If Only...

I absolutely loved the article “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism.” I enjoy learning about other cultures and I find it frustrating when people condemn them simply because they are different from our own and what we have always known. It is almost as if we as a culture consider our society as superior to all other cultures. Imagine how much more peaceful our world could be, though, if we all respected other cultures and societies and appreciated them for the diversity they provide.

            In Things Fall Apart, a Christian ministry leader, James Smith, does exactly what irritates me the most in this type of situation. When observing Okonkwo’s tribe, he looks down on it, believing that their customs and way of life are primitive and inferior to his own. He even goes as far as to force his religion onto the people, replacing their own religious traditions with a strict demand to follow Christianity. Why could he not allow them to continue their own cultural customs as they had been long before he even came to their tribe? It is not as if their culture had any effect on him. Both James Smith and the Igbo people could have lived peacefully if he had just respected and appreciated their culture and the differences it had compared to his own.

            I’ve noticed similar behavior recently with the controversy over the new TLC reality show, “All-American Muslim.” This show is just trying to show the American public what it is like being a Muslim and being part of the Muslim culture by following and interviewing several Muslims throughout their everyday lives. And actually, if people would watch the show, they would find that the Muslim culture is not very different from the culture most of us know. Besides their religion, they live lives just like most Americans; they have jobs as doctors, teachers, and sports coaches, they get married, they have children, they watch television. However, because of assumptions and stereotypes many people associate with the Muslim culture, many have already criticized the show and TLC for disrespecting victims of the tragic events of September 11^th. The home improvement store Lowe’s has even gone as far as to have their commercials removed from the time slot during which “All-American Muslim” is being aired. But this is exactly the problem. If people would stop the criticism for just a moment and watch the show, they would realize that these Muslims do not at all share the views of those who attacked our country. They actually feel the same way the rest of America feels about the attacks. It just angers me that as a country in general, we are still not able to respect other cultures and give them a chance before we judge them based on misconceptions.

            In my dream world, everyone has respect for each other despite differences in culture, religion, or beliefs. However, it seems that this will have to remain only a dream for now.

If That's Romance, Count Me Out

          Wuthering Heights is considered by many to be one of the greatest romances in literature. Although I can definitely understand why readers see some romance within the novel, I myself do not believe that it is a great romance. In my opinion, romance should consist of more love and romance than drama and sorrow. And I think I speak for many when I say that within Wuthering Heights, there seems to be more drama and sorrow than anything else. However, this novel is not alone when it comes to using drama excessively within romance. Too often are romance and love depicted as needing drama and conflict to exist, whether it is in novels, movies, theater, or television. Romance should inevitably lead to happiness, not fighting and depression…right?

            In Wuthering Heights, none of the characters ever really reached true romance, in my opinion. I would consider true romance to be a happy, loving relationship between two people that is not constantly surrounded by or involved in drama. True romance is instead filled with love, happiness, and respect for each other. I don’t believe this label would apply to any of the couples in the novel. For example, Edgar’s love for Catherine was never completely reciprocated, in that she always had a love for Heathcliff, even when she was married to Edgar. On the other hand, Heathcliff’s love for Catherine was also never truly reciprocated because they were never actually able to be together and share their love for one another, except maybe in their afterlife, which is debatable. So, with all the drama within this love triangle, I do not see how Wuthering Heights could be considered a great romance, when really, none of these characters had what I would consider a true romance.

            I don’t live in a fantasy world where I believe that couples who have a true romance never argue or have a disagreement. Couples will argue, it’s unavoidable and in my point of view, sometimes necessary. But to constantly be fighting and upset with each other, that is not romance. That is just a couple’s own personal soup opera, and it’s not healthy. However, within every type of entertainment and media, if a romantic relationship is being displayed, there is almost always a serious conflict that is involved in the couple’s relationship. For once, I would like to go to a movie, or read a book, or watch a play, and have a couple that has not had any issues. But no, there’s always some sort of drama. It could be that the boy doesn’t want to be seen with the girl he likes because she’s different from his social group (Grease) or the girl’s father would not approve of her boyfriend, so she keeps him a secret (Dirty Dancing) or (and this one always makes me so angry) the girl doesn’t really believe in love (500 Days of Summer.) There is always drama or conflict in the relationship. Even if the couple is in a happy, loving relationship at the end, there is always something that was keeping them from being that way from the beginning. And frankly, I just think it is unrealistic. I realize that a plot needs a conflict, but does it always have to be so dramatic? And can’t it involve something else other than their relationship? I understand that there will be occasional problems within relationships, but if you go through ridiculous, exaggerated, and unnecessary drama during a relationship, it just seems not worth it to me. Can’t couples just be happy and together without having to undergo such a traumatic experience to get to that happiness? I have seen plenty of couples with great relationships that don’t recreate their own episode of Days of Our Lives every day. It is possible, and from my experiences and observations, more common.

            So, no, I do not consider Wuthering Heights to be a great romance. I also do not consider a majority of the “relationships” that media and entertainment create to be great romances either. Love does not equal drama, and drama does not equal love. Unfortunately, it is commonly portrayed that love is fueled by drama and requires it for existence. But if that’s romance, then count me out.

