After the fifth snooze of her alarm, Sarah wakes up. Fuddling around in the bathroom for half an hour she decides, it was time to leave! What a discombobulated young lady, Officer Janelle Charleston thought; always rushing, dangerously crossing, toast in one hand and homework in the other. What a mess! Dry and clean, yet rather warm for a morning in the middle of March. Marching down the street, the morning traffic awakens her fully, “Oh no!”  her glasses were still sitting on her dresser, begging not to be forgotten, she felt too sated to turn back. The day wouldn’t be a normal day if Sarah hadn’t forgotten the most important pieces to complete it, be it, her glasses, a pen or her laptop. The rest of the walk felt depressing, what could possible add to the day? The train! The sudden burst of energy had everyone running to catch the train. She had caught her train! Looking down at her notes, she attempts to memorizing her french vocabulary “Je peux passer?” she says out loud. There must have been French people on the train because heads turned instantaneously. The transfer from the G was not too bad, despite the state of Sarah’s journey so far she was on time. Like clockwork every three minutes the L train rushes around the bend, it’s getting better isn’t it? “I am going to make it” she said. She had a 9:05 class and the time was 8:50, it would be close but she had successfully made it before. The train doors opened and she was the first to climb the stairs. She squeezes herself onto the 6 train and after just the one stop she weaves her way around the crowd of pedestrians also walking in the same direction but much slower. Here she was, she had made it.

As the title of the talk reads, translating Morocco was the topic of today’s talk. The author Foud Laroui spoke about his book The Curious Case of Dassoukine’s Trousers which is being translated from French to English by Emma Ramadan, and the reason it was written in French as a Moroccan writer as opposed to Arabic (the official language of Morocco). The easiest and most coherent explanation he gave for not writing in Arabic was “a Catholic person would not read or write in Latin as nobody would understand what they were talking about”, if he wrote in Classical Arabic nobody would understand, as very few read or write in classical Arabic in Morocco. Although French is a foreign language to him, it is an inherited language to Moroccans, and if not all, most understand French. During the talk Laroui brought up an important topic which directly addresses an identification issue he faced, “Moroccans do not have a language where they feel at home”, this being said I’d go a step further by rewording the talk as, ‘Translating Moroccan, from a language to a way of life’ as the title does not address why a country would need to be translated.

Although the author is more than twice my age he addresses issues such as reality, identification and intersectionality which many people who are immigrants and live in metropolitan cities experience as their reality including myself. Being second generation British and on top of this a New York implant, I face constant identification issues but also intersectionality (the idea of overlapping identities and living in-between places without having a comfort zone) on a daily basis. Laroui has many identities, as being second generation Algerian, born and raised in Morocco, encouraged by his father to speak French from a young age (forcing the rest of his family to also speak french to communicate), French educated in Morocco, relocated to Paris, currently residing in Amsterdam, and later in life realized he had lost his Arabic roots and so relearned Arabic. During the talk he explains how he came to settling with Holland over Paris or Morocco, he explained that he felt a foreigner in Paris and no matter how good of the language he spoke he would always be considered as the ‘Muslim immigrant’ despite never stepping foot into a mosque his entire life and speaking better French than most French people themselves. He has settled with Amsterdam because in my own words it is a ‘happy medium’, literally no questions asked about his identification. It sounded as if he liked the idea of blending in and from the sounds of it, he is accepted.

The most interesting question asked during the talk was addressed to Laroui himself, the question asked was lengthy and was spoken in French as the lady asking could not speak English very well. The question was answered as an explanation explaining a Mexican tv show shown on Moroccan TV. The TV show was originally dubbed in classical Arabic as the producers did not know what the politically correct language should be. Shortly after realizing no-one could understand they dubbed it into Moroccan Arabic, which was also a problem especially for Islamic Moroccans as it gave Arabic women a reason to feel liberated.
His summary of the show and it’s language issues better explains why he writes in French as a Moroccan writer.

– Sarah Boateng

Reading the words of M. NourbeSe Philip’s “Discourse on the Logic of Language” I envision her reenacting how Frederick Douglas would have taught himself how to read. M.NourbeSe Philip repeats the word language continuously throughout her poem however she bre aks the word into two parts as if she is making sense of the word to create a deeper understanding of it. The words she continuously repeats throughout her poem are languish and anguish, meaning;
languish – suffer from being forced to remain in an unpleasant place or situation, and
anguish – severe mental or physical pain or suffering.
The two words which eventually form the word language play a heavy role in the life and upbringing of Frederick Douglas he suffered mental and physical pain from his master Colonel Lloyd but also suffered immensely in the living conditions as a slave.

