The Hasidic community presented in Unorthodox is one which on the surface seems like a typical strict religious group with a traditionalist mindset, but there are more nuances and complexities than initially meets the eye. While on the surface, it seems that they live an extremely patriarchal society: one where the men are expected to be the breadwinner, with the power in the family, whereas the sole purpose of women is to reproduce and manage the family. In fact, if a woman is infertile, this is grounds for divorce – it is seen as the greatest misfortune. The women are expected to follow a rigid set of rules including when they can sleep with their husband, when they can touch their husband and are expected to not work, depending solely on a man.

Women are expected to maintain their innocence and naivety until they are married, only after which are educated on their own biology, however, the very next day they are expected to be experts. There is clearly a double standard of what is expected from men and what is expected from women. While this is typically patriarchal culture, what is interesting about this society is that the women are the ones who are reinforcing such a culture. In Unorthodox, it is Esty’s mother in law who is very much involved in her private life with Yankee, her mother in law is the one who is most insistant on them having children despite Esty clearly not being comfortable. Instead of men enforcing this disparity between men and women, it is the women themselves who perpetuate this degrading culture. To an outsider, this may seem absurd. We have been brought up with a very contradictory mindset, so it is perplexing to think that a woman would do this to another woman. We are very quick to assume that it has to be a man who is repressing other women from their freedom – simply because those are the large majority of the stories we often hear. We forget that this is all these women have known, they have been told for generations that this is how it is supposed to work. It is human tendency to believe what we have grown up being told because we don’t know anything else. I think the global issue that comes to light is the assumptions and prejudices that we have that men perpetuate patriarchal culture when in fact we often overlook human tendency.

What does your novel say about how the United States deals with Muslim immigrants and expatriates?

Mohsin Hamid’s novel, The Reluctant Fundamentalist, follows the main character, Changez’s, experiences as a Pakistani immigrant in the United States. The novel is set around the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and allows comparison of how such immigrants were treated before and after the attacks. Initially in the novel, Changez experiences more covert forms of racism, this includes preconceived notions individuals have about his background and identity. Following the 9/11 attacks, Changez is subject to a lot more hostile and aggressive racism where he is distinctly discriminated against due to his appearance and race. This implies that although the United States is advertised to expatriates and immigrants as a place to start fresh, and build a life in a truly diverse and inclusive environment, in reality, Americans have many prejudices against Muslims which cause them to treat them differently and makes it harder for them to integrate into American society.

Initially in the novel, Changez experiences the distorted public perception of Pakistani’s and although no one is overtly disrespectful or discriminatory, there are subtle indications of such prejudices. The very first instance is the first few lines of the book, where Changez tells the American “Do not be frightened by my beard: I am a lover of America.”, this implies that the American associated Changez’s appearance with that of a terrorist and is instantly guarded. This says something about human nature and how one event has caused so many individuals to make such gross generalisations as to the intentions of any individual. Such covert forms of discrimination continue, such as when Changez boards the plane “My entrance elicited looks of concern from many of my fellow passengers, I flew to new york uncomfortable in my own face”. This suggests how the uncomfortable looks on other people’s face obviously make Changez feel concious and could play a role in his changing identity in the first part of the book and how he felt the need to lose his Pakistani roots and become more American.

Initially, Changez is seemingly motivated by getting ahead in his career and dreams of achieving the “American Dream”, he is a character who will do anything to reach this even if this means losing parts of his identity. This is exemplified when in Manila he “attempted to act and speak, as much as my dignity would permit, more like an American.”, this illustrates how although America is thought to be a society where people of all races thrive, the judgemental nature of American society may actually cause such expatriates to become Americanised and lose some aspects of their own culture in order to fit into society and be treated the same.

Apart from the coloured public perception of Pakistanis, this discriminatory nature is deeply rooted in American society and is even exemplified in the differing expectations for law enforcement with people of a connection to the Muslim community. Changez is “dispatched for a secondary inspection” at the airport and hence this shows how deeply rooted this prejudice is in American society that it is even prevelant within those who are supposed to be enforcing the constitution itself and the core beliefs of the country.  

