This first semester of ASTU was eye opening. I learned more about life narratives in three short months than I even though there was to know about them. Though I had read many life narratives before starting this class, I had never really throughout about the “so what?” It was this encouragement to think deeper and analyze work more critically that I found the most significant. Though a hard hard concept to get used to at first it is one of the things that is transforming me from a high school writer to a ‘scholar’.

My ability to analyze life narratives was at first hindered by my confusion of new scholarly terms that at the time seemed like they were being thrown at us. Abstractions, reporting expressions, gists, low level detail, it was over whelming and hard to adjust to. But it was through the analysis of “Persepolis” by Marjane Satrapi that things started to come together for my understanding, starting me on my path to becoming  scholarly writer.

One of the main abstractions we talked about was witnessing, and the way life narratives act as an outlet of witnessing for the protagonists as well as a way for reader to ‘witness’ their trauma. What I found most interesting about this concept was that it not only related to “Persepolis” but it came back constantly through out our examination of other trauma life narratives. In “Persepolis” we examined how Marjane uses the form of graphic novels as a way for her to witness the trauma she faced as a child. Her telling of her story acted as a mode of remembering, which we also saw in the novel “What is the What” – the auto biography of Valentino Achak Deng. This novel written by Dave Eggars, is structured in such a way as to show how Valentino remembers his traumatic childhood through the telling of his story.

Through this study of “Persepolis”, and “What is the What” along with other scholarly articles and other forms of life narration, I was able to discover the genre of life narratives as more than just the act of autobiography. Life narratives proved to be a powerful tool, not only for the people expressing their story but also for human rights initiatives and humanitarian issues. I also was able to understand the issues around them and how they act as “soft weapons” (Whitlock) – powerful, but easy to be manipulated to appeal to consumers in the Western market.

I look forward to term two, when I will be able to continue this discovery of life narratives, focusing next on local narratives. In term one we explored life narratives of people who faced hardship predominantly in the ‘east’, and so I think it will be very interesting to compare and contrast these with works that focus on the stories of people from the Vancouver area. I hope to further my ability to produce scholarly work, and knowledge of the intriguing genre of life narratives.

The documentary “God Grew Tired of Us” serves as a powerful life narrative of the “lost boys” who seek refuge in the United States from their life in the Kakuma refugee camp. The film focuses on three men – John, Daniel and Panther, following their new lives in a foreign country. The culture shock is instantly apparent as the film shows their reaction to electricity and running water in their apartment. But the film also subtly suggests cultural differences, like the lack of community importance in the US. The film follows the boys as they struggle with their identity, and dealing with their past in a new country.

This film is structured by dispersing interviews with the boys throughout the narration of their story by Nicole Kidman. It made me question though, why aren’t the boys narrating their own story? The answer is simply because of star power. This film was not only narrated by Nicole Kidman, but the executive producer was Brad Pitt, and by having such big hollywood names the movie would have likely gotten more leverage and publicity in the market. Nicole Kidman added a celebrity aspect to the movie, and would likely make people more interested in a documentary, rather than if the lost boys narrated it.

It seems that increasingly in the west by having a celebrities name attached to a humanitarian cause, the issue automatically gets more attention and often therefore money to benefit the cause. Using celebrities for campaigns has a strong impact, but do pose some ethical questions. Celebrities can take away from the importance of the issue, as they are gaining publicity as well by doing these humanitarian initiatives. NYU Economist Bill Easterly says that, “[celebrities in support of aid efforts] amplify the simplistic idea of the basket case that is Africa. A homogeneous place that is in need of benevolent outsiders, and celebrities, to save destitute children. Most importantly, current celebrities do not challenge the power structures that perpetuate poverty.” (http://www.humanosphere.org/2013/09/the-marginal-impact-of-celebrity-on-humanitarian-campaigns/)

Furthermore, according to the popular website Wikipedia, this film stars, “John Dau, Nicole Kidman, Daniel Abul Pach, and Panther Boir.” Reading this made me pause, as I thought, “Nicole Kidman?”, I knew she was the narrator of the film but it didn’t seem right that she would be listed as a star beside the three men who the film revolves around. Not only that but within the list of stars she is number two. By her being listed as a star it seemed to de tract some of the significance of Panther, John and Daniel, and their story. When we watched the movie I honestly didn’t even know she was the narrator until the end. I understand that she did play an important role in the film and should be credited for her work, but that title of ‘star’ just seemed out of place.

In October my ASTU class was introduced to a blog called “Baghdad Burning” written by an Iraqi women who uses the web name Riverbend. This blog is a narrative of what life was like during the American occupation of Iraq, reflecting on politics and Iraqi culture. Riverbend’s blog proves to be a testament to the strength of the Iraqi’s, because of the way it depicts daily horrors people had to face during the war, such as bombings, power outages, extreme violence and death.

