as the inferior class of Romans. “They are dissolved: hang ‘em!” (Act 1, Scene I). The Patricians, Coriolanus, seem to want to get rid of the Plebeians as they do not form any importance in the Roman society, and are according to Coriolanus unnecessary and should therefore vanish. 

In the play, Coriolanus is represented as a tragic hero; meaning that he is a “literary character who makes a judgment error that inevitably leads to his/her own destruction” (Bainbridge. 2008) In the play, Coriolanus is considered a classical hero in the full beginning scenes since he has been able to defeat the battles against the Volscians. “Misguide thy opposer’s swords! Bold gentleman, Prosperity be thy page!” (Act I, Scene 5) However, as soon as he returns back to Rome his arrogant and disrespectful attitude towards the Plebeians will lead him to his own destruction. Significant is that he is represented as a classical hero in the battle field, but in the capital of Rome he is rather rather a tragic hero since his arrogance towards the Plebeians arouses hatred towards Coriolanus. Coriolanus’ defeat against the Volsces arouse hate as well, which later on in the play will lead to his own destruction. “He’s the devil. Bolder, though not so subtle. My valour’s poison’d” (Act I, scene 10).

Linguistic Imperialism | a lawyer's perspective

Present is a scenario where I will be a lawyer who will be representing the Frisians and their language, and why it should be preserved rather than promoting the spread of the English language.

Arguments for supporting Frisian

Intrinsic argument

• Frisian is one of the earliest form of the Germanic languages, therefore having a major importance in the history of European languages
• Frisians have on their own literature dating back from the Middle Ages to the present day
• The language promotes tribal consciousness
• Frisian possesses its own vocabulary, morphology, and syntax and therefore obtains its own resources for complex concepts and feelings

Extrinsic argument

• Frisian is still relatively spoken in the Frisian areas, and therefore the speakers still obtain a big vocabulary
• Since recently Frisian has a 'google translate' page specially developed to help maintain the language and popularise it amongst Frisian youth 
• Frisian older generations are motivated to promote their language to younger generations
• Frisian people have, after years of pleeing, finally received the aknowledgement of Frisian as an official language of the Netherlands

Functional argument

• Because of the wide range of literature dating back from the Middle Ages, it is very resourcefull for historians and linguists 
• As it promotes tribal consciousness, people living in the Frisian areas will be able to identify themselves more with their origin as well as forming communal unity with one another
• Its own vocabulary, morphology, and syntax provides different resources for complex concepts and feelings

Arguments against the spread of English

Intrinsic argument

• Due to the trading power of the English during the Golden Age, the hegemonic spread English was a matter of course for the Frisian traders with the British.

Extrinsic argument

• Despite the fact that much trade is and was done in English, English was 'forced' upon the people. Therefore it shouldn't affect the native language of the Frisian areas.
• Frisian may have fewer speakers, but many educated such as professors, doctors, and teachers speak Frisian. And therefore the spread of the Frisian language can easily skyrocket if Frisian is thought in schools.

Functional argument

• English was popularized due to its hegemonic imperialism. It is branded as convenient as most people can speak it, however Frisian speakers are highly encouraged to increase the amount of its speakers through media and education. Frisian is still spoken at Frisian homes and therefore is much more convenient for its speakers than learning English as a third language (aside from Dutch or German)

Frisian Podcast

Here is the link to the podcast which I made together with Luc Blonden.
We will be discussing the endangered language Frisian, enjoy!

Frisian Language Podcast

The Only Speaker of his Tongue | David Malouf

"It is a mystery of the deep past, but also of now. We recapture on our tongue, when we first grasp the sound and make it, the same word in the mouths of our long dead fathers, whose blood we move in and whose blood still moves in us. Language is that blood."

In this passage from 'The Only Speaker of his Tongue', Malouf communicates the strong connection between language and culture as well as identity. The language dates back to his ancestors, who established many years ago the society he grew up in. This language dates back from the time where his forefathers had established societal mechanisms and beliefs, resulting in a deep connection between the language one speaks and its history. The language is what tells the history of a specific group of people, passing along generations of the same culture. Even though the language can tell the following generations about the beliefs and values of its society as well as its history, there remains an unknown history to the use of the language, "It is a mystery of the deep past". One can only interpret the language's role based on the possible stories that have been carried on, but evolution of the language may never be fully revealed due to its partially unkown nature. Malouf communicates how one culture as well as identity is being passed on through the language, by speaking the language of your community he shows us that you identify yourself to those values and beliefs of that particular community, as well as its uses. By speaking the language, one is open to the culture of their community as well as its historical origins, to when the language was created. Malouf show through the section "Language is that blood" that the culture is carried on through speaking the language, contributing to the developing identity of the individual speaking it. It is the history that is being passed on through a way of communication, as to how the ancestors built a culture to which its language is the messenger between the present and the past--connecting the younger speakers with their origin to help them shape their identity.

Language, Power & Resistance | Indigenous languages

Since language, knowledge and culture are associated with each other, losing an indigenous language may result in many negative consequences for its speakers as well as the world.

According to the United Nations, preserving indigenous languages such as Tlingit is a highly valued. The language itself, is the verbal translation of not only emotions, experiences, and observations, but also the translation of entire cultures. Languages, forms of communication by a specific groups, are vanishing all over the world due to lack of speakers or supression of dominant languages.

Inuit in Alaska cutting pukaangajuq, which is Inuit for the best snow for igloos

Ever since the many colonizations taking place in the 18th Century, indigenous languages have collapsed and been replaced with more dominant languages such as English, Spanish and French. As many of these languages are dying, important knowledge can be potentially lost as the language vanishes, an example are the scientific advances of indigenous languages. Languages such as Tlingit have more precise ways of describing botanicals, animals, etc. to which languages such as English have nothing as descriptive and precise to describe it. Many of these languages do not only have better ways of describing things but often have more namings for things with slight variation. Inuit for example, which is spoken by mostly Eskimos in the Northern areas have a whopping twentyways of describing snow. Varying from the word aniu to describe packed snow to upsik for wind-beaten snow.

Indigenous languages often have more (precise) ways of describing the natural world around us since these languages have existed for a very long time, full of discovery and observation. This also applies to the culture which is tied to the language. Of this languages is taken away, traditions and ways of life which pair up with the language will vanish. "the death of a language such as Tlingit means more than the loss of another obscure, incomprehensible  tongue. It marks the loss of an entire culture" Time Magazine. Therefore it is crucial to preserve indigenous languages in order to preserve its history and culture with it as well, which greatly expands our understanding of the world.