Great Works Fall 2013

In Chu T’ien Hsin’s “Man of La Mancha”, the narrator relives the day that he became obsessed with preparing for his death. He was mainly concerned about two things: how would he be identified at all with his nondescript wallet with no ID card? and, would the things he left behind be impressive or reveal how boring and shabby he is? It seems like he is comfortable with his actual identity and only uncomfortable with how it would be perceived.

He starts by saying “that was the day I began thinking about and making preparations for my own death,” which makes you think you will be reading a narrative of the events of that day. I found it interesting that most of the story was not really about the actual happenings of the day but a few hours followed by his speculation on what could happen and what could have happened.

We don’t really know much about the narrator throughout the story. Reading the first few paragraphs, I thought he might be a college student or as the bio said, maybe a writer, but I would not have thought that myself. The whole tone of the story is nonchalant even though it is discussing death. While reading the story, without knowing anything about the background of the narrator, I tried to come up with what it may be. Maybe he was a college student working on a pointless assignment (or an entry level job where he is doing tedious work), which might be hinting at him being dissatisfied with the direction of his life. “He’d pinpointed my problems: insomnia, too much coffee, and arrhythmia” (1234) sounded like problems someone in their 20s would have. After reading his thoughts for several pages, you would hope to have a better idea of who he is as a person, but you don’t, so maybe his indistinct wallet is actually very descriptive of his identity.

He is also worried about whether there would be anything impressive left when his family went through his belongings. He brings up the quote “a dying tiger leaves its skin intact”(1236). I did some research and found that this is a different translation of a Japanese saying which goes: “When a tiger dies it leaves its skin; when a person dies they leave their name”. He is concerned about how he could leave an impressive legacy or reputation behind if people pilfer through his things and find nothing noteworthy. I found it interesting that he said his preparations would “go far beyond passive procedures” but rather developed into a “highly proactive state” (1237). What he calls proactive is planting charitable donation receipts and fake casual personal notes that would make him seem intellectual (I think that’s what he meant by the notes at least). So he thinks the most proactive way to make his legacy more significant is to not actually do charity work or publish a book, but to plant things that would make it seem like this is what he would’ve done.

I also noticed that he went from a Japanese coffee shop to a Japanese clinic and then mentioned a Japanese quote. In the bio they mention that this was a time that Japanese institutions were spreading through Taiwan. The narrator’s identity crisis is tied with the changing identity of Taiwan going on at the time. The story ends with a quote from Don Quixote, which was about a knight who sets out to earn honor and fame. It seems like he wrote this down as maybe one of the trinkets he plants to be found after death.

As we near the end of another semester, I start to think about reading for pleasure–not for work–over winter break. Or about buying books for gifts. A professor of English is under considerable pressure to buy “good” books for people.

I am compelled to read some of the books cited here just by reading one line. Amazing that one line has that effect on me.  I wonder if any of you will be moved to pick up one of these books, too?

Have you read any great books lately that you’d recommend? Please add your recommendations in a comment!

Reading this short story, the only one published by Morrison, really made me pause, and read myself. Recitatif forced me to examine my preconceived notions of race and ethnicity. It contained little to no imagery, something we have not seen in past pieces we’ve read, which further caused me to grapple with the issues of race and class. The text reiterated to me, the basis that racial distinction is not judged based on physical appearances but rather by our imaginations at work.

Because we are never given background information on both Twyla and Roberta apart from their mothers, Morrison is forcing us to use our own judgements while attempting to characterize both Twyla and Roberta. Both characters are at the start in the same position-placed in the orphanage. Both have mothers who give them away. Both have mothers who visit them on the same day. At first glance, the girls seem of equal stature. Yet, as the story progresses, the girls move on and blossom into adulthood. Twyla and Roberta entered opposite realms of the world, contrasting professions and lifestyles, yet their race is still undeterminable to me.  It may sound provocative, even un-pc for me to admit but I was forced to associate Twyla with the black race due to her circumstances and assume Roberta was part of the rich and famous class. Because of their surroundings, I judged them. I determined the color of their skins based on imaginary colors. I painted their faces black and white, black or white due to the information given to me by Morrison which I feel was deliberate.

