Purple Hibiscus & Perfection

In “Purple Hibiscus,” author Chinamanda Ngogi Adichio paints a tale about one nigerian family and their hardships when the Nigerian government is overthrown by the military. Although to members of the congregation and every one else outside of the family, Papa seems to be the ideal man, generous and thoughtful, but with his family he is anything but. He is extremely strict and won’t except anything short of perfection. For example, his daughter Kambili received her report card from school and was second in her class. Any parent would be proud of that fact, but he was disappointed that she couldn’t do better. This is a fifteen year old girl and he expects her to be perfect, but that is something that is impossible.
Perfection. That is what I would like to discuss. Papa got mad at Kambili one time for being a few minutes late to get to the car after school and he slapped her in the face because of it. A man who punishes his kids for not being perfect certainly is not perfect himself. If he was perfect then her wouldn’t hit them or get angry over something as silly as being a few minutes late. Because of his strict, demanding ways, his children don’t seem to be able to have a normal adolecence. They do not have time to socialize with their peers because they are so afraid to make him mad. Their schedules are so strict that they don’t have any real time to do anything for themselves. How are they supposed to grow and develop to their full potential (perfection) if they can never just experience life in a less controlled environment. I feel that Papa is just way to strict. And I know that I’m reprating myself, however I really feel that that is the case. I don’t see how Kambili and Jaja are able to tolerate him. Actually,we don’t learn much about Mama, except for the fact that she has had many miscarriges and has another one during the early aprt of the novel. But I wonder what all of that banging was right before she was carried out to go to the hospital. I wonder if Papa was beating her. I mean he does seem like he could be the type and that would make sense why he hasn’t left her despite the fact that she can’t seem to havve any more children.

Father Tyrant

There is significance in the fact that our narrator is Kambili, a 15-year old child. The first reason that seems to stand out to me is that fact that it echoes the ideas of colonialism and imperialism that we've been talking about in class. The fact that our narrator is a young girl, living in her house with her parents who run her life ( as most children should), relates very much to the presence of the white man, almost as a parent, in Africa throughout the book. This relationship with the other characters in the book just highlights the ongoing situation in the background, obviously done on purpose.

It's interesting to note how Kambili will sometimes justify her father's actions or almost agree with him, even if they have negative conotations for her. On pages 41 to 42 we see this. Kambili's father tells her that she had the second highest grades in the class because she "chose to" and didn't put in enough work. This is suppossed to make Kambili feel bad. A normal parent would be happy with his daughter's stellar performance, but Kambili's father has to nit-pick. The fact that Kambili feels bad, or even worse, guilty, shows her relation with her tyranic father. It's so weird, but happens so often, that people will see their tyrant as a good thing and a positive person, because they simply don't know any better. This relationship exists to compare and contrast with Africa's situation, which we will probably learn more about during the following week.

Religion as a Motif

In Purple Hibiscus, religion as a motif plays a crucial role in the lives of the characters. The strict, confining rules of the Catholic Church are echoed in the walls of the household, where every minute detail of life is outlined with duties and responsibilities. Religion, which creates a restricting and suffocating environment is contrasted with the purple hibiscus, which Adichie uses to symbolize “freedom to be, to do” (16).

The novel is told through the eyes of Kambili, a 15-year old girl who narrates how Father Benedict usually refers to the “pope, Papa, and Jesus—in that order.” It is in this line that Adichie makes reference to the Holy Trinity—the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit, indicating that Papa is perceived to be more than a mere man, not only in the eyes of Kambili, but in the eyes of church, and therefore, the community at large. Father Benedict uses Papa’s actions of making generous donations to Peter’s pence and paying for cartons of communion wine as “illustration[s] of the gospels” (4). This seems to parallel the abuse of indulgences, a major point of contention for Martin Luther, the leader of the Reformation during the sixteenth century in Europe. Back then, the church would grant remission of punishment for sins upon receiving monetary gifts. In the same light, Papa seems to be “buying his way into heaven,” even though he ironically places himself above mortal sin.

Interestingly enough, the importance of religion is reflected in how Adichie presents the novel to her readers. She divides the novel into 3 sections: Palm Sunday, Before Palm Sunday, and After Palm Sunday. Palm Sunday is a Christian holiday which celebrates the entry of Jesus Christ into Jerusalem, a week before his death and resurrection. Because it is apparent that Kambili’s life is centered on her father, Adichie seems to be foreshadowing the death of Papa, and hinting at how the lives of her characters will change as a result of their newfound “freedom to be.”

