In the Blood by Suzan-Lori Parker

 

In the Blood is a play by Suzan-Lori Parker that focuses on the life of Hester, a woman who lives in poverty and has to struggle every day in order to make ends meet. This is a woman who has five children that have different fathers who she believes have to be supported well in order to have better lives. It is also important for Hester that she advances the lives of her children so that they can have the opportunities that she did not have. She seeks to make sure that she gets the help of her children’s fathers, but this ends up not being possible and she is disappointed. This play shows the manner through which Hester is led by her frustration as well as illiteracy and sense of shame into killing her oldest son.

One of the most fundamental subjects that are discussed in the play is Hester’s illiteracy. While she is an individual that cannot read, she is determined to make sure that her children achieve a level of literacy. However, it is essential to understand that for Hester, her illiteracy must have been an extremely frustrating factor because she was not able to achieve the qualifications that would have made her life better. In addition, she seems to be a highly empathetic individual that seeks to ensure that those around her receive happiness, and forget their troubles. This is the case with the manner through which she ends up giving herself to men in order to console them when having a bad time in their lives.

However, her lack of literacy can be considered a reason behind her eventual murder of her son. When someone scrawls the word ‘slut’ close to where Hester and her family live under a bridge, she is not in a position to read it. Her son, Jabber, who is more literate than his mother, makes the decision not to tell his mother what it means. When Hester learns the truth about the scrawl, she must feel all her frustrations build up until she cannot take it anymore. Her bludgeoning Jabber to death is a means of taking her frustrations out on him to such an extent that she does not think rationally. She is instead governed by her baser emotions which make it extremely difficult for her to realize the consequences of her actions until it is too late.

In conclusion, Hester is an individual that is governed by her emotions to such an extent that she ends up taking an action that she regrets. Her life is essentially a tragedy because it is one that she has to struggle every day in order to make it work. She is involved in acts that are considered loose by other members of her society and this it to such an extent that she is looked upon as a person at the sidelines of the community in which she lives. Therefore, her killing of her son, despite its being deplorable, can be considered a means through which she fights back against the humiliation she feels for being called a slut.

The Narcissism of Minor Differences

 

The narcissism of minor differences is a concept that promotes the idea that human beings have a tendency to want to promote their differences with others rather than similarities. A consequence has been that human beings often seek to ensure that they emphasize on differences to such an extent that there comes a time when they end up in conflict with others who they believe to be different. In this paper, there will be an analysis of the theory of narcissism of minor differences as a nature of humanity, a form of self-identity, a form of uniformity, and finally, its negative effects.

The theory of narcissism of minor differences can be used to effectively explain the aggressive nature of human beings. Individuals tend to seek to enhance the differences between them, even though they may have the same origins, because they seek to advance their aggression towards one another. There is often a failure among them to recognize that rather than being different, they are actually quite similar and this creates a situation where they seek to magnify their differences to such an extent that they create a gap that seems unbridgeable. When this theory is considered from the perspective of human aggression, it explains a lot concerning the manner through which individuals end up not being able to handle being similar to one another because others remind them too much of themselves (Muris, Merckelbach, Otgaar, and Meijer, 2017). It might also be because of the desire to be so different from one another that they do not see their deficiencies; a situation that can be considered a cause of the aggression that they show towards one another. Therefore, minor differences end up becoming extremely pertinent to the lives of individuals because it makes them come to terms with their aggressive nature.

The narcissism of minor differences can also be made use of in determining the manner through which self-identity develops. This is especially the case considering that individuals have ended up forming groups that they believe hold similar characteristics and make them superior to others. A consequence has been that some groups have developed centuries of hatred and aggression towards one another to such an extent that they have not been able to determine the extremely greater number of similarities between them. The case of the Shia and Sunni divide among Muslims is an extreme example of the manner through which the narcissism of minor differences can end up disrupting the lives of individuals to such an extent that the way that they self-identify is based on the minor differences rather than the greater number of similarities between them (Nuruzzaman, 2017). The failure to better understand each other can lead to situations where it is difficult to bridge the divide made from minor differences. This is the case when it comes to the Shia-Sunni divide, which has been ongoing for centuries and has led to a situation where both sides consider themselves to be superior to the other and also look at their counterparts as heretics because they do not have the same minor political beliefs (Van Notten, 2014). They also fail to recognize that despite their minor differences, they both strongly identify as Muslims, and have the same practices of worship that bind all Muslims.

One of the most significant aspects of the narcissism of minor differences is that it involves a situation where despite an emphasis on their uniqueness, they are actually quite similar. Such is the case with societies such as the United States, which consider themselves exceptional because they pride themselves in attributes such as living in a society governed by democratic institutions, the rule of law, and an emphasis on individualism (Fosshage and Hershberg, 2014). However, these attributes tend to be based on more similarities than differences among individuals in society. This is especially considering that because of their beliefs in these attributes and their exceptionalism, rather than emphasizing their differences, these individuals are actually submitting to a form of uniformity. Therefore, without even realizing it, their indulging in the narcissism of minor differences has led individuals towards the bridging of these differences and essentially becoming a more cohesive society. Under such circumstances, it becomes possible for the narcissism of minor differences to act as a means of bringing people together rather than keeping them apart.

