Ignorance is bliss...

I find Marxism utterly confusing. I believe the source of my confusion lies in what Karl Marx actually wrote, and in how Marxism is interpreted particularly in government. To be honest with you, to better grasp this philosophy (is it a philosophy?), I would have to spend a great deal of time reading more of Karl Marx’ writing and draw my own conclusions… which in itself may, again, be a misinterpretation of his theory (is it a theory?). I just know that there are times I really like Marx and other times that I think it’s a load of crap. I guess I am just really confused. If there is anyone out there who is a Marx expert, where can I go to explore Karl Marx and his theory(?)/philosophy(?)/system(?). It seems that everything I have read contradicts other things that I have read. My head is a big question mark.

I would also like to comment on something mentioned in class. One of our Cuban classmates mentioned that in Cuba, abortion is seen as not a big deal. “It is just something that you do.” I guess it kind of relates to “Abortion is Illegal.” Although I understand that this approaches abortion in political terms, it still bothers me. I feel that it is a real tragedy that in Cuba, and here, and elsewhere in the world, human beings are reduced and degenerated to a mere statistic; just a number. I mean here we are in literature class, discussing books such as The Sentimental Education and how art is viewed as a commodity being sold in the same catalogue as a pair of boots. We are all shocked at how art has been devalued and mass-produced. I don’t know, but for me, a human life is even more valuable than a painting, or a sculpture, or a book. Why, then, in certain societies, is a human being reduced to such a status? It’s sickening really.

Anyways, I just think it is very interesting that societies place value on humans based on their “wantedness” and “need” within that society. One family wants a child, another family doesn’t. Nevertheless, there is still a child involved. What makes one child’s life more valuable than the other? Money? Social Status? Race? If this child had been one year older, the thought of placing value on these children because of any of these characteristics would be frowned-upon. Also, if a family is well-off and then 2 years down the road, becomes poor, do they then have the right to get rid of a child? Of course not.

It just seems we have things backwards sometimes. Human beings should be valued, and so should differences. We are not all the same and every life counts. With war, with abortion, with mass production, with a lot of businesses, humans are dehumanized to products… to necessities… to mere objects to be disposed of as we see fit. We stand up for equality, for justice, for peace... but only for those which are “worthy” of our attention. We choose who deserves these rights. Isn’t that a bit hypocritical?

Overall our society lacks personal responsibility. We are selfish beings who do what is convenient and look for excuses. Not to be a downer, but it sickens me… and sometimes, I sicken myself.

I need some chocolate ;)

Maybe I'm not wrong all the time...

“Imagine my surprise, then, at the variety of interpretations that P.P. Cuéllar’s misadventures deserved: the parable of an important social class, castration of the artist in the under-developed world, a paraphrase of the aphasia among young people brought on by comic strip culture, a metaphor of my own ineptitude as a narrator. Why not? Any one of these may be correct. One thing I have learned from writing is that in this craft nothing is ever entirely clear: truth is a lie and the lie truth, and no one knows for whom it works. What’s certain is that literature does not solve problems—instead it creates them—and rather than happy, it makes people more apt to be unhappy. That’s how it is and it’s all part of my way of living and I wouldn’t change it for any other.” – Mario Vargas Llosa

I have always wondered what authors felt about the various interpretations of their work. I guess I assumed that there was a “correct” and “incorrect” interpretation as the author must have had a particular intention in mind. With this quote Vargas Llosa proves my reasoning to be false. Here it seems that he is saying that sometimes, authors just write and interpretation is left to the reader. Surprisingly, I am pleased with this revelation.

I remember when Dr. Conway made a comment in class regarding The Sentimental Education. He jokingly (I think) mentioned that reading this novel was a personality test. He may have been joking, but I think he has a good point. If in literature, as Vargas Llosa affirms, interpretation is in the hands of the reader, then, in fact, the revelation of the meaning behind it is really a revelation of yourself.

This leads me to my first post in a way. As readers and as individuals, we bring into our interpretations our own personal experiences. Therefore, what one piece of work means to one person, can mean something totally different to another.

Anyways, this causes me to begin my viscous cycle of questioning on how literature should be taught and received... or any non-quantitative subject area. At the same time, it helps me to understand that perhaps I am not crazy for having completely different interpretations than the majority of my classmates when it comes to certain pieces of literature. In the end, even if conclusions are different, it still evokes thought. And isn’t that the whole point?

Notebook

After reading Notebook of a Return to the Native Land, I admit that I was a bit confused as to what the purpose of the novel was and its underlying meaning. I believe my main source of confusion stemmed from that way in which is was written. It was more of a long poem, or a mesh of differing thoughts with no ouvert connection. It wasn’t written with the same structure that my mind was trained to comprehend.

Initially, because of this unique style of writing unfamiliar to me, I wasn’t blown away by the book. To be honest, when a classmate asked me what I thought, I responded with “I didn’t understand it. So, I assume it’s brilliant.” However, after the lecture given by Dr. Sol, I began to understand it a bit better. Indeed, this style of writing served a purpose. I suppose the best description of it would be in its title: a “Notebook.” This made more sense to me. After all, my journals and notebooks are full of thoughts without fluidity or consistent structure. I just write what I feel, perhaps with a hope of understand myself better, resolving an internal struggle of mine or to simply play around with different ideas. After making this connection, Césaire’s search for personal identity through his writing helped in my comprehension.

In conclusion, I find post-colonial literature fascinating… culturally and historically fascinating in that this time period consists of a grand collision of completely different people. And through their writing, I am better able to understand their struggles and individual perspectives.