Our World Is Not What It Seems
I make it known that I am a proud member of the Troy High Symphony Orchestra – probably more often than I like to admit. And before you ask: yes, I am entirely aware of the perception that orchestra kids have, and, yes, I know how pretentious I sound every time I talk about anything remotely music-related. But to me, the orchestra and its associates are superior. This isn’t just my opinion. It’s a fact.
In literature, a similar idea ensues, but in a much more rational sense (sorry to all the band kids that I may have offended with my previous statement). It is established in “Saving Sourdi” as Nea immaturely misinterprets her sister’s desires, it is exemplified in Homegoing through two sisters separated at birth, and it is connected to modern America through popular culture.
Imagine reality through a psychoanalytical lens, with each performed action having the intention of dominating the historic competition for resources. According to “The Science Behind Racism: A Psychological Approach” by Caroline Wyatt, “Rivalry occurred mostly because of limited resources and disappeared when resources could only be gained by the two groups working together” and in the absence of vital competition “group rivalry may occur along arbitrary lines.”
This explanation of rivalry provides context for Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi, a novel that explores two foils as they follow anti-parallel paths. The novel details the lineage of Esi and Effia, two sisters separated at birth. As Esi’s storyline develops, Gyasi writes about the fight for black liberty in the United States, starting with slavery and elaborating into modern American culture. Effia, on the other hand, has the opposite experience, her family tree climbing down the societal ladder as her descendants are named outcasts. The reciprocation of Esi and Effia’s experiences, one running toward freedom and the other being chased from it, exemplifies the importance of understanding history holistically. As we are taught in our misleading history classes, slavery was introduced because white people viewed African cultures as uncivilized. But as Effia’s narrative details, this was far from the truth. Many African cultures had wars over territory, a natural pecking order, and essentially, their own (PERFECTLY FUNCTIONAL) way of life. But I must digress. White saviorism is a topic deserving of its own dissertation.
Politically incorrect humor aside, the video perpetuates a concept vital to our understanding of reality: simplicity to some is not simplicity to all, and comparatively, reality through one perspective is not the same as reality through another.
Our understanding of history is based upon a single story – as detailed by Chimananda Ngozi Adichie – so consequently, a lot remains unknown. As authors like Yaa Gyasi continue to tell their stories through marginalized narratives, our our knowledge of social structures, power dynamics, and behavior will grow. So truthfully, our current reality is not the entire truth, and it would be significantly different if we understood history through multiple perspectives.
But why would this matter? Unfortunately, as problems like global warming, world hunger, and depletion of natural resources become increasingly abundant (I know, so optimistic), the competition for resources will return. However this time, we won’t be competing against each other. Rather, we will be competing against time and the limitations of our planet. It is imperative that humans understand the differences between our societal cliques (both arbitrary and rational), and most importantly, how these differences can propel us forward. Because, as history has proven, when opinions are shaped around a single narrative, the end of our reality inches closer and closer to oblivion.
In literature, a similar idea ensues, but in a much more rational sense (sorry to all the band kids that I may have offended with my previous statement). It is established in “Saving Sourdi” as Nea immaturely misinterprets her sister’s desires, it is exemplified in Homegoing through two sisters separated at birth, and it is connected to modern America through popular culture.
At its core, life is built upon mere theories and our only concept of reality derives from our trust in humanity. But unfortunately, just as easily as stories are passed down through generations, they are spitefully manipulated to fit a particular narrative, as seen in "Saving Sourdi," and Homegoing. This raises a question: how true is the reality that we perceive, and moreover, how different would it have been if our understanding of history was shaped around an opposing narrative?