The anymonity of both characters and their colorless bodies is the heart of the issue. Not only do Twyla and Roberta exemplify the notion of our imaginative and segregaded minds, but Morrison introduces yet another character to shed light on this sad reality we all succomb to. When Roberta rehashes her memories of the incident with Maggie at St. Bonny’s, the two have clashing recounts of the color of Maggie’s skin. Twyla even questions her own self: “What was she saying? Black? Maggie wasn’t black” (1184), and Roberta’s rebuttlement is “Like hell she wasn‟t, and you kicked her. We both did. You kicked a black lady who couldn’t even scream.” (1184).  Morrison  has taken the traumatic memory of Maggie’s victimization and transformed it into a paradigm for her own feelings of victimization, replacing herself for Maggie. She introduced Maggie as well to deepen this idea of our made up versions of who we really are.

After reading this short story, I went back to the introduction on Toni Morrison to find where her voice as an author shined in this story. What I found most interesting is that Morrison asserts that up until now, authors wrote primarily to a white audience, they assumed the color of their audience, just like we as readers assume the race and ethnicity of the characters in our stories. Morrison reveals to us that she wrote Recitatif to “challenge such assumptions [and] envision the possibilities of transcending racial division and embracing a common humanity.” (1173)

Thinking of breaking into Publishing after graduation?

Join us as Writing Center consultants and Baruch alumni talk about their experiences in the industry.

Ask questions, hear stories, get advice!

The Writing Life:

Getting a Job in Publishing

Moderated by

Brook Wilensky-Lanford (Paradise Lust, Grove Press, 2011)

Editor, Killing the Buddha

Featured Panelists

Alexander Landfair

former Nonfiction Editor, Narrative Magazine

Shannon Azzato Stephens

former Industry Relations Assistant, American Booksellers Association

Theresia Kowara (WSAS ’12)

Editorial Assistant, W.W. Norton

Wednesday, December 4th, 7pm

Baruch College Writing Center

VC 8-185

Your presentations on your final projects should be no fewer than 8 and no more than 12 minutes. Please briefly introduce your project, including an explanation of WHY you chose to do what you did, and then isolate 3-4 main points or aspects of your final project to highlight. That is, prepare a focused presentation of your project; avoid being too general or rambling on in a unfocused way.

Your presentation must include some visual aid (projected on the screen or in the form of a handout).

Your 8-12 minutes should include time for questions and discussion. Anything you can do to encourage discussion will be highly valued in the evaluation of your presentation. Lively and stimulating presentations are desirable.

All Final Projects are due on Wednesday, Dec 11, regardless of your presentation time.

Here’s the schedule for Final Project Presentations, as determined by the random drawing in class on Monday, Nov. 25.

Wednesday, Dec 11

1. Derick
2. Rena
3. Nastassia
4. Youssef
5. Melody
6. Peace
7. Bayan
8. Natalie (may be pushed over to Dec 18)

Wednesday, Dec 18

1. Steven
2. Brian
3. Daniel
4. Summer
5. Vanja
6. Gen
7. Rishika
8. Zara
9. Paola

Each year, New York Times Op-Ed Columnist Nick Kristof is accompanied on a reporting excursion by a student.  In addition to traveling with Mr. Kristof, the winner will contribute to The New York Times website in blog posts and videos.

Full Contest rules can be viewed here, http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/official-rules-2014-win-a-trip-with-nick-contest/.  Submissions (essay or video) must be received by January 19, 2014, and all entrants must be students, US residents, 18 years or older and enrolled at an American college or university.  Essays must be 700 words or less and videos no longer than three minutes.

Perforated sheets, and anything with holes, really, seem to hold great significance in this story. You first learn of a holed object, when Aadam Aziz’s nose is mentioned. Aziz bumps his nose while praying on his knees, and blood drips from his nose as rubies. After this incident, he vows to abandon religion and never kiss “earth for any god or man.” This decision leaves a “hole in him, a vacancy in a vital inner chamber, leaving him vulnerable…” (1132). This same hole later clogs up with hate– while he knows he is Indian by ethnicity, he identifies with the Western culture more because of the education he received in Germany. I think religion plays a huge role in identity because many of one’s values, morals, and beliefs come from the religion one practices. By choosing not to follow any religion, Aziz creates a “hole” in his identity– which troubles him even years after this decision.

In general, there is  much emphasis on Aziz’s nose; it is quite large. Looking like a “mad plantain”, or an elephant’s trunk, one could even cross a river on his wide nose (1135). Because Aziz’s nose is his central feature, the hole in him must be what he struggles most with– his identity is distinctly “holed”.

