The Figure 8 of Cultural Relativism

From the beginning of man, there has been war. According to the World English Dictionary, "war" is defined as "open armed conflict between two or more parties." The one word that jumps out at me in that definition is "conflict." By deductively reasoning that if man has war then man must have conflict, I present the question, "Why is there conflict between man?" Now, that may be quite a broad question to have a single answer and I understand that. Yet, I will attempt to answer it in one way that, in essence, may be found wrong in the eyes of another - and so the "figure 8" begins.

In response to the question presented, I will answer by saying, "Man engages in conflict due to the narrow view and stubbornness of those who cannot and will not understand the cultural differences between their culture and another." Many people in the world exhibit such characteristics as intolerance and stubbornness. These are the people who would obviously rebuke the theory of Cultural Relativism due to its call for liberal awareness and tolerance toward the practices of other cultures. Cultural Relativism states that there is no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another because there is no "universal truth" in ethics. However, in reading "The Challenge of Cultural Relativism" by James Rachels I have come to believe that while Cultural Relativism creates a an argument, it creates an argument for one point of view. By truly following Cultural Relativism, one would realize that Cultural Relativism may not be the only answer, if it is an answer at all. Essentially, Cultural Relativism creates a perpetually contradictory stream of thought, or what I call the "figure 8 effect."

I find Cultural Relativism appealing because of its contradictory nature. Instead of creating a concrete theory, Cultural Relativism allows me to form my own opinion, while following its fundamental purpose - looking at the world through respectful and tolerant eyes.

Cultural conflict finds its way into many different literary pieces. In Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart, there is an obvious conflict between the native culture of Okonkwo's people (in Africa) and the culture of the white Christian missionaries who integrate themselves into Okonkwo's society. Okonkwo's unwillingness to adapt or even understand the Christians and the Christians' unwillingness to accept and respect the native culture and religion lead to a deadly conflict that ultimately causes the death of Okonkwo. Had these two factions followed Cultural Relativism, even slightly, conflict could possibly be avoided. Yet, the many narrow-minded people in this culturally diverse world will continue to exist, meaning cultural conflict is inevitable; that is why there is conflict between man. If you don't agree with my response, I would like to let you know that I respect your opinion and believe that there is no one answer.

MEDIA CONNECTIONS: Both the idea of the "figure 8" and the idea of cultural conflict are prevalent in music today. Outasight's song "Figure 8" serves as a self-explanatory example for the former. The Black Eyed Peas' song "Where Is the Love?" illustrates cultural conflicts and a plea for their ending. Yet, these ideas, especially cultural conflict, are common concepts used not only in the music of today, but also music throughout history.

The Damsel's Need for a Pot of Hot Grits

Last month, I discussed "battle axe women" and their position in literature and society. Continuing with this theme, this month I will discuss the so-called "victim" or "damsel in distress" type of woman that is a popular characterization in some pieces of literature. This past month, we read Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë. The plot of Wuthering Heights surrounds the doomed love of Catherine and Heathcliff. Internal conflict arises in Heathcliff due to his unrequited love for Catherine, who, due to societal circumstances, chooses to not allow herself to follow her love for Heathcliff. The consequences of this choice unfold throughout the remainder of the novel, as Heathcliff destroys others and Catherine destroys herself.

Heathcliff's response to his doomed love is to act out in revenge. Offended by Catherine's choice to pursue and marry Edgar, Heathcliff plots to court Isabella, knowing Edgar vehemently disapproves. Through his relationship with Isabella, Heathcliff is able to hurt both Catherine and Edgar. Due to Heathcliff's choice to target Edgar and the resulting tension and conflict, Catherine falls ill. In my opinion, Catherine was playing "victim" in this situation. Instead of accepting her choice to marry Edgar (despite her love for Heathcliff), she wallows in self-pity. At the start of the novel, I had faith in Catherine since she appeared to be a passionate and strong-willed individual. Yet, her decline shows that she is, in fact, not a resolute individual, but a frail one.

Just as "battle-axe women" appear in today's society, so do "damsels in distress." Once again I find myself referencing Tyler Perry's Madea movies. Not only does Madea represent "battle-axe women," but she also teaches other women to follow her example. In Madea Goes to Jail, Madea finds herself preaching forgiveness. She states, "Everybody got a life. What you do with that life is up to you. Stop being the victim." Once again, in Madea's Family Reunion, Madea teaches a woman in an abusive relationship to not be a "victim," but to fight back (by throwing hot grits in the face of her physically abusive fiancé and fighting him off with a hot skillet).

Much to my disappointment, Catherine played "victim" in Wuthering Heights and as a result, destroyed herself. If only Catherine had known Madea, she would have had the courage to end the conflict between Edgar and Heathcliff that ultimately killed her. Yet, I believe it was Catherine's choice to stop fighting and because of that, the novel was not able to elicit any pity for Catherine from me. Maybe, Catherine did not have to be a "battle-axe woman, " but I wish she at least had the strength to better herself.

