Stuff

Apathetic Like Them

Brannigan - “A noisy or confused quarrel.” Expostulate - “To reason earnestly with someone in an effort to dissuade or correct.” No matter which connotation is used, a debate is a debate.  Rather than debating, most of the “Black Like Me” discussion group had an indifferent attitude towards the majority of the article. For a variety of reasons, there was little that was actually agreed upon, and considerable misunderstandings on a variety of different levels.

The article's title was, to a certain extent, estranged from the article's main idea. According to Fil Fraser's biography, he was indeed black. The title, in conjunction with the biography, gives the impression that the article itself contains either a black perspective, or, at a minimum, is somehow focused on blacks. On the contrary, the article has little to do with either.

One could assume that Fraser is trying to capitalize from the success of an infamous non-fiction book by using the same title. Whatever his reasons for choosing that title, after going through the article, some of Fraser's key purposes for writing the article were identified.

Fraser conveys Canada's progression towards multiculturalism by detailing the trials and tribulations of various groups and individuals. Whether it was detailing the hardships of life as a “frenchie” in Montreal, or describing political figures' attempts to entrench the bill of rights into the constitution, the author attributes the success of multiculturalism in Canada to multiple entities.

Fraser wrote this piece for several purposes. For example, by detailing the dominant impression of the times, there is an attempt to educate the younger generation on the malevolence of unwarranted exclusionism.

Narrowing the scope, Fraser uses a variety of narrative devices to convey his message to the reader. The inclusion of conflicts, key events, moving vantage points, sensory impressions, and a first person perspective are all expressed translucently. Although, it is important to note that the article seems to be devoid of dialogue.

During group discussions, some incorrectly stated two quotations, in paragraph 23 of the article, as dialogue. It is important to distinguish the difference between quotations and dialogues. The definition of a dialogue is “a reciprocal conversation between two or more entities.” On the other hand, the definition of a quotation is “the repetition of one expression as part of another one, particularly when the quoted expression is well-known or explicitly attributed (as by citation) to its original source.” Knowing these two key definitions allows for effortless disambiguation of the narrative device in question.

Fraser quotes Otto Jelinek, minister of multiculturalism, and Brian Mulroney, 18th prime minister of Canada; both address the same crowd on two separate occasions. Although technically they were having a conversation with the crowd, the article only displays incredibly brief excerpts that are not followed up in conversation by any other entity in Fraser's narrative. Furthermore, the quoted excerpts could be argued as being well-known, since they clearly signal a turning point in the attitude of Canadian politicians.

However, that was not the only case of misunderstanding within the group. There was a disagreement about applying a selectively detailed concept to a broadened scope. Some claim that the author's narrative selectively details his experiences geographically. Although the two are not mutually exclusive, it would be more appropriate to categorize that as a moving vantage point.

One could argue that any piece of non-fiction narrative writing can be categorized as a selection of details. It is important to try and decipher where an author intentionally tries to use the technique, rather than to clutch at straws.

Of course, there is an underlying reason for all of this. The low expostulation to high indifference ratio was a direct effect of most group members neglecting, willfully or otherwise, to do the required reading for the week. Blaming the taxonomic discussion style for either the lack of discussion between individual group members, or the incorrect identification of rhetorical devices, is a fallacy. If anything, the orderly format of discussion made the wide-spread presence of social-loafing even more evident.

Aside from the apathy and the misunderstandings, the overwhelming theme of this article resonated with every individual within the group. The fact that Canadian culture is an amalgamation of other cultures does not make it any more valid or any less valid than any other culture. After all, what is a culture but the selective accumulation and mutilation of the other cultures that precede and surround it? Canada is a culture of cultures. Canada is a culture of many. Canada is a culture of one.

[[ ALTERNATE ENDING ]]

Aside from the apathy and the misunderstandings, the overwhelming theme of this article resonated with every individual within the group. The fact that Canadian culture is an amalgamation of other cultures does not make it any more valid or any less valid than any other culture. It was a conversation with his android officer, Data, when the captain of the USS Enterprise, Jean-Luc Picard, said it best.

Data, in an effort to give meaning to visions he experienced while he was shut down, analyzes and assimilates many different cultures. To no avail, he decides to discuss his situation with captain Picard.

“I have analyzed over four thousand different religious and philosophical systems,” said Data. “as well as over two hundred psychological schools of thought in an effort to understand what happened.”

“And what have you found?” replied Picard.

“I've been unable to find a single interpretation of the images I saw during the time I was shut down. The hammer, for instance, has several meanings. The Klingon culture views the hammer as a symbol of power, however, the Tapo Tribe of Nagor sees it as an icon of hearth and home. The Ferengii view it as a sign of sexual prowess.”

“I'm curious, Mr. Data. Why are you looking at all these other cultures?”

“The interpretation of visions and other metaphysical experiences are almost always culturally derived and I have no culture of my own.”

“Yes, you do,” replied Picard, “You're a culture of one. Which is no less valid than a culture of one billion.”