Category: Uncategorized

A story that must be told in a way that isn’t actually telling at all; that is the Zong massacre. September 6th of 1781 Captain Luke Collingwood set sail from the coast of Africa in his ship, The Zong, with 470 slaves as cargo. In four months time, Captain Luke Collingwood arrived at destination with only 320 slaves aboard. So what happen to the 150 souls that were unfortunate enough to vanish over the course of the voyage? That is a tale M. NourbeSe Philip tells without telling.

When a six to nine month voyage turns into a four month disaster, Zong’s cargo started to wilt and die. With the understanding–or rather lack of understanding–of his insurance policy, Collingwood set out to terminate his cargo rather than let them die a natural death. One hundred and fifty slaves were thrown overboard to fall victim of the weights of the sea,

the some of negroes

over

board

the rest in lives

drowned (6)

Zong! #3 alludes to the throwing of slaves overboard. Slaves were referred to as “negroes” back in the era of slavery. They were thrown overboard The Zong and left to drown. In Zong! #5 readers discover a contributing factor as to why slaves were discarded,

did not exist

sustenance

water &

want

dead

the more of

of negroes (14-12)

With a lack of resources that allow for the survival of Collingwood’s cargo, many were thrown overboard. “Sustenance”–defined as the nourishment a body needs to hold the strength to live–“did not exist.” With the dwindling recourses, more and more slaves were disposed of.

With just the first eleven Zong!, and a bit of background context found in the back of the book, readers begin to develop an understanding as to what happened during the Zong massacre. With just to poems readers are allotted the knowledge of one contributing factor to the wasting of the 150 slaves: lack of supplies. however, upon reading page 189 readers find out that the lack of food and water wasn’t the sole reason for the murders, “Captain Luke Collingwood is of the belief that if the African Slaves on board die a natural death, the owner of the ship will have to bear the cost, but if they were ‘thrown alive into the sea, it would be the loss of the underwriters.’ In other words, the massacre of the African slaves would prove to be more financially advantageous to the owner of the ship and its cargo…” (189). Collingwood believed that if he allowed the slaves to die of natural causes such as thirst and starvation, he wouldn’t get compensated by his insurance company. Collingwood believed that if the slaves died purposely–if he threw them overboard to drown–the insurance company would then see fit to reimburse him.

As previously stated, Zong! is a telling of the Zong massacre without actually telling. M. NourbeSe Philip writes,”‘A novel requires too much telling,’ I write, ‘and this story must be told by not telling–there is a mystery here–the mystery of evil'” (190). With no first hand account of any slave who witnessed the Zong Massacre, there is an unknowing that revolves around it. The only account of what happened is the Gregson v. Gilbert case, also known as the Zong case. With only the legal actions to obtain the insurance monies as proof of the massacre, the true horrors in which were Zong may never truly be uncovered. M. NourbeSe Philip tells the massacre without actually telling as it isn’t her story to tell. Justice for those 150 souls that were lost in 1781 needs to be demanded. But how can justice be demanded when the only viable proof is a legal case that dehumanizes the slaves in order to collect insurance money?

Questions to think about:

If your opinion differs from my post, why do you think M. NourbeSe Philip wants to tell the story of the Zong Massacre without actually telling it?

Do you agree with M. NourbeSe Philip when she says “‘A novel requires too much telling,’ I write, ‘and this story must be told by not telling” (190)? Explain your answer.

Humans are molded by their environment.  From a young age humans are able to interpret different situations and decide the best way to handle them, based off of human nature as well as instinct.  The power of self identification is that of major significance in discovering who one is as an individual.  Over time people go through many phases, obstacles, and challenges which help mold them into the people that they wish to be or to become.   A force, completely created by the mind as a response to change itself and the threat of change, tends to shape minorities as well as society as a whole in America.  That force being racism.  Self-identification is a difficult concept to grasp when people are telling you that your completely normal and civil way of life is incorrect and that you should be murdered for it.  It’s very difficult to discover who you are as a person when you have no idea how the other person is going to interpret you at first glance.  However it is identifying who you are as an individual which is most important when resisting all of this hate. Rankine identifies , “You are you even before you grow into understanding you are not anyone, worthless, not worth you” (311).  Although racists may try to break someone down and make them believe that they are useless, they must remember their roots and who they are as a PERSON.

