Greetings.

This previous week in our Art Studies class with Doctor Luger we were able to make some serious connections with a wide variety of the literature, themes and scholars which we have covered in this course. Using scholars  thoughts and theories and finding as lenses and applying them to literature inside and outside the field, finding similarities and connections is a satisfying feeling. From  Juliana Spahr’s novel – This connection we everyone with lungs to Poems from Guantanamo, put together by lawyer and human rights activist Marc Falkoff, and Judith Butler’s writings on vulnerability. I find the more we as a class have read the richer and our classroom discussions have become. I do not intend on getting too side tracked from the main objective of this blog post, but I do have a thought that I would like to share. As the term is slowly coming to a close and we are creating proposals for final projects, I have begun to reflect on the coordinated program and its effectiveness. For a class like Art Studies which mainly deals with literature and academic writing, being with the same group of people and having the same professor for a year has been significantly beneficial. Being comfortable to share opinions and thoughts not only with peers but also your professor has created and catalyzed some seriously interesting and engaging discussions.

This week I would like to focus my blog post on  Poems from Guantanamo  a collection of 22 poems written by 17 detainees from the Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba. The poems in this book were certainly thought provoking and emotional to read, perhaps further complicated by the description found on the opposite page. The description included the name of the detainee/ poet along with an age, a sentence or so on their family/personal life (education or endeavors) with the remainder explaining the supposed reason for their detainment. Each explanation slightly differs in length, tone and content. As a reader I found it rather difficult to read the poem without the short bio significantly affecting my reception.  However, it was the “Notes on Guantanamo Bay” written by the editor Marc Falkoff that caught my attention. This is not to say that the poems are not captivating, moving or emotionally provoking – they are, but rather I was greatly intrigued by Falkoff”s experience in getting these poems published.

On page 1, Falkoff talks about the  “secret level security clearances from the FBI” they were given in 2004 to visit the detention center. He goes on to describe the atrocities and – in my opinion – various violations of fundamental human rights, from sexual humiliation to extreme forms of torture. But what really caught my attention was the last line – detainees, “forced to witness American soldiers intentionally mishandling the holy Qur’an”. I find it ever so fitting to include something which, in my grade 12 religion class was a significant area of study – The Golden rule, also known as the Ethics of Reciprocity. According to the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Golden rule says to “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” 

This is such a basic concept.

You have heard it before.

Maybe in a different language or different wording.

I believe  there is place and urgency  for global mindfulness of the Golden Rule to be lived out in this world.

You are probably wondering what my title has to do with my blog this week. So am I.

The journey of the blog I am now currently writing has been a long one; I started approximately three and a half days ago. Like nearly all writing assignments – but particularly Art Studies – I find this one difficult to write.

Why?

Because I am consistently critical as I am writing; this has proven to be extremely time consuming.

This was the introduction to my blog (three and a half days ago):

For the last 3 Art Studies classes with Dr. Luger our main focus has been on the novel, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close written by Jonathan Safran Foer and the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks. This somewhat confusing novel tells the story of Oskar Schell, a 9 year old boy from New York. Oskar loses his father in the events of 9/11 and in his attempt to find closure finds something quite different in his father’s closet – a key. This is the start of an ambitious quest to locate the matching lock. In our class discussions we have spoken about various aspects of the novel as well as the events and response to 9/11. All which I found interesting. Truth.

Initially, my thesis statement involved some kind of skepticism regarding the wording of the “War on Terror” and an exploration of the growing anti- Islamic sentiments, not only in the United States but world-wide.

That which was written after, well, you cannot see it, because I deleted it.

Why?

Because I tried to answer the question Why was a war chosen to end terrorism?  I lost myself for over 5 hours in cyberspace, reading nearly everything that caught my attention relating to the “War on Terror” and global anti- Islamic sentiments. I proceeded to write what would have been my 3 body paragraphs and finally I came to the conclusion that war is exceptionally complicated and painful for nearly all involved. I certainly could have told you that and I am nearly positive that you too could have told me that before I did my research and writing and you read this blog. I realize that my conclusion may seem rather anti-climatic and obvious. However, I think it can be credited with some validity. If you read up and think long enough about why war was chosen to end terrorism I think you will agree with my conclusion.

Right now, I am doubting myself yet again, because I am not sure if my style and content are acceptable for this assignment. However the stakes are sitting at a solid 2 percent of my grade so I have decided to continue.

This problem I have experienced which I would like to call mild, but chronic writers block is recent and began in September 2014 (coincidentally the month I started university). I have spent a decent amount of time wondering what happens to me when I have to write and why, because in all honesty it is one of the most frustrating experiences. However, after all my reading and having little direct substance to show for it I think I realized what has been contributing to this mild, but chronic writers block. While I write I am constantly concerned what people, especially the teacher is going to think of what I am writing- to such a great degree that it inhibits me from producing work in a decent amount of time. I am not saying one should not think about those reading their writing- please do- but don’t let it stop you  from expressing what you think or feel (granted respect is present).