“Saving Sourdi” by May-lee Chai explores this concept. As Nea, out of naivete and fear of losing her sister, wrongfully assumes Sourdi is unhappy in her marriage, she goes to extreme measures to “save her.” However, in the end, Nea realizes her sister will never revert to her young self, leaving Nea without her life-long best friend, and therefore, creating a mountain of aggressive emotion. With this demonstration of Nea’s selfish intentions, the audience grasps the presence of perspectives. It can easily be predicted that the same story told through Sourdi’s perspective would demonstrate a completely different narrative – one of contentment with her own marriage and life. But the audience doesn’t see this side of the story, so we are only allowed the understanding that Sourdi is in danger and needs to be saved. In this sense, any concept of opposing narratives remains speculative rather than concrete. In other terms, “Saving Sourdi” expresses that narratives exist, but doesn’t extend to how they can be dissected.
“Saving Sourdi” by May-lee Chai explores this concept. As Nea, out of naivete and fear of losing her sister, wrongfully assumes Sourdi is unhappy in her marriage, she goes to extreme measures to “save her.” However, in the end, Nea realizes her sister will never revert to her young self, leaving Nea without her life-long best friend, and therefore, creating a mountain of aggressive emotion. With this demonstration of Nea’s selfish intentions, the audience grasps the presence of perspectives. It can easily be predicted that the same story told through Sourdi’s perspective would demonstrate a completely different narrative – one of contentment with her own marriage and life. But the audience doesn’t see this side of the story, so we are only allowed the understanding that Sourdi is in danger and needs to be saved. In this sense, any concept of opposing narratives remains speculative rather than concrete. In other terms, “Saving Sourdi” expresses that narratives exist, but doesn’t extend to how they can be dissected.
The picture above demonstrates the importance of perspective. Above the water, the elephant could easily be mistaken for a dinosaur, when in truth, it's just an elephant, much in the same way that May-lee Chai only writes through Nea's perspective and keeps Sourdi's thoughts a mystery.
So, how can we begin to dissect such perspectives and explain the significance of history being shaped around a single story?
So, how can we begin to dissect such perspectives and explain the significance of history being shaped around a single story?
Imagine reality through a psychoanalytical lens, with each performed action having the intention of dominating the historic competition for resources. According to “The Science Behind Racism: A Psychological Approach” by Caroline Wyatt, “Rivalry occurred mostly because of limited resources and disappeared when resources could only be gained by the two groups working together” and in the absence of vital competition “group rivalry may occur along arbitrary lines.”
This explanation of rivalry provides context for Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi, a novel that explores two foils as they follow anti-parallel paths. The novel details the lineage of Esi and Effia, two sisters separated at birth. As Esi’s storyline develops, Gyasi writes about the fight for black liberty in the United States, starting with slavery and elaborating into modern American culture. Effia, on the other hand, has the opposite experience, her family tree climbing down the societal ladder as her descendants are named outcasts. The reciprocation of Esi and Effia’s experiences, one running toward freedom and the other being chased from it, exemplifies the importance of understanding history holistically. As we are taught in our misleading history classes, slavery was introduced because white people viewed African cultures as uncivilized. But as Effia’s narrative details, this was far from the truth. Many African cultures had wars over territory, a natural pecking order, and essentially, their own (PERFECTLY FUNCTIONAL) way of life. But I must digress. White saviorism is a topic deserving of its own dissertation.
Yaw, a descendent of Effia, connects to the troubling misinterpretation of history as he professes, “This is the problem of history. We cannot know that which we were not there to see and hear and experience for ourselves. We must rely upon the words of others…From there, you begin to get a clearer, yet still imperfect, picture.” (Gyasi 226-227) I know, I know. This line is actually mind-blowing. And it certainly touches on just how true our reality is.
Consider “The Danger of a Single Story” by Chimananda Ngozi Adichie. When our perception of society is built around a single narrative, whether it be race, gender, or ideology, we struggle to maintain meaningful connections with others and progress as a global society.