Racism is a concept which is primarily learned from generation to generation both intentionally and unintentionally.  The true strength of racism is so strong that it tends to linger on within those who are impacted negatively by it.  According to Rankine, this lingering often can lead to many of the feelings of frustration and feelings described before as being worthless. The frustration of racism doesn’t only come with the nasty treatment being perpetuated, but also the fact that often it is impossible to change a racists views of someone, “All our fevered history won’t instill insight, won’t turn a body conscious, won’t make that look in the eyes say yes, though there is nothing to solve even as each moment is an answer” (322).

Throughout Citizen, Rankine often refers to racism effecting people as “injuries”.  She does this in part to show the significance it has in damaging the mental state of those affected, but it also draws some insight in how injuries are usually unwanted and linger as well.  Just like racism, injuries are a form of adversity which one can learn from and it could help their character.  These “injuries” are so harmful that they often can leave one questioning their own being, “the worst injury is feeling
you don’t belong so much-to you” (Rankine 334).  Rankine also highlights the constant fear of the justice system that many people of color live in and then follows it up with the far too common response that is given when a tragedy happens to someone of color, “Yes, and this is how you are a
citizen: Come on. Let it go.Move on.” (342).  Perhaps this instance is one of the major factors into the problem with self identification.  Being told that you need to move on from your justified feelings of angst, hate, and fear.  Being told that the way that you are feeling is incorrect.  Often when a racist microaggression happens, it is either left unidentified by those unaffected or it numbed by some sort of coping mechanism such as “close-the-gap laughter”.  Instead of finding a solution to the problem, society as a whole tends to ignore it and pretend as if it doesn’t exist.  In a world filled with people telling you who you are having never met you, it is almost impossible to find out who you are yourself.  Who you would be without the injuries.

1:  Can you think of any examples from either Citizen or personal experience where a racist event/microaggression was silenced by a coping mechanism such as an awkward laugh or ignorance? What was the overall feeling of the situation afterwards between both parties?

2:  Do you believe that self-identification is equally as harmful as it is beneficial to ones mental state? Why or why not?

P.S. my page numbers refer to the PDF copy I used. (http://1.droppdf.com/files/zBFF0/citizen-an-american-lyric-claudia-rankine.pdf)

So, who are you? This is the big question that Rankine poses to the readers in chapter 7. “You are you even before you grow into understanding you are not anyone, worthless, not worth you.” (Rankine 139). Rankine is trying to portray to the reader how it feels to be black in a world where people are looked down upon because of the color of their skin. She says that she is an “alien to this place.” (Rankine 140) Rankine is trying to make the reader feel as unimportant and small as a colored person does on a daily basis. She uses the word “injured” to describe the negative effects of the color of her skin. “Nobody notices, only you’ve known, you’re not sick, not crazy, not angry, not sad- It’s just this, you’re injured.” (Rankine 145). This excerpt really stood out to me because she saying that her skin color is an injury, but how will it be healed? She can not change who she is and she must live every day with the color of her skin holding her back from opportunities in her life.

Rankine also mentions a date: July 13th, 2013. This was the day that Trayvon Martin’s verdict was given to the judge. The judge ruled the murder of sixteen-year-old Trayvon Martin was an accident. The shooter, police officer, George Zimmerman was found not guilty. This verdict hurt a lot of people and made the black community feel like they were taking a step back instead of forward in the fight for equality. “Trayvon Martin’s name sounds from the car radio a dozen times each half hour. You pull your love back into the seat because though no one seems to be chasing you, the justice system has other plans” (Rankine 151). Rankine was saying in this quote that the verdict of Trayvon Martin’s case was a message to the entire black community. The narrator in the quote says that even though they were not physically being chased, the United States justice system was after them.

In the last few pages of the book, Rankine brings the story back to first-person point of view. “Yesterday, I begin, I was waiting in the car for time to pass. A woman pulled in and started to park her car facing mine. Our eyes met and what passes passed as quickly as the look away. She backed up and parked on the other side of the lot. I could have followed her to worry my question but I had to go, I was expected on court, I grabbed my racket” (Rankine 159). When the narrator says she has to go to the court, we can infer she is talking about Serena Williams. Serena Williams faced many microaggressions on and off the court as Rankin mentioned earlier in the book. Rankine ends the book with an ambiguous quote that leaves the reader wondering. “It wasn’t a match, I say. It was a lesson” (Rankine 159) Rankine leaves the reader with this lesson and it is up to the reader to decide what they are going to do with this lesson.