Reading Edict I, Philips explains as Frederick had explained that the slave owners did not want them to learn how to read or write as if they do learn they will eventually rebel against their masters, this was the reason why Frederick wanted to learn how to read and write, he wanted the opposite of what his master both wanted and rejected.

Along with the words she repeats, I hear the early life of Frederick Douglas before learning how to read and write. As a child growing up Frederick and most young children were not allowed to grow with their mothers, they were separated and the use of tongue represents the connection Frederick had with his own mother which was broken as if it were a synonym for an umbilical cord. The connection with the word tongue and the mother plays a large role in both the life of Frederick Douglas and Philip’s Discourse on the Logic of Language.

Watching both clips I noticed there are many differences between the two and also Shelly’s original novel. The first I noticed was how much longer the creation of Frankenstein was exaggerated in both movies compared to the novel. The novel seems to focus more on the technicalities of the creation, materials and how the scientist will successfully bring the man back to life whereas the movies focus on how one man has the power to bring back life, both lengths are testimonial to how the director wants his audience to feel after watching the movie.

The second and most obvious attribute I noticed is the absence of words in Branagh’s rendition of the movie compared to Whale’s. The use of music and sound affects creates much more of a exciting experience and borderline scary, which I’m sure Shelly would be proud of. The tempo is fast and seems to speed up towards the end of the scene, the feeling it gives me from listening is adventurous, by the end of the scene I feel I have made it to the top of a mountain, ironically the scientist at the end of the scene is standing proudly on top of his creation. Whale’s rendition seems to focus on the scientist himself and how he single handed brought a dying man back to life, he even claims himself as God by the end of the clip. Generally Whale’s Frankenstein is not as exciting as Branagh’s and sways away from the novel itself.

Thirdly I notice the Creature’s body and face is left a mystery in both clips but particularly Branagh’s film, it is to create suspense for the viewer. By revealing his face at the end of the clip we are more convinced by what a miracle the scientist has done without actually proclaiming himself as God.

Sarah Boateng

Reading Descarte’s ‘Cogito Ergo Sum’ theory (‘I am thinking, therefore I exist’) seems to me to be a very simple concept which also leads me into thinking Descarte has over thought his own theory. He is explaining that those who are able to think for themselves exist as beings which I agree with however it seems throughout reading his writing he goes deeper into the process of our thoughts and where our idea’s come from, this is where I believe he has become lost in his own thoughts. Clearly Descarte believes in a God which he brings up multiple times in his writing to make a comparison between ourselves and perfection (God), but reading his writing seems as though he is trying to join the ideas existing based on the simple fact that one is able to think with the concept that your existence is weighed based on your knowledge from person to person.

Although I disagree with the continuation to his theory on existence and what it takes to be perfect, I like that he is questioning perfection which he later realizes does not exist unless of course you are God “Thus I saw that God could not have doubt, inconstancy, sadness and the like, since I myself would have been very glad to be free from them, ·which shows that they are imperfections” because everyone experiences uncertainty and sadness which were the few human attributes he mentions to be signs of imperfection. As we all know there will always be someone smarter than you, just because this is not true does not make us any less of a person than they are.

The words Whitman uses in his poem ‘Song of Myself’ repeats itself in my mind as I pace up and down the platform waiting for the phantom train to arrive, late of course, “Clear and sweet is my soul, and clear and sweet is all that is not my soul.”. Whitman uses this line to create an understanding of what it means to be fully in synch with our body and mind and also aware of our thoughts and feelings and how they may impact the people around us.

This specific line stood out to me because it acts as a reminder to myself to not allow the hustle and bustle of New York to affect me negatively. There of course will be times where we step out of this perfect character we aim for and for me it is between the hours of 8am and 9:05am where I dare not describe my soul as sweet. Along with the other hundred people I encounter on my journey to school I am fighting my way onto over crowded trains and weaving my way through crowds of tourists and city strollers, only to endure the smell of unbrushed teeth and sweaty backs.

The satisfaction I feel when I have finally arrived at my destination (school) is as if I have just run a marathon and won, it is a bitter sweet feeling where the sweet reveals itself when I can come home after a long day and say I learned something new today.

Sarah Boateng