She was the Most Corageous

Since I was the only one to not read aloud my poem on Tuesday, I decided to finish it and post it on this blog. I'm not a poet, but here it goes...


March is the fool that comes
before the 1st.
A baby is born next door;
out of wedlock.
Nobody told her how to act
or how to behave
Heck, nobody even told her how to do the laundry,
Instead, now...
She is blessed in the unluckiest way.
with a human being
and no collective support.

Mid-way through March.
All alone,
She was now becoming familiar with the tiny human life.
She became attached to something
in a way
that a man feels attached to empowerment.
Unmarried mothers from east to west
from the ghettos to the suburbs
Looked up to Her for Her internal courageousness;
because only a courageous woman with no husband
would keep an infant with a deadly disease.

April smells of lavender.
it could cover up all
but the stench of mere defeat.

April brought woes to
Her, and only Her
for Her family, was not in sight
and She was losing her child.

March fooled everyone who thought that
April would be the coming of Joy since it was
May, that She lost Her baby girl.

On Dark Noise and What Not

Full disclosure: I'm writing this right before my class at 2:40pm and I need to prep for Jamila Woods class visit. I'm sure folks know of Jamila Woods -- the Chicago poet, the black church voice having, black grl soldier. But what folks might not know is she's in an artist collective called Dark Noise with Prof. Marshall, Fatima Ashgar and others.

I want to turn to the latter really quick. I want to center this post on an interview of Fatimah I heard recently. There's this radio show/podcast in Chicago called AirGo (shout out Damon Williams and Daniel Kisslinger). Fatimah Ashgar was interviewed on that show and talked about her art being relational. That is, the aesthetic goal of her work is to build relationships.

That's profound. When one thinks about poems or paintings, one may asses the aesthetic value of that poem on painting under the guise of: "what is she saying with this?" or "how does this make me feel?" It's a one-way street -- the goal is to place a piece of work into the world and let it affect those it affects. But the audience does not then turn and affect the artist. In that way, it is not dynamic.

But if the goal of your work is to foster a dynamic, a relationship, that throws a wrench in our conventional aesthetic schema. The aesthetic value of an artist's work is assessed by the relationship. That's radical to me.

I don't know what this analysis can lead to (for our ethics, politics, etc.). It's dope though. Perhaps that's what Dark noise is (a la Audre Lorde and what not)?

Economic Conciousness

Especially with reading Jamila Woods' poetry for class today, I am always pleasantly surprised as to the consciousness of social issues within the variety of work. This may be a simple and granted observation, but nonetheless, it is the level of discourse that is consistent from Audre Lorde to Jamilia that is important.

In Woods' work, there is heavy focus on the class structures that separate poverty and wealth, and how that affects social and familial dynamics. She demonstrates that the relative inequality and the changes in additudes are the result of "being green"; that is, forgetting where you came from and your roots, and placing money over family. Her poem "beverly, huh" demonstrates a stark awareness of this hypocrisy within the black community straddling these economic lines. Woods seems to yearn for unity for overall equality for her race as humanity.

We see a similar dynamic played out in Zami, where economic standing strongly infleunces the lifestyle of individuals who are deemed "outside" of society. Audre Lorde addresses this problem with her own formula of independence, living her own life according to her rules, and putting complete dependency upon herself. In Jamila's work, we can perhaps see the opposite, where the family in Beverly falls into wealth for the sake of comfort, instead of facing prejudice and changing circumstances for the better.

It would be interesting to see if Jamila herself would draw or agree with these connections, and whether or not they influence her in developing her consciousness of other social issues. I, at least as a reader, can daw some parallels, but each poet is different in expressing their ideas.

