Anakena Paddon
SOC 400 Final Post
It
was clear from the very first few sentences why the Arundhati Roy text was
chosen for our last reading of the semester. Roy, speaking about India, talks
about the country encapsulating “progress and regress simultaneously […] adding
a few centuries on to either end of our extraordinary CV.” To me, this clear
tension between the “schizophrenic nature” of trying to find one’s place in a
world of “modernity” and a world of “tradition” is what we’ve been talking and
arguing about all semester.
Roy
gets into a debate with herself about her role as a “writer-activist”, as she
has been dubbed after working on non-fiction and fiction books. The moral and
ethical questions she asks herself seem to me to be relevant to any person with
any form of privilege – not just authors. She seems to struggle with the burden
of the responsibility she feels is hers because of her literacy, the scope of
her reach due to her “success” and she struggles to balance out her micro role
as a single human being with the macro world around her. As Roy says, “there’s
no innocence. Either way, you’re accountable,” and I think this applies/should
apply to all.
As
she states so clearly, the power struggles in the heart of India are merely a
representation of those that take place in the world. The tension between
drastic change and the maintenance of a status quo, the tension between rich
and poor and how to fill the ever-increasing gap between the two, the tension
between education and illiteracy…. All these are themes we have discussed in
depth repeatedly over the course of this semester.
What
I appreciate about Roy but what also irks me is that, once again, I find myself
asking, “yeah, but where is this conversation leading to?” How many times did
our conversations go off onto (very interesting and thought-provoking)
conversational tangents without reaching a concrete, finite point? I suppose my
personality type wants to find “the answer”, the “finish line” at the end of
the debate, and by nature, a conversation about globalization and progress
cannot give one.
I
think the first time I really became frustrated with what seemed like an
unsatisfying format of class arguments/discussions was during the week on
Economic Globalization. Here was a topic (sweatshops, factories) that we have
all heard and talked about multiple times but what is always left is both a
feeling of guilt and of powerlessness – in the grand scheme of things, what can
any one individual do to alter the
lives of women in Mexico or children in southeast Asia? And this section
brought to light some of the more subtle clashes of interest… we take sweatshops
to be the emblem of all globalization evil and then suddenly we are faced with
factory workers who need and demand the maintenance of these factories, because
how else are they supposed to make a
living?
I
was almost dizzy with frustration, confusion and trying to sort out my thoughts
after that class. I have since then tried to accept that what we do in class
does not require a polished, final answer. Our conversations have definitely
been fruitful, challenging and some of the most interesting of my college
career (I took this class purely out of interest, having completed both of my
major requirements and I am so glad that I did). I feel like I can still talk
circles around myself (and probably others) on the topic of the ins and outs of
globalization. It’s daunting and a bit scary to fathom how many layers this
topic has and how to approach any and each of them. Since I cannot myself find
a way to reach an “answer” or a “concluding point”, I suppose the best way to
go about facing the topic of globalization is to continue having intelligent
conversations about it; to continue challenging ourselves to learn more, become
more aware and are more. Easier said than done, but I hope that this course and
the wealth of readings we’ve discovered have given us the toolbox to go out
into this big ol’ scary world and make some positive impact.
No comments:
Post a Comment