carlychan
Dec 3, 2009
Book Reports / "Waiting for the Barbarians" & "The Inheritance of Loss", settings comparison [7]
yes... lol
yes... lol
carlychan
Dec 2, 2009
Book Reports / "Waiting for the Barbarians" & "The Inheritance of Loss", settings comparison [7]
Thanks Mustafa, I haven't realized that I use "moreover" in the first sentence in the essay.
Thanks Mustafa, I haven't realized that I use "moreover" in the first sentence in the essay.
carlychan
Dec 2, 2009
Book Reports / "Waiting for the Barbarians" & "The Inheritance of Loss", settings comparison [7]
The topic of my essay is comparing the setting of 2 novels. How are the characters shaped by their environment? Do any resist the influences of their environment and define themselves against it? Are any defeated by their environment?
I hope you guys can give me some feedback and proofread it. Thank you.
Racism has been an issue for many people throughout the world; moreover, the on going process of globalization has not been able to eliminate this problem. Most of the characters in both novels "The Inheritance of Loss" by Kiran Desai and "Waiting for the Barbarians" by J. M. Coetzee are torn and defeated by racist environment. The Magistrate and the barbarians in "Waiting for the Barbarians" are certainly overwhelmed by the apartheid regime which is created by the nameless Empire. Moreover, the Judge, Lola, Noni and Biju in "The Inheritance of Loss" are psychologically overwhelmed by racism and are victims of colonial time and post-colonial time. However, some characters are not defeated nor against the racist environment they are living in. All these characters have their own feelings toward the living environment that are affecting their beings. They also have their own ways to encounter or surrender to the difficulties created by racist environment. No matter the characters are defining themselves against or supporting the environment they are in, racism creates a big impact on these characters' lives.
"Waiting for the Barbarians" is set in a vague setting which Coetzee has not given much detail to indicate where and when the story takes place. However, it is an allegory about an apartheid regime, and this allegorical story is likely portraying "the white government which came to power in 1948" (Country profile: South Africa) in South Africa. In this apartheid era, white minority have taken over the land of the black majority; they have also ruled South Africa with their own racist laws. The white minority have "aimed at separating the races and ethnic groups that inhabit the country: white, black, Indian, and "Coloured" (mixed)" (Laure and Laure 11). Though the Indians and the Coloureds are treated cruelly by the white minority government, they are not treated as severely as the black people; as Tutu as pointed out the "blacks are systematically being stripped of their South African citizenship and being turned into aliens in the land of their birth" (qtd. Mermelstein). Furthermore, education that are provided for the South Africans are funded differently according to different races, "the education of every white child costs about £64 p.a. ...an African child costs about £9 p.a. ...an Indian child or Coloured child costs about £20 p.a." (Mermelstein 18). As a result of racism in South Africa, the black people have felt devastated in their native land. The setting in "Waiting for the Barbarians" is similar to the apartheid regime described about South Africa. The Magistrate, Colonel Joll, and Mandel are depicting the privileged white people and the barbarians are depicting the disadvantaged black, Indian or Coloureds in South Africa.
Under the apartheid regime in "Waiting for the Barbarians" the Magistrate, Colonel Joll and Mandel all work for the nameless Empire in the story. Although they are the privileged people in the apartheid regime, not all of them are experiencing the same kinds of emotion toward the Empire. Moreover, they differ in their attitude toward the Empire's injustice laws.
The barbarians in the novel are unmistakably tortured and treated with no respect by the Empire, and especially by Colonel Joll. Moreover, the barbarians are thought to be "lazy, immoral, filthy and stupid" (Coetzee). However, with unequal rights and freedom the barbarians are not defeated. They will not surrender to the Empire and they will fight back if the Empire attacks them. This is evident when the Magistrate brings the barbarian girl back to her people: while they are following us they are also leading us (Coetzee). The barbarians in "Waiting for the Barbarians" define themselves just as the black people who have defined themselves in the South Africa apartheid era. The blacks are "striving with incredible determination and fortitude for the right to live as men - free men" (Mermelstein 19).