Additionally, in the aftermath of 9/11 Changez experienced many overt forms of discrimination. One of the most hostile being when he was walking to his rental car and an American man “made a series of unintelligible noises—“akhala-malakhala,” perhaps, or “khalapal-khalapala”—and pressed his face alarmingly close to mine” and after another man pulled him away he finally walked away saying “fucking Arab”, this shows how bitter Americans and as a result make uneducated conjectures such as calling Changez an Arab when he is infact Pakistani and not Arab. Furthermore, this portrays how direspectful and demeening Americans can be to people such as Changez because of the “unintelligible noises” that the man makes, and shows that quite often those who carry out these acts of discrimination are uneducated of Muslim culture and practices and punish all Muslims for the wrongful actions of a few individuals. Although Changez believes that “those rare cases of abuse that regrettably did transpire were unlikely ever to affect me because such things invariably happened, in America as in all countries, to the hapless poor, not to Princeton graduates earning eighty thousand dollars a year.”, Despite Changez in attempting to convince himself in the fact that he was different from his fellow Pakistanis undergoing such abuse simply because of his fancy education and high paying job. Following this incidence, the novel reveals that this is naive to believe and in reality despite of class, Muslim immigrants and expatriates will encounter such racism. 

In conclusion, Changez is subject to numerous acts of racism, and while before the 9/11 attacks such acts were very subtle following the 9/111 attacks these comments and actions were malicious. Despite Changez having his life going in the right direction, he still has a passive reaction to all of these instances of racism. This may suggest that despite Changez seemingly having nothing in common with these terrorists, he is still seen to be one and is completely helpless, showing that even money and riches cannot spare anyone.

Conduct a close reading of Changez’s reaction to further developments he encounters in the wake of 9/11 (pp. 94-96, 4 paragraphs, “America was gripped… to be mere coincidence”). Why does Changez react as he does? How does he view and explain his own reaction? Formulate an argument about Changez’s double consciousness based on the text.

In the book the Reluctant Fundamentalist, in the aftermath of 9/11 and the following backlash on Pakistanis and Muslims, Changez’s double consciousness becomes apparent. Throughout the book until this point, Changez has been the epitome of perfect, with stellar academics getting him into Princeton, and a job at a top firm Underwood Samson, but following 9/11 his reaction makes his internal conflict apparent. Changez reacts to the aftermath of 9/11 by denying that this is something that would affect him, almost as if he was unwilling to let the American Dream which he was so close to achieving go. Changez puts up a barrier to protect himself and his emotions, he is in denial, and is in the middle of an identity crisis, hence he takes the opinions of his father and delves himself into work because he doesn’t truly know himself.

In this time of personal crisis, Changez is now also thrown into a situation where there is a crisis developing in society as well, the amalgamation of these two crises leave Changez confused on his own identity and hence is conflicted on his own opinion. Changez admits that “my mother was frightened, my brother was angry, and my father was stoical—this would all pass, he said.”Of all the views his family had presented, I find it interesting that he chooses to take the view of his father, the one who is most indifferent to the situation at hand. Changez chooses to be in denial as this “reassures” him, and he “dressed myself in them as
though they were my own”. The choice of using the specific phrase “dressed myself in them as though they were my own”, suggests that Changez is taking another persona or an opinion which is not entirely his. Changez is still unsure about his own identity and hence since he is not entirely confident in his own opinion he finds reassurance in taking his father’s opinion. Changez believes he has made progress in his relationship with Erica, and he is doing well in work, so to his eyes, he is close to achieving the “American dream” which is why he set out to Princeton in the first place. Changez is desperately trying to find some sense of stability in his life and therefore likes the explanation his father provides him, and then retells this same explanation to Wainwright when he inquires about the situation in Pakistan.

Changez undergoes an identity crisis where at times it seems as if he is leaving his Pakistani roots and becoming more and more American, however, there are also other times where he displays his pride in being Pakistani and condemns American culture. For example, Changez’s initial reaction to 9/11 was a smile on his face as he saw America, a superpower, brought down to its knees, by Pakistan. However, in this particular excerpt, it seems as if he is trying to distance himself from his Pakistani roots. Changez describes how “Muslim men were disappearing, perhaps into shadowy detention centres for questioning or worse”, he talks about Muslim men as if he is not one of them. He instead says that he is unlikely to ever be abused as they were because “such things, invariably happened, in America as in all countries, to the hapless poor, not to Princeton graduates earning eighty thousand dollars a year.” His tone suggests that he sees himself as separate from his own men because of his education and his pay. This exemplifies Changez’s double consciousness, as at times he seems to take a lot of pride in his Pakistani culture and at other times such as this he implies that he no longer identifies with the experiences that other Muslim men go through simply because of this newfound success.

