On page 78, Charlie portrays "the locals as cats, the Japanese as dogs and the British as monkeys." What is the postcolonial significance of each group being portrayed as these different animals?
Pages 36-37 with the giant robot remind me of the argument we had over Fanon's idea that decolonization is always a violent process. One character says "resorting to violence will only worsen matters," and then fighting stops. Is this suggesting that violence is necessary or not?
Certain parts of this book remind me a bit of Dictee, but Charlie's story has more context. Page 25 has fragmented bits of text similar to Cha's writing style, and the differing "forms" of writing/art styles displayed next to one another also reminded me of Cha's work.
@zoekrank1 I understood this quote to mean that postcolonial societies are left with the pluralism and racial hierarchy that was imposed onto them while actively under colonial rule. Pluralism itself seems to stem from this singular consciousness.
think Naruse is necessarily agreeing but rather just pointing out that postcolonial literature is impacted by colonial ideals like capitalism and English, making a large historical narrative that is able to be tracked.
"Literary narratives offer a way of tracking postcolonial capitalism's different historical manifestations" (Naruse 16). This statement reminds me of Achebe's argument, that writing in the colonizer's language would allow more people to understand the colonized culture. I do not
"By implication... this form of imagination" (239). I am struggling to understand what Goh is arguing. I think he is agreeing with Anderson that race shaped how nations categorized themselves after colonialism, and this was a result of the pluralism that colonial powers created.
The second paragraph on page 237 discusses the idea of history being erased to "keep the pluralist worldview of the colonial and postcolonial state intact." How is it decided which history is or is not taught? How do postcolonial governments benefit from colonial ideas?
@MalloryAsis I am also having trouble differentiating them. Later there is a quote that says, "postcolonial multiculturalism is defined by... state formation" (243). This feels a lot like pluralism in that they are both manmade phenomenons that discourage cultural exchange and identity.
@nobile_sam99999 In that passage Cha also writes "She says to herself she could displace real time." I think this passage is about time always moving forward despite any trauma someone experiences that might hold them back, especially some type of displacement/diaspora.
@QuetzalWoomy how women's mental health is treated in regards to relationships, and how a woman is always attached to a man, which we saw in the last section of reading.
@QuetzalWoomy The note talks about a woman who is "afraid of going crazy" and is signed off at the end simply as "A friend." The letter only mentions one name, the person it is addressed to, and is talking about her sister. I think this letter might have been added as an anecdotal example of
bility of mother from daughter, creator from creation which we discussed today in class. The child being lifted by their mother to look out of a window ties this together for me. There is more than one generation viewing the same thing, but the mother must help the child do so.
Dictee ends with a list, a short poem, then a child looking out of a window being lifted by their mother. This list counts up to ten, ending with, "A circle within a circle, a series of concentric circles" (173) and only this quote repeats on 174. This reminds me of the insepara-
oppositions suggest? I think of it as the opposition of remaining stable vs. being in diaspora, but there could be other postcolonial undertones that I am missing.
Cha repeats that "Earth is dark" on page 159. This seems to be in opposition to the "whiteness" that has been present for a few sections now and is also repeated from 158 to 162. Cha states, "...now you are formless... Given to stillness to whiteness" (159). What do these
We talked in class about what the film represents and whether or not it is voyeuristic. On page 140 and 141, Cha says, "If she could display it before her and become its voyeur" in reference to writing. Is the "she" in the film the same "she" that is now seemingly writing in a
@Anna44332211 Maybe it is about how the colonizer wants the colonized to act a very specific way, for example, Bhabha's "almost the same, but not quite" idea of mimicry. In that instance the symbolism of a screen and camera angles makes sense.