The Magistrate is against the apartheid regime created by the Empire; furthermore, he is not pleased with working as a Magistrate. He is similar to those white people that McGreal has pointed out who are "deeply involved in the struggle against apartheid but they are very few in number" (qtd. Diala) in the South Africa apartheid regime. Moreover, the Magistrate is unconsciously making amends for the sins that the Empire has committed. The Magistrate has been washing the barbarian girl's feet, because Colonel Joll has broken her feet when she is caught in the barracks with other barbarians. The Magistrate feels that "there must always be a place for penance and reparation" (Coetzee). Clearly, the Magistrate is torn by the ridiculous behaviour the people of the Empire have toward the barbarians. Furthermore, the Magistrate has not considered he is a free man until he has been imprisoned by Colonel Joll; his thoughts are explicitly exposed when the guards are taking him to the room in the barracks, "I have set myself in opposition, the bond is broken, I am a free man" (Coetzee). The Magistrate is not defeated by the apartheid regime; he has defined himself and revealed his rejection to the apartheid after he is no longer a magistrate.
On the other hand, Colonel Joll and Mandel are both privileged people who are not against the apartheid regime in the novel. Moreover, both of them are comparable to South Africa's white minorities during their apartheid era; they are "actively and passively supported that system" (Diala). Colonel Joll is the person who tortures whoever he wants. Also, the Magistrate has indicated that Colonel Joll is the actual barbarian in the story. Moreover, the Magistrate asks Mandel "how [he] breathes and eats and lives from day to day" (Coetzee) after he has killed and tortured so many innocent lives, and Mandel has rejected answering the Magistrate's question. Colonel Joll and Mandel both have supported the apartheid regime by torturing the barbarians, and making scenes to induce their people to believe that the barbarians are attacking them, "in every generation, without fail, there is an episode of hysteria about the barbarians...show me a barbarian army and I will believe" (Coetzee). Clearly, they are blindly following the immoral laws that the Empire impose on the barbarians.
Evidently, the characters in "Waiting for the Barbarians" are viewing the apartheid regime differently. Colonel Joll and Mandel are people who are supporting the apartheid regime because they are the ones who benefit from it. In contrast, the Magistrate and the barbarians are people who are psychologically torn by the apartheid regime. However, they are not defeated by the Empire because they are trying to define themselves that they are the ones who are opposing to the apartheid regime in their own ways.
"The Inheritance of Loss" is a parallel narrative story which is set on a mountain near the Himalayas of the Kalimpong town in India and the city of New York. Throughout the book, Desai is switching the setting once in awhile on current events happening in Kalimpong, memories of the Judge and Biju's experience in America. Moreover, Desai wants to emphasize on how Indians perceive the racism that they encounter in colonial time and post-colonial time in their lives and what troubles them mentally.
The Judge has been torn by the racism he has experienced while he studies in England. He has been despised by the Englishmen and as a result, he has started to loathe the Englishmen; moreover, he loathes that he is an Indian. The Judge has become "critical of Indian society and critic of Britain" (Codell). Clearly, he has developed Anglophilia. Also, the Judge has felt embarrassed in England and eventually "he saw nothing of the English countryside" (Desai) when he has finished his studies. After he has returned to India, he tries to dehumanize his wife because he has been dehumanized by the racism he has encountered in England. Moreover, he wants to become an Englishman and this is evident from his beloved dog, Mutt. By definition, Mutt means a mix-breed dog and while his dog is actually a pure-breed. This suggests that with the influence of English culture, the Judge has a mixed culture background; however, he wants to be a pure Englishman just like Mutt as a pure-bred. The Judge is unable to overcome the racism he has experienced in England and as a result he is a victim of colonization.