Changez reacts to these new developments by throwing himself into his work and deny the possibility that his lifestyle may change. Changez describes how “clad in my armor of denial I was able to focus—with continuing and noteworthy success—on my job.” This portrays how Changez copes with the instability and changes in his life by delving into his work further. Additionally, this implies how despite the conflict and unrest in Pakistan and the possibility of his family being in danger, he chooses to prioritise his work. Hence, portraying his changing identity and his willingness to change what used to be important to him.

In conclusion, this excerpt exemplifies Changez’s double consciousness and conflicted identity, as his first instinct is to deny the possibility of losing the “American dream” and separate himself from his Pakistani roots.

In Chapter 5 of the Reluctant Fundamentalist Changes responds to the twin tower confessing “And then I smiled”. This is an important turning point in the character development of Changez as up to this point he put America on a pedestal, speaking about the great amount of oppurtunity he now has.

Following this confession, Changez explains the reason for this reaction was “episodes—no, I was caught up in the symbolism of it all, the fact that someone had so visibly brought America to her knees.” This adds more depth to Changez’s personality and adds another dimension to him. This feels like a turning point in the book because so far Changez has been seemingly perfect, got into Princeton on scholarship, been number one in his company Samson Underwood, but at this point in the novel it becomes evident that there is a darker side to his character. Seeing that this is a turning point in the book, it is surprising that his tone still sounds so indifferent to the horrific events.

Link to article: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dhftlO6F9pjiPx51dYsqCNOE1LN2GoYt4vr-7zquD4w/edit

In this post, Bourdain challenges the cultural stereotypes regarding Mexico in American society. Bourdain addresses how despite Mexican culture being a fundamental part of American lifestyle and culture, there still seems to be a gross misrepresentation of this country. Bourdain reflects on how Mexican food is deeply embedded in American culture, Mexican people are at the very core of the American economy, and how Mexico is considered an exotic place but despite the multifaceted Mexican culture, the single story of Mexico believed by the vast public is that it is too full of corruption for there to be any hope. Bourdain effectively conveys this message to his audience through the means of techniques such as tone, ethos, and rhetorical questions.

Bourdain uses an effective and appropriate tone for his audience. Seeing that this is a post on Facebook, it seems fitting that he uses a more conversational tone – he uses a tone which makes the text read like a speech. Since his audience in this particular context is more likely looking to read something more casual, in order to catch and retain their attention, he aims to make his essay most relatable and laid back for his viewers. This is observed from his sentence structure for example “We love Mexican drugs. Maybe not you personally, but “we”, as a nation, certainly consume titanic amounts of them—and go to extraordinary lengths and expense to acquire them.” The tone is clearly aimed to be more conversational than read like formal literature. 

Additionally, Bourdain appeals to the ethos and logos of his audience by making what he says relatable. He alludes to references which all viewers can understand and hence they are more likely to see the logic in his argument. An example of this being: we demand that Mexicans cook a large percentage of the food we eat, grow the ingredients we need to make that food, clean our houses, mow our lawns, wash our dishes, and look after our children.” Bourdain challenges this Mexican stereotype by showing the lack of logic and hypocrisy in this argument. He clearly highlights what the role of Mexicans and Mexican culture is in American society, following which, he states what the perception and stereotype of Mexico is. When these two aspects are put alongside each other in the way he does, the disjunction is evident, and this contrast in turn highlights the hypocrisy and the lack of logic in this one sided story. 

40-45 mins: What was the documentary’s most powerful scene for you?

I would say the scene where all boys sit in a circle and do the activity where they write on one side of the paper what they project to the world, and on the other side, what they actually feel, was the most powerful scene. I think this was especially powerful because it didn’t refer to one specific person, but rather showed how a group of young men all felt the same way; they felt as if they had to project a persona filled with happiness and entertainment but really all they were feeling was fear and pain. I think the fact that this not only helped the audience empathetically connect with the stories of these individuals, but it was extremely powerful to see that all the boys felt the same way, it clearly highlights how widespread this problem is.

Additionally, what I found interesting when I saw the group of boys chosen, was that they were all men of colour, it would be interesting to question whether this was an intentional choice or whether there are some preconceived biases which are coming into play here. Other than this, all the boys were roughly the same age, this emphasises how widespread this problem is especially in teenagers. This point can be connected to others mentioned in the documentary, for example, how male suicide rates increase drastically from pre-teens to teenagers, and the more long term effects that societal norms and values have imposed on young men. The scene powerfully depicts the struggle that these men face.