Trusting Fate a Little Too Much

After reading Oedipus the King in English, which I consider to be one of my favorite pieces of literature we’ve discussed so far, I began to think a lot about the concept of “fate” versus “the butterfly effect.” We were surveyed in class on how much we believe in either fate or the butterfly effect, and I was surprised at how many people seemed to favor the idea of the butterfly effect. I was the strongest believer in fate, which caused me to wonder why this was. Not that I would ever change my opinion because a large majority was favoring the opposite view, but I began to really criticize the idea of fate during my thinking.

It seems like such a simple concept, “What is meant to be, will be,” and “What is supposed to happen, will happen.” Maybe that’s why people trust the concept of fate so much, because it’s simple and it makes perfect sense. However, it seems to me that people put almost a little too much trust in the concept of fate. To be so sure that everything will work out how it is supposed to is, yes, a nice thought, but is it realistic? If I wasn’t typing this blog right now, would it be realistic to assume that if I did not do it “fate would step in and what is meant to happen will happen and I will still pass the assignment?” Obviously this is an exaggerated example, but people do seem to put a lot of trust in fate. For example, how many romance movies have you seen where the girl stumbles upon a man at an unexpected moment and, boom: she’s sure he’s “the one” because why else would she have come across him under such odd circumstances unless they were meant to be together? Oh, you poor naïve girl, just because you saw a man on a subway two days after you saw him buying a hotdog on the street corner doesn’t mean you’re supposed to marry him. I fear the media’s promotion of the classic “it’s fate” scene has also begun to effect actual women of society. Watch an episode of “Say Yes to the Dress” and you’ll probably hear the word “fate” at least once when the bride is talking about her fiancé and how they knew they should be together forever. Trust in fate is everywhere, and as a fellow believer in fate, even I’m worried about some people. I agree that we each have a general path that we are destined to follow, but I’m not about to allow major decisions to be barely thought over because I have my full trust in fate, it’s just not practical. Some of the actions and decisions are still up to you, whether you believe in fate or not.

Unfortunately, what happened in Oedipus the King is that the main characters tried to defy fate by trying to work their way around their specific circumstances, which just led them right back to their original stated fate. These characters did not have their full trust in fate, and what they were destined to do actually happened, ironically. The difference, however, is that we don’t have an oracle to ask what our fate will be. Therefore, no one knows what they’re destined to do, and it is up to each of us to make our own decisions in order to reach our own fate. Was this fate pre-determined? No one knows for sure, but we all have our beliefs. I do still believe that everything will turn out the way it is meant to, but I roll my eyes at those that lead their lives with a full trust in fate, making no effort to actually think about important decisions, such as, “Should I marry this guy just because “fate” brought us together on this subway after I saw him two days ago buying a hotdog on the street corner?” Spoiler alert: the answer is no.

Misinterpretations of Literature

     Authors write literature with an intended message or idea that they want to convey to their audience. However, somewhere in the mix of reading and reflecting on what has been read, some audience members become confused and completely misunderstand what they author was actually trying to express through their writing. I find this issue to be both devastating and frustrating, as the reader does not get the benefit of comprehending what could be a fascinating message, and others are challenged to try to explain to them the actual message.
     The Fountainhead is obviously a novel with an intended message. Throughout the novel, Ayn Rand promotes and demonstrates her theory of objectivism through various plots. To further convey her theory to her audience, she uses characters that embody the quintessential form of objectivism and others that are the complete opposite. This is where the misinterpretation can come into play. Instead of understanding that Howard Roark is who Ayn Rand would deem the "perfect man" in terms of objectivism, some readers interpret Ellsworth Toohey to be the "perfect man." Clearly this is not what Rand intended her readers to believe.
     I stumbled upon this example of misinterpreting The Fountainhead unexpectedly while watching one of my favorite movies, Dirty Dancing. When the main character, Baby, confronts another character, Robbie, about a situation he has gotten a girl into, he completely disregards the situation, explaining that he will have nothing to do with it. To verify his reaction, he tells Baby to read The Fountainhead after saying, "Some people matter, and some people don't." Obviously, he got the exact opposite message from the novel than the one Ayn Rand actually wanted her readers to understand.
     This then causes even further problems. Robbie explains his interpretation of the novel before telling Baby to read the book. So then, Baby reads the book, and based on what she heard of Robbie's interpretation, she could possibly feel the same way about the novel, and tell someone else about it. Soon, people everywhere are misinterpreting this work of literature and are not getting the intended message from it. Although the characters in Dirty Dancing are not real people, I'm sure there are people out there who have had this interpretation of The Fountainhead and this scenario could happen.
     Overall, it upsets me that some people will walk away from a great novel, such as The Fountainhead, with the wrong message while a great message lies undiscovered within the novel. Along with upsetting, this can also be frustrating for others when trying to discuss the novel with people who have totally different messages that they drew from the literature. Although there really is no solution for this issue, it would be nice if people could take the time to really reflect on what they read with a thoughtful, open mind. Maybe this would at least improve the problem.