Questions:

1. Now that we have all finished reading Citizen, think about the title. Why do you think Rankine chose this specific title? What does it mean? Find quotes or evidence in the text that can explain her reasoning or choice behind it.

 

2. Rankine left us with a lesson and leaves it up to the reader to interpret that lesson. What do you think was the overall lesson that Rankine wanted to portray to her readers?  What specific points in the text stand out to you as part of her lesson?

Section three of Claudia Rankine’s Citizen is centered around the narrator’s response to microaggressions and racism, much like section one, but in this section, rather than laying down and taking it, the narrator chooses to mildly oppose it.  “Mildly” is the key word here, since the narrator is taking a stand against the words and actions of her aggressors, and yet still isn’t truly lashing out, isn’t truly laying her feelings bare in the face of her aggressors.  Through the use of questions, the narrator draws attention to the microaggressions that plague her, perhaps drawing pause from those who, either intentionally or not, wronged her, and yet, in the end, the narrator finds herself questioning her own motives and her own life once more, implying that simply posing a question is not enough to make a social construct crumble.  

One of the first key examples of this is in the anecdote where someone at work calls “you” by the wrong name, in which Rankine writes, “Yes, and in your mail the apology note appears to referring to ‘our mistake.’ Apparently your own invisibility is the real problem causing her confusion. This is how the apparatus she propels you into begins to multiply in meaning./ What did you say?” (43). Even though the coworker apologized for the senseless mix up, the “apology” didn’t actually get to the brunt of the matter, and instead seemed to apologize for the fact that “you” weren’t more recognizable to her, that “you” were too “invisible,”  that “you” didn’t make an impression strong enough to be differentiated from an entirely different human being. It is implied that when the initial mistake was made, the narrator raised enough fuss that the woman felt the need to apologize for what she did, and yet, the actually apology showed that the coworker didn’t learn anything from her microaggression. And then, instead of pursuing her justice, instead of confronting the coworker on her empty apology, the narrator is left questioning herself, trying to figure out what it was that she did that made herself so invisible. Although not allowing the initial microaggression go unnoticed was certainly a step in the right direction, especially in comparison to the first section, the narrator’s failure to continue this front, to pursue the apology she rightly deserves, shows how standing up for yourself once in awhile will not change the world.  Instead, it will result in a white woman writing you an unfeeling “apology” letter that places blame for her prejudice on your shoulders, as if the coworker was saying, “Is this enough to get you to shut up?” instead of “Is this enough to let you know I’m truly sorry?”

The final anecdote from this section is one that both seeks and denies passivity.  The narrator’s friend (who, although not defined in the actual text, is most likely white) says that she simply “…refuses to carry what doesn’t belong to her,” (55).  This represents a notion that carries the same feeling as nihilism; that if it doesn’t pertain to you as a specific, agency-driven individual, then you should simply forget it, ignore it, move on, as it doesn’t really matter.  Although this is a point of view likely achieved by only those who needn’t worry about the constraints of racism, the narrator still seems as if she wants to achieve this outlook on life, as if she’s decided by the end of the section that it’s better to ignore microaggressions rather than seek to rectify them.  With almost a wistful tone, Rankine writes, “You take in things you don’t want all the time. The second you hear or see some ordinary moment, all its intended targets, all the meaning behind the retreating seconds, as far as you are able to see, come into focus. Hold up, did you just hear, did you just say, did you just see, did you just do that?” (55).  The “you” that begins this section bears an almost accusatory bite, as if the narrator accuses them self of going too far, of exaggerating too much, of reading between the lines to the extent where pretty much anything can be perceived. And yet, all the instances the narrator has pointed out earlier have been valid, obvious examples of microaggressions. It’s as if the narrator has grown tired of calling others out, receiving a small apology, but then being ignored or looked over once more, so instead of continuing her small rebellions, she turns her aggression further inward. Her barrage of questions asking herself, “did you just hear, did you just say, did you just see, did you just do that?” (55) shows how the narrator has turned her anger towards herself; asking herself to change instead of the world.  

 

Questions:

1. What are some ways you take the blame in your own life?  What are some instances where you’ve transferred someone else’s mistake onto yourself?

