James's passage immediately reminded me of Peter Weir's "Dead Poet's Society", a movie based at an English boarding school. While the passage also deals with a boarding school, that is not why I connected the passage with the movie; that is simply a coincidence. What is not is the fact that it is an environment full of students who were expected to perform very highly in school, who were brought up with a certain strict mentality, and who eventually find ways to revolt. (honestly, who ever thought of sending their kids far away to a preppy school? If anything, this gives them more freedom to goof off. James was a train ride from home, allowing him to resist his parents. Neil lived far from home, allowing him to practice acting to a extent. Nonetheless, I digress.)
James's escape from all the studies, math, and scholarships was cricket. He claims that things change on the field, saying that everybody lets go. However, most boys still followed the rules. James, previously a goody too shoes lookin, decided to be like whatever. He soon applies this to his school work and is put as risk of losing his scholarship and ruining his family's reputation. Honestly, I think James reached a point where he did not give two shits. He used to lie and sneak his way around to play cricket, but eventually, he just went to cricket and took the consequences. I think this is because he finally realized how much of a façade his life is. This ties back to Foucault's idea of truth. James claims that "everything (emphasis added) began from this basis that Britain was the source of all light and leading...[that] success was to have succeeded in approaching that distant ideal...[that is] impossible." His life (he keeps mentioning eight years of it) was wasted trying to fulfill an unreal expectation set upon by his parents and society, a truth that would dictate many of his life choices until he became aware of this truth. He then set his own truth, or rather just didn't care, and thus lived his life like whatever.
I found the Gandhi pamphlet to be interesting. Here we see a conversation in a pamphlet between Gandhi and a critic. Essentially, Gandhi is saying that the English need to leave and take their culture with them. Gandhi is setting this idea that people of different cultures cannot coexist within one civilization. This reminds me of Wole Soyinka's "Death and The King's Horseman", a play that shows the clash of people from British and Yoruban culture in Nigeria. The message of the play is that people from two differing cultures cannot exist without constant conflict of interests. This is Gandhi's message in this passage. Gandhi is okay with the British people, but not with the culture. He would be willing to let the British stay if they accepted and lived by Indian culture, something that he sees as a real possibility, something that the reader, and myself, do not see as a real possibility. However, it seems that he focuses more on just plainly kicking them out. He thinks there is a possibility of coexistence, but he knows that the British will not accept Indian culture and thus, thinks they should "leave his house." Gandhi thinks there should only be one culture in India, a non-progressive idea! Gandhi, the world leader of peace, says that we should not accept different cultures in a society.
I also thought it was really funny how the reader rekt Gandhi by pointing out that the pamphlet will be printed by British machinery. Ha.
No comments:
Post a Comment