Category: Comparative Literature

The short stories Mericans by Sandra Cisneros and In Response to Executive Order 9066: All Americans of Japanese Descent Must Report to Relocation Centers by Dwight Okita develop a common theme of cultural differences. Specifically, the differences experienced between the American culture and the home cultures of the protagonists. The unnamed protagonist of Okitas story is a Japanese-American girl being taken to a relocation camp during World War II. Mericans focuses on Micaela or Michele, a Hispanic girl interacting with Americans, but it is not specified whether the story takes place in the U.S. or a different country.

Both authors use a first-person point of view; however, whereas Michelle narrates her story directly, the Japanese girls story is presented as an epistolary poem. In a single letter she answers, presumably to the U.S. Government issuing the eponymous order. In both cases, this technique allows the reader to better understand the protagonists concerns and the issues they face because of their position.

Okita highlights the absurdity of essentially accusing children of hostile military action, as well as their limited comprehension of the gravity of the situation. Through the use of a first-person narration, Cisneros brings attention to issues caused by generational cultural differences and possibly differences caused by immigration. The children are forbidden to both enter both the church and explore their surroundings, representing their home culture and the American culture, respectively. However, they fully identify themselves as Mericans, pointing to them preferring integration over honoring their original culture.

Cisneros uses bilingualism to further highlight the cultural differences experienced by Michele. Her narration is mostly in English, but uses Spanish words for things related to her home culture. Even her name is presented as both Michele and Micaela, its English and Spanish variants, to illustrate her status as someone caught between two cultures. Importantly, it is the awful grandmother who calls her by the Spanish name, while her brother calls her Michele. Even the Americans try to address the children in Spanish, discriminating them as outsiders.

The childrens identification as Mericans, their grandmother as the awful grandmother, and their use of English, show that they view themselves as belonging to the American culture. Okitas use of English as the only language in the poem emphasizes that the protagonist views herself as an American rather than a Japanese person.

Both authors use symbolism in their works, Cisneros to represent the different cultures and values, and Okita to represent the protagonists relationship to her friend Denise, as well as America treatment of Japanese immigrants. In Mericans, the church and the awful grandmother represent the childrens home culture and their disdain for them shows their separation from it. All the activities they are forbidden from doing outside the church represent the American culture in which they find themselves and their desire to interact and integrate with it despite the grandmothers orders. In Okitas work, Denise calls tomatoes love apples, and the protagonist sees packing tomato seeds as important.

Even after denise turns her back on her, she still offers her a packet of the seeds, extending her goodwill. Similarly, the relationship between the two girls symbolizes the treatment of Japanese immigrants by the U.S. during World War II. Denise accuses the protagonist of being an enemy and mistreats her despite having no reason to suspect her of any actual hostility.

Both stories discuss the theme of cultural clash, using similar literary devices and techniques to achieve similar goals, but they differ in the use of these techniques. The authors use first-person point of view to give the reader a better understanding of their protagonists. Using a language other than English, or not using it, shows the stories protagonists stances on their position between two cultures. Finally, symbolism features heavily in both narratives, connecting seemingly small and personal stories to broader concepts.

Both written pieces represent memoirs, which implies that those stories happened in real life, and it raises more exceptional emotions within the readers. Us and Them is a powerful piece discussing mindless beliefs and adaptation to something uncomplicated, like television. Sedariss purpose is to show how people are unable to notice the real joys of life. Many people choose to stay in a comfort zone and judge those who are different from them. First, the storys tone seems to be curious and humorous.

Still, when the Tomkeys show up to get Halloween candy, the mood changes. It can be noticed with I did not want them to know how much I had, so I went into my room and shut the door behind me (Sedaris, 2019, p. 887). Thus, one can notice the switch to irritation, and, later, self-search emotions.

Who is Malala? also represents an influential work, and Yousafzais goal here is to show that inner fears and premonitions sometimes signal out real events. Besides, the author raises a significant issue of women in society and the Taliban movement in Pakistan, aiming to show the unfairness and false beliefs of that period. The tone of this story is serious from the beginning because it starts by mentioning the teachers bad dreams and Malalas fears (Yousafzai, 2019, p. 900).