The boys are shown to be sitting in a circle, this sets the mood for this scene, as something extremely vulnerable and important. Additionally, the camera zooms into the different boys as they write, this is an intentional choice, that further emphasizes the synonymous nature of the words they all write and can help evoke a sense of empathy from the audience.

 Reflection on how Gandhi conflicts as he struggled to build or retain his identity / identities.

In Gandhi’s memoir, Playing the English Gentlemen, he explores the conflict he faces in his own identity as an Indian, trying to submerge himself into Western culture. Gandhi delves into issues commonly faced with a conflicting identity, one where they struggle to find a compromise to two very opposing identities, in his case, specifically that of his Indian culture and beliefs and those of him trying to become a part of Western society. Is it morally correct to change your identity because you feel out of place in a new society? Gandhi explores this concept through the exploration of vegetarianism, varying clothing styles,  and the need to learn the Western musical culture.

Gandhi first explores the differences between him and his peers through his beliefs in vegetarianism. He initially states that “health was the principal considerations of these experiments”, however, states that eventually “religion became the supreme motive”. Food is a quintessential aspect of our social lives, we often meet our friends over a meal or meet new people at social events. Our social lives quite often revolve around food. Gandhi is torn between the pressure that his friends place on him and his own identity as a Hindu. Hence, Gandhi describes this very distinct image of this distance between him and his western friends as his friend tells him “If you cannot behave yourself, you had better go. Feed in some other restaurant and await me outside”. This quotation also suggests some form of disparity in social class. Gandhi’s friend implies that Gandhi is below him in sophistication because of the condescending phrase “if you cannot behave yourself”. In the global scale, perhaps this could extend to suggest some form of racism that is prevalent in the Western world towards Indians.

Secondly, Gandhi explores the different clothing styles that Indian and Western culture has to offer. Gandhi states that “the Bombay cut I was wearing was, I thought, unsuitable for English identity”. Clothing is also an intrinsic part of our identity, we all have very distinct fashion senses which are in line with our personality. Additionally, we often base our first impressions of a person based on what they are wearing. Gandhi deciding to change his clothes to better suit the English lifestyle may suggest how he feels the need to change his exterior in order to better blend into a society where he stands out too much.

Lastly, we see Gandhi trying to immerse himself in Western culture by trying to learn the Violin and dance. Gandhi goes to such an extent to alter his identity, or at least what others perceive him as. His writing style is in the form of a narrative; the reader can see the trials he undergoes and the barriers he faces to become a part of Western society. The trials which he faces accumulate and eventually lead to his epiphany on his true purpose for coming to England.

How does the persona express issues with her identity through this piece? Analyse a few key stylistic techniques she uses to make her point.

In the essay, I Want a Wife, Judy Brady explores the unrealistic expectations, numerous duties, and demands that wives are traditionally faced with. Judy Brandy considers why she would want a wife, in almost a sarcastic way. She lists the demands which these women are faced with, in order to emphasize the reality of how much is truly expected of them. This highlights how the expectation they are faced with to be perfect, to fit into this “perfect mould” which is believed to show what a perfect wife acts like. Judy Brandy portrays these women’s identity, with simply having a duty to the family, nothing more. There is no individuality involved in such matters, but rather their whole identity, and purpose of living revolves around satisfying their husband and children. She expresses the issues which are persistent in such matters through taking the male’s perspective, listing the demands which are expected from a wife, certain diction which emphasizes the loss of individuality that these women face.

In the first paragraph of the essay, it is introduced that the narrator is a woman, that she is a wife and a mother, Yet, throughout the essay, she explores what is required from her in these roles. The author subverts a way of narrating these demands, which would typically either be done from a purely male or female perspective, however, here she instead narrates it from female thinking about her demands as a wife and sarcastically explains why anyone would want a wife. The narrator portrays having a wife almost like they are a robot, someone who simply lives with the purpose of making your life easier. In all the demands which she lists in the following paragraph, none stand to benefit the wife, but rather the male, in this case, is portrayed as selfish, he simply thinks about how it benefits him, but does not cast any thought as to how it would impact his wife. For example, in paragraph two the narrator states “It may mean a small cut in my wife’s income from time to time, but I guess I can tolerate that”. Even though this should really be something that the wife needs to have an opinion on, the husband can simply disregard the wife’s opinion. To him, it is something that “he” has to tolerate.