This made me think of the first GEOB discussion group meeting I had 2 days ago. Collectively we had to come up with a set of community guidelines for our discussion- which reminded me of my first day in grade 4. We went around the table and each person offered up their suggestion. It felt childish, but the Teacher’s Assistant made sure that everyone spoke. One wise man in the discussion said “Be real”, a few people laughed, but I swear he is onto something. I am sure that the majority of you know what it means to be real, and I know I probably should not get into the habit of consulting Urban Dictionary for definitions when I am doing University work, but I found some good definitions to remind you.

“The action of being true to the code of ethics of one’s self, culture, and environment.”

“Simply describing something that is not fake.”

“The action of being true to one’s self as well as being true to others.”

“[Being] free from any intent to deceive or impress others.”

He said something along the lines that it appears people in university are often trying to impress others and in the process lose authenticity and genuineness. I agree. Obviously lack of sincerity is everywhere, but if I do say so myself- It is at university that I have experienced the most.

So what?

In the wake of a new year, I urge whoever is reading this blog…

Be real. Be genuine. Be you. 

Zero percent cheesiness intended.

Greetings earthlings.

After reading Obasan, a novel written by Japanese – Canadian author, Joy Kogawa,
our ASTU class visited the Joy Kogawa Fonds learn more about the making of the book, but also, gather a better understanding about Kogawa. The Fonds are located in the basement of the UBC Library in the Rare Books and Special Collections archives. It was an interesting experience – one I enjoyed more than I anticipated.

“The fonds consists of drafts and source material for Joy’s poems and novels, records
generated for and through her work in various fields such as human rights, certificates and
other documents relating her education and work as a teacher, memorabilia mainly
concerning writers and poets, other people’s works sent to Joy, business and personal correspondence,
and published materials in which Joy’s works were published.” (Tsuruta 1-2)

The excursion to the archives really made Joy Kogawa come to life for me, not only as an author, but also as a person. We had the opportunity to read her writing, and touch pages that once must have clustered her office of living room while she was writing Obasan. When the archivist who facilitated our trip said it can actually be rather fun to snoop around and find juicy bits of information, I was skeptical. I did not think that going through someones’ old papers and letters could be interesting at all- but I was wrong. My peers, Jessica and Jackie actually found some really intriguing letters between a poet who claimed he could love both his wife and Kogawa- certainly something I was not expecting to be present in the fonds.

While looking through the fonds, I came across a lovely piece of fan mail. A woman wrote to Joy Kogawa explaining how the story of Obasan had spread and gained national attention. This particular fan wanted to share with Joy that a restaurant outside of Vancouver had been opened up and called the Emily Kato Restaurant. This small gesture is actually quiet noteworthy. Someone read the book and was obviously impacted by the book that when they saw this restaurant they wanted to share the news with the Joy.

For me, visiting the archives established  how local this story truly is.

This week I have chosen to focus on Joe Sacco’s graphic novel, Safe Area Goražde – a depiction of the Bosnian War (1992-95). Joe Sacco a Maltese – American journalist illustrates the Bosnian war from various angles. Although Sacco is neither native nor an insider, I would like to highlight (a mere) 3 of many aspects which I believe give Sacco authority in telling the story of others and this novel legitimacy. This includes his search for “Real Truth”, choice of genre, and the inclusion and depiction of himself throughout the novel.

In the prologue Sacco introduces an unnamed character claiming to “know the Real Truth about Goražde” because he has “seen everything”, but promptly Sacco reveals he “never visited that man”, but rather “avoided him completely”. This prologue effectively demonstrates that Sacco was not looking for one account of the war to tell this story, but rather multiple sources reflecting on the past, present and future. By including a wide variety of people, he creates a broad and extensive collective experience of the war. His search for various voices is exemplified on pages 160 and 161 titled “Can you live with Serbs again?” Here, Sacco illustrates 9 individuals’ responses with not one response the same. I think it is obvious that Sacco was not trying to hide or supress voices and think contributes to the validity of the novel.

It appears that Safe Area Goražde, has been characterized and well received as a graphic novel. Sacco along with many others in the field of graphic novels and narratives massage the genre into something rather unique; his inclusion of what seems to be well researched history and first hand truth claims gives this novel validity. In an article titled Journalism and Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt written by Bill Kartalopoulos he indicates that the “compulsively detailed images invite an extended gaze that both informs the reader and invites [them] to participate in Sacco’s practice of ethical witnessing.” Sacco does not shy away from exposing his interpretation of the mainstream journalism happening in Goražde at the time and his choice to expose Goražde in a less conventional way . On page 130 he demonstrates how quickly the reporters and photographers are in and out of Goražde in less than a day. I think Sacco’s style demonstrates sincerity; he is not looking for a quick story to report amidst the hype, but rather a deeper understanding as an “ethical witness” (Kartalopoulos, 2002).