However, it is possible to say that with sorrow and thoughtfulness, the story gives a perception of lightness and easiness through the way the author is describing daily school activities.

The two discussed writings show personal stories, which, most likely, shaped their personalities and influenced the course of life. The stories share such elements as integrating the unobtrusive description of daily actions, or the connection to the emotions of family members. Us and Them also uses a pig comparison to strengthen the primary goal, while Who is Malala? grounds her objectives in powerful personal experience. It is possible to claim that due to the seriousness of the events that occurred to Yousafzai and how it impacted her future life, her piece is influential and thought-provoking.

All three pictures portray males in straw hats, and probably each of those men has a different background. The left image shows a man who is concentrated, calm, and who, at the same time, experienced grief (Van Gogh, 1887). The middle portrait represents a confused person who is lost in his reality and who has an inner struggle (Wanford, n.d.). The right picture represents a young man who is disappointed and sad, probably having a broken-heart or other challenges (Reddit, 2018). Those images are similar because they disclose the individuals feelings, although differently, through shades, colors, and various painting techniques.

The man in the left picture has green eyes that are concentrated on someone, to whom he is talking. His clothes have a weird smell, reminding fresh lavender and the fragrance that one can feel in an old church. The gentleman is neat and polite, always being a good listener and a quiet person who does not talk much. This man can be a professor, or an artist, who spends most of the time reading, writing, or creating.

The male in the middle picture looks slovenly, exhaling a musty smell. This person does not seem to be sober, and it is possible to state that he is trying to prove something, probably the unfairness of life. This individual can be a homeless drinker, who lost everything, including his job and family because of his addictions. It seems that the man is still fighting with himself, and one day he will be able to return to a decent life.

The young man in the right picture is a person who makes an impression of someone who crosses his palms and tries to hold his emotions. One can feel the fresh linen fragrance from him and see how clean his clothes are. It is possible to claim that he is a man from the countryside, who wants to move to a big city, and something got in his way, either financial problems, or misunderstanding, or unrequited love.

References

Reddit. (2018). Peppermint man, Kris Knight [Image]. Web.

Sedaris, D. (2019). Us and them. In F. Weinberg, M. D. Goggin, & R. Bullock (Eds.), The Norton field guide to writing: with Readings (pp. 883-889). W. W. Norton & Company.

Van Gogh, V. (1887). Self-portrait with a straw hat [Painting]. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, United States. Web.

Wanford. (n.d.) Man with straw hat 1938 Pablo Picasso [Image]. Web.

Yousafzai, M. (2019). Who is Malala? In F. Weinberg, M. D. Goggin, & R. Bullock (Eds.), The Norton field guide to writing: with Readings (pp. 900-905). W. W. Norton & Company.

An antagonist is a character who opposes the main one on the way to achieve goals. The antagonist-protagonist opposition is one of the possible driving forces of the central conflict of literature work. The actions of the antagonist not only create obstacles that the protagonist must overcome but can also serve as a reason for the development of the character of the protagonist. Antagonist is not always a single character: it can be a group of characters or an impersonal force such as a natural cataclysm, social order, or a physical object. As a rule, the antagonist is interpreted rather narrowly: only one, the most important villain of the work is considered the antagonist. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the role of objects-antagonists in the literature and to identify their distinctive features.

In the short stories Lottery by Shirley Jackson and Something amazing by Elizabeth McCracken, unreal objects act as antagonists. In the first case, it is a lottery box, and in the second, it is a ghost. They have a significant impact on the heroes of the stories and determine the course of their lives. It is important to note that antagonistic objects themselves have no character, emotion, or moral principles. They are inanimate; therefore, they cannot have such features. Thus, their very essence makes them antagonists, which in its own way affects others. There is something in them that can break or destroy people without special intentions. This makes antagonistic objects more terrifying than human antagonists because their influence cannot be changed in any way.