Duffy’s imagery centres on colours and textures in this poem. What effect do these create?

In the poem, Mrs Midas, Duffy subverts the well known Greek myth of Kind Midas, she takes the well known male perspective and instead narrates the story from his wife’s perspective while adding more twists and turns.

Duffy creates beautiful, and divine imagery to describe the various objects that King Midas turns to gold She describes these objects, using colours, and textures in extremely creative ways. For example, she initially explains how he “plucked a pear from a branch…and it sat on his hand like a lightbulb”. Duffy has many ingenious ways through which she describes the shining gold sitting in his palm. Initially, Duffy describes the various objects in glamorous ways, through this repetitive imagery of shining, gleaming things, it creates almost a divine setting. The reader is able to imagine everything filled with gold, the textures and colours of the “golden chalice”, and the “burnished throne”, present Midas as someone with power. It shows the beauty and perfection which seems to be present in his life. Things which are typically gold, tend to show something grand and majestic.

However, following this, we can see how their relationship takes the turn for the worse. We see that something which once seemed so perfect, so glamorous, is actually a now broken relationship. Duffy now longer visually presents the dazzling gold, but rather focuses on Mrs Midas and her husband’s broken relationship as a result of his greed. She describes the separate beds which they now sleep on and how she puts bolts the door, terrified. Duffy describes how they “turned the spare room into the tomb of Tutankhamun”. This is significant because this golden imagery is no longer shown in a positive way, but rather the tomb of Tutankhauman is full of gold but symbolises death, specifically the depth of their relationship.

In these ways, Duffy uses this golden imagery to represent Mr and Mrs Midas’s relationship as a result of the blessing in disguise as a curse. This golden imagery describes the differnet stages in their relationship as they try to cope with this paramount change in their lives.

What does Little Red Riding Hood teach children about society, gender and sexuality?

Little Red Cap is a subversive form of the traditional children’s story: Little Red Riding Hood. The Little Red Riding hood is a well-known story that has been recited to children of all generations and is written in the third person, however, Duffy’s version takes on the perspective of Little Red Riding Hood herself. This version is far from the innocent bedtime story that children were told but with a dark twist, explores the question of sexuality, gender, society and coming of age.

At the beginning of the poem, it is clearly established that the character is at “childhoods end” and the use of setting is used to emphasize this point. For example, the poet describes how the “houses petered out into playing fields”. Houses usually connote warmth, and safety, perhaps the security which comes with childhood is coming to an end, and as the character approaches adulthood there is an endless field of possibilities. This centralizes the poem around the idea of a coming of age character, one which is exploring her role in the world, understanding societal norms, and coming to terms with her sexuality.

We see in the poem that Little Red Riding Hood is the one that pursues the Wolf; she is the one who makes the decision to go with him. In the original story, she is put in unexpectedly put in an unfortunate situation with the wolf, and all of this culminates to the huntsmen saving her. This characterizes her as a “damsel in distress”, as women commonly have been in the past, suggesting, that she needs to be saved by a man. The societal norms of gender roles is evident in this original story. However, unlike in the childhood story, she is a character with agency in Duffy’s poem. Duffy subversives Little Red Riding Hood to make her a character who dreams of adventure and explores her lustful emotions for the wolf.

Little Red Riding Hood’s sexuality is a key theme in this poem. She explores this new avenue of her life for the first time with the wolf. The passion she feels is explored in great detail. For example, her “stockings ripped to shreds, scraps of red from my blazer”.  In the first few stanzas, it is obvious that their love is passionate, it is perfect. However, in Stanza 5, Duffy describes how a white dove “flew, straight from my hands to his mouth One bite, dead”. This could perhaps be referring to her virginity, and could perhaps connote how something which she was taught to treasure so much by society was just devoured without much meaning by the wolf. This could indicate the different expectations placed on men and women. Women are taught from a young age to treasure their virginity, that it is something truly divine, but for men, that some expectation is never placed. Even in this subversive relationship, one where Little Red Riding Hood has agency, the power dynamics in the relationship are the same. The man always seems to hold some higher power than women. This clearly says something about the values of our society, and while these have been changing in recent times, this inequality still does exist.