Feminism lens to Things Fall Apart

I’m analyzing “Things Fall Apart” by Chinua Achebe from a Feminist point of view. The theoretical text reveals that when applying feminist criticisms to a text, we should think about a couple of questions, like whether the author of the text is a man or a woman, the role of the female gender in the text, and the attitudes held towards females by male characters. I plan on applying these perspectives and more when analyzing the novel.

Most of the characters in the book are stereotypical Nigerian women: wives, mothers, sisters, daughters, but their characters remain undeveloped. They cook foo-foo, bring palm wine to their husbands, bear numerous children and are considered property to be bargained for at marriage time. The Nigerian men have multiple wives which also proves that women have little respect. This can be related to Ekwefi, the only female character with any depth in the novel. She first appears in the woods while following the priestess. The priestess brings the daughter to another village before she takes her to the cave to see the deity. Here is when we are given a glimpse of Ekwefi’s character. It is important that the child and the priestess are females. Later on I will look at the idea of the mother. Although it appears from the stereotypical characterization at the beginning that the motherhood has little significance, the end of the book reveals a different perspective of the mother.

In addition, the text provides several quotes that are parallel to the attitudes towards women in “Things Fall Apart.” For example, Alexander Pope is cited as stating that “Most women have no character at all.” In the novel, a man is called an “agbala” meaning a woman, if he has no title or had no character. In addition, because Ezinma shows some masculine characteristics such as having a temper and showing confidence, Okonkwo tends to wish that she had been born a male. The text also says that “consciously or unconsciously, women and men conform to the societal constructs established by society. Boys, for example, should be aggressive, self-assertive, and domineering, but girls should be passive, meek, and humble.” Although Ezinma possesses the masculine traits, she is still looked at as one of the typical women in Umuofia, later getting married and leading a life that is parallel to her mother’s.

Technopoly

The way I see it, technopoly relates to Brave New World in a huge way. When reading the chapter from Neil Postman’s Technopoly I realized that it is very similar to Singularity. Singularity was the idea that one day we will become powerless to technology and technopoly gave us a reason as to why it could happen. Technopoly says that the reason for us being set back is because we have opinions and emotions which causes us to question things instead of just doing it. Technocracy was defined as a “society only loosely controlled by social custom and religious tradition and driven by impulse to invent” (Postman 41). Postman defines the concept of technopoly as being a “totalitarian technocracy” (Postman 48). This concept can also be used to define the new world state in Brave New World because everything is based on technology starting from the way they are created, to the way they think and what they do. Frederick Winslow Taylor fits into the discussion because he wrote a book called The Principles of Scientific Management that “contains the first explicit and formal outline of the assumptions of the thought-world of Technopoly” (Postman 51). He basically said that we are inferior to technology. Postman and Kurzweil both have the same idea that humans are one day going to merge with technology and they explain that through the theories of technopoly and singularity. However, they have different opinions about it. Postman sort of warns us about it while Kurzweil can’t wait for the day to come. Overall, reading this article allowed me to better understand Brave New World because it had many explanations for the concept of singularity. It allowed me to see that tradition was definitely forgotten and replaced and it was pretty obvious that the concept of technopoly has already begun in the novel.

Singularity

In Lev Grossman's article "2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal", I feel like the point is partially true but it is way more dramatic or exaggerated. I mean, in today's times, man is already merging with technology in a sense to become better or to improve on certain aspects. In my opinion, this isn't a bad thing at all but instead it is beneficial to our society. To me, authentic means that it is original and I don't think that merging with technology makes us any less authentically human whatsoever. When I started to read this article I immediately thought of the movie IROBOT and that is what Grossman is saying our world will come to. He claims, "All that horsepower could be put in the service of emulating whatever it is our brains are doing when they create consciousness — not just doing arithmetic very quickly or composing piano music but also driving cars, writing books, making ethical decisions, appreciating fancy paintings, making witty observations at cocktail parties." In our reality, this is just a fictional theory but it lead me to something else that I believe is a form of singularity. Prosthesis. Prosthesis is used to help people who have gone through certain tragedies that resulted in the loss of limbs and maybe even parts of their face. Having a prosthetic allows people to be more capable of doing certain physical things. For example, the video above proves that the merging of man and technology is beneficial. Now, in our world this is a good thing but in the book, it is not. It is obvious in the novel that singularity has already began to occur right from the beginning when the reader finds out that people are created through the use of test tubes. They are born with their whole life planned out such as their job. It is not to the point where the people are literally robots but what they do and how they act are pretty much robotic. Bernard on the other hand, is different. In the book, Bernard said that he was "not just a cell in a social body" (Huxley 90). He thinks for himself and he has his own opinion and take on certain situations, unlike everyone else who just follows the crowd. Bernard is right about the people losing their essential humanity as technology progresses because in the novel, singularity has already existed in a way and it is continuing to evolve. However, in real life, the concept of singularity can only go so far.