The Judge's neighbour, Lola and Noni, are two old Anglophile ladies who are living together in a house called Mon Ami. They are obsessed with things from England; "[their] vegetable patch containing...the country's only broccoli grown from seeds procured in England...their washing line sag under a load of Marks and Spencer panties" (Desai). However, their Anglophillic dream has been crushed after Lola has talked to the Gorkha leader; they have realized that "they had been wrong...the two of them had been fools feeling they were doing something exciting just by occupying this picturesque cottage, by seducing themselves with those old travel books from the library" (Desai). They are those people who are "clinging by their fingernails to the vestiges of the empire" (The Inheritance of Loss by Kiran Desai).
Biju is part of the illegal immigrants' world in New York. He and other Indians who are working illegally in New York are trying to accomplish the "American Dream". With the ongoing process of globalization, Indians are trying to get out of their homeland and achieve their goal in working in America. In the novel, Biju and other Indians have been "tossing aside toothless grannies, trampling babies underfoot" (Desai) just to strive to get the chance to go to America. Although Biju has gotten the chance to go to the United States, he has not been able to survive as an illegal immigrant working ill-paid jobs in New York. With overwhelming hours of work, Biju has discovered that he has not "even [heard] about any of the tourist sights-no Statue of Liberty, Macy's, Little Italy, Brooklyn Bridge, Museum of Immigration" (Desai) when he has decided to go back to India. Biju is torn by the identity of an illegal immigrant in New York and his feelings are comparable to the Judge's feeling when he is returning to India.
Biju and the Judge have experienced similar feelings after they have encountered with the west. However, Biju's illegal immigrant experience has happened during post-colonial time and the Judge's experience has happened during colonial time of India; their similar experience suggests that globalization has not been able to improve the problem of racism. Moreover, the Judge, Lola and Noni's anglophilia is the by-product of colonialism, and "anglophilia can only turn into self-hatred" (Wounded by the West). Moreover, their self-hatred is developed because they realize "the impossibility of being recognized as "British"...since there will always be something missing, namely, the right skin colour" (Zeit 5). In general, the Judge, Biju, Lola, and Noni all are "stunted by their encounters with the west" (Wounded by the West).
Racism clearly is an impact to most of the characters in both novels. The Magistrate and the barbarians definitely cannot withstand the apartheid regime and they are defining themselves to state that they are not defeated and strongly fighting for a racist-free government. The Judge, Lola and Noni have become Anglophiles from racism during colonial time. Moreover, Biju has not accomplished the "American Dream" because he is drowning as an illegal immigrant in New York. Regardless of the characters being defeated or not by their racist environment, they are all psychologically damaged by racism they have stumbled upon. Globalization has not removed the problem of racism in the world; however, with time passes hopefully racism can be reduced and all nations can be treated with respect and fairness because racism is a problem which is a tough issue around the world.
The topic of my essay is comparing the setting of 2 novels. How are the characters shaped by their environment? Do any resist the influences of their environment and define themselves against it? Are any defeated by their environment?
I hope you guys can give me some feedback and proofread it. Thank you.
Racism has been an issue for many people throughout the world; moreover, the on going process of globalization has not been able to eliminate this problem. Most of the characters in both novels "The Inheritance of Loss" by Kiran Desai and "Waiting for the Barbarians" by J. M. Coetzee are torn and defeated by racist environment. The Magistrate and the barbarians in "Waiting for the Barbarians" are certainly overwhelmed by the apartheid regime which is created by the nameless Empire. Moreover, the Judge, Lola, Noni and Biju in "The Inheritance of Loss" are psychologically overwhelmed by racism and are victims of colonial time and post-colonial time. However, some characters are not defeated nor against the racist environment they are living in. All these characters have their own feelings toward the living environment that are affecting their beings. They also have their own ways to encounter or surrender to the difficulties created by racist environment. No matter the characters are defining themselves against or supporting the environment they are in, racism creates a big impact on these characters' lives.