Though all of Riverbend’s posts are interesting, I wanted to examine the specific example of a post entitled “American Heroes…” posted on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 at 9:37 pm. This post (which I have linked below) starts off with the depiction of a scene where a “mosque is strewn with bodies of Iraqis.” Riverbend then goes on to describe the brutality of the American Marines, as one of them shots a “seemingly dead man”, and says matter-of-factly, “he’s dead now.” She reveals that her family had watched this scene unfold on the news, even her young cousin. The small girl is shocked by watching this and ask, “Is he dead? Did they kill him?” It becomes clear the moral dilemma the adults are posed with by this question. Though the true answer was, “yes darling, they killed him,” it pains Riverbend’s cousin to have to tell his daughter the truth. A child should not be subject to witnessing such violence, never mind live in a country engulfed war, where such atrocities have sadly become common place.

It is this idea of such atrocities becoming common place that seems to trouble Riverbend the most. That an American solider who were supposedly there to free the Iraqi’s from their ‘terrible political state’ committed such brutal acts of violence against helpless Iraqis. It becomes apparent that this was the reality of the invasion though, and that this was not an isolated event. It also become clear that but that these type events were not only tolerated, but blatantly covered up. After all the Americans were supposed to be heroes, liberating the Iraqi people, although the reality was that many of them were actually “murderers.”

“Bagdad Burning”, written in english is very clearly directed towards a western audience, and so something important to point out about this specific post is how it begins. The family is depicted watching the news report of the event, as if removed from the war like westerners. The main difference though lies in the actual content of what would have been show to its audience. Where Riverbend and her family witness an American soldier kill a hopeless man, Americans were supposed to be in support of the war and lead to believe the soldiers going over seas to Iraqi were American heroes. Riverbend suggests that Americans were perceiving the invasion the wrong way, and so she blatantly directs the reality of the invasion to an American audience when she writes, “the people slaughtering Iraqis- torturing in prisons and shooting wounded prisoners- are “American Heroes”. Congratulations, you must be so proud of yourselves today.”

It is blogs like “Bagdad Burning” and a similar blog – “Where’s Read” that work as life narratives to provide truth. Blogs that have little market incentive,and so uncomodifyed these life narratives are very powerful literary works. Though directed to a western audience these blogs are written by someone living through the war and updated as the war evolves resulting in an honest depiction of the struggle.

Link to Riverbend’s blog post “American Heroes”, click here: http://riverbendblog.blogspot.ca/2004_11_01_archive.html

Link to the blog “Where is Raed?”, click here: http://dear_raed.blogspot.ca

At the tender age of 8, I was captivated by Deborah Ellis’s novels The Breadwinner, Parvana’s Journey, and Mud City – A trilogy inspired from a story that an Afghani woman had told Ellis while she was visiting a refugee camp in 1996. This woman told Ellis of her young  daughter who didn’t live with her in the refugee camp but rather had to disguise herself as a boy in order to provide for her family. Ellis was inspired by the interview and based her novels on Parvana, and her plight as a child in the war torn country of Afghanistan. These novels though fictionalized are important comodifyied examples of traumatic life narratives of children, specifically produced for an audience of western children.

These novels were revolutionary to my thinking of the world as a child. At such young age, I was inherently less aware of the world outside of my own ‘world’. I didn’t know much about global issues or the plight of children like Parvana, and so by reading these novels I realized how different other kids lives were to my own. Reading Ellis’s novels made me empathetic to not only Parvana’s tale, but sparked my curiosity. I began to read more stories of children who faced hardships, and in the process got quickly enthralled in the genre.

In an interview with Deborah Ellis from the website Papertigers, Ellis says, “some of the things I heard from kids [in the Afghani refugee camp] formed the basis for the Breadwinner novels.”  Ellis only bases the books off of a few anecdotes from children as well as the mother in the refugee camp, and therefore had to create much of the story herself. Novels like Debroah Ellis’s The breadwinner pose questions about the genre of life narratives, and what defines a life narrative versus a fictional novel.

The breadwinner is a very powerful story of the trauma Afganhi children faced during the war and because of its success was able to bring light to these social issues. The problem is thought that most of the novel was in fact fictionalized; manipulated and co-opted for a western audience. It served as a “soft weapon” (Whitlock), comodifyed for a specific audience of western children, but powerful none the less.

Ellis says, “We create the world we want to see,” which is exactly what comodifyed life narratives for a western audience do; they shape how the west sees the world. By producing narratives for a western audience the stories are often shaped a certain way in order to be the most successful in western markets, often disregarding authenticity of the story, posing questions about the ethics of these comodifyed works. For this reason fictionalized life narratives such as The Breadwinner face a lot of controversy, and the reader of these novels should keep in mind that the truth is often stretched in order to be successful in the markets.

Click here for an interview with Deborah Ellis, entitled “The Power of One Voice”, which goes into more detail some of her works and writing process.

Eli Pariser’s Ted Talk – Beware Online “Filter Bubbles” raises the important issue of the personalization service of web companies like Google, yahoo news and Facebook, and why users of the internet should be weary of this new phenomenon. He talks about the “invisible algorithmic editing of the web” that tailors what you see online, resulting in what Pariser describes as a “filter bubble”. He emphasizes how little control users of the internet have to decide what they see, because of these algorithms, and how ultimately this customization is in fact not beneficial to us.

