I agree with Alana's points that she brought up regarding 'honor killings' and the plight of Imoinda at the hands of her husband.
This action was just one of many cultural differences I noted in this story and although I struggled with many of them--it was a reminder of how cultural differences have always existed between our different sub-societies throughout history.
In addition to how Imoinda died, I also recall the beginning of the story when Oroonoko's grandfather was overcome by his desire to have the prize that was Imoinda.
Because it was custom, the grandfather claimed his right as acting king to send the veil to Imoinda--the equivalent of a subpoena, only it was most immediate and could not be denied except by death. I don't know about my colleagues, but this idea of being summoned was revolting to me. Still, I remembered that my horrific reaction stems from what I know as acceptable social customs--thank God our President can't do that!
Ultimately, this story was amazing to me, I even learned more history than I knew when I began it. Again, it was truly a reminder of the differences that did and still do exist in our various cultures on Earth.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Oroonoko: A Reminder of Cultural Differences
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I didn't see this posting when I replied to Alana's. I wish I had since I tried to explicitly tie Oroonoko's actions through history to our society today. I could have tied the two postings, too. I used a different example, but it's interesting you bring up the President.
Using the example of President Clinton and relating the power of the presidency to the power of celebrity in general, I do not find Oroonoko's grandfather's actions so foreign. Wrong, yes, but not foreign. I firmly believe that many celebrities today wield that same power over their fans. Now, the power is not legally binding (not even in Clinton's case), but it seems so socially. The creator of "Girls Gone Wild" is an excellent example. Joe Francis has been at the forefront of a wave of female commodification through his video empire. But his actions resulting from that power is mind-bogglingly perverse and twisted, largely due to the fact that he has been able to keep himself out of prison - and even keep women from pressing charges on him (google "Joe Francis" and click on the second link; it is an article from the L.A. Times by Claire Hoffman and it is well worth your time).
Sorry for being so incendiary. I guess I'm making up for my physical absence for the next two weeks!
I should warn that the article I link to, while well-written, does go into some detail of Joe Francis' videos. I suppose before I give my wholesale approbation of it, I should make that caveat. It can be quite graphic.
Post a Comment