"Waiting for the Barbarians" is set in a vague setting which Coetzee has not given much detail to indicate where and when the story takes place. However, it is an allegory about an apartheid regime, and this allegorical story is likely portraying "the white government which came to power in 1948" (Country profile: South Africa) in South Africa. In this apartheid era, white minority have taken over the land of the black majority; they have also ruled South Africa with their own racist laws. The white minority have "aimed at separating the races and ethnic groups that inhabit the country: white, black, Indian, and "Coloured" (mixed)" (Laure and Laure 11). Though the Indians and the Coloureds are treated cruelly by the white minority government, they are not treated as severely as the black people; as Tutu as pointed out the "blacks are systematically being stripped of their South African citizenship and being turned into aliens in the land of their birth" (qtd. Mermelstein). Furthermore, education that are provided for the South Africans are funded differently according to different races, "the education of every white child costs about £64 p.a. ...an African child costs about £9 p.a. ...an Indian child or Coloured child costs about £20 p.a." (Mermelstein 18). As a result of racism in South Africa, the black people have felt devastated in their native land. The setting in "Waiting for the Barbarians" is similar to the apartheid regime described about South Africa. The Magistrate, Colonel Joll, and Mandel are depicting the privileged white people and the barbarians are depicting the disadvantaged black, Indian or Coloureds in South Africa.
Under the apartheid regime in "Waiting for the Barbarians" the Magistrate, Colonel Joll and Mandel all work for the nameless Empire in the story. Although they are the privileged people in the apartheid regime, not all of them are experiencing the same kinds of emotion toward the Empire. Moreover, they differ in their attitude toward the Empire's injustice laws.
The barbarians in the novel are unmistakably tortured and treated with no respect by the Empire, and especially by Colonel Joll. Moreover, the barbarians are thought to be "lazy, immoral, filthy and stupid" (Coetzee). However, with unequal rights and freedom the barbarians are not defeated. They will not surrender to the Empire and they will fight back if the Empire attacks them. This is evident when the Magistrate brings the barbarian girl back to her people: while they are following us they are also leading us (Coetzee). The barbarians in "Waiting for the Barbarians" define themselves just as the black people who have defined themselves in the South Africa apartheid era. The blacks are "striving with incredible determination and fortitude for the right to live as men - free men" (Mermelstein 19).
The Magistrate is against the apartheid regime created by the Empire; furthermore, he is not pleased with working as a Magistrate. He is similar to those white people that McGreal has pointed out who are "deeply involved in the struggle against apartheid but they are very few in number" (qtd. Diala) in the South Africa apartheid regime. Moreover, the Magistrate is unconsciously making amends for the sins that the Empire has committed. The Magistrate has been washing the barbarian girl's feet, because Colonel Joll has broken her feet when she is caught in the barracks with other barbarians. The Magistrate feels that "there must always be a place for penance and reparation" (Coetzee). Clearly, the Magistrate is torn by the ridiculous behaviour the people of the Empire have toward the barbarians. Furthermore, the Magistrate has not considered he is a free man until he has been imprisoned by Colonel Joll; his thoughts are explicitly exposed when the guards are taking him to the room in the barracks, "I have set myself in opposition, the bond is broken, I am a free man" (Coetzee). The Magistrate is not defeated by the apartheid regime; he has defined himself and revealed his rejection to the apartheid after he is no longer a magistrate.
On the other hand, Colonel Joll and Mandel are both privileged people who are not against the apartheid regime in the novel. Moreover, both of them are comparable to South Africa's white minorities during their apartheid era; they are "actively and passively supported that system" (Diala). Colonel Joll is the person who tortures whoever he wants. Also, the Magistrate has indicated that Colonel Joll is the actual barbarian in the story. Moreover, the Magistrate asks Mandel "how [he] breathes and eats and lives from day to day" (Coetzee) after he has killed and tortured so many innocent lives, and Mandel has rejected answering the Magistrate's question. Colonel Joll and Mandel both have supported the apartheid regime by torturing the barbarians, and making scenes to induce their people to believe that the barbarians are attacking them, "in every generation, without fail, there is an episode of hysteria about the barbarians...show me a barbarian army and I will believe" (Coetzee). Clearly, they are blindly following the immoral laws that the Empire impose on the barbarians.
