Jojo's Adventures

  I really liked the beginning of Equiano’s narrative. His descriptions of everyday occurrences are rich and detailed. He creates pictures with his words. We talked about how this part is the best so far in class, but I wanted to reiterate that I felt that the descriptions of his transitions at the beginning of his servitude were boring. But then I realized that that is so unfair to say. Of course those parts were boring to read, imagine how monotonous they were for Equiano. He had to live it. It is so much less interesting than his previous life, and that shows that his previous life was probably more interesting to him as well. Thus, we need to consider all parts of the novel important, and pretend we are living them ourselves. I also felt that the fact the he was moved around so much dehumanized him even further. Although he made “friends” (if you can even call them that) along the way, a true friend would have fought to keep Equiano in their lives. Instead, he seems replaceable...

  Seeing the pictures shown at the beginning of the lecture was particularly saddening. No one looks happy. This does not surprise me, however it is still sad to see. I also wonder if the original “purpose” of the camps was ever truly the original purpose or if they always knew what it would end up to be. I was shocked to hear the part about bathing them in kerosene. That reminds of the treatment Jewish people received during the Holocaust. Everyone has such a negative few of the Holocaust, however not much is known about these horrific “boarding schools”. It is also astonishing that these schools received funding despite not being real schools. They do not educate in a scholarly sense. They simply prepare them for the work they will be forced to do in the future. The change of the structure boarding schools take on for the Native Americans is important. It is crucial that the Native American cultures are encouraged to flourish. However, we can’t forget the origin of these schools....

  I do not think it is possible to talk about Smasher without talking about Blackwood. They are inverses of each other, and as such the story would not be complete without the two sides of the spectrum. Smasher represents the side of Will that wants the aboriginals gone. He has no mercy for them as humans, and he takes pleasure in their pain. Blackwood is the opposite. He sees the aboriginals as equals, supporting them and even learning their own language. Blackwood represents the side of Will that wants to live peacefully with them. What is shown in Will’s thoughts seems to represent the mind of the average colonizer. Neither here, nor there. However, Greenville uses the two opposing characters of Blackwood and Smasher to portray the extreme ends of the ideology. We can also see how Smasher’s perspective is more or less supported by the British government. When they send the letter with directions on how to handle the aboriginals, it states that peaceful coexistence must first be ...

  It was eye opening to realize that settler colonialism/ colonialism in general is not a single act, but a structure of being. This is concerning, because structures are much harder to dismantle than it is to fix the repercussions of a single act. Knowing this logic enables us to peer into the structure of our own society today, and discover the remnants of settler colonialism. When speaking about learning about settler colonialism, a friend, who moved here from India to go to Santa Clara informed me about the lasting effects of British colonialism in India. She told me about the past, how Indians were forced to fight in World War II on the front lines, being used as animals. She told me how the idea of white supremacy was so deeply ingrained into their society, it still permeates the mind of the elders today. For example, her grandmother prefers her out of all her grandchildren because she has the lightest colored skin. It is even more disconcerting that the British stay in India...

  What is the future of the Thornhill land? That is the very question isn’t it. I have two trains of thought when pondering this question. On one hand, Thornhill and his family could make peace with the aboriginals, splitting the land in a way deemed fair. Maybe they create a cohesive environment where both peoples are supported. That would be the ideal situation. On the other hand, violence could ensue and people die. I have a feeling it is going to be a mix of both. I have an inkling that there is going to be a cohesive environment where everyone gets along, but then the former neighbors of the Thornhill’s will show up and prompt violence, causing chaos. The reasons I think this might be the case is that a) Sal acknowledges the aboriginals as people who should be killed without reason, and we know that Will respects Sal. B) The neighbors seem to get joy out of violent tales. However, the more I think about it, Will is obsessed with property and possessions. He might get obsessed ...

  Settler colonialism is when a people invades a space where humans already existed and attempts to displace them entirely, with the end goal of taking over the land. We see two phases of settler colonialism in the books There There and The Secret River. The former details life for those who were displaced long ago. There are lasting and detrimental effects of colonialism and they are clear in the novel. Some examples include identity crises, lack of government care for certain displaced races, and lack of infrastructure to support a healthy community. In The Secret River, we see settler colonialism as it is taking place. The British came to Sydney, Australia, in order to create more space. However, they disregarded the people already living there. Though we hear tales of aggressive retaliation from the aboriginals, we have yet to see any form of violence. The Australian native peoples simply seem to want to maintain possession of the land they live on. From the lecture, I learned ...

  In The Secret River, there is a lot of mention about dirt and muck and mud. This theme comes up multiple times every few pages in the first portion of section 1. From when William and Sal lay in the mud (p18), to when William uses mud to remember his mother (p19), to when Lizzie protects William from the mud (p11), mud is mentioned quite frequently. It is even mentioned in the prologue to the work, when the narrator talks about how he is standing on dirt. Though possibly just a symbol to represent how dirty the town is, I think that mud could possibly represent a symbol of rebirth. Though I do not know where the book will go, I have a feeling that it will fade as the story goes on, insinuating that improvements to life have been made. Again, this is totally a guess as I have not read enough of the book to make a concrete suggestion as to the meaning of mud. Another thought I had was that mud is representative of the working class. On page 11, the sister, Mary, says, “Your name i...

Javi: I really liked the robustness of Javi’s final project. I felt like I got a synthesis of the works without actually reading them. I enjoyed the overarching theme of critique, as we see this in almost every work we look at. From Javi’s project I learned a few important things. Firstly, I learned about an important female author, Mirabai. She is recognized as a feminist, disregarding the social norms around her. Another author, Equiano, pioneered the slave narrative form that was used by many after him. Kanafani critiques the authority around them, which is important to prompt change. My favorite work Javi looked at was the work by Luisa Valenzuela. I love the idea of metaphors being used to articulate a thought.  Abby: Abby’s topic brought up ideas that I had never considered before. I have never really considered the difference between how females vs males think about death. The Tale of Genji seems like a fascinating read (I do not think I would like Genji very much). La Celes...