The Passage to a Fantastic Analysis

Chapter Eight

Passage:

He dreamed that he was in jail, being whipped despite his good conduct, screaming shamelessly, but not offering any resistance. They gave him milk to drink. Suddenly he saw little Sana, lashing Rauf Ilwan with a whip at the bottom of a staircase. He heard the sound of a Koranic recitation and had a conviction that someone had died, but found himself, a wanted man, somehow involved in a car chase! The car he was driving was incapable of speed--there was something wrong with its engine--and he had to begin shooting in every direction, when all at once Rauf Ilwan appeared from the radio in the dashboard, grabbed his wrist before Said was able to kill him, and tightened his grip so mercilessly that he was able to snatch the revolver. At this point Said Mahran said to him: "Kill me, if you wish, but my daughter is innocent. It wasn't she who whipped you at the bottom of the staircase. It was her mother, Nabawiyya, at the instigation of Ilish Sidra."

Analysis

This extract from the novel comes when Said is staying at the Sheikh’s house after the attempted but failed murder of Ilish. This comes at a point where Said is pleased with himself for the (at this point) assumed success but in the presence of the Sheikh, he feels guilty.

It is clearly a dream sequence, but Mahfouz surprises the reader as most of the flashbacks that occur in the novel are very positive ones in order to juxtapose Said’s unhappiness in the present time, and most an audience is generally accustomed to a dream being positive. Instead, the author exposes us to a violent and panicking situation like the one we and Said are already in.

This could be done in order to comment on the paranoia that Said is feeling in his current situation and the paranoia of living under a dictatorship. This would be supported by the illogical sequence of events within the dream, where he first sees Sana lashing Rauf then all of a sudden is in a car chase, then Rauf is coming out of the dashboard. This is done to show the mindset of Said at this time, him clearly not being in a stable mental condition.

Said’s dream seems to be very concerned with the theme of justice, something prevalent throughout the entire novel. He finds himself in jail, perhaps a flashback to his four-year imprisonment, where he is being punished despite what he thinks to be “good conduct”. This could mimic the idea that he believes that he is being wrongly punished.

Despite this, Said clearly accepts his inevitable death as a tragic hero, provided that his own daughter who pushed him away is safe. He clearly has concern that his own reputation as a criminal must not tarnish hers, but rather the one who he believed was the cause of his further criminal activity, Nabawiyya.

Narration Admiration - Stream of Consciousness

The Thief and the Dogs is one of very few compulsory novels that in my 12 years of schooling, I have actually enjoyed. It could be the character of Said Mahran, or the interesting plot of a man who just longs for revenge regardless of its consequences, but I think that one of the aspects of this novel as opposed to others that made me enjoy it is the way in which it is told.

The reader follows Said in his journey, and I felt like I was one the journey with him. Naguib Mahfouz never lets the reader in on some new information that Said isn’t exposed to, and this goes towards building intense suspense.

The primary function of the stream of consciousness narrative mode seems to be its ability to get the audience into the head of the character. It allows the audience to observe how the mind of the protagonist operates to great effect, and forces the audience to see the world or a certain environment from someone else’s perspective as opposed to their own or a fairly neutral one. With this however, the author must be careful to avoid bias in creating an environment and not to paint anything in a false light, potentially offending people of a certain culture.

As The Thief and the Dogs progressed, I actually found myself rooting for Said despite his imminent flaws and almost antagonistic characteristics. I still wanted him to kill Rauf and Illish so that he could be at peace with himself before death, even after killing innocents. I think this is largely because of Mahfouz’s ability to make the reader care about this character through opening him up to the audience. Just reading the book, the reader can tell that there are no secrets being kept from them by Said, which makes for a more likeable character and allows the audience to fully embrace that character for all it is. In this way, Naguib Mahfouz was able to write a novel where the character drove the plot, and the story was not based on what happened to Said Mahran but what Said Mahran did and its consequences. Given this, being able to follow him throughout all this means the reader feels like they are at the very forefront of the plot and nothing too substantial is happening behind their back.

“Suddenly the blinding light went out, and the firing stopped; there was darkness again and quiet fell. He, too, wasn't firing any more. Slowly the silence was spreading, until all the world seemed gripped in some strange stupefaction. He wondered . . . ?” This moment in which Said was slipping into death was a powerful example of the stream of consciousness narration, especially given the use in conjunction with such imagery. The fact that at first he doesn’t even realise that he is dying (or perhaps even dead) makes the reader feel bad for him with all his naivety. Employing this technique at this point allows the reader to slip into death with him. It offers up a possibility for the process of dying and perhaps how Mahfouz believes death occurs, a process which no one has experienced and lived to tell the tale.

