The Pixilated Mind

The mind of a 20-yearold trying to find his way

The eyes of a 20-yearold adjusting to the amorphous of the shades

The body of a 20-yearold stuck between descending and transcending

Pixilated an ignorant in bliss

Pixilated confusion in an eternal state

 Pixilated an amalgam of disconnected shades

The Pixilated mind, a mind intertwined

 The Pixilated mind, a mind that is not solely mine

 The Pixelated mind, a mind that is both yours and mine

——————————————————————————————-

The mind of a 20-yearold trying to find his way

 The eyes of a 20-yearold adjusting to the amorphous of shades

 The body of a 20-yearold stuck between descending and transcending

Pixilation, the ignorance of bliss

 Pixilation, the eternal state of confusion

 Pixilation, the disconnection in the amalgam of shades

 The Pixilated mind, a mind intertwined

 The Pixilated mind, a mind that is not solely mine

 The Pixelated mind, a mind that is both yours and mine

{This blog is in response to Judith Butler’s book, Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable?… I know its might the third time in a row I have spoken about her work. But I think I may of found a connection between her work and Kendrick Lamar’s new album, “ To Pimp a Butterfly,” that I want to discuss.

For those who have not heard it yet, “To Pimp a Butterfly” is a musical roller coaster. Kendrick Lamar’s retro approach to the album’s production ads character this his words. Lamar’s lyrics may be the best I have heard in some time. Lamar is known for his ability to tell a story through his words. His album is structured in sequential order, each song, in one from of another, builds off the previous song. }

I must begin by saying this is not an attempt to delve into the nitty-gritty of each song. Truthfully, I don’t think I have the right. I am no expert on lyrical meaning and have no relationship with the album’s author. Therefore, I intended to speak holistically on what I consider to be one of Kendrick Lamar’s overarching themes.

In a lot of ways Kendrick Lamar is speaking about the connection and disconnection between people of difference, in this case, I think it is a racial difference as well as a class difference. I believe his metaphorical title illustrates this. To pimp means nothing more than to exploit. The butterfly, once caterpillar, remains exploited. In my estimation, the butterfly is emblematic of the transformation of The Black Man. The once shackled specimen has evolved. Albeit to something beautiful, the butterfly remains restricted, in effect, he is still not free.

———————————————

Judith Butler’s work seems to be motivated by the inhumanity of war. Essentially she asks, who is to be the judge of one life is being better or worse then the next? Her rebuttal seems to argue that the frameworks which shapes are lives such as the media, structure the lens we see through. In effect, our knowledge and understanding of the world, is not our own organic creation. According to Butler, the media moulds it.

Music, especially on the main stream, should be considered a form of media, a frame, which moulds the way we view the world. Herein lines the value of this blog. Kendrick Lamar, from my interpretation of his work, speaks on the plight of The Black Male. In essence, he is engaging and expanding the black consciousness in America. I applaud him for using rap as a medium to educate the masses.

{This blog is essentially a preamble for my term paper. It will be in relation to my topic for the paper and will read like my stream of consciousness. }

At my current state, the angel I am going to take with this paper will pertain to our connection, or oneness, in regards to trauma. Questions like, does trauma connect us or disconnect us, and how does this affect our collective trauma (in this case, collective memory) and individual trauma (individual memory). I will be applying the above to Jonathan Safan Foer’s Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by analyzing the different mechanisms used by the novels three narrators who coped with trauma.

Some of my premature and rather grandiose ideas, question how the depth of this so-called connection we have with each other. Considering that tragic instances, on national scales such as, 9/11, seem to have disconnected the United States with the Middle East. My view is predicated on the understanding that connection is not simply interaction, but something more along the lines of harmonic interaction. I must admit, though, that 9/11 also formed solidarity between fellow Americans, which appears to strengthen the connection they had with each other. Herein lies the dilemma I have with this idea of connection, as it is most noticeable in times of mourning, during the process of enduring trauma. My quandary with relationship between connection and trauma illustrates what I consider to be the PARADOX OF TRAUMA.

{BTW any of you out there reading this blog, and want to use my transcendent paradox, don’t forget to hit me with that MLA citation (Mokam, 2015)} (:

All things considered, I have now raised the question of this connections existence in the first place. Is it possible that this connection is temporary, ignited during times, which pinpoint national emotions such as, pride and despair?

As Kanye would say, “ I DON’T HAVE THE ANSWERS!” Mokam would say, I don’t have the answers, YET!