The nose, as suggested by Tai, is also “the place where the outside world meets the world inside you” (1138). This may mean that the nose is the threshold that filters reality. Maybe the nose controls instinct. Tai shares a story with Aziz of how an officer had a “vegetable” just like Aziz’s, whose nose itched every time it wanted to warn him. Because the officer never listens to his itch, he later kills himself. Does the nose represent intuition– with intuition being a big part of identity?

Later, when Aziz visits a sick patient, he discovers a sheet has been placed over her. The sheet has a hole in it, revealing only the sick area. This perforated sheet makes Aziz appalled, because it only makes sense that a doctor must examine the whole patient in order to find out what is wrong. Ghani sees Aziz’s confusion and tells him that he is not permitted to see his daughter’s body. However, with more frequent visits, Aziz gains permission to view and examine more sacred parts of her body, such as her chest and bottom.

This perforated sheet symbolizes the cultural separation of men and women. The sheet serves as the traditional barrier between both genders, and supports the tradition of strict sexual roles. This perforated sheet also blocks both parties from seeing the whole truth, while it equally successfully hides a part of themselves.

Does the hole in this sheet also symbolize the hole that exists in Aziz? Is he trying to fill up this void with love/lust? Or is this thought too far of a stretch? These are questions I have, since the analyzer in me is inclined to want to connect all “holes” to identity.

“In Camera,” by the Egyptian author Nawal El Saadawi, largely focuses on two themes: female social standings in oppressive societies, and torture (physical abuse) of women. The story centers on Leila, a young girl who is imprisoned for calling the king of her nation “stupid.”

Although this dictatorial regime could be compared to the social system of any oppressive regime from world history, the idea of being thrown in jail and tortured for calling a politician “stupid” is very shocking and hard to understand in a society such as ours. This is something that occurs daily in the U.S. – people criticize the government and the president every day, and often call politicians names without the fear of being raped and beaten. Yet, this seemingly harmless and innocent girl is tortured for voicing her opinion.

What this hints at is the author’s criticism of the female social standing and expectations in societies similar to this one. Twice in the story, we experience the point of view of her parents, both of which give clues to what is (not) expected of girls. Her mother, for example, explained: “Politics is a dirty game which only ineffectual men play.” It seems that Leila and her mother are both representatives of women in their societies – they suffer quietly, keeping most of their thoughts and fears unvoiced and locked in their own minds, and the moment their opinion is heard, they get treated worse than animals.

The most shocking and emotionally devastating part of the story was the description of Leila’s mental and physical state, following the inhumane torture she suffered. From the beginning, it is obvious the consequences were dehumanizing: “By the third day, she still had not returned to normal but remained like a small animal incapable of uttering the simple words: My God! She said to herself: Do animals, like humans, know the existence of something called God?” These sentences, in particular, stuck in my mind throughout the rest of the story. It made me think about the kind of experiences someone has to endure in order to be left in such a broken state. The violence and monstrous behavior of certain people can have a truly horrendous effect on the victims; it destroys their faith and hope, two of the things that make us human.

A large part of the dehumanizing process was the damage done to Leila’s senses and speaking abilities. When she is brought into the courtroom, the light hurt her eyes and blinded her, hinting that she spent several days in complete darkness. Furthermore, she could hardly distinguish the noise around her, and could not even speak up to ask for a glass of water. In fact, her lips were described as being “stuck together” and her eyes “stuck on the picture” of the king. By numbing her sight and hearing, they made her a lot more vulnerable to her surroundings. It seemed to me like this was deliberately done in order to make it easier to completely break her mentally, while the large painting of the king could have been used as a warning to her and others, that he hears and sees everything and that no one is safe – not even a young girl who has not even reached her twenties.

El Saadawi did an amazing job at evoking emotions from the readers by clear descriptions of Leila’s state. It was interesting how she chose not to reflect on the victim’s feeling and emotions often (since Leila appeared very desensitized through majority of the story), but rather focused on the experiences she went through and her physical state. El Saadawi really brought the character’s senses to life, thus making us imagine the pain and suffering Leila experienced. Overall, “In Camera” proved to be a rather emotionally straining story, with a feeling of incompleteness about it at the end; but this is exactly why it has the ability to accomplish the author’s ultimate aim – to get her readers to take action against oppressive powers, rather than just sit back and sympathize with the characters.

As Rena was talking in the previous class of the fact that everyone is a slave to someone, it reminded of this website, and I thought I would share it with you.

http://slaveryfootprint.org/

Good luck to everyone for your final project.