Both this novel and Things Fall Apart are written from a third-person perspective. The primary difference is that the narrator in this novel is selective with what is revealed to the audience, trying to keep the reader in the same position as the main character Said. On the other hand, Chinua Achebe makes use of an omniscient narrator in his novel. Both of these techniques are effective in their own ways, however I much prefer the way The Thief and the Dogs is written as I was truly invested in the plot when reading and it always felt very contained whereas Things Fall Apart felt all over the place as the narrator had so much to tell about so many different situations, added to by the need for exposition and explanation of key aspects of Igbo culture.

Value of Translation: I'll give ya 10 bucks for it

When I read something, whether it be a book, meme, or road sign, I place no consideration as to whether it is translated or not. In modern society, translation is just that easy, opening Google Translate, then copying and pasting being the minimum requirement.  All in all, translation is one of many developments that has made a more globalized society.

The reading I was exposed to yesterday made mention of something along the lines of, “Translated gives you what you don’t know you want.” As I described to my peers, I interpreted this as pertaining to the unawareness of us to other cultures, and by translating a text into our own tongue, we are given a sneak peek into the culture of the author and the culture of the environment they create in their literature through its setting and characters. Our previous unawareness is wiped away and instead our doors are opened to something different, something eye-opening, something beautiful.

On the other hand, that beauty can be lost if translation fails. Not only can a foreign reader fail to really capture the culture of the translated literature if this is done poorly, but even worse it can misrepresent a culture in a light which would disgrace its inhabitants. This can occur, and often does especially with the consistently negative content of the news, through translation of certain material and lack thereof of other material, painting a culture or nation in an unfavourable and perhaps biased manner. This is why translation should be done with care.

I look at it with a very simple perspective: translation increases the content available to me. Regardless of whether it provides a whole new view on life or anything of that gist, I believe that the more content that is out there and available, the better informed we can be. 

"Death to America!" - Amin

“It is okay for the government to mislead in order to promote security.”

It most certainly is not. Or at least mostly.

Before watching Control Room, I had a juxtaposing perspective on this prompt to that I have now. The way I saw it, in the case of an economic crisis or structural problems, the public should not be informed of the issue because something is only good for as long as people perceive it that way. Now I see that my scope was limited to viewing security as a sense that the public feels like there are no issues that can harm them. I still believe that in the case of internal issues, it is okay for the government to mislead to make the public think everything’s dandy, but have only recently realized the further extent of the prompt.

The 2003 invasion of Iraq was certainly not something that was an internal issue for America, and the danger (or at least alleged danger) to American security was certainly not hidden from the American public. This is an example of a different kind of misleading, where this “nonsense” as a Jazeera journalist calls it in the film is established to evoke fear in the Americans. This fear of being attacked causes the public to consider attacks and takeovers in Iraq to be acceptable and even respectable, for the sake of “freedom” and “security” as it is constantly reiterated by government officials and soldiers.

Ultimately, this allows the American military to act almost without boundaries, because as an Iraqi journalist stated, “What can we do? We just shut up.” I found it almost comical that President Bush took all but three sentences in this celebration of American success to suggest that the UN lifts economic sanctions in Iraq, pretty much confirming where his priorities are.

Many may look at this situation as having negative consequences limited to Iraq, delineated by the economic and political disarray they were left in and remain in today, but I believe the real issue lies in the social factor of this tragic story. In the end, the Americans got what they wanted, and left Iraq (but not really because they’re still there) with control over oil reserves and a radical view of the Middle East. Perhaps unintentionally, the American media radicalized the Iraqis and Arabs, even alienating them. Those within the American public who were left with the biased view of this conflict most likely have an alienated view on Middle Eastern inhabitants, and although being scared of everything and everyone is perhaps the way to security, it would be our failure as social beings.

What gives me hope is that AL Jazeera News came out of this story as the hero. I hope they can continue “ruffling a lot of feathers” and challenging ‘fact’, and break down a powerful statement by a journalist in the film: “Objectivity is a mirage”.

"Nobody builds walls better than me"

Original Article: http://europe.newsweek.com/2016-presidential-election-donald-trump-make-america-great-again-520289?rm=eu

it’s true: TRUMP is president

It seems that the nightmares of so many have been made true by the votes of a few more. Brash character Donald Trump triumphed over Hillary Clinton, the announcement of what many are calling the apocalypse coming by 2am on November 9.

Early polls proposed a comfortable lead for the democratic candidate but American and foreign onlookers were instead slowly lead to the realization that this would be the president of the most powerful nation in the world:

Regardless of flaws in both candidates and Trump’s consistent confidence in his victory even before the votes were casted, there was hope for many that the American voters would come through and make the right decision.

Once 2am rolled around and Wisconsin caused the Trump-meter to tick over 270, the number of electoral votes needed to win presidency, and all hope for those many was shattered as the most shocking and perhaps most consequential electoral decision was made.