 

2. Recently, there have been several prevalent examples of microaggressions happening towards black women in America.  Since we’ve already talked about Serena Williams in class, what are some other ones we haven’t mentioned yet? How did those examples play into stereotypes at large?

The prose poems in the first 40 pages of Citizen: An American Lyric by Claudia Rankine highlight and define the term microaggression. Microaggression is, “a statement, action, or incident regarded as an instance of indirect, subtle, or unintentional discrimination against members of a marginalized group such as a racial or ethnic minority” (Oxford Dictionary). I was really drawn to the pages where Rankine used Serena Williams as an example to spotlight these underhanded comments / actions that occur on a daily basis, and how recipients react to said occurrences. For example, Serena faced prejudice on the court when the umpire declares that her foot was on the line while she was serving. After the buildup of other injustices from umpires, players, and fans alike,(five bad calls from Mariana Alves, Indian Wells, etc.) Serena “snaps”. She yells, “I swear to God I’m fucking going to take this fucking ball and shove it down your fucking throat, you hear that? I swear to God! (Williams, 29). I feel as if this quote is extremely pertinent to these two sections of the book. There were so many instances and microaggressions, that Serena finally let out her frustration and anger. In a world where we are taught that silence is better than violence, I agree with Rankine when she says, “It is difficult not to applaud her for existing in the moment, for fighting crazily against the so-called wrongness of her body’s positioning at the service line” (29). Even though many people deemed Williams as “crazy” after this outburst, it is empowering to see her stand her ground, no matter how the delivery may be; because in actuality Williams is reacting to much more than just her body’s positioning.

Questions:

1. There have been many examples of racism, microaggressions, and oppression that African Americans specifically have had to face. Take for example the riots in Ferguson, Missouri after the death of Michael Brown. Do you think violence, or even an outburst like Serena’s, is ever “the answer”? In better terminology, do you believe it is better to be silent, or to react to these microaggressions?
2. Can you find other examples of microaggression throughout the story?

In The Uses of Anger by Audre Lorde, the anger of African American women is the main focus. Lorde speaks widely about the topic of women holding in their anger instead of letting it be heard by others. Anger should never be held in because in the long run it is not helping you in any way. Lorde explains it more thoroughly in this quote: “My fear of that anger taught me nothing. Your fear of that anger will teach you nothing, also.” (287). Lorde is trying to explain that if you keep everything in and aren’t able to let it out and share with others, you will not accomplish, learn, or make a change in anything. Her story is an alternative, another way of teaching people how to deal with racism/sexism in different situations and circumstances.

Lorde speaks out, not only on African American women dealing with racism but also the way white women react to it. She tells a story about a time when a white child saw an African American child in a stroller and said “Oh look, Mommy, a baby maid!” the mother continued to shush the child but did not correct her in any way. This is one of the reasons why racism still goes on today. When the children are not reprimanded or educated on racism at a young age, they will still think it is not a problem when they grow up. “We have been raised to view any difference other than sex as a reason for destruction…” (282). This quote is true in the fact that people were raised racist and violent looking for differences to scrutinize people for, but I do not agree with how she says “other than sex”. I think plenty of people see the difference in sexes and use it to downplay women and many people have been raised to think so. I think its interesting how the narrator says this even though most of this excerpt is about black women being oppressed and holding in all of their anger because of it.

Lastly, Lorde speaks on how women were raised to deal with this anger. Basically they were raised and taught to not standup to people because of how they were treated back then. Shutting up and holding your anger in does not help anyone in any way. Lorde states “No tools were developed to deal with other women’s anger except to avoid it, deflect it, or flee from it under a blanket of guilt.” (283). Like stated earlier, women back then were told to just listen to the man, who was known as the higher up because of sexism, which still exists today but not to the same extent. Lorde is speaking on that in saying they never knew anything else besides to avoid their anger and keep it in because it would not help if they let it out. I agree with her statement in the fact that, this is how it was back in her day. Women today have become independent and are now able to stick up for themselves in any situation, especially a racist situation.

Questions:

1. What do you think Lorde would have comprehended differently if she was living in the world today while writing this piece?
2. Lorde emphasizes a huge point that holding in your anger and frustrations will get you nowhere. Do you believe that you should always speak out about your anger and frustrations, or is it sometimes better to keep it to yourself?