Evidently, the characters in "Waiting for the Barbarians" are viewing the apartheid regime differently. Colonel Joll and Mandel are people who are supporting the apartheid regime because they are the ones who benefit from it. In contrast, the Magistrate and the barbarians are people who are psychologically torn by the apartheid regime. However, they are not defeated by the Empire because they are trying to define themselves that they are the ones who are opposing to the apartheid regime in their own ways.
"The Inheritance of Loss" is a parallel narrative story which is set on a mountain near the Himalayas of the Kalimpong town in India and the city of New York. Throughout the book, Desai is switching the setting once in awhile on current events happening in Kalimpong, memories of the Judge and Biju's experience in America. Moreover, Desai wants to emphasize on how Indians perceive the racism that they encounter in colonial time and post-colonial time in their lives and what troubles them mentally.
The Judge has been torn by the racism he has experienced while he studies in England. He has been despised by the Englishmen and as a result, he has started to loathe the Englishmen; moreover, he loathes that he is an Indian. The Judge has become "critical of Indian society and critic of Britain" (Codell). Clearly, he has developed Anglophilia. Also, the Judge has felt embarrassed in England and eventually "he saw nothing of the English countryside" (Desai) when he has finished his studies. After he has returned to India, he tries to dehumanize his wife because he has been dehumanized by the racism he has encountered in England. Moreover, he wants to become an Englishman and this is evident from his beloved dog, Mutt. By definition, Mutt means a mix-breed dog and while his dog is actually a pure-breed. This suggests that with the influence of English culture, the Judge has a mixed culture background; however, he wants to be a pure Englishman just like Mutt as a pure-bred. The Judge is unable to overcome the racism he has experienced in England and as a result he is a victim of colonization.
The Judge's neighbour, Lola and Noni, are two old Anglophile ladies who are living together in a house called Mon Ami. They are obsessed with things from England; "[their] vegetable patch containing...the country's only broccoli grown from seeds procured in England...their washing line sag under a load of Marks and Spencer panties" (Desai). However, their Anglophillic dream has been crushed after Lola has talked to the Gorkha leader; they have realized that "they had been wrong...the two of them had been fools feeling they were doing something exciting just by occupying this picturesque cottage, by seducing themselves with those old travel books from the library" (Desai). They are those people who are "clinging by their fingernails to the vestiges of the empire" (The Inheritance of Loss by Kiran Desai).
Biju is part of the illegal immigrants' world in New York. He and other Indians who are working illegally in New York are trying to accomplish the "American Dream". With the ongoing process of globalization, Indians are trying to get out of their homeland and achieve their goal in working in America. In the novel, Biju and other Indians have been "tossing aside toothless grannies, trampling babies underfoot" (Desai) just to strive to get the chance to go to America. Although Biju has gotten the chance to go to the United States, he has not been able to survive as an illegal immigrant working ill-paid jobs in New York. With overwhelming hours of work, Biju has discovered that he has not "even [heard] about any of the tourist sights-no Statue of Liberty, Macy's, Little Italy, Brooklyn Bridge, Museum of Immigration" (Desai) when he has decided to go back to India. Biju is torn by the identity of an illegal immigrant in New York and his feelings are comparable to the Judge's feeling when he is returning to India.
Biju and the Judge have experienced similar feelings after they have encountered with the west. However, Biju's illegal immigrant experience has happened during post-colonial time and the Judge's experience has happened during colonial time of India; their similar experience suggests that globalization has not been able to improve the problem of racism. Moreover, the Judge, Lola and Noni's anglophilia is the by-product of colonialism, and "anglophilia can only turn into self-hatred" (Wounded by the West). Moreover, their self-hatred is developed because they realize "the impossibility of being recognized as "British"...since there will always be something missing, namely, the right skin colour" (Zeit 5). In general, the Judge, Biju, Lola, and Noni all are "stunted by their encounters with the west" (Wounded by the West).