By using Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close as my foundation, I intend to find these answers. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close illustrates how individuals, as well as collectives-unions rather- cope with trauma. This illuminates, in my estimation, that trauma is multifaceted. So as it looks, I am on the right track. But how do I take what I have gained from Extremely loud and Incredibly Close and apply it to the aforementioned questions. Is this the opportunity to incorporate Judith Butlers Frames of War: When is life Grievable? It may just be. Butlers works touches on our precariousness, oneness, and connection even (depending on how you look at it). She professes; tragedy (the creator of trauma) in any capacity is negative. As she believes my pain is your pain, a trope seen throughout her work. And therefore, tragedy due to violence should be eliminated.

Writing this paper, in some cases will be arduous and painstaking, but in others will be enlightening. Nevertheless, I embrace the challenge and look forward to finding the answers to my questions.

This blog is in response to the recent reading and class discussion surrounding Judith Butler’s, thought provoking, book, “Frames of War: When is Life Grievable?” In this blog, I intended to explore what I found most intriguing about Butler’s work- the precariousness of us all.

Is there a shared oneness in us all, as in, us humans? Is there a binding factor that brings us together? Are we simply just one? These are some of the questions I asked while reading Butlers work. I must start, though, on a more basic level, by asking what is she really trying to say?

It appears, that Butlers work is motivated by the inhumanity of war. Essentially she asks, who is to be the judge of one life is being better or worse then the next? Her rebuttal seems to argue that the frameworks which shapes are lives such as the media, structure the lens we see through. In effect, our knowledge and understanding of the world, is not our own organic creation. According to Butler, it is moulded by the media. From an Orwellian stance, the media is The Party, and we- Winston- are more or less forced to buy into a system, or perhaps, a perspective. Therefore, are ability to even value a life as better or worse, derives from how others lives appear on the media.

{Please forgive me for making seem as if the media is the only frame in our lives that structures our perspectives, there are many more, I simply don’t have the time to discuss them all.}

Butler’s belief, from my understanding, is that there is a unifying factor that brings all of us humans together; be it the mere fact that we are from the same species or something more abstract- we are all, according to Butler- the same. Therefore regardless of how the frames shape our role in the tragedy as either the victim or the saviour, tragedy dooms us all. My pain is your pain appears to be the overarching theme in Butler’s piece. This seems to be her reason for not valuing one life over the next.

In theory, Butler work should resolve many of the problems we have in this world. Yet, in practice, her work is futile. Butler devalues the differences we have in society, and instead, attempts to form solidarity by placing emphasis on what makes us human. Herein lies the problem, we must celebrate what makes us different and learn how make these differences live in harmony with each. Not push our differences aside to fetishize over our sole similarity.

I commend Butler for attempting to end the violence and tragedy we have in this world by placing emphasis on our so called precariousness, or oneness.  She offers a unique perspective that sadly cannot be applied to the real world, however.  In some regards there is a shared oneness in us all, yet in my opinion, our similarities will not quell violence and acts as such, it is the celebration of our differences that will.

(This blog is in response to two class discussions I had this week, and will be addressing terrorism along with the media’s selective illustration of it.)

Terrorism in the 21st century is rampant. It is said that the so-called “ War on Terror” began with what I would consider to be the worst day in American History, 9/11. 9/11 is the genesis of a decade of heinous act after heinous act.

There are a plethora of saddening stories of how bigotry has taken lives in this past decade. I, however, will only focus on the two most recent acts terrorism. Last Wednesday, January 7^th, the satirical magazine Charlie Hedbo was ambushed by Al-Qaeda like operatives. The assault, which took place in Paris, ended 12 lives. This tragedy underscores the new breed of terrorism.

In comparison to the massive amounts of hysteria caused by the devastation of 9/11, the recent attacks in Paris can be considered to be relatively dormant.The mere disappearance of the Twin Towers – without taking into consideration all the other catastrophes of the day – validates the sheer magnitude of this act of terrorism. Conversely, the tragedy on January 7^th did not rupture any of Paris’s renowned infrastructures. This new form of terrorism, albeit less destructive, is still as evil and some even argue more lethal, as it is harder to detect and thus prevent.

Call me a cynic, but I don’t think it was a coincidence that another form of this small-scale terrorism happened four days before the events in Paris. One can draw parallels with the attack in Paris to the recent massacre in Northern Nigeria. Boko Haram, a fundamentalist Islamist organization, similar to Al – Queda kills in the name of Allah. On January 3 2015, Boko Haram essentially wiped out two villages in Northern Nigeria, killing roughly 2000 people. The sheer numbers of this massacre, one would think, would cause it to be handled as if it was a large-scale terrorism attack. Yet the media’s coverage of this tragedy was not nearly as extensive as the recent events in Paris, even though there was a considerable difference in death toll. I question the reasons why.