The internet is known to be a way for the world to connect, but because of this new system of filtering we are becoming less exposed to certain information resulting in what Pariser describes as a “web of one”. These filters exclude things you wouldn’t typically click on, which is in turn restricting us from broadening our horizons by seeing different points of view, and getting a greater understanding of the world. It is always important to see ‘both sides of the story’ before forming an opinion, but these online filters are inhibiting our ability to do this. The alarming aspect of this system is that many people don’t even realize its happening, and so it could become very easy to unconsciously form certain biases based of your “web of one”. One of the most important things Pariser noted about the filter bubble is that it is a reflection of yourself, but the problem is that we can’t see what gets edited out; we don’t know what we aren’t seeing.

After watching the video, I became more observant of this ‘service’ in action, and started to noticed this customization in my own use of the internet. The one way I noticed it most obviously was with Facebook. I came across this advertisement for two different concerts on my Facebook page last weekend (screenshot below) and it struck me.  I had not ‘liked’ either of the artists on my own Facebook profile, yet here were two different ads one on top of the other of two concerts that I would in fact be attending in the following weeks. I realized in the days leading up to this occurrence I had been searching the respective artists online and so the algorithm must have detected this repetitive searching, resulting in an advertisement on my Facebook page that it ‘thought’ I would be interested in. This example of the algorithm at work, showing how our personal tastes are being tailored to, but in the process leaving out things that could broaden our horizons.

Pariser’s presentation made me really think about what the future of the internet will look like, an idea exemplified by this quote by Mark Zuckerberg, “A squirrel dying in front of your house may be more relevant to your interests right now than people dying in Africa.” This quote though sadly accurate, shows how influential people of web companies like Mark Zukerberg the chairman and chief executive of Facebook justify the personalizing of internet websites. People are often more interested in local problems because these issues can directly affect their lives, while something going on half way across the world doesn’t affect their day to day going-ons and so one is inherently less interested. Sites like Facebook use filters in order to just show people what they want to see, but it is important that even though someone isn’t as interested in say global issues, they are still aware of them. The problem with the filtering of search engines and new sites, is that this information that we may find less interesting will just stop showing up, resulting a world of people who are only aware of things that interest them, and therefore narrow-minded.

In my last blog post I talked about Post Secret and how its aspect of anonymity helps people to release their secrets. I will now continue that discussion by focusing on how Post Secret can empower people who view the postcards to share their own secrets, and the way the project has the power to help the creators as well as the viewers ‘heal’ and “find their answers” as a form of therapy.

Secrets are inherently very powerful, and as Evan Imber – Black writes in his article, “The Power of Secrets“, they have very “destructive qualities”, able to break down relationships as well as ones own sanity. Keeping secrets bottled up inside can be dangerous to one’s mental heath and so the simplicity of writing the secret down and sending it away can help to someone move on and let go. This action of release for someone struggling with a secret could be therapeutic, as we can see in the postcard pictured below that reads, “I’VE HELD ON TO THIS POSTCARD FOR 2 YEARS MOVED IT 3 TIMES, BUT I ALWAYS HAD IT PINNED AT MY DESK. I ALWAYS KNEW WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY… I WAS NINE IT WAS RAPE. THIS WILL NO LONGER HAUNT ME. THE WEIGHT GETS LIFTED NOW.” In this example one can tell that the trauma of being raped as a child has haunted him or her even into their adult life. Their struggle was evident, but once they released the secret they felt a sense of liberation.

The format of Post Secret benefits not only the person who sends in postcards but also those who read the blog, because it acts as a way for someone to relate to a struggle they are facing. When weighed down with a bottled up secret sometimes people can feel isolated and alone, like no one would understand their issue, or that people would be judge them for it, but Post Secret has become a place where someone struggling can find strength knowing other people face the same issues they do. On November 9, Frank Warren created a special post entitled “Soldiers Secrets”, where all of the submissions involved soldiers or their loved ones. Joining the army and going to serve in conflict is very  emotionally and physically hard for soldiers and can be devastating on their loved ones, and so for either party going through issues about the military, reading posts of people going through similar troubles as you can be very beneficial. A postcard such as the one below that reads “SOMETIMES I FORGET WHY I’M DOING THIS. BUT THEN I REMEMBER… IT’S FOR YOU.” could help a solider regain strength to go into combat, while the second one which reads, “I’m afraid if you come home with PTSD, I won’t be able to help you. I don’t want to lose you.” could be relatable to people who have loved ones in combat and have similar fears.

Post Secret is a very unique and powerful blog, unlike any other another form of personal narration. It expresses sincere truth in a public domain, something that is now rare in our world plagued with ‘reality shows’. This project is intriguing and connects people through common problems, and can therefore help people through hardships. Post Secret is more than just a blog, it is a form of therapy.

*First picture accessed from http://www.postsecret.com on October 27, 2013. Second and third pictures accessed from http://www.postsecret.com on November 11, 2013