Racism clearly is an impact to most of the characters in both novels. The Magistrate and the barbarians definitely cannot withstand the apartheid regime and they are defining themselves to state that they are not defeated and strongly fighting for a racist-free government. The Judge, Lola and Noni have become Anglophiles from racism during colonial time. Moreover, Biju has not accomplished the "American Dream" because he is drowning as an illegal immigrant in New York. Regardless of the characters being defeated or not by their racist environment, they are all psychologically damaged by racism they have stumbled upon. Globalization has not removed the problem of racism in the world; however, with time passes hopefully racism can be reduced and all nations can be treated with respect and fairness because racism is a problem which is a tough issue around the world.
carlychan
Dec 2, 2009
Writing Feedback / THE FIRST FRIEND IN MY LIFE [7]
Hi,
as I was reading your writing, I feels kind of choppy? Maybe try to connect them somehow...with conjunctions maybe?
Hi,
as I was reading your writing, I feels kind of choppy? Maybe try to connect them somehow...with conjunctions maybe?
carlychan
Dec 2, 2009
Writing Feedback / I am many things, but as a seventeen-year old; Class Essay About Myself [9]
Try to use more conjunctions between sentences.
Example:
Every fifth house has the same floor plan, the trash is invariably under the sink, and six-foot privacy fences surround the miniscule yards; therefore, when I am an adult, I would like to live in an Italian flat that overlooks the village plaza.
Try to use more conjunctions between sentences.
Example:
Every fifth house has the same floor plan, the trash is invariably under the sink, and six-foot privacy fences surround the miniscule yards; therefore, when I am an adult, I would like to live in an Italian flat that overlooks the village plaza.
carlychan
Jun 15, 2009
Writing Feedback / Cultural psychology short paper [9]
I couldn't reduce the words in my paper because the requirement asks for approximately 4-5 pages... and this is barely 4 pages
I couldn't reduce the words in my paper because the requirement asks for approximately 4-5 pages... and this is barely 4 pages
carlychan
Jun 15, 2009
Writing Feedback / Cultural psychology short paper [9]
I've revised my paper and included the suggestions that Simone and Sean suggested. I wonder you guys can proof read it for me... like grammar and punctuations. Thanks.
I've revised my paper and included the suggestions that Simone and Sean suggested. I wonder you guys can proof read it for me... like grammar and punctuations. Thanks.
carlychan
Jun 14, 2009
Writing Feedback / Cultural psychology short paper [9]
Thank you Sean and Simone, I'm going to take you guys' advices and try to incorporate it in the paper. Thank you so much :)
Thank you Sean and Simone, I'm going to take you guys' advices and try to incorporate it in the paper. Thank you so much :)
carlychan
Jun 13, 2009
Writing Feedback / Cultural psychology short paper [9]
Hi, for my cultural psychology paper I had to interview someone about their family meal and it asks to describe that person's meal, describe my own family meal and in conclusion compare and contrast the two meals, family roles, cultural values, food consumption and family relation. I hope that you guys can help me to proof read this. Maybe you guys can give me some suggestions to improve this paper. Thanks!!
There is the paper:
Lenore's family meal only happens every Friday. Grandparents, cousins and other extended family members all participate in this regularly scheduled meal, if no other plans keep them away. Her family is fairly religious; therefore family dinner usually starts before 7:00pm, which is before Sabbath enters. Lenore and her sister set up the table for dinner and welcome other family members as they slowly gather at her house for this weekly feast. Also, when dinner is ready, no one has a special privilege to start eating before anyone else; therefore, everyone consume this one course meal altogether. As for the food consumption, Lenore's father prepares and cooks fish and vegetables for dinner. With Lenore's help, her father is able to serve their big feast on time. In addition, if anything is needed, Lenore, her sister or her father would get it in the kitchen. However, Lenore emphasized that the food is the not the most important thing for this family meal, the many conversations that take place during dinner is the most important aspect for the meal. Everyone have the equal opportunity to speak; however the conversations that take place should be polite conversations. Furthermore, they casually chat about memorable things that have happened last week, any spectacular events that are going to happen, and jokes. Lenore emigrated from Israel with her family five years ago; it is obvious that her family is trying to keep up the tradition that they usually kept in Israel, even though they moved to another country. Although Lenore only spends one meal per week with her family, this meal allows them to bond with each other. Family gathering once a week has a great influence to the close relationship that they want to develop within their family.