In the story Lottery, readers do not fully understand what is happening. At first, all the characters in the story are excited, and it seems like something good is happening. People pull pieces of paper from a lottery box and seem to want to win this lottery: All of us took the same chance (Jackson 12). This impression is reinforced by the generally accepted image of the lottery as something positive. However, by the end of the story, the tension is growing. It becomes clear that this box is evil and can harm the one who wins in this lottery. And so it happens: at the end, it turns out that the one who pulls out the marked piece of paper is thrown with stones. It becomes even more terrifying when people start throwing stones without any thoughts about the harmful results of their actions.

The lottery box itself is not dangerous. The author describes it as an old and shabby object: it splintered badly along one side to show the original wood color, and in some places faded or stained (Jackson 10). It does not have a specific storage location, and sometimes it just lies on the floor in the store. However, once it falls into peoples hands, it becomes a dangerous weapon that can destroy lives. The systematic and traditional use of the lottery box seems especially frightening. People seem to not understand the absurdity of their actions and deliberately doom one of the city residents to death. Thus, in this case, the antagonistic object is a symbol of human cruelty and susceptibility to the herd instinct.

Another example of an inanimate antagonist is the story Something amazing. In this work, the antagonist object is the ghost of a dead girl. The author begins the story by describing how it affects people. It makes people feel suddenly cold, and then unsure of yourself, and then loathed by the world (McCracken 41). It is like a cold wind blowing; it evokes negative emotions, it scares the surrounding children. However, in fact, this ghost does not exist. It is only memories of a person and a set of stereotypes stored in memory.

Despite being unreal, the ghost can actually destroy human lives. For example, several years after her death, the mother of a deceased girl turned from an ordinary person into a helpless and far from the world being. It is hard for him, and sometimes he thinks it wouldnt be such a bad bargain, his mothers death for his own freedom (McCracken 45). She does not perceive the surrounding reality and is immersed in her suffering. This makes her so strange that the surrounding children begin to consider her a witch, who was the culprit in her daughters death. At some point, the son completely blocked access to the ghost girls room, and this made the mothers life much easier. Obviously, this is due to the fact that she has become less likely to refer to her memories and reinforce suffering.

Antagonistic objects are an interesting way to diversify literary works. Unlike humans, they do not have a special character, cannot change depending on the circumstances, and behave unpredictably. Their actions and manifestations rely solely on the people around them. Hence, in Lottery, people themselves invented traditions that destroy lives and involve the lottery box. In Something amazing, people consider a persons ghost to be something material and living, which also spoils their lives. These stories allow readers to draw an important conclusion: they need to take responsibility for their own lives. They should not see the highest value and deep meaning in intangible objects and ordinary objects because human life is much more significant. It is important to be guided by adequate principles and soberly assess reality. This is the only way to live a happy life and maintain the correct perception of the world.

References

Jackson, Shirley. The Lottery. The Creative Company, 2008.

McCracken, Elizabeth. Thunderstruck and Other Stories. Random House Publishing Group, 2014.

This essay depicts the self tribulations that two men, Gregor Samsa and Meursault deal with in their separate yet similar lives. It also depicts their tragic ends and their attitudes towards men, law, religion and society. The two gives the expectations that man, religion, law and society have on fellow men.

Gregor Samsa is a good hearted young man who works as a salesman to support his family. His transformation to a giant insect has several meanings attached to it. It could mean the kind of life Gregor lived, that of pity, pathetic or unfulfilling. Because of his good nature, he does not feel burdened caring for his family while his father lazy around the house. After his transformation, Gregor still remains optimistic that this situation is temporary and it will soon end. He feels warm and contented that he was able to afford his family the apartment, and has a hope of sending his sister Grete to a conservatory to study violin. Despite this, Gregor also sees his metamorphosis as an escape from the pathetic life that he lived before and this gives him a kind of satisfaction.