critique.

Here is the link.

Usually, it is typical for the purpose to be extremely obvious in the first paragraph of a paper. In this case, trying to find the purpose of the essay was a little difficult but was it because that the introduction paragraph was poorly written? Or was it because it was not structured the way that I am use to? The introduction paragraph to this assignment was completely the opposite of how I have always been told to write it. This one was filled with many quotes and statements from other reviewers of the novel. I was told to never include more then one quote in the introduction paragraph and if I did happen to include one then it was to be the first line of the intro. By the way this person wrote her introduction, I assume that her intended audience is anyone who is interested in the novel and wants a review on it. Based on her intended audience and her thoughts and research on the book, this text was definitely structured in a way to applaud or praise the novel. Her main focus was to prove that The Great Gatsby was a well written book and this intended message would have been appreciated by her targeted audience. The thesis was sort of unclear to me because I was always taught that the thesis was the very last sentence of the paragraph. If I were to guess what her thesis was I would say that “ ‘Its symbolism, allusion, indirection, irony, ambiguity, and mythical dimensions’ (Eble 34), are eternal, transcending times and eras” would be her thesis. This thesis is only partially her own words and again, I was always told to use my own words in the entire introduction.

    All of the content and material that the writer used in her paper was all positive feedback or statements that complimented what she had wrote in the previous sentences. This way, the material she used enhanced her point and benefited her. The evidence used in this paper played a major role because it verified her claims about the novel. The type of evidence that she used was definitely appropriate and the most persuasive because all of the material that she chose to include in the essay conveyed the same opinions and thoughts that she was trying to get across. She used the quotes to her advantage and what I thought was that no more then two or three verbatim text quotes were allowed in a paragraph while in her paragraphs she had more quotes and less of her own writing. The pattern that the writer used in her essay was to state her opinion on the text and then she brings in a statement from a different person that reviewed the novel to carry on her opinion and to improve it. All of the writer’s transitions were done very smoothly because it began with a continuation of the previous paragraph so the whole essay was unified and consistent.  
          The paper had very appropriate and great vocabulary. Everything was easy to comprehend. The writer new how to use words that had positive connotations and that improved the text tremendously. The language used was carefully chosen to carry out  her claims and statements about the novel. This was a clever way to persuade the reader to lean towards her side or take on the novel. I did catch a couple of comparisons in the paper that was made to have the reader lean towards her side of the argument as well. She chose to use them whenever she could to further prove her point. They surely assisted in her writing by enhancing her main goal of persuading the reader that the book was well written and put together. I feel like the author did sort of put herself in a position of authority on the subject by using many great examples of verbatim text by other reviewers but in a way it would have been a stronger position of authority if she had included more of her own words in the text.

After closely examining the paper I noticed that it was very different then what we are usually taught in the beginning years of high school. There was always a specific way or structure to write things. I learned that the rules of writing can be slightly bent and that not very paper has to have the same exact structure to it. The way that this was written did in fact surprise me a little because again, it was written in a totally different way. It contradicted the rules of writing a paper in many ways. First, I was told to not have more then one quote in the introduction. Secondly, I was told that the thesis had to be the last sentence every time. Third, I was told that a paragraph should not be over eight sentences because it would be too long. Lastly, I was told that the author and title of the book always had to be introduced in the first paragraph. Overall, by looking at this essay, I learned that writing an essay with a different structure can result in a well written essay as well.

:)