However, for me, my family meal happens every day at dinner. During that time, all family members are expected to be present. Yet dinner is not regularly scheduled; it may start any time between 6:30pm to 8:30pm. Our family dinner is a small gathering which includes my parents, my brother and I. If anyone is not available to be present for dinner, my parents usually save up some food in case that person has not eaten anything on their own. Everyone sit down at the dinner table and eat together. Anyone can leave the table when they are finish eating; however, everyone is responsible for taking their dishes and eating utensils to the sink when they finish their dinner. As for preparation, my mother prepares cooks and serves everyone at the same time. In addition, my brother and I are responsible to clean up the table and put away extra food in the refrigerator. Also, if anything is needed during dinner, my brother and I are responsible to get it. The foods that we eat during dinner are usually Chinese food, which consist of meat, fish, vegetables and rice. Sometimes there may be soup that is served with the dishes and rice. My parents are quite traditional; therefore, we do not talk that much during dinner. If we talk, we generally talk about school, friends or our day at work. No one has a special privilege in the right to talk first, everyone have the equal opportunity to talk. Also, everyone engage in the same conversation together. My family dinner is a small daily gathering to spend time and bond with each other. Although we do not engage in much conversation, it is still an opportunity to show care and build stronger relationship within the family.
It is obvious that there are many differences comparing Lenore's family dinner to my family dinner. For instance, Lenore's family dinner only happens once a week, but my family dinner happens every day. Moreover, Lenore highlighted that the food that they consume during dinner is not the most important thing for the family meal. They look forward to the many conversations that happen during dinner. They consider that building strong connections and knowing how each other are doing is the most significant thing for family gatherings. Unlike my family dinner, conversations rarely take place. Lenore's family starts their dinner before Sabbath enters, which means that her family is religious. In contrast, my family dinner happens at a random time and there is nothing religious about the meal.
On the other hand, there may seem to be many differences between Lenore's family dinner and my family dinner, there are few similarities between our family meals. Such as, the children of the family usually help prepare the family dinner and everyone help clean up after the meal is finished. Also, there are no special privileges for who speaks or eats first in both of our families. Moreover, Lenore's family dinner and my family dinner is only a one course meal. There is no appetizer or dessert before and after the meal.
Moreover, interviewing someone that has a different ancestry than I am has provided me with information in how families bond with each other and which cultural values they are willing to hold on to. From Lenore's descriptions of her weekly family meal, it gives the feeling that people in Israel treasure the quality time that they spend with their family members. Moreover, they are keeping their ritual to serve and eat dinner before Sabbath enters. This also shows that Israel people view that religion is also an important aspect in life. As for food consumption, it is unmistakable that Lenore's family likes to keep their diet healthy with low carbohydrates, because their meal only consists of fish and vegetables. Furthermore, the major emphasis about Lenore's family dinner is how they love to chat with every family member during the meal. This weekly family gathering improves and maintains a good relationship within the family. Seeing that there are similarities and differences between the two family meals, the mood of Lenore's family meal is the most unlike when comparing with my family meal.
Hi, for my cultural psychology paper I had to interview someone about their family meal and it asks to describe that person's meal, describe my own family meal and in conclusion compare and contrast the two meals, family roles, cultural values, food consumption and family relation. I hope that you guys can help me to proof read this. Maybe you guys can give me some suggestions to improve this paper. Thanks!!