Burdens According To Race Class and Gender (Short Paper)

Imperialism is something that is everywhere. In the cars people choose to drive, the places they choose to eat, even the issues they deal with in day to day life. In the following essay I will discuss the affect of Imperialism on persons in relation to their social class, race and gender according to The Black Mans Burden and The White Mans Burden Imperialism is defined as “The belief in the desirability of the acquisition of colonies and dependencies, or the extension of a country's influence through trade, diplomacy” this definition can be applied to the poems in question because in one way or another the main characters in the poems, be they white or black men, are being controlled by a larger purpose than personal gain. Though the burdens being described in both poems are both described differently, they are still cited as burdens regardless.On one hand the burden in Kipling’s The White Mans Burden is described as something the reader should “take up” (Kipling 1) while in the case of The Black Mans Burden the burden is described as something that one must “pile on” (Johnson 1) these two descriptions of what needs to be done with the burdens both makes their interpretations and meanings different. By allowing the burden in The White Mans Burden to be taken up the person who may be carrying it is being given a release. With The Black Mans Burden the burden is only being added to. This is something that is both seen in The Poor Mans Burden as well as The Black Mans Burden I felt as though with this connection, being poor and black are often things that are interwoven with each other. While I also agree with Ben's point that the speaker is saying it is appropriate for the person in question to take advantage of a local resource instead of going to places like Cuba or Hawaii I also feel like even with the convenience of being locals people are still being exploited wheter they are from Cuba or Hawaii. The main point of imperialism is to control smaller groups of people or in a larger sense countries. Lower classed indiviguals ie: brown and yellow people are more likely to be controlled by things like colonialism, capitalism or imperialism. Strangly although certain races are highlighted in all three of the burden poems, for some odd reason I am left with the idea that, although the person who may have the burden has shifted, ultimately the white man is still to blame for the burdens that follow after Kipling's poem

Posting on behalf of Diana Nemtzov --FL

I want to discuss the internal conflict going on with the characters throughout the story. It is apparent that identity plays an important and critical role in everyone’s lives and development. Most evident is Minke’s struggle to fit in with others around him and to discover his identity. Sadly he can’t fit it as either a native or a pure blood, due to his unique character. A question was brought up yesterday, is his internal conflict self inflicted, or can we say that outside forced are responsible such as the colonizing mission?

I believe that Minke is not at fault. Society comes with discrimination; it has its expectations and rules. When a person behaves differently then the members in the society they are often rejected. Minke is experiencing this rejection as he struggles to find his place in the world. Society looks down upon his native culture and makes him embarrassed to be native in any way. It’s sad to see that society’s rules take precedence over personal wants and needs, to the point where it begins to take over. I found this aspect of the story to be quite interesting because this is something everyone experiences and can often relate to.

Civilization and Colonialism

Posting on behalf of Jose Calle --FL

Civilization and Colonialism both have the same outcomes, to conquer and to rule the uncivilized, in the poem “The Poor Man’s Burden,” By George McNeill and in the novel This Earth of Mankind, by Pramoedya Ananta Toer illustrate this mutuality between civilization and Colonialism. As we discussed in class civilization or a civilize person is well educated, a leader, has a specific religion, power and most important is driven by reasoning. This ideology of enlightenment is used within colonialism. In other words colonizers (British, United States) are using civilization in order to colonize. At the beginning of empires as we discussed empires used ideology of believes of truth with out questioning to conquer land and people. In similar way Colonialism is conquering by using the ideology of civilization. What I can see the only change was the idea from religion base to reasoning conquer but not the method.

Civilization then is a tool used to colonize easily without questioning. In other words given some reasoning to people makes them easy to conquer. The knowledge given to the colonist is the required in order to govern. If the religion was no longer an effective weapon then turning “salvages” into civilize “manhood” through reasoning was easy to get the same outcomes where political, economical and ideological: land, exploitation, wealth and power. For instance in the novel, “Sing Veni, vidi, vici—I came, I saw, I conquered,” (p. 22) this phrases is used to describe in both imperialism (Civilization) and colonialism as one because at the end both are conquer whether through civilization or ideological. The relationship between civilization and colonialism is mutual and mutually complement one another. For example Minke in the novel who depend on the Europeans teacher in order to learn reasoning. Minke a privilege Native who goes to H.B.S. a prestige Dutch high school is a symbol of Colonialism and civilization. The fact that Minke is learning how to write and read or I’ll say bringing him into a new world of reasoning through this ideal making him easily to be control or conquer. As we discussed class he is unique and he doesn’t realize that because he is the only native in this school. I believe the fact that he is becoming more like a European makes him forget where he comes from or who he is.

I have a question; can we say that civilization is Imperialism in modernity? How can civilization be if the only way to acquire to civilized people is through uncivilized actions? Doesn’t exploitation is uncivilized?

This is a test