Reservation Grass

Todays discussion got me thinking about the meaning of Reservation Grass. This poem follows the theme of Diaz's book by incorporating poverty, drug use, and heritage. The poem makes significant references to Walt Whitman. The lines "We-myself and mine-toss it in a pot and wonder how it will feed us all-witness and wait-but never worry, never fret, never give a damn, over mowing the grass" got me thinking about the true meaning of the poem. There are two possible ideas of what this poem may mean. The first, by saying to not care over mowing the grass, this may be implying that Diaz and the rest of those impacted over the drug use and the remains of their ancestors in the yard should completely forget and not worry about the things that have happened in and around their lives. Secondly, the poem may be implying that the ones effected should not worry about the past thats buried in the yard while mowing it-when the subject is brought up-but should always think about it to make sure that the ancestors are always remembered, and the drug use will not be forgotten as a reminder of what should not happen, and a lesson learned.

The first idea of completely forgetting about these situations is a compelling conclusion to this poem. The rest of the book is rather depressing with the theme of drugs and poverty. Diaz's emotions and harsh critique seems to lead to the conclusion that all of the past should be forgotten. However, I believe that the main conclusion of this poem is that Diaz and the rest of those effected should not be troublesome when society questions them about the past. They should always be aware of the past to understand where they come from, and where not to go in the future. I believe this because firstly and simply, Diaz would not have written an entire book if those should forget about what has happened. Also, nobody should forget about the past because they were harmed by it. Having a past means that you have learned something, and Diaz has learned quite a lot from her family and life.

When My Brother Was An Aztec

Following class today, 3/24, I noticed we actually did not really come up with Diaz's thesis or argument, if we had to pick one. I would also like to discuss something else we did not mention in class, the three parts to the book.
The first of three parts really deals with Diaz's family and the cultural in which she lives. In many ways, it talks about life on a reservation, but more in general, the life of a Native American, past and present, in the United States. This section features many poems that deal with oppression of Native Americans, with a strong Mojave theme present. The different poems range from a serious tone, like in "The Red Blues", to a satirical tone, present in "The Last Mojave Indian Barbie".
The second section in this book takes her brothers drug addiction and talks with how it affected the family. Nearly every poem in this section show some sort of parent reaction, her mother or father, to Diaz's brother. It focus on the destruction he brought to the family because of his drug addiction. This is clear in "As a Consequence of My Brother Stealing All the Lightbulbs".
In the last section of Diaz's book, she reflects about life outside of the reservation where she grew up. A common theme here comes from Diaz's viewpoint of how she was thrown into the unknown - world outside of the reservation - when she moved off of the reservation. She puts the readers in the narrators shoes, which puts most of us in unfamiliar experiences as well, and what becomes of it is confusing and not always for certain. In this section she reflects on how unfamiliar and tough it was being thrown into a new world and how she handled it.

So, if I have to write a thesis, or explain to someone what this book is about, I would say that this book is about a Native American family who abruptly moved off a reservation into a new world and where this new, unfamiliar world, brought up many problems - like her brothers drug addiction and her realizing the harshness of the world - that were not on the reservation. Diaz does a great job of placing the readings in the shoes of the speaker in the book and giving the readers enough context to make sense of it and understand part of what she had to go through.

My Brother Was

When My Brother Was an Aztec is engaging to the reader by using common things to americans to explain Natalie Diaz's heritage of being a native american. One of the most unique ways that she does this is in her poem "The Last Mojave Indian Barbie." Diaz talks about how the Mojave Barbie is not like the american barbie because of her accessories that Mattel gave to her. The entire poem was very explicit in its meaning but one part that really resonated in me was the part when Ken makes Mojave Barbie put on her "traditional outfit, still twist-tied to her box." There is a lot to unpack in Diaz's writing as she makes the reader really question the situation. Is Ken oppressing Mojave Barbie? Does that mean that there is a bigger picture of oppression? (Similar to the white founding fathers of the United States making native americans like the Mojave move under their will) Does Mojave Barbie not accept her culture since her traditional clothing has never been touched? Is she trying to protect her heritage by not allowing other observers create unfair stereotypes about the Mojave? (Either way she is telling Mattel that she does not appreciate her casting) This only one of he many examples that Diaz talks about in her book When My Brother Was an Aztec.