The world we live in is structured by imperialism. This is reflected most in the media. Considering the media is strictly concerned with suiting the western perspective, it should not come to a surprise that the inordinate number of deaths in Northern Nigeria were pushed aside by the tragedy in Paris. As the French would say, c’est la vie.

Works Cited

“Charlie Hebdo and Its Satirical Role.” BBC News. Web. 16 Jan. 2015. <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-15551998>.

“Paris Attack: The New Terror – CNN.com.” CNN. Cable News Network. Web. 16 Jan. 2015. <http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/08/politics/paris-new-terror/index.html>.

“Satellite Images Show Devastation of Boko Haram Attacks, Rights Groups Say – CNN.com.” CNN. Cable News Network. Web. 16 Jan. 2015. <http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/15/africa/nigeria-boko-haram-images/index.html>.

Upon completion of Persepolis, I have begun to wonder what is actually captivating about this story. Is it Satrapi’s literary and graphic skills that woo us- her ability “to intertwine unspeakability, invisibility, and inaudibility”- in a rather simplistic prose and illustration? Is it the historical significance of the story (let’s be honest, an Islamic revolution is no joke)? Is it the quintessential coming of age story, such as Catcher in The Rye by J.D. Salinger, which us Westerners know and love? Or is it the author Marjane Satrapi’s departure from Iran, which eventually leads her to settle in the Western World? After a significant amount of time letting all-of-the-above brew, I believe it is a mixture of the last two.

In its essence, Persepolis is about a quick-witted young girl finding out about life while being beset by the calamities of Arab Spring. Hillary Chute summarizes it best:

“Persepolis narrates the tribes and tribulations of precocious Marji and her upper-class leftist parents: their protests against the Shah, and later against the Islamic regime; Marji’s growing class consciousness; the torture and killing of family and friends; the havoc wreaked by the Iran-Iraq war; and Marji’s fierce and dangerous outspokenness, which eventually leads her fearful parents to send her out of the country at the age fourteen.”

The historical context- or setting- is secondary to Marji’s growth. Marji’s childlike naivety- her ability to express or imagine the chaos and horror that is all around her, not for what it is, but for how she innocently perceives it- is what captivates us. For instance, when Marji hears about a man being cut into pieces, her subsequent illustration of this is not of a man with lacerations at all the major joints with his bones protruding, covered with bloodied excess flesh, it is of a stick figure whose limbs, along with his torso and head, are detached from each other (image below). She lacks the maturity that comes with age and consequently cannot depict occurrences as such, for what they really are.

At first glance Catcher and the Rye and Persepolis can be seen as apples and oranges. However, the characterization of Holden Caulfield in Catcher in The Rye is similar to Marji’s in Persepolis. Holden Caulfield embarks on an odyssey of finding himself that is akin to Marji (i.e. Holden is finding himself through the awkwardness and alienation of being a teenager and Marji amidst a time of war). While both characters possess an immense amount of potential, they both unfortunately have to combat negative aspects of life, as well.

As I previously mentioned, Persepolis ends with Marji leaving Iran to move to Europe. Satrapi spends the rest of her life in Europe, and became just as proficient with Western languages as she is with her mother tongue. In short, she has assimilated (some could even say succumbed) to the Western World. Her story is solely intended for a Western audience. Satrapi enlightens the world on her truth by adroitly telling her story through the lens of a young girl which in turn, limits how truthful she can be; as if the whole truth would be too much, too real, too hard to handle if it was told in a more accurate manner. Satrapi does not want to create western guilt. She does not want the West to dwell on the fact that yet again, western imposition has led to a coup d’état. She avoids that by being as fictitious as one could be in the genre of non-fiction. Which begs the question, is this story in fact a piece of non-fiction? Ostensibly, Persepolis is an auto-graphic-narrative, yet in actuality it’s merely just a piece of historical fiction.

Although it’s Marjane Satrapi’s narrative, her story has been fabricated to meet Western appeal. Nonetheless Persepolis is still a great story and piece of literature. Marji’s fine balance of innocence and naivety enables the story to be relatable to almost every adolescent. Satrapi’s creative portrayal of her story makes it both insightful and engaging, yet not overbearing.