Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Duality Reality of Nationality
The discussion today and the whole book in general has made a bunch of references to dualism which seems like a neat topic for a post. The main one I want to delve into and probably do the upcoming essay about is nationalism. Borders seem like one of the most meaningless things that have arisen since the dawn of history. On Gethen, there is no war, no idea of war nor is there much of a sense of nationalism and I feel as if these two things practically come hand in hand. I feel as if borders are somewhat a good thing when it comes to separating different cultures so that the groups are each particular enough to make sense but when it comes to giant nation-states like the US and Russia and the list goes on it doesn’t really make sense to me. The pair hear seems to be either part of one’s country or not part of one’s country and there is no gray area in between, because of this people are pitted against each other and grouped together for really no good reason except that they were born far away from or close to each other respectively. Basically, nations in general are an abstract idea that is not useful for the most part and also harmful in many respects.
Estraven
So basically, someone incidentally ruined the ending to an extent for me today by saying that Estraven ends up dying so I decided I’ll make some last speculations about Estraven and reflect about him in general. Generally, even from the beginning of the book, I always thought that Estraven was good or trying to be good even if he was shown in a sinister light. I felt as if he was judged unfairly by Genly initially because of the manner in which he carries out his business but once he was exiled, I was sure he had good intentions because people generally aren’t exiled for doing bad things but rather bad things as perceived by the government or at least in books it is generally like this. The chapter Estraven the Traitor just consolidated this whim as well as his rescue of Genly.
I’d say that the most controversial thing that may or may not occur is whether or not Genly and Estraven have sex or kemmer or whatnot since I believe that it must be possible and they seem to be quite close. However, I’m kind of hoping for the possibility not to happen just because it is too weird for me to comprehend. I guess I’ll have to see what happens in the coming chapters, before he dies.
I’d say that the most controversial thing that may or may not occur is whether or not Genly and Estraven have sex or kemmer or whatnot since I believe that it must be possible and they seem to be quite close. However, I’m kind of hoping for the possibility not to happen just because it is too weird for me to comprehend. I guess I’ll have to see what happens in the coming chapters, before he dies.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Creeping Communism
More and more, both nations of Orgoreyn and Karhide have been striking me about Russia. The Karhidians to me resemble tsarist Russia since they have a king with absolute power as well as a relatively rural and undeveloped economy and system. In addition, the king does not have so much control over the media that Orgoreyn seems to have.
Orgoreyn on the other hand is run by the commensality of the thirty three and strikes me as the USSR. They're more advanced compared to the Karhidians and more importantly, the government has a secret police named the Sarf that controls everything. They control the media as well as the lives of the Orgota. They have camps that resemble the gulags of Russia and the general populace act more collectively than individualistically. This is most clear in chapter 13 as Genly describes his situation in the truck and his time at the work camp
Orgoreyn on the other hand is run by the commensality of the thirty three and strikes me as the USSR. They're more advanced compared to the Karhidians and more importantly, the government has a secret police named the Sarf that controls everything. They control the media as well as the lives of the Orgota. They have camps that resemble the gulags of Russia and the general populace act more collectively than individualistically. This is most clear in chapter 13 as Genly describes his situation in the truck and his time at the work camp
Monday, March 9, 2009
Traitor
"Within the year he ended the old feud. giving up half of the disputed lands to Domain of Stok. For this and for the murder of his hearthbrothers, he was called Estraven the Traitor."
In chapter 9, after hearing the story and the conclusion of the story ending in Estraven gaining the epithet of "the Traitor," It really brings into question the meaning of traitor. In this case, Estraven did betray his kin and arguably surrendered his clan to another but one can hardly call him a traitor for it. If anything, I'd call him a hero for it since the continuance of the war would've brought much more pain and suffering to his clan. Similarly, the young Estraven faced a similar situation since he was exiled for supporting Genly but was probably actually exiled for his opinion on the Sinoth Valley. Estraven wished to avoid war with the Orgota but Tibe probably got the king to exile him because he was an obstacle in his plans which we shall probably see unfold later on.
Anyhow, I believe that the meaning of traitor will probably become even more important as the story continues. In my opinion, you can only be a traitor if you betray yourself. If you are forced to act or think one way and you later show your true opinion you can hardly be called a traitor. If anything, it is more traitorous to supress your true beliefs and perpetuate some phony facade because when it really comes down to it, you won't be able to keep the facade up forever and then you will truly become a traitor.
In chapter 9, after hearing the story and the conclusion of the story ending in Estraven gaining the epithet of "the Traitor," It really brings into question the meaning of traitor. In this case, Estraven did betray his kin and arguably surrendered his clan to another but one can hardly call him a traitor for it. If anything, I'd call him a hero for it since the continuance of the war would've brought much more pain and suffering to his clan. Similarly, the young Estraven faced a similar situation since he was exiled for supporting Genly but was probably actually exiled for his opinion on the Sinoth Valley. Estraven wished to avoid war with the Orgota but Tibe probably got the king to exile him because he was an obstacle in his plans which we shall probably see unfold later on.
Anyhow, I believe that the meaning of traitor will probably become even more important as the story continues. In my opinion, you can only be a traitor if you betray yourself. If you are forced to act or think one way and you later show your true opinion you can hardly be called a traitor. If anything, it is more traitorous to supress your true beliefs and perpetuate some phony facade because when it really comes down to it, you won't be able to keep the facade up forever and then you will truly become a traitor.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Religion and Rainbows
"The Unknown, the unforetold, the unproven, that is what life is based on. Ignorance is the ground of thought. Unproof is the ground of action. If it were proven that there is no God, there would be no religion ... But also if it were proven that there is a God, there would be no religion ... The only thing that makes life possible is permanent, intolerable uncertainty: not knowing what comes next."