Gregor is seen to have a mindful and caring outlook to the society as seen towards his relationship to many people. When the office messenger accuses him of financial fraud and claims that that was probably the reason why he did not want to open his bedroom door, he tries to no avail explaining what has happened to him. He also has emotional attachment to people around him, He sneaks to the parlour when he hears his sister play the violin and  runs after Grete when he sensed he had caused harm to their mother and Grete ran out of the room to get her medicine.

Gregors spirit later succumbs to the cruelty that he sensed around him and dies. He sees the society as cruel as his father hits him with an apple, and his loving sister changes. She became assertive, strong and the bread winner of the family, she took care of Gregor but with time, could not stand his sight and at the end, she proposed that the family could not accept the bug as her brother Gregor.

There is no mention of Gregor coming into contact with the law or religion. Rather, his contact with man and society, he felt like a stranger because he was not like the others. He lived as a bug, with human emotions. He could not express himself nor eat the normal way, he talked incoherently when persuaded to open his bedroom door, and when his sister puts milk for him to drink, he found that he was unable to drink it, yet before the transformation, milk was his favourite This brought about the discrimination and ridicule he received. He climbed walls as a way of movement and crawled all over the house When he dies, there is no mention as to whether he received a burial or where his body went to. The cleaning woman found his frail body the following day&and later, the family moved away.

Unlike Gregor, Meursault is unemotional, detached and a spiritless man. Meursault received a telegram of his mothers demise and shows no feelings of loss, he says, &his mother had died on that day; he is not sure, or yesterday. But that did not mean a thing When he goes to the mortuary, He smokes cigarette, drinks coffee and dozes off, he even declined to view his mothers remains. At the funeral procession, he is not moved by the mourners who weep for his mother. If anything, he feels disgusted, and all he could think about was,.this to be over for he wanted to go to bed and sleep After the funeral he goes to swim with Marie. Meursault shows no interest in his lover Marie when she tells him she loves him, he says that, it doesnt matter, but probably not i.e., that he probably does not love her. When she requests to marry him, he replies coldly that they can get married if she wants. Marie tries to maintain their relationship even when he is in jail but he does not seem to notice her efforts. Meursault shows no concern for religion or the sanctity of human life. This is shown when he easily kills Raymonds mistresss brother with no particular reason. When he is taken to court, the magistrate calls him monsieur Antichrist for he could not believe a man to have no regards of God and be so emotionless of his mothers demise. During his stay in prison, he does not feel remorse for taking another mans life, he even feels that the police were being polite with him, yet he did not care what they could do to him. On the day of his execution, he was saddened that not so many people were there to see him. He is asked if he has any last words and he coldly says no.

Meursaults connection to the people around him is that of sincererity. He does not feel compelled to act in a particular way either by religion, law, society or even man, in order to be accepted, he does not need acceptance and thinks he can leave alone. This is the strange world that he lives in, a land with no reason to love or feel loved, show no emotion or remorse and a land where he governs himself and his feelings. He does things because he has the time to do them, not the reason. Meursault accepts to witness in court for Raymond even though he has no idea what happened between Raymond and his lover, and he accepts to write a letter a letter for Raymond, simply because he had the time. He exhibits profound confidence with his way of living and thinking, that he does not see it necessary to consider other peoples opinions about his way of life, nor the need to change his way of life.

In conclusion, Meursault and Gregor are two strangers living with human contact. Mersault does not pretend to display feelings that he does not possess and feels no remorse for not acting in the way society expects him to and this brings about his death. On the other hand, Gregor has a good heart and has emotions attachment to those around him, and yet is mistreated by those he cares about. And as such he ends up dying for it too. Such are the double standards that society puts on us. When you are real to your feelings and to yourself, you hurt those around you and are seen to be heartless and ruthless. Everyone will find fault in what you do, yet when you put considerations to societal norms and agreed upon ways of behaving, the society itself treats you like a stranger when you most need it. As human beings living in a society with governments, families, kinship and religion, it is important to find balance between these important components of society and at the same time, feel actualized and appreciated. This is the confusion will all go through and find ourselves living as loners when we are surrounded by people all over.