Song of the Month: "I Will Survive" by Gloria Gaynor

The Portrayal of the "Battle Axe Woman"

We did discuss Question 9 from the Beowulf Socratic Seminar points of discussion in class, but I would like to take this opportunity to discuss it further. Question 9 asks, "Discuss the position, role, and purpose of women. How do these viewpoints contribute to those our society has had or has regarding women's roles today?" In the "warrior" culture that Beowulf illustrates, women are portrayed in a juxtaposition of following roles: decorative accessory and promoter of peace and goodwill. While glory is given exclusively to the men of the society, women are meant to be nothing more than good hostesses, yet they are still believed to be symbols of peace. However, this portrayal of women in Beowulf only includes those who live in the "warrior" culture. Many analysts seems to forget one rather important female figure in Beowulf – the mother of Grendel.

Grendel's mother only appears for a brief time during the epic poem. Yet, her portrayal in this short period is enough to thoroughly convince anyone that she does not fit under the category of "promoter of peace and goodwill." So, how can we characterize Grendel's mother, one who differs so greatly from the other women in the epic? Simple. Grendel's mother is what we call a "battle axe woman." An alternate definition of the term "battle axe" is "a domineering, aggressive person...especially a woman." When Grendel's mother does get recognition from analysts, she is almost always shown as an antagonist of the poem. In the context with which the epic was written, I can agree with this. However, I believe by analyzing Beowulf in a new way we can unearth a sense of sympathy for this mother, who, in my opinion, does not differ from other mothers as greatly as one may think.

First, we need to ask ourselves, "Why did Grendel's mother fight Beowulf?" Although Beowulf  was written to glorify Beowulf and vilify Grendel's mother, we have the ability to question the intentions of Grendel's mother. Were her intentions evil or were they out of love for the one she lost – her son? I believe her intentions were reflective of the latter. She was merely following maternal instincts to avenge the death of her son. Unlike the pitiful women of the "warrior" society, Grendel's mother acted with aggression and hatred for the slayer of Grendel. The fact that she engaged Beowulf in fierce battle shows that she is a "battle axe woman." Therefore, it is incorrect to generalize all women in Beowulf as "promoters of peace and goodwill" when obviously there is at least one woman who acts as a forerunner for many women of today's society.

Many depictions of "battle axe women" appear in current day media. A famous example of a "battle axe woman" appears in the television show Everybody Loves Raymond in the character of Marie Barone. This controlling and overprotective mother acts as the matriarch of the Barone family.  Marie's domineering nature is a distinctive characteristic that defines her as a "battle axe woman." Yet, she is still a mother, acting only with the best intentions for her family. Another example of a "battle axe woman" is Tyler Perry's character, Madea, or Mabel Simmons. This native Louisianan is the epitome of the "mammy archetype, " a strong-willed southern woman who agressively defends her position as the head of her family. In many instances she is known to exert force when she feels disrespected. For example, in Tyler Perry's Madea's Big Happy Family, Madea crashes into a fast-food restaurant that lacks good customer service and hurdles the counter in order to show the cashier she is not a woman who is to be "messed with." See the following link for visual support: http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lm1nkpQh931qferjz.gif

Depending on how we analyze literature, we can formulate multiple different defendable interpretations. For me, Grendel's mother represents an early form of a characterization of women seen in today's society. "Battle axe women" may appear intimidating, but in many cases their intentions are honorable. Where would our world be without mothers like Grendel's?

Quote of the day: "Be the kind of woman that when your feet hit the floor each morning the Devil says, 'Oh crap. She's up.'" - Unknown

"Why Do We Even Have That Lever?"

This month in AP English we have sampled many different areas of English. From discussing literature to understanding the simple foundation of literary terminology, we have had a taste of everything. Upon receiving the notes for the second group of literary terms, I happened to take interest in a particular term: digression.

The concept of digression fascinated me in many ways. The term describes material that is unrelated to the subject of a work, so why does it even exist? Perusing the depths of my memory, I looked for examples of digression in the works of literature I have read. In many pieces, such as Hemingway's A Farewell to Arms and Rand's The Fountainhead, I found the unnecessary addition of information, usually involving the description of something. In The Fountainhead, Rand had a propensity to describe every detail of every building, object, etc. Although in some cases one could argue the importance of a particular description, I believe Rand's 700 page masterpiece could have easily been trimmed to a still very accomplished 500 paged feat. Digressions such as the ones in The Fountainhead seemed utterly superfluous, yet I decided to keep an open mind and searched for useful digressions outside of literature.

Always looking for useful literary connections to defend my love for Disney's The Emperor's New Groove, I searched for useful digressions in the movie. To my great excitement, I found just what I was looking for. In a scene where the movie's villainess, Yzma, and her dim-witted henchman, Kronk, travel to her "secret lab," the two encounter a wall with two levers on it. One lever would lead them to the lab, while the other would activate a trapdoor causing its victim to fall into crocodile-infested water. Naturally, Kronk pulls the wrong lever, causing Yzma to fall into the dangerous water. Why did the writers of the movie choose to include this digression when correct lever would continue the plot? I came to the realization that this rather humorous digression was used for comic relief. In the words of Yzma, my discovery was "brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, I tell you! Genius, I say!"

Encouraged by my discovery of a use for a digression, I have reformulated my opinion of the term. I still retain my former opinion that in many cases digressions are unnecessary to the entirety of a work. However, I believe in certain instances, digressions can be used for entertaining an audience, especially through comedic use. There is a fine line between useful and useless digressions. So, I challenge any current "digression happy" author who happens to read this blog to ask yourself, "Why do we even have that lever?"