Personally, I liked chapter 5 and its crazy, nutso cult and this quote at the end of the chapter really sums up what the author was trying to say about religion and life in general. by saying that "Ignorance is the ground of thought," it made little sense to me at first glance until I thought about the opposite, the knowledge of everything. What would be the point of thinking if we already knew how to make our world perfect and what we are supposed to do in life? By saying "Unproof is the ground of action," it builds upon the first idea since research is only undertaken to understand what was previously not understood.
The second part is the seemingly nonsensical section about religion but yet again upon thinking about it the statement also makes perfect sense. Most religions are generally built around a faith in the supernatural. If it were known that there is no supernatural, then faith in it would be impossible and nonsensical and so religion would cease to exist. Although hard to grasp at first, if it were proven that the supernatural existed, then the faith that religion is based on can barely be called faith. Rather it would now be fact and therefore religion would no longer exist because there would be no need for it. Basically, religion is not based upon knowledge in either direction but rather an acceptance that you don't know whether there is a force greater than yourself but believe that there may be one.
Lastly, the mention that uncertainty is what makes life possible correct in multiple senses. If we always knew exactly what to do, it almost takes away all of the choice from life and taht cand hardly be called living. In addition I'm also reminded of the impact of science and it's impact on life. The best examples I can think of this are rainbows. Originally, when I looked up at the sky and saw a rainbow, it was beautiful. Not only because they were bands of color seemingly floating in midair but also because I had absolutely no idea how they were there. However, after learning that they were merely made up of light that was refracted through droplets of water, well they weren't as pretty anymore. I almost feel as if accumulated knowledge completely demystifies the world around us. I suppose that is what it is meant to do but at the same time it takes much of the fun out of life and may ultimately make the future so bleak and boring that it may not even be worth living. However you'll still find me looking up at the clouds for animals, shapes and faces, even if they are merely just a mass of condensed water droplets.
Personally, I liked chapter 5 and its crazy, nutso cult and this quote at the end of the chapter really sums up what the author was trying to say about religion and life in general. by saying that "Ignorance is the ground of thought," it made little sense to me at first glance until I thought about the opposite, the knowledge of everything. What would be the point of thinking if we already knew how to make our world perfect and what we are supposed to do in life? By saying "Unproof is the ground of action," it builds upon the first idea since research is only undertaken to understand what was previously not understood.
The second part is the seemingly nonsensical section about religion but yet again upon thinking about it the statement also makes perfect sense. Most religions are generally built around a faith in the supernatural. If it were known that there is no supernatural, then faith in it would be impossible and nonsensical and so religion would cease to exist. Although hard to grasp at first, if it were proven that the supernatural existed, then the faith that religion is based on can barely be called faith. Rather it would now be fact and therefore religion would no longer exist because there would be no need for it. Basically, religion is not based upon knowledge in either direction but rather an acceptance that you don't know whether there is a force greater than yourself but believe that there may be one.
Lastly, the mention that uncertainty is what makes life possible correct in multiple senses. If we always knew exactly what to do, it almost takes away all of the choice from life and taht cand hardly be called living. In addition I'm also reminded of the impact of science and it's impact on life. The best examples I can think of this are rainbows. Originally, when I looked up at the sky and saw a rainbow, it was beautiful. Not only because they were bands of color seemingly floating in midair but also because I had absolutely no idea how they were there. However, after learning that they were merely made up of light that was refracted through droplets of water, well they weren't as pretty anymore. I almost feel as if accumulated knowledge completely demystifies the world around us. I suppose that is what it is meant to do but at the same time it takes much of the fun out of life and may ultimately make the future so bleak and boring that it may not even be worth living. However you'll still find me looking up at the clouds for animals, shapes and faces, even if they are merely just a mass of condensed water droplets.
Distrust
"But I do fear you Envoy. I fear those who sent you. I fear liars, and I fear tricksters and worst I fear the bitter truth...Fear is King!"
This may just be my opinion but I really don't like the King. He seems horribly distrusting towards others and if he thinks that everyone around him is a liar and trickster I can't imagine that he sees himself as any different. Basically, he sees lies and tricks as a part of the human condition and I can't help but dislike a character who staunchly believes in this. The fact is that we can never really know exactly what other people are thinking but this is no reason to completely distrust all others completely. I believe that one should only be distrusted if they give a good reason for it, otherwise I give people the benefit of the doubt.
This may just be my opinion but I really don't like the King. He seems horribly distrusting towards others and if he thinks that everyone around him is a liar and trickster I can't imagine that he sees himself as any different. Basically, he sees lies and tricks as a part of the human condition and I can't help but dislike a character who staunchly believes in this. The fact is that we can never really know exactly what other people are thinking but this is no reason to completely distrust all others completely. I believe that one should only be distrusted if they give a good reason for it, otherwise I give people the benefit of the doubt.
Aura
"Power has become so subtle and complex a thing in the ways taken by the Ekumen that only a subtle mind can watch it work...one feels the man's power as an augmentation of his character"
I agree with the idea that the author has introduced with this statement. The way I see it, she is talking about a person's presence or aura which is a difficult thing to sense but is extremely powerful. Even if someone does not have much tangible power, this subtler aura someone gives off can easily manipulate people. In many ways this power over people is much more useful than tangible power itself.
I agree with the idea that the author has introduced with this statement. The way I see it, she is talking about a person's presence or aura which is a difficult thing to sense but is extremely powerful. Even if someone does not have much tangible power, this subtler aura someone gives off can easily manipulate people. In many ways this power over people is much more useful than tangible power itself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
