This
is Water by Wallace implies the unconsciousness we humans
yield to the world comes naturally and cannot be changed by anyone but
ourselves. He states that what you think of others “depends on what you want to
consider”. Meaning it is through our eyes we choose what it is we wish to see.
It is by our use of choice, to see others in the same world being disturbances
to us when we, too, are in others’ worlds seen as people who are also just “in
the way”. Morrison’s Nobel Lecture refers to a wise, old, and blind woman who
is visited by youngsters and asked if the bird in their hands is dead or alive.
She replied saying that she did not know if the bird was dead or alive, and
that all she knew was that it was in their hands. The works are similar in expressing
how it is important on how you perceive what is in front of you. And because of
that, should change how you think of what is around you. The bird signified
language and she basically told the young ones that it was up to them, if it
were dead or not. The differences between the two are that Wallace explains why
being empathetic, even if unwillingly, will help open your eyes to what’s
around you. Morrison however, explains with the story, that it will be up to
you how you want others to see you. She did not tell the kids what they wanted
to hear, and with that, they assumed what they wanted.
I agree completely with everything you have to say about both literature pieces and the two authors being similar and different. People are always thinking or seeing what they want to think, see, or hear because we never want to picture anything less then what we truly want to imagine. We have a choice on what we want to see and how to perceive it which can either be in a good or bad way. As well, we also get to decide on how others see us but at the same time, we can’t actually control how they view us because it just depends on what the person that is taking in. Agreeing again, the two authors are different because like you said the authors wrote in different styles of tone but managed to get out the same ideas in the end.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your blog completely, both authors conveyed the same message. I agree with how you explained how the bird represents the diversity of language and how it can mean many things however it is up to the person on how they interpret the language. This statement, “He states that what you think of others “depends on what you want to consider”, correctly explains what Wallace was trying to explain in his commencement speech. Your use of how human nature can result in many different outcomes is valid and both authors used this to open the eyes of their crowd to this point.
ReplyDelete