Fun Home – identity 1

What makes the artistic/literary representation of people (or places and cultures) – and their various social identities – so complex?

I think the most basic idea to summarise an answer to this question would be that everyone has a different perspective of what the “correct” representation is. Most people want to be recognised in literature. They want to see themselves accurately represented in the characters they read about. But it is incredibly difficult to represent the identity of a whole culture or group of people accurately, because identity means/is made up of different things to different people. I do not think our identities can ever be perfectly represented in literature (unless we write about ourselves) because according to sociology, identity is literally “the idiosyncratic things that make a person unique”.

Individuals can identify themselves as belonging to a group, but that does not mean each person in the group is the same in every way, because that is just not how identity is. This is where we differentiate self-identity versus general identity. Our self-identity ties to our social groups and group identity because it is what is around us that influence how we behave, what we believe, etc. and this is what constitutes what we consider as our identity. This might mean we are made up of “different” identities, and which one comes through depends on the situation? Especially in this modern day and age where we are exposed to (and have learned to become so accepting of) so many types of people, communities, ideas, identifying in the same group as someone doesn’t necessarily mean your values and beliefs are the same. In the Crazy Rich Asians example, it brought a lot of debate because it really only showcased the glamorous side of Singapore. However, maybe that was just what the director/the book was trying to portray? Looking at the fact that it DID NOT represent the ENTIRE of Singapore, and the ENTIRE Asian population, people did not want others to be misled into believing that this is how everyone in Singapore/Asia lives, considering the level of WORLDWIDE recognition it received. I am thinking it was just a shame that such a popular film does not actually portray the greater majority of the population/minority groups. Then again, this film was not intended to raise awareness on poverty/income gap in Singapore…but to just enjoy an interpretation of the lifestyles of some Crazy Rich Asians. This is why I believe it is important to consider the writer’s intention and context before arguing about representation. A piece of literature may be “inaccurate” in depicting a certain group of people, but the writer might have just been wanting to share their own views, explore their own imaginations of a story, intend to challenge generalisations, or maybe they just lack the knowledge. (Of course, this would be a whole other story if they meant to wrong or negatively affect a group of people.) It is interesting to read about interpretations, and I think that is why other people should be allowed to tell someone else’s story. (I want to say, that we assume positive intention when we read these interpretations, but that is not always the objective of the writer.) We just have to be careful about how quick we choose to accept/believe/take them literally, because literature has the power to influence us. And this is where our own identity comes to play a role in how we understand and respond to texts. Depending on our own beliefs/values/preconceptions/expectations, we also have the power to interpret the story in our own way.