With plans to evict groups of Mexicans, Muslims, and whichever other minorities he can get his unusually small hands on out of the country in a similar fashion as he did contestants on his show The Apprentice just last year, as well as to abandon the Affordable Care Act, it will be an interesting 4 years under the reign of Donald Trump.

Coriolanus Outline

Coriolanus Outline

• ·       Extract from Coriolanus
• ·       Specifically, this occurs after Coriolanus has been exiled from Rome and as a result has approached his former enemy Aufidius with plans of collusion in an attempt to take revenge
• ·       This leads to their temporary team0up only to end in Coriolanus’ mercy and death at the hands of Aufidius
• ·       In the passage, Aufidius is discussing with his lieutenant Coriolanus’ successes and his own reverence for the main character as he considers the collusion
• ·       The extract is organized so that Aufidius clearly overpowers his lieutenant in his abundance of dialogue, only interrupted by a single question

• ·       In this extract, Shakespeare firmly emphasizes Aufidius’ reverence for Coriolanus despite his consistent antagonism towards him (especially through the use of animal imagery) and effectively foreshadows Coriolanus’ ultimate demise.
• ·       Thematic approach

• ·       Large part of the passage seemed to be an appraisal of Coriolanus with minor hints towards the planned murder of him
• ·       Multiple references to dragon (Coriolanus), which is fierce and mystical beast. Doesn’t fit into the body motif societal system
• ·       Animal imagery (osprey simile)
• ·       Mutual respect
• ·       Fire drives out one fire (only someone as powerful as Coriolanus could kill him) – dragon also parallels
• ·       Tomb (foreshadows public death)
• ·       Refuses to call him by his awarded name (always Caius or him)
• Final line shows his plan to kill him and make him his (stand on his body sign of overpowering)

• ·       Through use of animal imagery among other literary aspects of the extract, Shakespeare is able to show not only Aufidius’ reverence for Coriolanus but also his continued antagonism towards him and plans of murder. Shown significantly through the metaphors of dragons/fire.

• ·       I found this extract to be  powerful in that it allows the audience to see an alternative perspective of the main character through its omniscient third person narrator and through the literary depth which Shakespeare employs in the use of literary devices and character complexities in these apparent soliloquys 

IOutlineC - Moons of Jupiter

Intro:

• Moons of Jupiter story
• Situated near the beginning of the story when Janet first talks to her father in his hospital room
• First reveal and development of the relationship between Janet and her father
• The story that incited her success this story unlike those before it aimed to include the complexities of a regular novel in spite of its condensed format
• The stylistic choices in which it was written, tracking back and forth from the future, to the present to the past.

• Munro manipulates time in order to juxtapose stereotypical short story structure and also express human complexity in the way that people typically don’t think linearly while also characterizing the relationship between Janet and her father through implicit communications.

Chunk 1 (1-7):

• First section focuses implicitly on the flourishing of relationship between the main characters
• Can be seen through the writing and beeping of heart monitor expressing life as a bunch of jagged lines (fluctuations like a rollercoaster) and a ticking timebomb (waiting for life to end)
• Perhaps defines life as a few jagged lines as opposed to one flat line
• Physical display of the room shows that her father’s most intimate and vulnerable sides are literally exposed, similar to his exposure of emotions in this tough time
• “I tried to ignore it” shows Janet’s ignorance to the situation and foreshadows the complexities of their relationship in her composure (where perhaps she should’ve showed more care)

Chunk 2 (8-30):

• Munro employs periphrasis at the very beginning of this section, tracing back to the events from the previous day, as starting in the middle of the story she is now beginning to build context for the reader
• Through her intentional way of retelling of previou events, the reader can infer that the narrator has seen her father in a similar state before, in addition to the father and her having a special, not very effusive relationship
• Munro then returns back to the present day to characterize the daughter and the father as being proactive, wanting to hear a selection of alternatives before reaching decisions (In tying with Munro’s style of capturing the essence of human life)
• Adds tension to the plot by stating that without the operation the father would only have 3 months to live, and that to in a bedridden state.
• Develops this theme of emotional intelligence as in spite of his situation Janet is trying to put a positive spin on an otherwise negative situation.

Chunk 3 (31-40):

• From advancing plot, Munro traces back to characterize and build context.
• She uses personal language to allow the reader to feel exactly Janet would be feeling at that time
• She then goes on to describe the relationship between Janet and her father as being not effusive and of too much approval but instead of tacit affection.

Conclusion:

Munro defies the typical conventions of short stories by employing periphrasis from the very onset of the story to build plot and context simultaneously - in a seamless fashion. This is effective in creating a story that is both centered and continually moving forward.