I want to start by stating, I couldn't tell where the sections were and accidently read the whole thing. On a more analytical note, I felt the dialogue flowed well and was easy to read, even the large sections where one character had large pieces of dialogue. However, I didn't like the actual topic itself. I felt like the author was attempting to show that the native, simple culture is superior to complicated European Culture. I felt, though, that the native culture was just as hypocritical and dumb as the European one. For all of the natives "freedoms" the still had crazy rules like veils, and chains, or at least a month love affairs. Also, they said that they just wanted sex to be about reproduction, yet the men weren't to have it until they were 22. I say they only wanted reproduction, because people wore veils and were not supposed to have sex after they were barren, even if they could still enjoy it. I thought it was incredibly hypocritical that when the chaplain explained that people who had affairs during marriage were only punished by social disrespected, the native said that was silly and a sign of weakness ont he part of the law. However! The native explained that disrespecting their own sexual laws were only punished by social disapproval, unless it was an underage girl who got the honor of being locked in a room. On a similar note, the native's use of logic and attacks on European morality would be far from his comprehension, especially since earlier the two commentors had explained that the natives could barely communicate their ideas. I just felt the narrative was flawed and the topic was hypocritical in itself, unless I totally missed the point and both cultures were supposed to be bad. I just didn't get that feeling.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I really did not like the format of the story. I felt like having the A and B was not exactly hard to follow, but it felt very repetitive and annoying to read. A would say something and B would question exactly what A had just said. It replicated actual conversation in that actual conversation is sometimes very repetitive, but it was not interesting to read. I would've rather it be a play completely or written in regular prose, because as it was I did not enjoy the format.
I agree with Nick when he wrote that he enjoyed the end of the reading the best, particularly the part about acting differently in Paris and in Tahiti. Though I'm embarrassed to admit I even thought of this, it totally reminded me of the lyrics from Usher's song "Yeah" when Ludacris says "we want a lady in the street but a freak in the bed." It seems applicable to me.
The reading got more interesting as it went on. I was fascinated by the fact that the Tahitian culture was so different than our own, but Orou was so good at justifying their own way of life that it didn't seem to be that strange in actuality. Our rules are so ingrained in our culture that I hadn't even thought of the fact that the idea of religion or of incest being wrong wouldn't occur to another culture.
Post a Comment