This is why literature like Homegoing is important. We attain a deeper understanding of a narrative already known to us, but we see how it connects to narratives that are unknown. Imagine if our history was not centered around the power of the white man, but instead, the power of humanity. Exemplified, again, through Homegoing and Effia’s white husband’s reliance on her to merely survive in a community of which he did not speak the language or understand the culture. (Gyasi 17)
So back to the example of the epic and prodigal Troy High Symphony Orchestra. As arbitrary as it seems, my evidently aggressive passion for it (again, sorry band kids) actually models the innate human desire to form groups based on commonalities. But as this was essential to survival in ancient civilizations, today, it is almost the exact opposite. The division that our global community experiences has led to more war, more environmental crises, and ultimately, more death.
Although we will never truly know what our reality would be if history had been told through an opposing lens, we certainly see satirical examples in American popular culture. Take the infamous Key and Peele “Substitute Teacher” skit for instance. As an audience, we witness a reversal of racial power dynamics – a black teacher mispronouncing the perceivably simple names of white students and punishing them for correcting him, just as traditionally, white people have done to people of color.
Consider “The Danger of a Single Story” by Chimananda Ngozi Adichie. When our perception of society is built around a single narrative, whether it be race, gender, or ideology, we struggle to maintain meaningful connections with others and progress as a global society.
This is why literature like Homegoing is important. We attain a deeper understanding of a narrative already known to us, but we see how it connects to narratives that are unknown. Imagine if our history was not centered around the power of the white man, but instead, the power of humanity. Exemplified, again, through Homegoing and Effia’s white husband’s reliance on her to merely survive in a community of which he did not speak the language or understand the culture. (Gyasi 17)
So back to the example of the epic and prodigal Troy High Symphony Orchestra. As arbitrary as it seems, my evidently aggressive passion for it (again, sorry band kids) actually models the innate human desire to form groups based on commonalities. But as this was essential to survival in ancient civilizations, today, it is almost the exact opposite. The division that our global community experiences has led to more war, more environmental crises, and ultimately, more death.
Although we will never truly know what our reality would be if history had been told through an opposing lens, we certainly see satirical examples in American popular culture. Take the infamous Key and Peele “Substitute Teacher” skit for instance. As an audience, we witness a reversal of racial power dynamics – a black teacher mispronouncing the perceivably simple names of white students and punishing them for correcting him, just as traditionally, white people have done to people of color.
Politically incorrect humor aside, the video perpetuates a concept vital to our understanding of reality: simplicity to some is not simplicity to all, and comparatively, reality through one perspective is not the same as reality through another.
Our understanding of history is based upon a single story – as detailed by Chimananda Ngozi Adichie – so consequently, a lot remains unknown. As authors like Yaa Gyasi continue to tell their stories through marginalized narratives, our our knowledge of social structures, power dynamics, and behavior will grow. So truthfully, our current reality is not the entire truth, and it would be significantly different if we understood history through multiple perspectives.
But why would this matter? Unfortunately, as problems like global warming, world hunger, and depletion of natural resources become increasingly abundant (I know, so optimistic), the competition for resources will return. However this time, we won’t be competing against each other. Rather, we will be competing against time and the limitations of our planet. It is imperative that humans understand the differences between our societal cliques (both arbitrary and rational), and most importantly, how these differences can propel us forward. Because, as history has proven, when opinions are shaped around a single narrative, the end of our reality inches closer and closer to oblivion.
I hope this essay didn’t send any of you spiraling into an existential crisis like it did for me while I was writing it. Honestly, having to argue whether our reality is actually our reality was a task I masochistically assigned myself, but in exploring it further, I found a new understanding of myself, my intentions, and my perception of the world — all of which are reasons that I encourage you to do the same. We owe it to ourselves to paint a more complete and detailed picture of global history, just as many people have already attempted. In doing so, we persist toward uncovering more about the narratives that created the problems we experience today and the narratives that serve as corrections for the thinking we have been conditioned to have, ultimately shaping our reality into one of stronger connection, richer history, and deeper sympathy. Hopefully.
The ball is in our court.
Here's a picture of my cat to make you feel less doomed! Enjoy!!
Comments
Post a Comment