Beast of No Nation by Uzodinma Iweala

I have not finish this book yet, but I thought I talk about what I have learned from reading it. Iweala's disturbing tale of Agu, this young boy, it seems who came across an army that was not his choosing to join up to fight this war against an enemy I have yet came across. Agu's journey, if you will, is one of hopelessness. He is a boy who had nothing due to this war and in a country where there is only a few options to survive, leave or fight, he had no choice. Again, I go back to 100 Years and I see a pattern of violence and how it can destroy a country and a community. What I gather from the reading thus far, is a sense of madness, not from isolation like in Sheep or 100 Years, but from war. Agu was not wanting to kill, but was force to and once he did kill, he became accustomed to it. He was brainwashed by all he had seen and without anyone to tell him otherwise, he kept on doing what he had to to survive. The only authority figure he had was one who wish the fighting to continue, the Commandant. There is a lot more I want to touch on, but that will have to be without a post since this is the last one. One note, nationalism, is this war for country or for greed? Is there a reason other than survival to fight? Is that how it is today in Africa with Darfur? This problem needs to be address to stop the cycle. Iweala's "Beast" shines a light into this violent nd disturbing reality in Africa. I look forward to finishing this book to help me know more about how this happens and why, if possible.

The Complete Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi, conclusion

I did not want to combine the two post into one, so I'm first will talk about Persepolis and then Beast in the last post.

Concluding the book, I can relate my journey to Marjane a bit. Now I did not live in war-torn Iran but to have an upbringing where you were poor and grew up around trouble and having to reject stereotypes and not become a number is pretty hard itself. I can relate how Marjane tried to find herself when she left for Austria and tried to learn all she needed to become the person her family wanted her to be. They had very high expectations for her, which some people like myself have been thru. It can be tough to live up to those expectations and not drive yourself crazy. Her story took her to a foreign land where she met different people and tried many things she was not accustomed to. It changed her. Kind of like 100 years of Solitude, she brought back with her more confusion than she had when she left. The outside world, which was suppose to be better was not, at least not when it came to her journey to finding herself. This book reminded me a bit of Boku's own journey in Sheep Chase, where he was isolated a lot with his thoughts and feelings. Marji seemed to be at times, alone to her thoughts and trying to find what it is she was looking for. When she returned, she discovered that as much as she missed home(her family and friends, the culture and the food/tea, even the air) she realize how much she did not missed the rules of hierarchy. Take Fanon's point on cultural diversity and differences where he states, "In the guise of a pastness that is not necessarily a faithful sign of historical memory but a strategy of representing authority in terms of the archaic". We would need to redefine our thinking as the people in Iran had to. They were force to either bow to the hierarchy and do what they say about rules they did not agree with or try to live, unhappily with the new rules. Marjane and her friends, not to mention others that disagree with this old philosophy of traditionalist, fought when possible. The fight was more subtle because of the fear of prison of worse, but they tried. The problem was that living like this is only a way of living not whole. They were not really living and her parents knew this. The most terrible part about this for her is that she had to leave even though she did not want to, like many of the people that have left Iran. Their search for happiness continues, elsewhere.

The Complete Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi

The Complete Persepolis is a story that has been described as an autobiography. The term autobiography is a perspective done through the eyes of the writer. In this case, it's done by a person who wants to express her feelings about her country, Iran and explain how a country can be torn apart by differences of opinions. This is true with many countries including our own. Conflict is and probably will always be a part of our society. Satrapi takes us through her life and tries to show a perspective that we do not normally see here. There is a perception about Iran that has been very negative through out the world and I think she is trying to explain that there is not any real difference between Iran from most with the obvious exceptions.

We live in a society of labels and classes both here and in other parts of the world. To label this as an autobiography might not be accurate on its own. The viewpoints are not many, but one, our author. She takes us through her life and what she learned through out her life and it's interesting to see how much the girl change into a smart woman trying to still figure things out and keep her identity. These traits are universal and I think that for her to tell this story is good so as to see that Iran and the Middle East is not what we have been told completely. There is a sense of assimilation in culture with the younger people. Are they aware? Do they use this form to get through their lives? I wonder how one can condemn actions by the west and yet adapt their ways?

As for this book being a graphic novel? I think Satrapi might have intended this form to get to a certain group of readers, young readers. Young readers tend to be more susceptible to this genre and while this is not a children's book, young adults tend to read this genre and she might had hope to shape a new generation of readers about what is going on over there. I want to see how the author continues to grow in this book. I think my knowledge of the Middle East has grown a bit as well.

One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez(fin)

Marquez's Solitude shows how solidarity can at times, not be best. The Buendia family came down in part, because of their desires. Choices were made that had consequences that revealed later were tragic. The Buendias were happy people(at times) and while warned (Jose Arcadia and Ursula), travel a path that went to a place of possible danger. In Solitude, was Marquez thinking that people who became colonialized became trap in a life predetermined if not by nature than by post colonialism? Was their fate predetermined before outside influence came in to play? While I'm not saying I approved of marring family members and having children by them, is there more a mythology of oneness here? Were we all related anyway and for us all to achieve oneness and for everyone to be true and caring for each other, that we must be one?

As for Frantz Fanon's views on anti-colonialism, there are things to think about. Change can be good, like our new president elect Barack Obama, but when change comes to third world countries where we think they are wrong about things and we tend to impose our will on them, to eventually ruin what was once a utopia to them and change it to something we think they should be. This is not what should be, but actually what we should be careful on. In Solitude, how outside influences helped Macondo turn a small community into a seemingly thriving society that eventually would resort back a bit to it's former self and then an end that was tragic tells you that the phrase: The grass is always greener on the other side, might just be a deeper truth. Was the moments the men(Col. Buendia, Aureliano Segundo and Aureliano) being in solitude, a realization of the outside world's influence and was this Marquez's way of telling the world to butt out of things that do not concern them? People always seemed to die after bringing something from outside Macondo. Maybe Aureliano figured it out too late, ignorance is bliss.