The essay, Age, Race, Class, and Sex: Women Redefining Difference, was written by an African American feminist, Audre Lorde, in 1984. She discusses the idea of women being substandard due to their age, race, class, and sex. She states the repression that women have encountered and the troubles that women face in society, especially Black women. Lorde’s argument is that Black women are more targeted because they are black and they are women. When I began to read this essay, the first thing that came to mind was the play A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry. Although the play and this essay have been written 25 years apart, I can see some similarities between both texts.

One of the main ideas in the essay is that Black women face double oppression. In A Raisin in the Sun, Beneatha faces oppression from not only the white society, but from her brother, Walter, who is a Black male. In the play, Beneatha is only focused on her dreams of being a doctor. But Walter doesn’t approve as he says to Beneatha “Who the hell told you you had to be a doctor? If you so crazy ‘bout messing ‘round with sick people-then go be a nurse like other women-or just get married and be quiet…” (38). This shows Beneatha’s dreams of being a doctor are frowned upon, even by her own brother. He is implying that women are fit only for supporting roles, such as being a housewife and supporting her husband.

In the essay, Lorde mentions a “mythical norm” which is an ideal image of what an American should look like in society. “This norm is usually defined as white, thin, male, young, heterosexual, Christian, and financially secure” (116). This quote from the essay reminded me of the two themes in A Raisin in the Sun including race and the American Dream. In the play, Walter dreams of having his own business and be able to provide for his family financially. At the time the story was written, it was easier to reach his dream if he was a white male who was financially secure. Walter says “Why? You want to know why? ‘Cause we all tied up in a race of people that don’t know how to do nothing but moan, pray and have babies!” (87). This shows evidence that Walter is furious at his own race who are to blame for their own hardships and inability to achieve their American Dream.

Another quote that Lorde states in her essay was “As members of such an economy, we have all been programmed to respond to the human differences between us with fear and loathing and to handle that difference in one of three ways: ignore it, and if that is not possible, copy it if we think it is dominant, or destroy it if we think it is subordinate” (115). From the way I understood this quote was that instead of learning about the differences in society and accepting it, people choose to ignore it. If it is something that is influential to them, then they may go along with it. If it’s something that they oppose of, they will abolish it. Relating back to A Raisin in the Sun, I believe this quote from the essay relates to when Mama buys a house in the white neighborhood. Because the Younger family was African American, the white neighbors didn’t want them to move in. The neighborhood didn’t choose to ignore the fact that American Americans were moving into their neighborhood, they decided that they would pay them so they wouldn’t move in to keep them out. This is an example of what Lorde is talking about, as she says “…or destroy it if we think it is subordinate” (115).

Questions:

1. In my blog post, I gave examples from A Raisin in the Sun and how these examples go along with Lorde’s Essay. Can you think of more examples from A Raisin in the Sun or The Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a Girlhood Among Ghosts? 
2. Because this essay is written in 1984 (34 years ago), do you think oppression that women encountered in society back then still happens now? Why or why not?
3. Off topic question: As you have read Lorde’s essay, why do you think she did not capitalize the word “America”?

Throughout The Woman Warrior, Maxine Hong Kingston highlights the influence of Chinese culture on the lives of Chinese-American women growing up in the United States. The title, The Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a Girlhood Among Ghosts, is representative of the overall themes presented within the work. Stories from the past, treatment of women, and ghosts all play a large role in describing the struggles of Chinese girls growing up in American society.

In the chapter titled Shaman, Kingston introduces several stories told by the narrator’s mother. These stories serve as a glimpse into the mother’s life in China, which allows the reader to compare and contrast the narrator’s childhood with her mother’s. In one of her stories, she recalls an encounter with a ghost while she is on her way back from doctoring. This battle with a ghost, and the others revealed afterwards, imply the negative connotations that the Chinese associate with the term ghost. It shows that those immersed in Chinese culture believe that ghosts are haunted creatures that need to be defeated. The narrator goes on to explain that she knows her mother was victorious in her encounter with the ghost, because she can eat anything. She states, “Big eaters win” (90). This reflects the value placed on eating in Chinese society: those who can eat an obscure variety of foods are seen as strong and admirable, capable of overcoming the evil spirits known as ghosts. These stories give the readers insight into Chinese culture by painting an image of the life of narrator’s mother and therefore making it easier to envision Chinese practices and ideals.

