We were talking about how initially, Chanu was presented with ridicule, but how throughout the book he became more and more truthful and hit things right on the mark (we wondered why). I commented that in a way, the reader is very much like Chanu, or is represented by him in the book. This applies especially in academia, where theorists are commonly accused for thinking too much and not doing anything - just like Chanu, the academia is plagued by sensitive thought but no application of it to real world. Furthermore, Chanu’s inability to act is reflected in the reader, as he/she are unable to act on the book – we are both just passive observers/readers. The final comparison (I thought of this after class) is between Chanu and Monica Ali herself – just like him, she sees and understands and questions the problem, but approaches it very passively (rather than an activist approach) –by writing a novel. This, in the end, question whether literature can ever be a form of activism (I don’t know the answer to this.)
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Sample Class Contribution
A characteristically excellent analysis from our seminar members that I asked classfellow T.H. type up to share for record's sake.