Throughout the novel Sacco includes himself, and in a speech at the Walker Art Centre, he emphasises that it “makes it clear to the reader that [we] are seeing things though [his] eyes.” Paradoxically, we never actually see his eyes which are hidden behind the glare of his spectacles. Again Kartalopoulos suggests that “Sacco’s point of view is inscribed onto every page… always [appearing], signaling his involvement in the events being depicted even as he frames those experiences after the fact.” Being visible in his novel grants him a freedom to express his own emotions and show his humanness; and he does.  In a not-so- pleasant encounter on page 192 with a Bosnian man, he is accused of failing to mention the “6 Thousand Killed [in] Srebrenica” and Sacco depicts himself uncomfortably in the corner and he openly says, “I wanted to be put a hundred thousand miles between me and Bosnia, between me and these horrible disgusting people and their fucking wars and pathetic prospects.” I think instead of excluding himself from his novel he creates a trustworthy platform for his work which contributes to the authority I think he has to tell the story of others.

The idea of false consciousness was first formally introduced to me a week ago in both my Political Science and Sociology classes. Subsequently I have read Persepolis (2003), written and illustrated by Marjane Satrapi. It is a personal account of her childhood; growing up in Iran at the time of the Islamic Revolution.  After class discussions with fellow peers and personal reflection, I have chosen to highlight the idea of False Consciousness prevalent in Satrapi’s graphic novel, Persepolis. To define this concept, I have chosen a definition from “Introduction to Politics Canadian Edition” (2013). False Consciousness is, “A belief or perspective that prevents someone from assessing the true nature of a situation. The concept reflects the Marxist idea that capitalism makes it impossible for most people living within the system to see the true nature of their exploitation.” (455)

Leading up to the Revolution, Islamic Fundamentalism became an increasingly (not by choice of the people) important facet in Iran. Prayer was enforced as a central aspect of daily living. There was a change in acceptable attire for woman and men. Women had to be properly veiled and could be arrested if they did not adhere to conservative and fundamental customs. Teachers were portrayed as largely influencing the youth’s opinions and ideas on religion and politics.

Marx believed that religion served society as a distraction, misleading people from seeing and understanding the repressive nature of Capitalism. Marx equated religion to drugs, saying it is, “the opium of the people” (1843). Those who believe in a religion have drugged themselves. Their religion has created their views on social issues to be distorted and inaccurate.

In Persepolis, various aspects of the Islam religion are explicitly portrayed. However, most shocking to me was the scene when Marji’s family maid, Mehridia, shows Mrs. Satrapi the plastic, golden painted key given to her son at school. She explained that “They told the boys, that if they went to war and were lucky enough to die, this key would get them into heaven” (99). In addition, “They told them that in paradise there will be plenty of food, women and houses made of gold and diamonds” (100). Mehridia represented the working class; the masses of Iran at the time. False consciousness requires large portions of the population to believe in certain ideals. The elites in power targeted the poorer and less educated. Thousands of young kids were recruited and sent out into battle with plastic keys around their necks, under the pretense that they were headed for an afterlife, “even better than Disney Land” (101).

Reading “The Role of Interpretive Communities in Remembering and Learning” (Shahzad, 2011) proved to be thought provoking and confusing. Perhaps shocking to you; prior to reading this study, never had it occurred to me that the concept of an interpretive community (Fish, 1976) might have existed. Shahzad describes an interpretive community as, “A collectivity of significant others, (who) play an influential role in the consumption and negotiation of knowledge” (2011).

In this particular study Shahzad is extending Wertsch’s (2002) theory focusing on textual resources and how they “shape the speaking and thinking of individuals to such a degree that they can be viewed as serving as ‘co-authors’ when reflecting on the past”. His study suggests a process of mediation occurs between Human Agents and Technologies of Memory.  However, in Shahzad’s further findings, she includes interpretive communities (2011) as being another main force influencing how students learn and remember.

What intrigues me about interpretive communities (Shahzad, 2011) is their intricacy. If interpretive communities exist, every individual forms part of a variety. These interpretive communities act as filter systems for the information we receive, but more importantly how we receive it. With these interpretations, our opinions on information are formed. However, we are not part of one single interpretive community, but rather multiple. If individuals are products of these multiple interpretive communities that would mean that we are both affected by interpretive communities but we also have an effect on them.

This leads me to question the concept and significance of interpretive communities. In an increasingly globalized world, the composition of our interpretive communities is becoming more diverse. Individuals are continuously moving in and out of various interpretive communities, carrying with them their own interpretations of knowledge. An interpretive community cannot interpret information as a whole; it requires individuals. Individuals individually interpret information. Therefore, how significant is the “collectivity of significant others” (Shahzad, 2011), and really how remarkable is it that vast groups which we are coming in contact with are interpreting the information we receive, when we too are interpreting information for others.