Not only are ghosts presented in the story of the past, but they also play a role in the narrator’s modern life. The narrator recalls, “Once upon a time the world was so thick with ghosts, I could hardly breathe; I could hardly walk, limping my way around the white ghosts and their cars” (97). In this statement, the narrator is referring to White Americans as ghosts. She is characterizing them in this negative light because they are foreigners who discriminate against Chinese immigrants. She is implying that these ghosts were everywhere during her childhood; they were unavoidable. Her diction makes the reader feel as if the ghosts are restricting her from reaching her full potential. The use of the word “limping” suggests that the narrator was forced to live her childhood in the shadows of these white ghosts. While growing up, she continued to try her best to please her parents, but had to do so with discrimination from Americans. This idea is backed up by historical context, for example, the Chinese Exclusion Act prohibited Chinese from immigrating to America.

While the narrator struggles with injustice from Americans, she also has to deal with the burden of rigid Chinese ideals. She describes the situation of her childhood household, “I could feel that clamping down and see how my mother had pulled the blinds down so low that the bare rollers were showing. No passer-by would detect a daughter in this house” (101). This statement reflects the concept that most Chinese felt ashamed to have daughters. The narrator uses descriptive language to show the intensity of her mother’s shame. She pulls the blinds as far down as possible to hide the fact that she has a daughter. Although girls were often looked down upon in Chinese society, women were responsible for many important roles. The narrator’s mother explains, “I shouldn’t have left, but your father couldn’t have supported you without me. I’m the one with the big muscles” (104). This quote is representative of similar ideas presented in A Raisin in the Sun, ideas that women are inferior to men even though they are just as hard working. This unjust viewpoint is present across cultures: it is held in both Chinese and American cultures. However, at the time the narrator is speaking, women’s’ rights were more widely accepted in America. This allows for another conflicting value between Chinese and American cultures for the narrator. The two cultures contrast and make it difficult for the narrator to establish her own identity.

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you feel that there are any specific stories shared that have a significant impact on the narrator’s life? If so, which one(s) and why/how?
2. What literary elements does the narrator use in describing the “ghosts” and how does this use reflect her viewpoint of Americans?
3. How do some of the values introduced in The Woman Warrior relate to values presented in A Raisin in the Sun? (For example: treatment of girls/women). In both works, how do these values shape or inhibit the identities of the main characters?

In The Woman Warrior by Maxine Hong Kingston, and the memoir “No Name Woman,” the theme of ghosts in Chinese culture portray a complicated history of the narrator’s family. Shaman includes the story of her Mother experiencing smoke spindles appear, acting as the ghosts her Mother talks about. She goes on to assign the word “Ghost” as a title to describe people. For example, Kingston writes, “America has been full of machines and ghosts- Taxi Ghosts, Bus Ghosts, Police Ghosts… There were Black Ghosts too, but they were open eyed and full of laughter, more distinct than White Ghosts” (97). This shows how the narrator’s perception of people in America are inherently negative as she compares them to ghosts. She has been told so many stories about ghosts from her ancestors that she does not know what is real or not anymore.

Kingston is shows how difficult it can be for the children of immigrants to balance the lifestyle of America with her Mother’s stricter Chinese traditions. The narrator wants to please her Mother, but struggles to make her happy while falling short of actually feeling like a part of her families’ culture. Tying into the theme of food, Kingston writes, “Oh, the shame of it- a whole family of skinny children” (102). Her Mother uses this as a reason to not leave leftovers on the plate, as a way of bringing her Chinese heritage into light. These traditions are fundamental in Chinese culture. The Chinese believe in pride of providing for the family, as in the necessity to put food on the table. This also contributes to China’s values of harmony and keeping the traditional family mindset.

What was alarming about this passage was not the startling of her Mother with the smoke spindles, but the connection Kingston makes between ghosts and food. Kingston states, “now I see that my Mother won in ghost battle because she can eat anything” (88). It was interesting to me how the narrator believes hunting for food and battling ghosts go hand in hand. She follows this up with stories from the Chinese Academy of Science of old servants and hunters that are heroes because they are eaters. Kingston writes, “All heroes are bold toward food… The most fantastic eater of them all was Wei Pang, a scholar-hunter of the Ta Li era of the T’ang dynasty” (88-89).  I thought of this as another meaning to the word “warrior” which is also a reoccurring theme in the text because the narrator is exposed to the importance of pride, hunting, providing, and tradition.