Connecting Other Perpsectives

One idea that has interested me in this stage of the course is whether we can cross-reference other elements of criticism in literature. As an English/History double major, I find it somewhat easy to identify other ways of looking at writings from both the writer's perspective and the P.O.V. of the historian in hindsight.

Recently in my HIS-497 class, we have discussed different schools of thought and ways of "doing" history. We have looked at literature coming from a feminist perspective, a perspective of disability, and P.O.V.s on how to correctly "tell it like it is". This is easier said than done, but it is worthwhile to think on these different views, and how they connect to the thoughts and emotions of those who came before us.

I feel like we could apply the same kind of discipline to our own study of multicultural literature. We can analyze the way that the poet lays her words on the page, but as a historian, I value the words themselves a lot more than other "structuralists" may, but that is just a generalization. What I am also saying is that if we look beyond the words, and see it from the perspective of tragedy, loss, or hatred, we could be easily surprised how much we can get inside the head of the author. In the end, it may give the work more meaning to us as readers.

Comparing books so far

Before this semester began, I was not aware that authors wrote different poems that would connect into a book. Notes from a Divided Country has given me the best understanding of how individual poems connect to create an overall theme. We have read Zami: A New Spelling of my Name which was the most different type of book that we have read this semester. This book was a biomythology of Audre Lorde's life which was a book of facts with fictional aspects. Poems by Phillis Wheatley seemed more like a bunch of random poems thrown together rather than a book like A Walk in Victoria's Secret, Loose Woman, or Seam, that were all similar to Notes From a Divided Country. All of these books of poems have their own themes that overall connect to the whole books, but I think Notes From a Divided Country does the best to connect its theme to nearly all poems in the book. I make this connection because when Suji Kwock Kim uses words to refer to people like she, he, us, them, and we, these words are spoken mainly referring to the same people at the beginning of the book, as in the end as well. What I mean by this is that Kim's theme of family and war is displayed throughout nearly every poem of every section of the book, which I believe is much more recognizable in Notes From a Divided Country than any other books we have read thus far.

Li Po's quote before Chapter IV

The Chinese quote preceding part IV of "Notes From the Divided Country" is from an 8th century Chinese poet, Li Po, who is widely recognized as one of the most important Chinese poets of all time. I originally wanted to analyze this quote and how it relates to the remaining section, but I found something interesting when I researched the quote.

"We sit together, the mountain and me,
until only the mountain remains." Translation by David Hinton

My reading of this quote as it relates to the chapter is that human life is not necessarily insignficant, but is inconstant. Nature remians, but people are mortal and nobody lives forever. This definitely makes sense with the earlier images of death and destruction during the Japanese occupation of Korea.
In "On Sparrows", Kim, while admiring the ocean, says "Now I am afraid my listening will erase all that is not you." (pg 56) While the message in this quotation is slightly different, we still this message of inconstancy, and that things can wash away with time.

Interestingly enough, I discovered an alternate translation by Sam Hamill

"We never tire of looking at each other -
Only the mountain and I."

I read this translation as the complete opposite: here we see a message of constancy and immortality. In "Levitations", Kim's great-aunt comes back from the dead to appear before her and explain that being dead is not easy. Aside from this brief passage, I admit that it was difficult to find other examples that support this alternate translation. In the end, the fact that there exists an alternate translation that has the potential to completely change the interpretation of the text is very interesting.

Belonging within Faizullah's and Cisneros' Work

This post is perhaps in hindsight when we talk about themes we could've discussed in class. Even so, I think that there is one connection that is important in linking two of the most interesting books we've read thus far. On the whole, I think that Culture, in its broad terms, acts as a major element of identity for Tarfia Faizullah and Sandra Cisneros and their work in Seam and Loose Woman.

This also can further lead to considering the equally broad idea of belonging, whether it is to a place, an idea, or an aspect of a specific culture. Such a tradition or custom can have a definite locus or origin, from where the poet can derive biases and reflect as a kind of "omnipotent" onlooker to that element or history.

