After thinking whether the story of Frankenstein is monstrous or not. It super monstrous and unrighteous. The way his is judged because of skin color and appearance is wrong. It represents our society how we literally create barriers because of color LIKE WHAT that doesnt even make sense it’s plain stupid. Frankenstein is labeled as creation that should have never been made almost exactly how colored people were viewed years ago its truly disgusting and sad.
In the alternate ending of the story, Armand is shocked and saddened by the letter’s contents. He has never known his mother, and the fact that she is part of the enslaved race is difficult to swallow. Armand feels grief and regrets what his family must have gone through, and his heart breaks for the injustice they have experienced. He also feels immense guilt for how he has treated Desirée and their child and is now filled with regret. Armand realizes that he has judged Desirée harshly and unfairly and has let his insecurities and fears get the better of him. He now knows that he must make amends.
Armand takes a moment to compose himself before going to find Desirée. He finds her in her room, sitting with the baby in her arms. When she looks up at him, he can see the pain and hurt in her eyes, making him feel ashamed. He looks away, unable to meet her gaze. He apologizes for his behavior and tells her that he was wrong to accuse her of not being white. He admits to her that he is part of the enslaved race and has wronged her. Desirée is taken aback by his confession, but she can see the genuine remorse in his eyes. She forgives him, and they embrace him.
Armand and Desirée decide to leave L’Abri and return to Valmonde together. Armand is determined to make up for the wrongs he has done and to start a new life with his family. He begins to treat the enslaved people at the plantation with kindness and respect and is determined to ensure they have the freedom and equality they deserve. Armand works to make sure that his child is accepted by all, regardless of the color of their skin.
Desirée and Armand live out the rest of their lives together in peace and happiness. He is a better man because of his lessons, and he is eternally grateful to Desirée for her understanding and forgiveness. The couple work together to create a better world for their son and ensure that future generations will not have to endure the same struggles they have endured. They symbolize hope and positivity in a world filled with darkness and despair.
Teasing and using hypothetical or joking language is an incredibly complicated thing to grasp. Often, phrases are taken literally and responded to in a way they were not meant to. This is an intricate part of the english language and will be consistently heard in life. Shielding a child from jokes entirely will hurt them in the future, if they don’t develop with this crucial understanding. Joking doesn’t mean that life is unstable, it is simply a joke. It is important to work through misunderstandings as they occur, but shielding will hurt children more than protect them. There is, however, no need to pour every hard life reality and event on to a young kid. They don’t need to know intricacies of financial ruin, or every detail about drugs and sex or assault. Answering questions when asked, but not volunteering hurtful information is a way to go about this, and padding the answers slightly can also assist in teaching. Teasing kids is much different from showing them the entirety of reality, but in that case where harder subjects are questioned, denial will only lead to later hurt.
I believe that historical forms of activism, especially those that directly reflect the context of the time and the limits on activism, are some of the most powerful examples. This story by Tony Cade Bambara deals with the issue of authenticity and the unknowingness of childhood. Bambara tells a powerful story through the eyes of a young black girl and her family, along with their dynamics. She is too trusting and believes literally everything she is told. It is not simply an activist piece, it is also a reflection on the obliviousness of youth and the absence of truth, as well as the subtext of language. People look for meanings in pieces of work that are as fluid as this, making the activism more captivating and powerful. I do not think this piece is too far of a cry from modern activism in story form, instead it is just a story of the time. There is an accessible form of activism for every consumer, whether it be straightforward in a clearly outlined problems and solutions essay, or hidden in a captivating story. It is an artistic form of activism, and just as valid as any other. Writing is empowerment and telling stories has always been a form of liberation.
I believe that the female character in the story represents not just Ichiyo’s own struggles, but those of all women in the 19th century. At the time, women were not held to the same standard as men, and as such, received lower quality educations compared to men. In addition to this, once they were married, they were not considered to be a partner to their spouse, but as property. The husband had all the power in the relationship, as evidenced in the words Oseki’s father said to her. Nothing could be done about this, and if women tried to speak out against it, they would be swiftly shut down by the same men they are trying to revolt against.
