Hello readers!

In last week’s ASTU class, we talked about philosophy scholar Judith Butler’s article Survivability, Vulnerability, Affect. In the article, she argues people value the life of “we” higher than the life of “others” (they define “we” as the community they belong to according on their identity). Moreover, “When a population appears as a direct threat of my life, they do not appear as ‘lives’，but as the threat to lives ”.

In this blog, I’d like to talk about how Joe Sacco’s narrative method in Safe Area Goražde correspond to Butler’s idea and reminds readers the gravity of the lives of people in Goražde.

From page 92 to 93, seven dead bodies are portrayed on the panel. Edin introduces them one by one: their name, their relationship with Edin, etc. However, in the news we read every day, those people will be described as a number. People in outside world won’t value their life as much as lives of people they know or people who live in their countries. Through Edin’s narrative, Joe Sacco remind us people who are killed in Gorazde share many things common with us. Their lives should be valued by the media and people outside Gorazde. Also, Joe Sacco portrays the dead bodies very precisely. He even adds Edin’s description like “Senad’s finger had been cut from one hand, the other was shut tight”. Through the condition of the dead body, we can imagine the torture those people received from the Serbs. Before the war, the two sides lived together friendly. This reminds me of the Butler’s idea of vulnerability: humans are vulnerable to the symbolic system where we act and define ourselves.

This is a rough idea of the essay that I will write. I will revise it before I start writing the essay.

Thanks for reading my blog.

Hi readers,

过年好! Happy Chinese New Year! This is my first Chinese New Year in Canada. Although I can’t have reunion dinner with my families tonight, I still feel thankful that I can meet awesome people here and listen to the lectures given by great professors. Best wish for everyone in year of the rooster.

Recently in ASTU class, we read The Reluctant Fundamentalist by Pakistan writer Mohsin Hamid. In the book, narrator Changez is telling his experience in US to an American “CIA agency” with a bitter and aggressive tone. Both of them are from Pakistan and graduated from Princeton. Changez feels accepted by United States until 9/11 happened. He was suspected by American because of his Pakistan identity. Meanwhile, serving a country that was invading his home country makes him feel guilty. Finally, he went back to Pakistan and become an anti-America professor. In the last part of the book, “you” is threatened by Changez, and it seems that Changez is going to murder “you”. Different from some books I read before, it gives me a sense of “immersion” by applying first person narrative. Especially in the last plot, I already substitute myself into “you” and feel that my life and the security of America is threatened.

Because of that, The Reluctant Fundamentalist is also considered a political thriller by some readers. For me, I think this book is thrilling from two aspects. Firstly, this book is like a warn to not only Americans but also all the people who treat people based on stereotype of their race and nationality. It’s telling readers that terrorists can emerge from hatred and stigma given from “you”. Another thing that make TRF thrilling is its connection to real world. The story that Hamid tries to tell us is happening right now somewhere in the world. Today, there are still “Changez” suffering from being judged by their race and nationality.

Hamid has said that if you are reading The Reluctant Fundamentalist as a thriller — “that’s because you’re already afraid.” We’re afraid because we are making the same mistakes as “you”.

Thanks for reading!

Hi readers!

This week, we finished reading Joe Sacco’s comic book Safe Area Gorazde. As an American journalist, Joe Sacco went to Gorazde during and after the Bosnia. In the book, he presents the individual experience of the victims and the damaged town with realistic comic style. In this blog, I’d like to talk about the role of journalist presented in Joe Sacco’s works and in society.

Joe Sacco portraits himself as a man with cartoonish face and thick glasses. I never found his eyes presented in the book. His appearance in the book looks foolish and ugly sometimes: when he went to party, his face is sweaty and his mouth is drooling (page 8). I think he portraits himself that way is to remind readers that journalists are normal people too. Although they can go to the scene that many readers can’t get to, the information conveyed by them is based on their perspectives. When I was reading the book, I found that Joe Sacco was trying to present multiple perspectives from different individuals. I believe that’s his way to be more “objective”.

Joe Sacco’s book reminds me of a Chinese journalist, Chai Jing. In her book, she writes about her experience of interviewing a little boy whose elder sister just committed suicide. After the interview, Chai Jing helped wipe the boy’s tears. This scene was shown to the audience. Some critics argue that this is a very unprofessional behaviour, since her emotion shouldn’t be shown because their emotional behaviour can affect audience’s understanding of the fact. Chai Jing said the thing that’s important isn’t whether her emotion was shown in front of audience but whether her emotion serves purpose.

In my perspective, I can understand Chai Jing’s behaviour and I believe her emotion was true, but I don’t think her emotional behaviour should be shown in front of audience. I believe that will affect audience’s understanding. Also, I think part of Safe Area Gorazde portrays Joe Sacco’s experience of an American journalist in Gorazde instead of the truth and fact of the war itself because Joe Sacco already got involved in victims’ life and became one part of Gorazde.

I admire those two journalists because of the way they dedicate themselves to their career. And, I think it’s important for journalist to feel the interviewees’ feeling and present it to the readers, but it’s also important to include opinions from different perspectives, because it will make the news more objective. I think it will be better if Joe Sacco can include Serbs’ opinions in his book.

Last week in ASTU class, we went to rare book library with Dr. Luger. In the library, we read the archive materials about Obasan. According to the libertarian, the achieves are collected from author Kagowa and the order they hold the archives is the follows the chronological order that Kagowa sent the achieves. Since there is a reason that Kagowa sent the files in a certain way.

The achieve assigned to my group is fan letters sent to Kagowa in the 1980s. There are letters from students, teachers, and kids. The one interesting thing we found in these letters is the interaction between Kagowa and readers. As Libertarian suggests, although there is no letter written by Kagowa in the achieve, the two letters from a Canadian history student show how Kagowa helps her on her project by giving advice.

Other two groups sitting next to me got the achieves showing how former prime minister Pierre Trudeau responded to Kagowa’s book and how Canadian and US newspaper response to the book. In other achieves, there are also records about the critics on the book. Those critics show how hard it was for Kagowa to publish the book.

Before we left, we were allowed to browse other archives about Obasan. I found some letters in Japanese and the rough draft of Obasan. Although I was exposed to the history of Japanese Internment in Canada before, when I read and touch those archives, I got a stronger sense that Naomi’s story is adapted from a true story and is written by a Japanese Canadian whose family suffered from discrimination. I also can feel the efforts that Kagowa paid to write the novel to acknowledge the truth that government didn’t pay enough attention.

Dr luger shared her own experience showing how fake stories are spread through the Internet and told us the importance of these handwriting achieves— they’re solid evidence of the history. I believe, in the age that internet is highly developed, keeping the archives become more important. Also, those archives remind us that we should learn from the past and try to avoid making the same mistakes in the future.

Hi my dear classmates!

This week in our ASTU class, we read and discussed the book Running in the Family by Michael Ondaatje. Running in the Family is a memoir where Ondaatje collected the memory and comments from his family in Sri Lanka. For me, Running in the Family is different from other books I read before, not only because of Ondaatje’s identity as a Sri-Lanka born Canadian, but also because he shows the process of collecting the fragments of family memory in the book and uses different narrative perspectives. Matthew Bolton says there are two main critiques about Running in the Family: Ondaatje’s ethic identity and historical inaccuracy.

In this blog, I’d like to share with you how I think of the way Ondaatje tell the story according to these two main critiques.

First, about ethic identity, Mukherjee argues that Ondaatje “undermines the notion of the national subject”, because he has immigrated from Sri Lanka to Canada and lived in Canada for years. However, I don’t think Ondaatje’s identity causes any problem for telling his family history. In contrast, his identity makes the story unique. Unlike the authors of other memoirs, I have read before. Ondaatje doesn’t show himself as the participant of his family history all the time. He also tells the story about how does he collect the memoir and where he gains his relatives’ anecdote. For example, in the beginning of Running in the family, Ondaatje goes back to Sri Lanka and describe the scene where he traces his ancestry history with his aunt and sister (Running in the Family, page 7). I believe Ondaatje never wants to tell his story as a person who is familiar with his family history and Sri Lanka but as an emigrant who traces back to his family’s history, as both witness and participate.

The way Ondaatje tells the story also reminds readers the story might not be accurate because they were collected from people’s dictation and memory. After reading this book, I changed the way to think other memoirs and history books. I never doubt the accuracy of the autobiography before, because the authors are mostly celebrities and they use a lot of details (like photos) to make me believe automatically that they’re telling truth. I rarely questioned history books, and now I start to think that the authors might change the fact or show the fact selectively to achieve their own purposes. Thus, unlike the critics that accuse Ondaatje of telling inaccurate history, I think Ondaatje has reminded the readers of the stories are collected from personal perspectives.

These are my opinions about Running in the Family. Hope everyone can survive and get good grade in midterm！

Hello readers!

I’m Gao, Qianhui. In my first journal, I’d like to talk about the book we discussed in ASTU class Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi. In Persepolis, Satrapi narrated her unusual childhood experience during Islamic Revolution with comics in black and white. Even though Satrapi tells the story in young protagonist Maji’s perspective, we can still feel the cruelty of war. Before reading Persepolis, I knew little about Middle East. We didn’t learn about Middle East in high school history class. In my vague impression, Middle East is often related to war, and the women with veil are most obedient. I feel guilty that I know nothing about there are lots of people who are struggling for their freedom in Iran and girl with veil have no difference with girls without veil. Furthermore, I should never judge people with any stereotype.

This reminds me of the topic of CAP joint lecture—global citizen. After being enrolled into CAP program, I started to understand the meaning of Global Citizen. I will learn other countries actively and know more about different culture and religion.