I think this is applicable to trying to understand both Faizullah's and Cisneros' work, because both their subject matters entail some sort of origin from where they area able to comment and assert themselves. Cisneros does this by employing stark or aggressive (I use that word very loosely) images or aspects of her Latin culture, to where she is able to comment on the desirable behavior of the strong and effectual woman as a lover and as a force to be reckoned with. And I think that Cisneros was very pointed and intentional about making that connection, otherwise, I think that her work would've been much more "hollow" in giving great meaning to otherwise normal situations. Cisneros injects purpose to the subject matter.

On the other hand, Tarfia Faizullah's sense of belonging and identity entail some relatively complex twists. The origin, of course, is the War of Independence that Bangladesh waged with West Pakistan in the early 70s. Faizullah, though, doesn't try to answer her own concerns about the political ramifications of the actual war, but accentuates her personal connection as a woman of Bangladeshi decent with the Birangonas. While not truly employing a sense of broad culture like Cisneros does, Faizullah still makes a cultural connection with the actual nation from where her blood derives, where she takes on that persona of that all-understanding onlooker.

It would be interesting to see if the idea of actual belonging took precedence in the work which we will read later on in the semester. It would also be cool to see if culture, in all of its broadness, also plays a part, as I am sure that it will based on its already heavy bearing in the work read thus far. Obviously, we can in much more detail than just what I've put here, and would be interested in knowing if there was that same sense when reading both books.

Faizullah Admires America

Tarfia Fiazullah's parents immigrated to New York in 1978. In 1980, Tarfia was born. 30 years later, Faizullah returned to Bangladesh to interview several woman that were involved in the corruption of the Bangladesh government in the 1970's. Faizullah made her interviews into poems, and published her book, Seam. When I figured out the true story behind her poems, I began to realize that Faizullah made several references of her preferring to live in the United States as opposed to her parents homeland of Bangladesh. Faizullah says:

In America, the bodies
of men and woman march forward
in protest, rage candling
their voices-in Vietnam, monks
light themselves on fire, learning
too late how easily the body burns (p. 5).

Faizullah displays the difference between American men and woman and Bangladesh monks in their times of oppression. Faizullah admires Americans for their courage to fight back against the power and earn rights before it was too late. She denounces Vietnamese monks because they did not fight back against their oppression until it was too late. Faizullah embraces being American when she says:

Dark horde of men
and woman who look like me-
because I look like them-
because I am ashamed
of their bodies that reek so
unabashedly of body-
because I can-because I am
and American, a star
of blood on the surface of muscles (p. 12).

Faizullah returned to Bangladesh to learn that she was no different than any man or woman their. After learning about Bangladesh, she comes to embrace the fact that she is an American. She does this by again denouncing her heritage. Although, Faizullah sort of bashes the American culture by saying she can judge the Vietnamese people because she is American and that is the right she has--but again, she is saying that she is an American. Faizullah's visit to Bangladesh made her realize how good she has it in America when she says:

Two weeks ago I crossed two oceans wide as
the funeral processions to your grave (p. 17).

Faizullah explains that her return to Bangladesh was like getting ready to be laid down in her final resting place. She feels that the people in Bangladesh are constantly at risk of surviving. When Faizullah displays her uncomfortableness with the Bangladesh culture, she is implying that she is better off in America than in Bangladesh. I believe that through her studies of 1970's in Bangladesh, interviews with woman involved, and stories heard from her parents, Faizullah appreciates the American environment that she lives in compared to the Bangladesh customs.

Most Engaging topics thus far

The three most engaging topics thus far in this semester have been Lorde's essay, Daniel's "Mr. Greenberg" poem, and "Phyllis Wheatley on Trial". These three pieces have been most engaging not only because of the topics, but because of the discussions sparked in class. These discussions have sparked further interest in these three pieces, more than any other in the class.