The way that Oseki’s marriage is affected by her economic status is through her interactions with her husband. Her husband, Harada Isamu, is verbally abusive and constantly berated and belittles her for her lack of education. For everything that Oseki does, she is ridiculed by her husband who says that so and so is done incorrectly. She cannot socialize well with the other wives of Harada’s colleagues because she has not had the same experiences that they have. Harada would barely speak to her and it made her feel undesired by him. As the story progressed, her family even told her that it was better if she returned to her abusive husband instead of freeing herself from that toxic marriage, because it benefitted others. Essentially, she was to be a lifeless husk of a person and to act as a servant to Harada.
What I think Oseki learns through her run in with Roku is that everyone is going through their own struggles that are equal to, if not greater than one’s own. Roku’s life was basically in shambles when he met Oseki. The significance of this meeting was to show how their separation affected both parties. Their separation is made more evident when Iseki believes herself to be the reason for Roku’s current state of being. Roku thought that he would marry his childhood love, and that dream was promptly shattered when he learned of Oseki’s marriage to Harada. Both of their dreams were.
I believe that the writer’s race matters when dealing with issues of race. Race is such as sensitive and controversial topic that those who speak from it do so from their own experiences and struggles. To have someone outside of their race to speak on something so personal can be seen as offensive to the targeted audience. While it is possible for a person not of the same race to speak on a topic regarding another person’s race, it is best if done within their own racial confines, like Chopin has done. We can see the differences in the portrayals between this work and in Gorilla, my love, with the way the dialogue and internal monologues are presented. Kate Chopin’s portrayal of these struggles in “Desiree’s Baby” is really well done. In this work, she was able to portray the prejudice and hate that black people faced back then and still do now.
In my opinion, adults and elders in families should be somewhat careful around what they say around young children. However, just because adults should be cautious of what they say, does not mean they should shield their children by just saying “nice things”. There are times when the brutal truth is the best way to go about things. Sometimes, the truth is what is needed for a child to understand the gravity of the situation, lest the child become ignorant of things around them. When dealing with children, the concept of “my word is my bond” is something that should be honored. When something is promised to someone and that promise is not kept, trust is lost between the two groups and then they will be less likely to trust you in the future. Regarding “just teasin” kids, I believe it is fine to do so, as long as it is made abundantly clear that is it not something to be taken seriously, to prevent a situation like the one between Hunca Bubba and Hazel from happening again all because of a misunderstanding between both parties.
Through the Marxist theory, Oseki and Roku’s interaction was greatly significant because of the different economic classes that they ended up in. They both were from poor families originally but she was able to marry wealthy and live an upper-class lifestyle while he was never fully able to become successful. She loved him when they were younger and explains that she would have married him if the choice was fully hers, but she sees the hardships that she would have likely endured in their relationship due to his position in the lower class. She is evidently not happy in her current situation with Isamu, but it does not appear that she thinks she would be happy with Roku currently either. Through the lens of the Marxist theory, Isamu is her better option, regardless of her feelings for either of them. The interaction they have takes the reader back to what her father had said earlier when discussing her miserable marriage.He stated to her that if she remained unhappy, and if she returned to being their daughter she would also be unhappy, but she would be in an upper-class situation married living a nicer lifestyle.
At this period of time in Japan women had essentially no power as explained in “The Thirteenth Night”. The main character of this story is the wife of a very wealthy, successful and powerful man, Isamu, which becomes her purpose in life. As described by their marriage, she exists as a servant to him. She is to cater to his every need and accept all abuse that is directed at her in order to please him, while also providing him a child. The aspect of bearing the child is shown to be very important in this traditional marriage when she described to her parents that Isamu treated her very well up until she gave birth to their son Taro. This implies that one of her sole purposes as a wife to Isamu was to provide him with a son, and that after that happened her value as a person drastically decreased, and his treatment of her declined.
This servant-like relationship was not unique to Ichiyo’s situation, it was the culturally acceptable dynamic between men and women at the time. This is shown by her father’s views on Ichiyo’s miserable marriage. He constantly reminds her throughout their discussion that her purpose as a woman is to support and please Isamu no matter how poorly he treats her. He feels this way despite having sympathy for his daughter’s suffering. He explains that many women are miserable in their marriages as well, however they all deal with it because that is the way that things should be.
This story shows that women at the time were not viewed as individuals, but accessories to men. Ichiyo at the end of her conversation with her parents resigns herself to remain Isamu’s property which her father essentially suggested. Additionally, her father tells her that if she divorces Isamu she goes back to being “his daughter”, implying that she does not exist as an individual, only as a wife to a husband or a daughter to a man.
Powered by:
