A Passage To India

A Passage To India

            A Passage To India, written by E. M. Forster, is a novel about the troubles of the British control in India. The novel focuses on Adela Quested, an Englishwomen who wants to see 'the real India,' and Dr. Aziz, and Indian doctor. When Adela accuses Dr. Aziz of attempted rape, it turns both of their lives upside down and inadvertently changes it. The film adaptation of A Passage To India, directed by David Lean, also follows this plot fairly closely; however, there were quite a few major differences in the movie version. Although the movie followed the book very closely, and I know that there can be artistic changes made for book to screen, but the parts that were either changed or left out were important parts of the book.

            David Lean did stick to the original plot of A Passage To India and kept a lot of the movie the same as the book. Lean stayed true to the characters that Forster had created.  Judy Davis portrayed Adela Quested, in my mind, perfectly. She was able to keep Adela's repressed nature while also being open- minded to the new world surrounding her. She was dressed very plainly and wore no make- up, or at least looked like she was not wearing make- up. Victor Banerjee played the role of Dr. Aziz, and to my amazement he stole my heart in this movie. Banerjee was able to take the character of Dr. Aziz and made it his own. In the book, Dr. Aziz went head- over- heels to do what he could to make the Englishwomen, Adela and Mrs. Moore, comfortable on their trip to the Marabar caves, but it seemed like he was doing everything because he had to. In the movie however, he actually looked like he was glad to do whatever he could for the Englishwomen. Banerjee made Dr. Aziz a loveable character that I wanted to root for the entire movie. Peggy Ashcroft played the role of Mrs. Moore, and she seemed to be the most typical high- class Englishwomen. She looked and acted like the type of woman I would see going to see a show at the Royal Opera House in Covent Garden. Cyril Fielding was played by James Fox. In the movie, Field dawned a mustache that was styled slightly like a handle bar mustache. He looked like the ideal traveling British man. His look actually reminded me of the character Nigel Thornberry from the cartoon The Wild Thornberrys. Nigel Havers played Ronny Heaslop, the magistrate of Chandrapore, Mrs. Moore's son, and Adela's soon- to- be fiancé. Clive Swift and Ann Furbank played the roles of Major and Mrs. Callendar respectively. All of the characters in the movie look and act how they were described in the novel, so it seems like we are off to a nice start.

            Another similarity between the book and the movie are the stereotype of Indian culture. In the first chapter of the novel Forster describes the make believe city of Chandrapore. He starts the novel out with, "Except for the Marabar Caves- and they are twenty miles off- the city of Chandrapore presents nothing extraordinary" (Forster, pg. 3). With the first line of the novel Forster has already given readers the thought that the city is nothing special. In the whole first chapter Forster never actually calls the city beautiful until he mentions the sky. At the end of the first chapter, Forster describes the beauty of the sky and how it can change one's view of their surroundings. "The sky settles everything- not only climates and seasons but when the earth shall be beautiful. By herself she can do little- only feeble outbursts of flowers. But when the sky chooses, glory can rain into the Chandrapore bazaars or a benediction pass from horizon to horizon" (Forster, pg. 5). I will agree that the sky is a beautiful phenomenon, but it only enhances the beauty of its surroundings. The sky and the earth can stand on their own when it comes to beauty. Everything is beautiful in its own way. Forster puts the image in the reader's head that the image of the city that they are about to explore is mean, dirty, and will make people not want to come unless they are invited (Forster, Pg. 3).

            The Indians themselves are also heavily stereotyped throughout the entirety of the novel and movie.  In the move, there is a scene where Mrs. Moore and Adela are getting off of their boat into India and are walking to their train into town, and when they are walking through that part of the city there are so many stereotypes that are show in that little span of  thirty seconds you see women wearing hijabs, you see Mrs. Moore holding her nose from the presumable stench, you see a typical snake charmer, and you see extremely overcrowded place with people pushing past at every step (Lean, A Passage To India).  Hijabs are commonly worn by Indian women, but this is the only time during the movie where you see an Indian woman wearing a hijab. Therefore, it is my belief that this was used to show a stereotype of the Indian women.

            The part of the scene where Mrs. Moore holds her nose to keep the stench of India and the Indian people away is also considered a stereotype. According to Mohammad Jajja's , an English professor at the University of Bahawalpur, Pakistan, article "A Passage To India: The Colonial Discourse and the Representation of India and Indians As Stereotypes" he claims that, "The Indians are represented as dirty, ugly people, who are associated with smell, tobacco and the sound of spitting" (Jajja, pg. 44). What Jajja is saying is that whenever people think of Indians they automatically associate them with a terrible odor because they are considered unclean. This is how they are stereotyped in not only A Passage To India, both the novel and the movie, but also in life now.

            There is a small time where you see a snake charmer, there is never mention of one in the book, but there is no doubt that Lean decided to put a snake charmer in the movie so people would believe it was India. And finally the scene ends with an extremely large group of Indians walking the passengers to their train. And by 'extremely large' I mean that there were so many people that they could barely get outside of the gate from the dock to the streets. There are quite a bit of Indian children pushing people out of the way to get closer to the Englishwomen. You see others pushing the men who were carrying the luggage so they could help the Englishwomen. It seemed like that if someone would have tripped, then they would have gotten trampled. The horde of Indians were like a mob of people at a Walmart Black Friday event. There were that many people crowded around the women. This stereotypes the Indian city and population being overcrowded. It shows that there are too many people in one city.

             There is no doubt that both the novel and the movie contains racism from both parties. The English people are extremely racist towards the Indians, it is shown throughout the whole of the story, and There are moments throughout where the Indians make racist comments about the English people. The English are so quick to judge the Indians because they see themselves as the superior race. There is a part of the book where Major Callendar sends for Dr. Aziz to come to his bungalow at once. Dr. Aziz receives the note while he is in the middle of his dinner. He doesn't want to leave but knows that he must. After hiring a tonga, a light, two- wheeled, horse- drawn vehicle used in India (Tonga), he goes to Major Callendar's bungalow to see what the civil surgeon needs. However, when he arrives, he finds out that Major Callendar has left with no message for Dr. Aziz. This is one of the first sightings of Major Callendar's insulting behavior towards the Indians. Gulzar Jalal Yousafzai and Qabil Khan, the authors of the article "Rudeness, Race, Racism, and Racialism in E. M. Forster's A Passage To India," respond to Major Callendar's action of not leaving a message, "Major Callendar, due to negative attitude towards the Indians, does not like to take pains and leave a clear message. This shows his insulting behavior" (Yousafzai and Khan, pg. 80). Major Callendar knew Dr. Aziz would be on his way as soon as he received the letter, but he didn't even stay to tell Dr. Aziz what he needed. The fact that he didn't leave a note with one of his servants shows how much he just does not care for the Indian people. He made Dr. Aziz come all the way out to his bungalow for no reason, and Dr. Aziz is not even able to take his tonga back to his house. Later in this scene, two Englishwomen come out of the bungalow and literally take it away from Dr. Aziz. "This is the first example of racial superiority or racially biased attitude in the novel. Both the ladies are English and take the tonga without any thanks, without any obliged behavior" (Yousafzai and Khan, pg. 80). I'm sure they have an inkling that this tonga did not just appear out of thin air for them, they knew that it had to be somebody's. The only people around at this time are Indians and so they have no problem with taking the tonga because they feel like they are superior.

            Another instance where the English people are very racist, and very prejudice as well, is when all of the English people gathered in the club to discuss what happened to Adela are the Marabar Caves. They assume that the Indian people are all working together to attack their own. Elizabeth MacLeod Walls, the author of the article "An Aristotelian Reading of the Feminine Voice- as- Revolution in E. M. Forster's A Passage To India" which is about the use of the character Adele Quested, talks about this scene. She says, "These prejudices become apparent when the Major, addressing the Club members, claims that Adela's chaperone Mohammed Latif had been bribed by the 'prisoner' to shirk his duty, and the dawdling Godbole had staged his own tardiness to facilitate Aziz's planned attack" (Walls, pg. 64). They are assuming that Dr. Aziz, because he is an Indian man and can't be trusted around Englishwomen, planned the trip to the Marabar caves so that he could attempt to sexually assault Adela. The English people are saying that Dr. Aziz spent countless amounts of rupees and told his friends that he brought with him to make Mrs. Moore feel claustrophobic so that he could be alone with Adela. This sounds a bit farfetched to me. The English people also insist that all of the Indian people were in on it, including Godbole who is one of the most respectable Indians in the book/ movie. They assume that Godbole planned to delay Fielding from catching his train so he could not possibly stop Dr. Aziz from making his attack. They believe this all to be true simply because they do not like the Indian people so they all agree that they cannot be trusted.

            The Indians are also quite racist towards the English people as well, although, they do not openly show it like the English people do. In the beginning the of second chapter of the book, Mahmoud Ali and Hamidullah are having a conversation about the English and about how they all end up the same. Hamidullah talks about Dr. Turton and how he used to be very nice to him and they would share carriage rides. But that was Dr. Turton first arrived to India, he has since changed and have become like the other Englishmen, rude and the sense of being superior. Hamidullah says, " They all become exactly the same, not worse, not better. I give any Englishman two years, be he Turton or Burton. It is only the difference of a letter. And I give and Englishwoman six months. All are exactly alike" (Forster, pg. 7). They do not think that there can be any 'different' Englishmen and women. They are all alike no matter what. They may start out very nice, but they end up showing their true colors and changing. Hamidullah, Mahmoud Ali, and Dr. Aziz show their slight racism towards the English is this scene.

            While there were many similarities between the novel and the movie, there were many differences as well. There were many scene's from the book that were left out of the movie for timing reasons and of course there were scenes that were scenes that were changed for artistic purposes. One difference from the book to the movie was the absence of Miss Derek. She is not in the movie at all. All of her parts are used with Mrs. Callendar. In the movie, Adela does not hitch a ride with Miss Derek, instead Mrs. Callendar drops Mr. Fielding off at the Caves and inadvertenly catches Adela as she is running down the steep hill from the Marabar Caves. She then drive Adela straight to her house so she can be treated for her injuries (Lean, A Passage To India). Although Mrs. Callendar was used for Miss Derek's role with finding Adela, she does not take Ronny and Adela back to Ronny's from the polo game. Actually, Ronny and Adela don't ride back together at all. Adela tells Ronny that she does not want to marry him at the polo game and then the scene cuts to Dr. Aziz, Hamidullah, and Mahmoud Ali talking about how much it will cost for the trip the Marabar Caves. There is not a scene where Adela and Ronny fall back in love. Instead, there is a scene where Adela decides to go on a bike ride to sightsee by herself. She travels to outside of the city of Chadrapore and comes across a bunch of statues, most covered in moss and ivy, of people showing signs of affection by hugging and/ or kissing. Adela gets off her bike to look around at the statues. Out of nowhere, about a dozen or so monkeys appear and start to chase Adela and attack her for coming into their habitat. She immediately hops back on her bike and rides back to Chandrapore while the monkeys chase her to the edge of their home. Once Adela reaches Ronny's she throws down the bike and runs into Ronny's arms saying that she wants to marry him after all (Lean, A Passage To India). It was strange.

            While I was confused about what seemed to be a random monkey attack, I now understand why that scene was put into the movie. Most English people, a quite a few other people today, refer to the Indian people as 'monkeys.' This scene shows the audience how the English people think of the Indian people. They are seen as monkeys who will attack when a foreigner enters their habitat because they are wild. This scene foreshadows the accusation of Dr. Aziz by Adela and the English people. They don't actually know for sure if he did it or not, but they are willing to assume that Dr. Aziz would attack an Englishwoman because he is an Indian man.

            In an interview by Mark Tully David Lean, director, discusses the difference between the book and the movie.

"MARK TULLY: How much difference is there between Lean's 'Passage To India' and Forster's 'Passage To India'?

DAVID LEAN: He's a writer, I'm a film maker. I like movies, and I've tried to make a movie that I would like to see. The end is different, certainly, but I think I wouldn't be ashamed for Forster to read the script. I think I stuck with his characters, and on the whole, given the limitations of time, I mean what's one doing? One's doing something in 2 hours, a book that thick, it's a sort of sketch of it, and I'm extracting a movie from it. Those who want to read Forster, read the book. Those who want to go to a movie, and don't read, come and see our film" (Lean).

Lean is open about there being differences in his movie. He was right about the end being different. One of the biggest differences between the novel and the movie is one of the major themes in the book is entirely left out. The question of whether or not the English people and the Indian people can be friends. In the book, this question is brought up twice, once in the beginning and once in the end. It really wraps up what the book is discussing. It is brought up in the beginning by Hamidullah and Mahmoud Ali when they are talking about how all Englishmen and women are the same. They determined that they cannot be friends in India but possibly in England (Forster, pg. 7). The question is then brought up again at the end between Fielding and Dr. Aziz. Fielding asks, more personally, why Dr. Aziz and he can't be friends now. India's response to Fielding's question is "No, not yet. No, not there" (Forster, pg. 362). This is one of the most important themes of the book and without this scene, it completely changes the story in my perspective. Throughout the whole novel, I wondered if Fielding and Dr. Aziz was going to break the tension between the two conflicting nations and become friends, and in time would change how each nation saw each other. Without it you really have nothing to hope for. Dr. Aziz's innocence happens much earlier in the book that you are left with so much falling action and the film doesn't really tie it together.

            As I finished reading the novel and watching the movie, I took away two different experiences. Although there were many similarities and pretty much stuck to the book with the exception of a few scenes, I do believe that the differences outweigh the similarities. When you leave out a major theme of a book, you are changing what the author wants you to get out of it, therefore changing your perception of the story.

Work's Cited

A Passage To India. Dir. David Lean. Perf. Judy Davis and Victor Banerjee. EMI Films, 1985. A Passage To India. YouTube, 9 July 2013. Web. 9 Dec. 2014.

Forster, E. M. A Passage to India. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1924. Print.

Jajja, Mohammad Ayub. "A Passage To India: The Colonial Discourse And The Representation Of India And Indians As Stereotypes." Gomal University Journal Of Research 29.1 (2013): 38-48. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Dec. 2014.

Lean, David. "Newsnight Gold: Lean's Passage To India- 1." Interview by Mark Tully. Mapability.com. Tim Mankins, n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2014.

"Tonga." Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com, n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.

Walls, Elizabeth Macleod. "An Aristotelian Reading Of The Feminine Voice-As-Revolution In E. M. Forster's A Passage To India." Papers On Language & Literature 35.1 (1999): 56. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Dec. 2014.

Yousafzai, Gulzar Jalal, and Qabil Khan. "Rudeness, Race, Racism And Racialism In E.M. Forster's "A Passage To India." Dialogue (1819-6462) 6.1 (2011): 75-92. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Dec. 2014.

Wide Sargasso Sea FULL Review

For the first reading selection for our Post Colonialism class, we were assigned to read Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys. It was by far the most confusing book I have ever read. This book was sort of written in the perspective of a child of a white plantation owner. However, this owner's husband died and they were really poor. The whole book was a stream of thoughts by the girl. It was really interesting, but I wasn't sure if I could trust her or not, since it was all in her point of view.

                This was the thing that really threw me for a loop. How could I trust this girl's judgment if she was once part of a family that owned slaves. Although, she did not own slaves anymore because she was dirt poor, she still had a mentality of one who owned slaves. But I could not go through the whole book questioning everything, so I decided to just accept what she said as truth.

                Although she was a white girl, I did feel bad for her at times. She was more or less the bottom rung of the white society. She was a white girl who was born in Jamaica. Other white people saw her as one of the black people who lived there. They did not see her as one of their own. This was sad to me. However, she did see now how black people felt to an extent.

                She did not have many friends either. She had Christophine, her one motherly figure. I mean, she had her mother as well, but her mother did not seem to care for her too much. So Christophine was that figure for her. She also had Tia. Had being the key word. Tia was kind of a jerk. Tia was a black girl who had befriended the girl, Antoinette. Antoinette and Tia would meet every morning and go to the swimming hole to swim. One day Tia bet Antoinette her three pennies that she could not do a somersault in the water. Antoinette knew that she could so she did. However, she did the somersault but was coughing up water as well. Tia said that she did not do it and took her pennies. Antoinette was upset and called her a 'cheating nigger.' This is one of the first times when we hear Antoinette use language like that. When Antoinette came out of the water to put her dress back on to go home, only Tia's dress was there. Tia stole Antoinette's dress along with her pennies. Antoinette had to wear Tia's dress home. It was dirty. This was very interesting because I was like a role switch. Antoinette was now wearing the dress of the slave, and Tia was now wearing the dress of the white girl. Antoinette now hated Tia for stealing her pennies and her dress, so now she really had no one but Christophine.

                Another thing that I found interesting was the passage where Tia was talking about how Antoinette was very poor. After Tia took Antoinette's pennies, Antoinette said that it was ok she could just get more. And Tia said (remember that this is all Antoinette's stream of consciousness),

"That's not what she hear, she said. She heard all we poor like beggar. We ate salt fish-  no money for fresh fish. That old house so leaky, you run with calabash to catch water when it rain. Plenty white people in Jamaica. Real white people, they got gold money. They didn't look at us, nobody see them come near us, and black nigger better than white nigger."

               This passage really hit me the most out of this book. I felt like there was a lot of truth about this passage. I am going to try to decipher what Tia said to have a better understanding of it. So before Tia says this, Antoinette has told her that she can get more pennies anytime. This is when Tia says that this is not what she hears. So where is Tia hearing about Antoinette's family being poor? Apparently the slaves are talking about the family's wealth, or lack of. Tia mentions that they eat salt fish instead of fresh fish. Salt fish costs less than fresh fish. In the notes at the bottom of the page, it says that salt fish was for slave and apprentice wages. Even the term 'salt fish' has connotations for low-class status. So most people know that they are poor enough to eat salt fish. Tia mentions that their house is so leaky that they try to catch the water that drops in a calabash whenever it rains. Tia also mentions that she does not think that they are real white people. She says that real white people have gold money. Tia calls Antoinette a white nigger. And she says that a black nigger is better than a white nigger.

                The term white nigger really struck me. Because white people would call black people niggers. It was something they called them to tear them down. But now that tables were turned and Antoinette was now being called a nigger because her family was as low as the slaves. And this was worse because no matter what, Antoinette and her family would always have the upper hand because they were white, but people didn't see that because they were maybe even poorer than some of the slaves. People would think that Antoinette and her family were worse off than the slaves, and all of the slaves thought this.

                This book was more interesting than I thought it would be and it really made me see the side of a failing slave owning family. It really made me feel for the daughter and how she grew up. She never really had a chance for a bright future with the mother she had. But then again, I do not really want to feel sorry for her because she was a part of a once slave owning family. So I'm still torn about how I should feel about this book. And maybe this is what they author wanted the audience to feel. Unsure.

12 Years A Slave Review

                On Wednesday we watched the movie 12 Years A Slave. This was a movie based on Solomon Northrup's slave narrative. He was a free black man who was kidnapped and sold into slavery. The story follows Solomon who is now a slave in the south, and is desperately trying to make his masters believe that he actually is a freeman. After 12 years as a slave, he is finally freed. This movie made me feel things I have never felt before. The following will be my reactions to certain scenes from the movie.

                The one thing that seems to surprise me the most, even though it probably shouldn't, is the kidnapping of Solomon. Solomon is originally a free man living with his family, and he plays the fiddle really well. He gets tricked by two men who get him drunk and sell him down south. This is when we see him become a slave. I was so surprised by this. I mean, I know that it was probably, and unfortunately, very common. I couldn't imagine being kidnapped and sold into slavery. I can't even fathom someone doing that to another human being. But I guess that back then African American weren't considered 'human beings.'

                The next major part of the movie that took me aback was the obvious jealousy of Patsey by Mrs. Epps. I knew that Patsey was the favored slave of Mr. Epps because she always picked the most cotton out of all of the slaves. He was also sexually attracted to her and would rape her. Mrs. Epps was very jealous of Patsey. There was one point when all of the slaves were dancing in the house and Mrs. Epps threw a decanter at Patsey and it hit her in the face. She automatically dropped to the floor and started crying in pain. The only thing I could think of at this point was about how often this happened.

                Another part of the movie that stood out to me is when Solomon was forced to whip Patsy. Patsey went to another plantation where Mrs. Shaw lived. Mrs. Epps wouldn't let her have soap, so she went to get soap and was heavily whipped for it. The only reason Patsey was even whipped in the first place is because Mrs. Epps made Mr. Epps do it. He didn't want to do it so he made Solomon do it. This is the part of the movie where it actually made me start to feel nauseous. You could see the blood flying off of Patey's body with every whip. Solomon tried not to hit her very hart but Mr. Epps threaten to beat him. I couldn't even imagine being forced to harm someone. It's just terrible.

                The last scene of the movie will always be in the back of my head and in my heart. It was after Solomon was rescued and reunited with his family. There is a moment where there is nothing but silence between Solomon and his family. It felt like a moment of disbelief. He couldn't believe that he was back with his family. He was so sure that he would die a slave. I actually started crying at this point. The reunion was absolutely beautiful. 

Mary Prince Reflection:

            Mary Prince's narrative is by far my favorite so far. I know I have not read Harriet Jacobs yet, so I can't really say for sure, but right now it is my favorite. One reason I really liked this narrative is because I was able to connect to her more. I am not sure if it was because she is a woman or if her story was more captivating. I do think her being a woman is a big reason I liked it more. She is a woman and I am a woman so we already have that in common. I can relate to her on that level. I know more about woman's place during slavery than what the men's place was. I also think I understood her story a lot better than Equiano's story. He talked a lot about ships and about what he had to do on the ships. He focused quite a bit on the names of parts of the ship when he talked about his time on the ships. I do not know or really want to know about ships, or what different parts of the ship is called or do. That really turned me off with the ship talk, it made it more difficult to read. Mary Prince's story is so much more captivating. To me at least. She also focused more on the terrible things that happened. Yes, Equiano talked about the bad things as well, but Mary Prince was not afraid to call out her masters for being terrible masters. Equiano was afraid to talk badly about his masters. He was afraid that he would not be able to get his book published if he talk poorly of his masters. I also think that their audiences were very different as well. Equiano mainly focuses on English people in general while Mary Prince focuses her narratives on the English women.

            This narrative also made me think of season three of American Horror Story. When Prince was talking about when a slave did something that the white masters did not like, they would be taken and hung up on a tree outside and beaten until the masters were tired. Season three of American Story dealt with witches, and there was a rivalry going on between the white witches and the black witches. We are shown why there is rivalry and they flash us back to the early 1800's where we see Madame Delphine, a rich white woman who has many slaves. She accuses one of her slaves of raping her daughter and takes him up to her slave torture chamber in her attic. When we see this room, there are many slaves who are kept in little cages, some with their mouth and eyes sewn shut. When one of her slaves would do something she did not approve of she would torture them. With the slave she was currently about to torture for apparently 'raping' her daughter, she had him chained to the wall and stabbed him in the side, all while she placed a boar's head on his head. She said that if he was going to act like a beast, then he should look like a beast. I found it so very interesting that I could make a connection from what we had been reading to one of my favorite television shows. 

Equiano Reflection 2:

         The most important thing I learned from our class discussion this morning was how some slaves were put in a  position of power. Equiano was put in the position of an overseer, or in this case a driver. An driver means the same as an overseer except an overseer was a white man in charge of the slaves, and the driver was an enslaved black man who was in charge of the slaves. An overseer and a driver had to make sure that the slaves were doing their jobs to their fullest capacity. If they were doing everything to the overseer or the drivers liking then they would be beat by the overseer and/ or driver respectively. The drivers were given this position of power over their fellow slaves so try and increase productivity. The white men thought that if the slaves were being watched over by one of their fellow slaves then they would be more willing to work harder. It was a form of encouragement and incentive. The white men put in their heads that if they continued to work really hard then they could maybe become a driver one day. It was a sense of false hope. And to raise the stakes of the driver, they were also given a gun. The ultimate form of power.

            This really interested me. Why would the white men give certain slaves a gun. Were they not afraid that the slave would turn on them and kill them? One would think that when a slave would be handed a gun, he would want to get revenge on the people who were beating and torturing them. The slave would want to get out of there as soon as possible. But they don't. They follow the orders of the white people to watch over the slaves for them, and they do it without hesitation. Why would they do this? It was brought up in class that it could possibly be a form Stockholm Syndrome. Stockholm Syndrome is when a person starts feeling sympathy and/ or empathy for their kidnappers. In this case it would be sympathy and/ or empathy for their masters. They feel as though their masters are their family now. They don't want to harm them or leave. This is all that they know at this point. They would not know how to cope with life if they were out on their own.

            There was a question that was asked, or more like a question someone still had, that is still in my head. We had been talking about how we may not have slavery any more, but there is still racism everywhere. The question is how do we change and how do we start to change? This immediately sparked an answer. One student said that people would simply need to get their shit together and work towards equality. A start, I think, would be to correctly teach history in high school. I was told that Texas school system wants to only teach about the happy things that happened in history. That means they wouldn't teach about slavery, the Holocaust, or any other terrible events that happened. It is important to learn about these events so we can more easily understand certain people so we can see where they are coming from. If you delete someone's history, then there can never be an equality.

Equiano Reflection 1:

            Something I found very interesting about the discussion we had dealing with the first section of Equiano was learning about some items we take for granted now was the product of the slave trades. I always knew that cotton was a material that was big during slavery, but I did not know that chocolate, coffee, sugar, and more was also big during slavery and the slave trade. It really makes me think about what items I take for granted and not even think about what people went through at one point to have these said items. It is absolutely terrible. I also didn't know that some slaves were turned into fighters. Equiano many times had to man the cannons on the ship to fight off other ships to help out his ship mates. It definitely makes sense that he would have to do this, but it just never occurred to me. I guess it never occurred to me that being a slave, he would be allowed on the deck of the ship. I thought he would have to always stay below the decks. Whenever I was taught about slaves and ships I always heard that they were never allowed on deck unless they were leaving. And by leaving I mean being escorted off the ship and sold. It is really interesting to me that some of these slaves were trusted to kind of become about of the ships team. I didn't actually think this was ever a thing. I guess I learn something new every day.

            Another thing I noticed was that the way Equiano narratives this story reminds me of another book I have read, Night. The way he talks about the time before he was captured and sold and traded is really similar. Well, obviously Equiano wrote this narrative before the Holocaust ever happened, but I read Wiesel's book first. One big similarity was the death of both Equiano and Wiesel's friend. Equiano is really good friends with a boy named Dick. They play a lot on board the ships that they are on. It's not until Equiano and his master change ships that him and Dick are separated. A similar thing happens in Night. Wiesel becomes a friend a boy named Juliek who plays the violin. They met in a concentration camp and quickly became friends. They were about the same age and size so they were always put together when they would be sent to do certain jobs. Both Equiano and Wiesel are separated from their friend and later find out that they are both dead. Dick died while they were separated at sea, and Juliek died when he passed out due to exhaustion and was trampled. Both are terrible narratives. I find it very interesting about so many similarities between the two.

Week 9: International Slavery Museum

Hey everyone! Here is my latest blog post! I hope you all enjoy!

            On October 31, our class traveled to Liverpool to view the International Slavery Museum. At first I was skeptical about this museum because I thought that I had seen all of this material before. We learned a lot about slavery in high school and I even learned about slavery in some of the classes I took at Millikin this past year. I was curious to see how this was going to be different from what I had already learned. After visiting the museum, my eyes have been opened. It was not at all like I had imagined. I actually loved the museum, and that's saying a lot because I don't really like museum to begin with. There was so much to see at this museum, and somehow I saw all of it.

