Imaginary Geographies of the Singapore Heartland

Part B

Literal/Superficial Understanding: Uncle showing hostility against the East of Singapore, claimed much older or not ‘fixed’ by the government, compared to the more spacious and cleaner West (Jurong) – where there is less congestion, less urbanised.

• Hostility against the people living in the east because they are ‘too proud’ and ‘rich’
• “You know when young people marry and move out they all want to choose flat in places like Bishan and Toa Payoh cos all these places sound rich, sound new.”
• Parody: Ang uses sophisticated and elevated language to mock the sociology paper/academic writing style in which Singaporeans view the pioneer ‘Uncle’ generation, alienating them, misunderstanding yet overcomplicating their identity at the same time. What is interesting is that the points she makes are quite insightful, though expressed in an exaggerated way (hyperbolised using polysyllabic/complex diction).
  Ang’s possible intentions: even though as readers we know that she is overanalysing the uncle, its in an academic-style meaning that there is a level of objectivity in her perspective – so whether it be unconscious or not, we are driven to take away insights about the uncle’s behaviour. There is conflict though: we gain the Uncle’s perspectives directly through an interview-style though superficially, yet the analysis of the interviewer is merely an interpretation and therefore may not be true/reliable. This leads one to wonder whether Ang’s representation of the Uncle throughout the book is truly reliable.
• Irony: the incongruence between the simplistic view points of Uncle and the academic analysis of the interviewee makes this pastiche seem parodic.
• Fuller characterisation of the complex Uncle
• Jurong – supports development of Singapore ‘cleaning up’ yet also hostile against western influence — don’t need to see faces: interaction, enjoys green spaces (tension on outlook of urbanisation in Singapore, pro urbanisation but also enjoys food/environment)

Part C

• Satire: Ang mocks the readers’ over-interpretation of the Uncle character because seemingly, the interviewer’s sociological analysis seems valid (when they discuss the Uncle’s hostility towards western influence, a strong interpretation from other sections of the novel).
• “Everything good there, everything not so good there” – Ang Moh values of daughter-in-law, issue: Singaporeans not being satisfied with Singapore, looking outward for development/influence of colonisation
• Deeper insight: stirs reflection on whether Uncles are deserving of such in-depth analysis? We are made aware that they are more complex people than perceived, but Ang conflicts our thinking because she reveals her perspective as being unreliable – was her representation of the uncle unreliable throughout the book? Are uncles truly representable?
• Meta-parody (pg 75) – we are being mocked for our academic analysis – as though the Uncle is a specimen to study. But Ang shows how she is guilty of this herself – an element of self-awareness through the use of parody. Perhaps suggests that her own representation of the Uncle may not be true, and that perhaps no one can truly give this demographic a voice and represent them accurately.
• Towards (end of 72/3) – becomes sincere from parodic. The isolated line sandwiched between long insightful paragraphs, ‘the grandchild we consider the stereotypical products of Singapore’s hothouse education system.’ The use of simple language here carries a more sincere and serious tone, which is perhaps revealing of Ang’s true perspective on Singapore’s education system.