All best,

Youssef Hani

You will be looking at 2-3 of your classmates’ work. Hopefully, each will provide you with (from the original assignment):

• 45-55% of the project [in draft form] for feedback from the professor and some classmates
• In addition to the draft of about half of the project, you should attach a brief list or outline of what you have left to do, along with the cover letter (following the directions on the assignment sheet)

In response to the draft, list/outline and cover letter, please WRITE A LETTER to each of your classmates. Bring the letter to class on Monday, Nov. 25. BRING 2 COPIES of the letter (one for the author and one for the professor). Your letter should be 1-2 pages double spaced and consider the following points:

1. Revisit the assignment sheet and the requirements for the project. Be sure to look at the revised assignment sheet posted on the blog (remember the changes to the Timeline project). Is the project about 50% drafted? It’s just a draft; you’ll still edit what you’ve done and add more. But there should be some significant volume of work drafted.
2. For the Timeline and Blog (and our one video) projects, comment on the DESIGN elements. Is it visually appealing? Exciting? Enticing? Thought provoking? How can the author develop the design aspect to complement the reading experience and the overall point (theme and ARGUMENT) of the project in worthwhile ways?
3. For bloggers, I’d like to see at least 4-5 distinct pages, in order to add depth, texture, and interest to the blog. Does the blog have sufficient number of pages? Are the pages developed (they don’t have to have TONS of materials, but do they feel complete, relevant?) or do they seem dashed off — mere after thoughts? What suggestions can you offer?
4. Post some comments on the blogs in your review group, just to start some conversation. Blogs need comments! Ask your friends and family to visit your blog and post comments.
5. Have bloggers been maintaining the blog in a way that sets them up to have 12-18 meaty posts spread out over 6 weeks by Dec. 6? Very short posts, posts with just an image or link for instance, are great, but aren’t really one of the “meaty” posts unless the link or image is developed.
6. For Timeliners, are there a sufficient number of story boards? Are about or at least 40% of them on literature from our class? Is there a clear connection between the discreet entries? Or are they too, well, discreet? How to better connect them and build them toward a narrative that makes a central argument? Offer suggestions for the themes, threads, and arguments you see emerging that Timeliners can develop in the coming weeks. Timeliners will likely need an introduction and conclusion to tie it all together.
7. Are the Timelines tying the non-literary events or artifacts in interesting ways to the literature? Do you have suggestions for additional events/artifacts to use and/or ways to deepen the connections?
8. Do the time frames that Timeliners have determined make sense? Are they defended or explained, either directly or indirectly? That is, does it make sense that the Timeline begins and ends where it does?
9. Same for bloggers and the video artist, there should be a narrative developing. Is there? Is it coherent and are the posts (and scenes in the video) connected in meaningful and interesting ways? Is there an intro? (Be sure to write a conclusion, when the time comes!) IS the blog/video developing, or just circling around the same issues? Can you suggest ways to develop it? Is the video conveying a point and purpose? Is there some discernible and compelling argument emerging from the combination of the visual and spoken elements of the video? Does the video need some sort of framing device (and intro and conclusion)? Suggestions for it?
10. Not to forget the translators in the class: has the writer begun working on the translation and accompanying essay? Is the writer working through important decisions such as: choosing a text and/or specific passage from the text and justifying why that text? Why that passage? Why certain choices in translating certain words/phrases in certain ways? Is the translator trying to emphasize a certain theme, tone or argument through her or his choices (for instance)? Does it look like the author is on track to answer these points from the assignment: “In your explanatory essay, cite specific examples from your and other translation(s) as you 1) defend your translation choices and 2) make a compelling argument about the primary task(s) and responsibilities of a literary translator. You may do research to support your argument.” Translators need to do some digging: read translator’s prefaces or other materials in which translators discuss the text and their choices. This will help you think about your own choices as a translator and give you models for how to defend those choices. You might start by looking at the large chunk of the translator’s preface of The Shocken Bible that you can read on that book’s Amazon page (click on the “Look Inside option and start reading on page ix). See how the translator lays out the principle(s) guiding his translation (starting on the bottom of ix)? What principles are guiding YOUR translation? How can you help the people in your group think about the principles guiding their own translations? Also look at the American Literary Translators Association web page.  But these resources are just a start. Do some leg work. Try to help each other out with suggestions and comments on the passages translated so far and on how the writer is justifying and contextualizing his or her choices.