“The Vine and the Fish” Reflection

The Vine and the Fish

The extended metaphor of “The Vine and the Fish” compares invasive species (the kudzu and the Asian carp/silverfin) to Asian Americans. In a way, the metaphor works. For one, it seems to say that, in a capitalist society such as the USA, immigrants (in the case of the article, Asian Americans) are seen as “invaders” and something to eradicate unless they contribute meaningfully to the economy. A second meaning that arises from the metaphor is that Americans see immigrants as “invaders”: something initially useful but ultimately detrimental to the American environment and lifestyle; and eventually the idea engrains itself into the minds of Asian Americans. in a way, the invasive species not only represents Asian Americans but also the internal racism that Asian immigrants learn. Hook seems to be criticising the American tendency to categorise people into strict groupings, and then exclude people based on these categorisations, when the situation is a lot more nuanced; for example, the kudzu, while an invasive species, offers many benefits like a source of nutrients or being able to be made into shampoo. In fact, she points out that language plays a large role into this categorisation and exclusion; the fact that the Asian carp is connected to Asians and the fact that Trump calls the coronavirus the “Chinese virus” makes it easier for people justify excluding immigrants.

However, from an environmentalist perspective, the metaphor becomes unstable. Because, regardless of the economic benefits that kudzu or the Asian carp offers, it is undeniable that invasive species destroy native ecosystems and environments. By adhering to the metaphor set by Hook, it would seem that the most obvious solution would be to stop immigration completely.  Hook simplifies two complex situations to create her metaphor. Likewise, the metaphor ignores the voices of Native Americans, who would be the actual native environment being “invaded” in the context of the metaphor, not the voices of white Americans.

Map and The English Patient

– I had a lot of trouble with organizing; I had a lot of ideas and concepts I could spot out and wanted to address, but I didn’t know how to connect them together or how to group them

– I ended up dropping most just to keep it coherent

– I think the first thing I should think about when outlining is my body paragraphs and how I’m categorizing them. As in, am I going “chronologically” by what’s mentioned first? Or am I jumping back and forth the narrative timeline to address general concepts? It’s probably best that it’s a mix of both; group into general concepts but still follow the timeline so I don’t confuse myself and the reader

Political Correctness and Comedy

It’s impossible for a joke to be completely inoffensive, and it’s impossible to cater a joke to match everyone’s sense of humor. I think the most important to think of 1) why does it offend particular people? 2) is offending them your goal?/do you not mind offending them? and 3) what is the aim of the joke?/what is the joke laughing at? Comedy is a lot about finding your stance and solidifying it; it’s one of the ways in which people find the group they fit in with, and in a lot of ways, about expression of identity. So, in comedy, I think it’s very important to know where you draw the line and making sure you don’t cross the line.

Cleese also mentioned how all humor is critical. Just as how jokes are meant to be critical of aspects of society, the audience should also be critical of the joke. Likewise, so should comedians. The jokes they make, after all, establishes their identity, personal or public.

Mariella mentioned about how culture and generation could have affected Cleese’s, and other people’s, take on political correctness and society’s relation to comedy. On one hand, I can understand where they are coming from; a lot of people tend to go to extreme and go from “don’t offend the vulnerable” to “don’t be critical/offensive at all”. On the other hand, I have heard a lot of comedians complain about political correctness and how they can no longer use insults towards a minority as a joke. If the times have changed, then shouldn’t comedians also change to fit the times? There are other ways to make jokes. It’s no longer revolutionary or outstanding in any way to dehumanize people of color or other minority groups.

Ms Werner also talked about how it depends on who is telling the joke. A white person can’t joke about black people; goyim can’t make fun of Jewish people but can make fun of the Irish. I think it depends on what the joke is. A white person can joke about black people, but are they using negative stereotypes to make the joke? I mentioned before that jokes are usually how people form social groups; jokes are a way to notify people of their values and perspectives on topics, as well as to welcome and encourage people of similar takes. If a person, for example, jokes about how all Mexicans are thieves, then others know where they stand on that issue; it will also affirm to others of similar perspectives that it is alright to think this way and not change. I think that a reason why people are more “sensitive” to comedy these days is because there’s a lot more power in speaking up, possibly due to how easy it is to communicate ideas via social media or how easy it is to learn about something via internet. Before, it might’ve been harder because speaking up would only reach locals and wouldn’t change anything in society overall, so it was easier to just let it go. I think people just had enough of allowing people to perpetuate stereotypes that have effectively led to deaths.

Hitler’s First Photograph by Wislawa Szymborska

Think about:

– Transformation: translating from Polish to English; how does English translation differ from Polish (rhythm, connotation of words, etc)?

– Identity: content of poem

– Usage of dramatic irony (in a sense): Szymborska didn’t have to mention at all what Hitler would do when he was older, didn’t even hint at it, but the message/impact of the poem lies in what Hitler became; the audience already knew Hitler for the Holocaust but the narrator of the poem, as well as the characters mentioned (mother, history teacher), do not

Poetry Unseen Practice: Moon by Kathleen Jamie

In the unseen practice analysis of Moon, I wanted to talk about how the author uses personification of both the moon and the room to compare the mother to the moon, revealing to the audience the persona’s relationship with the mother, as well as to show the differences between the moon and the mother, possibly to highlight the transformation of the persona.

Things to work on:

– Time management

– Organization, in both the actual writing and in planning

Fun Home Reflection

September Goals:

  • Focus on technical language
    • Analyze/mention framing and content of panels
      • Shading, contrast
      • Spacing
      • Details of pictures
    • Use key vocabulary
  • Be detailed
    • Zoom in on the ‘how’ rather than being brief
      • Be more direct in explanation/analysis
    • Use more specific terms
      • ‘postive’ is too vague; should describe in more detail
        • What specific emotions are brought up
          • Nostalgia
          • Contentment
          • Happiness
  • Write in pen, not pencil

Panel Analysis

First Panel:

Shows relationship between young Bechdel and her father; scene of the father’s “soft side” is juxtaposed with the reveal of his violent reactions; shows how, despite how cruel and scary the father appears to the child especially when angry, he had his nice moments.

Of course, it’s my opinion that it doesn’t matter that he was nice sometimes. He still terrorized and abused his kids, whether through physical assault or through emotional neglect, especially in early childhood. He wasn’t a good father. But I think that no matter what my thoughts are, I can still see that this memory is somewhat important, albeit maybe not remembered clearly, by Bechdel.

Second Panel:

I think this shows the effect her father left on Bechdel, even after his death; it kind of shows that she mimics some of her father’s habits, such as being emotionless or numb, or at least her interpretation of his habits. I think it also gets the message that Bechdel never really got over the trauma of being nonchalantly being introduced to a corpse, even years after the event and years after her father’s death. So, the audience can see some negative consequences being left in Bechdel’s life.