In this blog I will be relating two passages written for different fields of study on the topic of social responsibility for individual problems. Mills’s excerpt “The Promise [of Sociology]” from The Sociological Imagination was published in the field of sociology, while Couser’s passage on disability is a life narrative . Before we are able to understand how they connect, there must be an understanding of what happens in both Mill’s and Couser’s writings.

In “The Promise”, Mills focuses on “public issues versus private troubles”; “Public issues” would be a direct result of a problem within a society, and a “Private trouble” would be a problem that occurred as a result of a flaw in a person’s character (Mills, 3). He finds that most individuals attribute their problems to their own personal failure, when they are in fact a social issue. He calls this relationship between the ordinary everyday lives of people and their surrounding society the sociological imagination.

In Couser’s short epilogue, Rhetoric and Self Representation in Disability Memoir, he suggests and critiques five rhetorics that the disabled use to represent their disability in life narratives; these are the rhetoric of triumph, gothic/horror, spiritual compensation, nostalgia, and emancipation. For the purposes of comparison we will focus solely on the rhetorics of triumph and emancipation.

Couser describes the rhetoric of triumph as when the “narrator removes him- or herself from the category of disabled or.. Denies that his or her impairment need be restrictive”, which he critiques because “disability is a “problem” that individuals must overcome (Couser, 34). Couser and Mill both seem to agree that it is wrong to make disability appear to be something that must be overcome by the individual rather than accepted by the society. Mill would argue that the fact that even though disability might be viewed as a personal problem, it is in fact a social issue that should be confronted as such.

The next rhetoric is that of emancipation, which Couser states, “represents disability not as a flaw in her but as the prejudicial construct of a normative culture” (Couser, 37). Couser seems to applaud this rhetoric because it is very close to viewing disability as a “political issue” rather than an individual one. This connects to Mills’ point of view in that it makes disability a “public issue” (Mills, 3).

These two pieces, though written for different fields of study, life narratives and sociology, unite in a common message. Couser and Mill both challenge the idea that a “private trouble” is not that of the individual alone, but rather that of the society in which they live (Mills, 3).

Sources

Couser, G. Thomas. Signifying Bodies: Disability in Contemporary Life Writing. Illustrated ed. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan, 2009. Print. 31-48.

Mills, C. Wright. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford UP, 1959. Print. 1-3.

In her novel, Malala, a young Pakistani girl shares her story of life and fight for education under the Taliban and describes her story in the context of the history of her society. Malala Yousafzai’s memoir brought about both love for her character and criticism for its generalizations of the culture and religion of Pakistan, which can be observed in the form of reviews.

One review by Summer gives Malala Yousafzai’s memoir two stars because of the way the book was written, describing it as a “an odd jumble of Pakistani history, politics, and personal experience that never quite comes together into a cohesive narrative.” (Summer) Summer takes the stance that what Malala is writing about is important; however, she felt the memoir was rushed and was in “serious need for editing.” (Summer)

The review by Limau Nipis, a Muslim, gives the memoir two point five stars because she felt that it was poorly written and too influenced by the co-author Christian Lamb. Nipis states that “Christina Lamb painted that all Pakistanis are violent”, which draws attention to the fact that Malala was not the only one writing this memoir, and readers might not be aware of the extent of Lamb’s influence. (Nipis) However, Nipis points out that she did appreciate Malala recounting the events of her childhood and her fight for education, giving this section “ 3 stars …  because Malala’s voice has become more prominent later in the book” (Nipis)

L.J. Smith , as a contrast to Summer and Nipis, gave the memoir five stars. Smith is quite taken by Malala’s struggle and ability to overcome the obstacles she had to face. She identifies the parts she enjoyed the most as “the beginning and end, where Malala speaks about her home, the Swat Valley, and everything that she loved and was proud about there.” (Smith) However, she also recognised that, in the middle of the book, “Malala describes many political events in her homeland”, which took away from the connection between herself and Malala. (Smith)

While both Summer and Nipis dislike the book for different reasons, they both point to the fact that the memoir gives a jumbled account of history. Nipis attributes this to the fact that the “co-author put on dates and tragedies and events”(Nipis), while Summer states that the book “sounds more like a collection of memories or family stories interspersed with factual information about Pakistan and the history of the Swat valley,” (Summer) Smith also points to this briefly by stating that “Malala’s voice was obscured and I rather quickly got lost in the details”(Smith). While Smith notices the loss of “Malala’s voice”, Nipis specifically attributes this exuberant amount of detail to Lamb, the co-author. In this case, the excess of factual information widened the gap of connection that all three reviewers felt between themselves and the author, Malala.

There was also a key difference in the way Smith and Nipis interpreted the memoir due to their own heritages. While Smith felt that Malala played a “role in making people of different cultures understand each other”, Nipis felt that “Christina Lamb painted that all Pakistanis are violent.” (Smith, Nipis) This is a key difference because while Smith feels enlightened for the educative portion of the memoir, Nipis, as a Muslim, feels she is placed in a misrepresented category.

When readers felt that they were hearing Malala’s words and emotions, they were more apt to enjoy the book. All of the reviewers described some difficulty in reading the middle section of the memoir because of the historical facts presented that were not all connected back to Malala and her story. Would this imply that making the memoir more cohesive would have greatly influenced the perception of Malala’s story and its readers responses?  

Citations

Nipis, Limau. Review of I Am Malala: The Story of the Girl Who Stood Up for Education and Was Shot by the Taliban, written and co-authored by Malala Yousafzai and Christina Lamb, GoodReads, 5 Dec. 2013

Smith, L.J.. Review of I Am Malala: The Story of the Girl Who Stood Up for Education and Was Shot by the Taliban, written and co-authored by Malala Yousafzai and Christina Lamb, GoodReads, 8 Nov. 2013

Summer. Review of I Am Malala: The Story of the Girl Who Stood Up for Education and Was Shot by the Taliban, written and co-authored by Malala Yousafzai and Christina Lamb, GoodReads, 20 Dec. 2013