In Lorde's "Poetry Is Not A Luxury", she presents to the readers how to think critically and look at a certain something from many and all aspects, in order to get a full look at that certain something.

In Kate Daniel's "Mr. Greenberg", a full class discussion was sparked on the meaning behind the poem and furthermore the meaning Daniel's stances on race.

The first critical piece we looked at, on the authenticity of Wheatley titled "Phyllis Wheatley on Trial", also sparked my interest but not only because of the class discussion, but also my interest in critic's responses. Since this, I have read many critic's responses to other novels, in particular "Moby-Dick" in my English 310. It was great, and definitely a better critique of the novel than this of Wheatley's authenticity.

My main point here is that, this class has carried over into almost every other class this semester. I am witnessing the beauty of a Liberal Arts education each semester here at Wabash, and as an english major I believe it carries over into every aspect of education. I've had discussions in other classes on nearly the same topics that broaden my spectrum and increase my knowledge on these topics, making me more understanding and more knowledgable in these topics than before. I look forward to discussions every day because I know it will only help me by either challenging or teaching me.

Response to "1971"

I'm going to immediately debunk anyone who's thinking, "He's just responding to the first poem in the book." That's purely coincidental - this poem is absolutely fantastic and it's purely coincidental that the first poem of "Seam" was both beautiful and full of themes. (lucky me)

I'd primarily like to look at sections iii and iv:

From a historical perspective, this poem addresses world events in a very interesting manner: the Bangladeshi crisis AND the Vietnam War were happening at the same time. Yet I've never even heard of the Bangladesh crisis. Go figure. The lines, "the bodies of men and women march forward in protest, rage candling their voices." speak to the intense passion felt for Vietnam and the conflict there, but I feel like Faizullah is sort of seeking an equal response for the Bangladesh conflict. She could be saying, "Hey guys, there's even more F***** up S*** going on over here!"

Additionally in part iii, there are countless references to her mother, dresses, weaving, and other traditional feminine or domestic themes. As well, she speaks of soldiers who don't even know that they're soldiers yet, merely "lean[ing] against the cool stone walls of your grandparent's house." This sort of domesticity being paired with the upcoming conflict reflects that none are safe from the reaching arms of war. This is further evidenced by the appalling statistics at the beginning of the poem.

Part iv furthers this theme of "violence on the homefront" with a rape or sexual assault scene that is sort of broken up by bits of memories and sensory experience. While this soldier is attacking her, she can only think of her mother, saris, her home, the ever-present cool green water, etc. In this violence ravaging her people, Faizullah can only seek a reprieve in her culture and her family.

Gender and the Political Scales

There is one element that I have noticed throughout the literature and media we've seen up to last week or so. That element entails the place and influence of politics as far a race, sexuality, and society are concerned. Especially with our own campus controversy on transgender applicants, as well at the national caucuses, these elements of identity have been heightened. But I would just like to gauge some discussion in this.

Of course, politics can play heavily into social norms and customs, to where some aspects of humanity are not "appropriate". We see this played out in the situation of Phyllis Wheatley, where her skin color, perhaps more than her sex, barred her from basic freedoms. Slavery was an accepted system, and there were freedoms that were honored in keeping slaves (seems a little ironic to me). But this was truth, and the system could not be touched. So far along that it was against the law to teach a slave to read and write in almost all cases.

I don't think that we see much of politics getting in the way of Zami, but there is that law banning homosexuality that she always refers to. In that book, it is all about social customs and understandings, and Audre Lorde is conscious of that. Even so, the two are inherently mixed to create and enforce that code. In this case it has a negative effect, but Zami shows that such a person can stand to her own emotions, and not let such a concrete institution.

These are the most attainable examples I can provide now. I would like to see if any of us can pull out some other instances were politics are mixed in with the elements of gender and race, and how society is a factor in it. The main point I want to demonstrate is that not all of the major elements of what our authors are thinking about entails personal understandings. Indeed, much of those may be influenced by outside forces.