There is the paper:
Lenore's family meal only happens every Friday. Grandparents, cousins and other extended family members all participate in this regularly scheduled meal, if no other plans keep them away. Her family is fairly religious; therefore family dinner usually starts before 7:00pm, which is before Sabbath enters. Lenore and her sister set up the table for dinner and welcome other family members as they slowly gather at her house for this weekly feast. Also, when dinner is ready, no one has a special privilege to start eating before anyone else; therefore, everyone consume this one course meal altogether. As for the food consumption, Lenore's father prepares and cooks fish and vegetables for dinner. With Lenore's help, her father is able to serve their big feast on time. In addition, if anything is needed, Lenore, her sister or her father would get it in the kitchen. However, Lenore emphasized that the food is the not the most important thing for this family meal, the many conversations that take place during dinner is the most important aspect for the meal. Everyone have the equal opportunity to speak; however the conversations that take place should be polite conversations. Furthermore, they casually chat about memorable things that have happened last week, any spectacular events that are going to happen, and jokes. Lenore emigrated from Israel with her family five years ago; it is obvious that her family is trying to keep up the tradition that they usually kept in Israel, even though they moved to another country. Although Lenore only spends one meal per week with her family, this meal allows them to bond with each other. Family gathering once a week has a great influence to the close relationship that they want to develop within their family.
However, for me, my family meal happens every day at dinner. During that time, all family members are expected to be present. Yet dinner is not regularly scheduled; it may start any time between 6:30pm to 8:30pm. Our family dinner is a small gathering which includes my parents, my brother and I. If anyone is not available to be present for dinner, my parents usually save up some food in case that person has not eaten anything on their own. Everyone sit down at the dinner table and eat together. Anyone can leave the table when they are finish eating; however, everyone is responsible for taking their dishes and eating utensils to the sink when they finish their dinner. As for preparation, my mother prepares cooks and serves everyone at the same time. In addition, my brother and I are responsible to clean up the table and put away extra food in the refrigerator. Also, if anything is needed during dinner, my brother and I are responsible to get it. The foods that we eat during dinner are usually Chinese food, which consist of meat, fish, vegetables and rice. Sometimes there may be soup that is served with the dishes and rice. My parents are quite traditional; therefore, we do not talk that much during dinner. If we talk, we generally talk about school, friends or our day at work. No one has a special privilege in the right to talk first, everyone have the equal opportunity to talk. Also, everyone engage in the same conversation together. My family dinner is a small daily gathering to spend time and bond with each other. Although we do not engage in much conversation, it is still an opportunity to show care and build stronger relationship within the family.
It is obvious that there are many differences comparing Lenore's family dinner to my family dinner. For instance, Lenore's family dinner only happens once a week, but my family dinner happens every day. Moreover, Lenore highlighted that the food that they consume during dinner is not the most important thing for the family meal. They look forward to the many conversations that happen during dinner. They consider that building strong connections and knowing how each other are doing is the most significant thing for family gatherings. Unlike my family dinner, conversations rarely take place. Lenore's family starts their dinner before Sabbath enters, which means that her family is religious. In contrast, my family dinner happens at a random time and there is nothing religious about the meal.
On the other hand, there may seem to be many differences between Lenore's family dinner and my family dinner, there are few similarities between our family meals. Such as, the children of the family usually help prepare the family dinner and everyone help clean up after the meal is finished. Also, there are no special privileges for who speaks or eats first in both of our families. Moreover, Lenore's family dinner and my family dinner is only a one course meal. There is no appetizer or dessert before and after the meal.
Moreover, interviewing someone that has a different ancestry than I am has provided me with information in how families bond with each other and which cultural values they are willing to hold on to. From Lenore's descriptions of her weekly family meal, it gives the feeling that people in Israel treasure the quality time that they spend with their family members. Moreover, they are keeping their ritual to serve and eat dinner before Sabbath enters. This also shows that Israel people view that religion is also an important aspect in life. As for food consumption, it is unmistakable that Lenore's family likes to keep their diet healthy with low carbohydrates, because their meal only consists of fish and vegetables. Furthermore, the major emphasis about Lenore's family dinner is how they love to chat with every family member during the meal. This weekly family gathering improves and maintains a good relationship within the family. Seeing that there are similarities and differences between the two family meals, the mood of Lenore's family meal is the most unlike when comparing with my family meal.