            We were told that the third floor was where the actual slave museum was, and everything else was not necessarily strictly about slavery but other things as well. On the first floor, it was all about child immigrants. We were able to read about some of the children's stories and how they were taken to, mostly, Australia and Canada so they could try to have a better life. It was so sad to see how young these kids were. The youngest I saw was about four years old all the way up to around fifteen years old. Their families sent them to homes in Australia and Canada where they were taught various things such as typical school work, and if you were a girl you were taught domestic work and if you were a boy you were taught outside labor. This floor tied in to the basement floors theme, which was also child immigration. However, the basement had a section which was a semi-replica of the streets you would walk down to get to the ships entrance. When you entered, everything was immediately darker. Lanterns were the only light source. You walked down this cobblestone road to where you found a bar on the ship. There were figures representing the people in the bars and they also had what bed would have looked like there as well. When you kept on walking, you entered another part of the ship where it looked like where the storage would go. This was the last part of the venture. It was so interesting to see what it would be like entering a ship that you would be on for potentially months.

            The second floor was all about ships. It talked about different parts of ships and what they did. It talked about Liverpool's harbor and how lots and lots of ships use this harbor constantly. We got to see different painting of ships that dated back to the 1600's all the way to the Titanic. The Titanic exhibit was closed, which was a big bummer. But it was cool to see these ships, because without ships there would not be any trading of slaves. Personally, the coolest part of the ship section was seeing all of the advertisements that were made for the ships. It was interesting to see what tactics people used to get others to get of the ships for cruises and travel. This isn't really something you see every day.

            The third floor was where the actual slavery museum was. As I walked up, I saw that there was tribal painting along the wall leading to a part of the museum. I followed this to find a video of different tribes dancing and celebrating. It showed how they celebrate and was really cool. Next I came across this interactive video on this computer of sorts. I put on the headphones that were connected and the narrator told me about an Ibago camp. I was about to learn about the different huts and who lives where. The man has the center hut where he lives by himself. This is the biggest hut directly across from the entrance into the camp. He is the center being in the camp. He will usually have multiple wives who each have their own smaller hut where they will raise their children. There will usually be three other huts sectioned off with a rock wall. Each wife will have a small farm with chickens and pigs to tend to as well. It was great to learn about this tribe of people, and to see how they lived their lives compared to mine. It was so completely different, and I loved it. As I followed the wall it led me into a room with drawers and different television screens showing different material. Some talked about different countries and what they were known for. One talked about of coffee was made and how the beans were grown. It was very interesting. While I was looking around I decided to look in the different drawers. In one I came across the Equiano's original book. I was skeptical at first, I thought it was a really good replica, you can never be too sure these days. But low and behold it was the actual original. It was so cool to see the book that we are currently reading in its original form. I spent some time just looking at it. It was very tattered, but was in great condition. As I moved on, I came across an enclosed video. I wasn't quite sure what it was, so I took a look. I was not prepared for what I was about to see. The video was what you would see if you rode with the slaves on the slave ship. I saw hundreds and hundreds of people chained together, vomiting, groaning, and the video went on and on. I was on repeat so you could watch the gruesome footage and really take it all in. I was horrified. I kept thinking,, ' How could people treat others like this. It is horrendous.' As I made my final sweep, I discovered another couple rooms all on the Congo. I learned a little bit about the Congo in the African American Drama class when we were discussing the play Ruined. All I can remember from this section was the lecture. The lecture talked about how if a family couldn't get what they needed to get by a certain time, then their version of law enforcement would cut a body part off of one of the children. That's how they would teach them to make sure they had everything they needed for next time. This made me sick. That's all I'm going to say about this section. Just terrible.

            This museum was a lot more fun than I thought it would be. I actually enjoyed learning more about the culture and of the slavery era. It really got me to think about how lucky I am. About how lucky I am to not live in that era, and to not live in the Congo. It made me realize that we take need to be grateful for the time we live in now. Yes, there is still racism, but there is no more slavery. And that is something to be grateful for.