UBC, what a lovely mess. I’m learning to enjoy being part of this opinionated hodgepodge of tortured souls that we’ve taken to calling “Global Citizens”. I think it was made clear as I read my peers weekly blogs that we all, whether explicitly expressed or not, agree on at least one thing – our world can do better than this.
A common topic that was undertaken in the blogs this time around was the graphic narrative we are currently studying, “Persepolis”, and how it is imperative that we use Marjane Satrapi’s story of her childhood as a means to combat the widespread misconceptions of Iran and its people (Isaiah illustrates this eloquently, worth a read). Satrapi has given us all a fresh framework to understand the Islamic Revolution and the Iran Iraq war, shifting much of the class’ focus to the real, human, relatable people like Satrapi who experienced it first hand. Healthy!
Olivea and Mia both effectively explore this idea of being able to personalize those we feel distant from because of preconceived ideas. By generalizing human themes of childhood rebellion and growth, Olivea argues “the fact that we can connect to Satrapi’s experiences makes her story even more powerful. It makes us stop and think about just how different we aren’t.” Similarly, Mia touches on the negative effects of allowing our views of Iran to be “painted with one brush”. It is heartening that we can reach these grounding levels of humanity as a lens through which to view our neighbours.
In this lies the apparent longing for the realization of our ever changing notion of what we’re calling Global Citizenship, and the implication that (to borrow Erin’s words), “An open-minded perspective to worldly events will inspire understanding and respect for the varying cultures that constitute this global experience.” But, as Peter argues with great conviction, there is an inherent danger in striving for Global Citizenship, which he believes to be an “essentially contested term”. Peter brings to light a certain type of insensitivity in how we often tread on the value of cultural differences and history in our attempt to bring about equality. Summary does it no justice, so read it please.
I think that in our hunger for a world better than this one, our increasingly (and arguably dangerous) post-modern thinking could be tempered with doses of reality like those brought up by Peter. Class discussions have naturally been focused heavily on equality, but it is quite plainly becoming frustrating how quickly we blur our definition of equality into one of sameness, how quickly our desire for open mindedness becomes a complete and utter disregard for truth and reality. I can’t claim to have a clear definition of either, it seems to be a fine line- though I suppose it’s impossible to represent anything linearly anymore. Cheers to post-modernism!
-Joseph