Discussion Questions:

1. What do you think the title “Ghost” means in the context of society? Is this label about occupation, race, or specifically Americans? What was strange about this section?
2. The phrase, “All heroes are bold toward food” (88), stuck out to me because of the power behind the word “heroes.” This section caught my attention because it allowed me to think deeper about the seriousness of Chinese perception. What phrase or section stood out to you and why?

While I rudely walked into the conversation about fifteen minutes late, due to having to move my car to try to save some money, I am glad I decided ‘better late than never.’ The discussion panel event in the fireplace lounge, “Teacher-Scholar: A Conversation with New Faculty in the English Department” was as entertaining as it was informative.  The professors on the discussion panel were Jeff Jackson, Katie Ahern, Laura Dunbar and our professor, Danica Savonick. I wish I could have been there in time for the introductions, especially if they mentioned which classes each of them taught. When I walked in Professor Savonick was talking about how “the classroom can be this transformative space where we can leave the room thinking something differently than when we walked in,” and that was something that really resonated with me as a non-traditional student; a twenty seven year old who hated reading and writing in high school, now loves to read and wants to be a writer. I am now trying to get my third college degree, and when I was in high school I had no desire to go to college whatsoever. There are certain professors that have an ability to really have an impact on their students, and without either of them really knowing it, one semester could change a student’s life. Being passionate about what you are studying is am extremely important part of the college experience, I believe. The professors on the panel today were certainly passionate about their careers. Prof. Savonick briefly discussed her research and the book she is working on about education and methods and ideas on how to improve teaching. Professor Savonick also talked about how she relates poetry to teaching, in that moments of silence are important in poetry, as they are in the classroom to let students process and take their time to speak. Professor Ahern talked about how her background was classically trained in music and music theory and then she switched gears to creative writing and applied her prior knowledge to the classroom in creative ways. She was able to pick up on if the acoustics in a room were too dry or too wet, (referring to certain factors in the room absorbing sound to a certain degree) then it affected student’s ability to use their voice in a certain way, and she was able to take sound into consideration and how it plays a role in the classroom, which I found fascinating. Laura Dunbar gave some insight on the cultural differences and expectations she had coming here to SUNY Cortland from Canada. She talked about how she encourages students to “relax into incoherence, incoherence is disorderly and disorienting,” I think what she meant by that was that you need to really relax and focus on what the point is you are trying to get across and let the words come to you, (but I am not really sure.) Professor Jackson talked about how for him, learning and teaching was like a video game, when you learn something new you get experience points and you level up. As someone who has played a lot of video games and Dungeons and Dragons for twelve years, his idea connected with me a lot as I have always used a similar mind set as motivation to exercise. It was great to know that there are so many different approaches to writing and that there is no right or wrong way to be a writer, you just need to find what works for you.

I had a question that I posed to the panel which was: “What books have had an impact on you as a writer that you would recommend to young writers to improve their skills or draw inspiration from?”  Danica expressed that a book that really helped her as a writer in editing her own work is called “The Artful Edit: On the Practice of Editing Yourself,” written by Susan Bell. She said that this book has helped her in the editing process in creating distance between yourself and your writing, but she is a firm believer that you should read what you like and write about what you like to read. That really connected with me because I want to be a fiction writer, and when I like a story that I just wrote it can be hard for me to proof read it because sometimes I get too excited that it is finally on paper and out of my head. Jeff Jackson said that comic books inspired to write stories about heroes as a kid, but as an adult a book that really stuck with him was “Writing Analytically” by David Rosenwasser. Katie Ahern said she was always drawn to the horror genre so the book “Men, Women and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film” by Carol J. Clover was a book of note for her, as well as the work of Stephen King. Laura Dunbar offered some interesting insight that you go through a whole PhD program, just to read one book; for her that book was an essay about organizational learning, distributive cognition and universities, unfortunately I couldn’t quite make out for certain the author of the essay (something like Angstrom.) There were so many great questions in the audience and all of the speakers had wonderful responses and very intelligent things to say. Overall, the discussion was fascinating and went beyond my expectations. I am quite grateful to know we have such passionate professors at SUNY Cortland.