The narcissism of minor differences more often than not ends up leading to chaos. Chaos comes about because individuals of similar origins or beliefs are forced into situations where they take on antagonistic positions towards one another. This is to such an extent that they fail to consider their common origins and their similarities and are instead more focused on seeking to advance their differences. The conflict between the Croats and the Serbs is an example of such a situation because these peoples are of a common origin and their languages are so close that they are practically dialects of the same language (Brodić, Amelio, and Milivojević, 2015). However, the enmity and sense of superiority towards one another has led them into conflict that has lasted many years (Reidy, et al, 2015). The chaos that has come about, especially from the attempts of the Serbs to dominate the Croats can be considered the negative result of the narcissism of minor differences because it has led these individuals towards a failure to advance their similarities. Instead, wars have been fought between these two peoples and there has been massive loss of life and property that should not have happened.

In conclusion, the narcissism of minor differences can be considered an extremely destructive force in human societies. This is because it leads individuals towards a false sense of superiority and uniqueness that makes them blind to the similarities that they have with others. A consequence is that it magnifies differences that are virtually nonexistent and makes individuals fail to come together so that their similarities can enable them to build a more cohesive and just society that cater for all their needs. The examples provided above show that getting into a situation where the narcissism of minor differences is prominent is easier than getting out of it.

Pre-Modern and Modern Views of Nature and Death

 

Walt Whitman and Emily Dickinson in their poetry address diverse issues concerning nature and death. These are two aspects of life that all human beings have to live with and have to come to terms with the fact that they will have an effect on them. In this paper, there will be an attempt to compare the pre-modern to the modern view of nature through an analysis of the poetry of Whitman and Dickinson.

One of the most important aspects concerning the views of these poets is that they promote the idea that death is essentially something that has to be feared. This is especially considering that in the modern world, people more often than not, because of the adoption of science as the mainstay of everyday life, are afraid of dying. In addition, the concept of nature is one that is seen to be hostile to human beings and that there is need to bring about its taming. The taming of nature is considered an essential aspect of being civilized; meaning that being in touch with nature is viewed as regressive. Therefore, the modernist view concerning nature and death are essentially hostile to both because human beings do not often have control over these aspects of life.

The pre-modern and modern poetry’s views concerning nature and death have a considerable number of similarities. When it comes to death, both views look upon it as an extremely personal experience. This is exemplified in the pre-modern era where there was the belief that death brought about a level of relief from the problems of everyday life. Moreover, it was intensely personal because it was closely tied to religious beliefs in such a way that there was the promotion of life after death. Whitman, in “When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd”, seeks to understand death and questions why God allows it to take place (Whitman). The modern perspective is also fairly personal when it comes to death because it is believed to involve the complete end of a life. In the poetry of both eras, nature is viewed as being beyond the control of human beings, with the latter having to live the best way that they can within it.

Despite the similarities between them, there are considerable differences between the themes involving nature and death in the pre-modern and modern eras. Among the most significant of these is that unlike in the modern era, in the pre-modern era, there was an acceptance of death an inevitable, but this was tempered by the belief that there was life after death. Moreover, acts of nature were believed to be the will of God and because of it could not be questioned. In the modern era, nature is viewed as essentially being hostile to human beings, as seen in Dickinson’s "Apparently with no surprise" where she questions the benevolence of God (Dickinson). This is an important perspective especially the case considering that these beliefs have become influenced by science.

In conclusion, the pre-modern and modern views of death and nature are displayed in the works of Dickinson and Whitman. In the analysis above, there has been an attempt to show the similarities and differences between the beliefs concerning death and nature in these two eras. The result is the realization that despite the similarities and differences, the views were extremely personal.

On the Translation of Culture Specific Concepts

 

In the contemporary world, where there has been an increase in instances of sampling of the literature from a diversity of cultures, translations have become common. This is an important aspect because it is a feature of the globalized world where individuals and cultures have essentially come to be seen as equal (Venuti, 2016). In addition, there has been an inspiration to ensure that there is the advancement of means through which the cultural practices of different peoples are understood. A consequence has been that there have been widespread instances where there is need to ensure that there are translations of texts aimed at bringing about this understanding. One of the biggest features of translations is that there is often language appropriation, where there is the inclusion of foreign words in the text of the language that the text is being translated to. It involves a situation where there is a potential of translations being used in the service of the ideology of the translator (Lefevere, 1992). This is an important means of making sure that there is the advancement of means through which aspects of the culture that is being translated are highlighted. A consequence is that the translated text ends up being interspersed with the text from the original language, which ensures that individuals who read it get a sense of the cultural aspect (Hermans, 2002). This situation can be one that encouraged readers to ensure that they seek to understand the meanings of the various words that have been used in the translated text, and read them in context so that the full meaning of the narrative can be obtained.

Translations into other languages can also face considerable dilemmas when it comes to the rendering of foreign words found in the original text. This is an extremely important procedure because it involves a situation where there is a need to render the foreign words in such a way that advances the retention of their meanings while at the same time making it possible to ensure that the cultural references are also left intact (Haroon and Daud, 2017). In most cases, translators seek to retain the original meaning through the use of approximate words in the language that it is being translated to because it allows the readers to not only effectively understand what is being referenced, but also helps them to come up with a means through which they can understand other cultures with direct reference to their own culture. However, there is often a diversity of translation procedures, and these are determined by the translator involved. In situations where words are difficult to translate and retain the original meaning, some translators choose to make sure that they either maintain the original word during translation, or seek to make use of words that are as close to meaning as possible to the words on the original text (Williams and Chesterman, 2014). In this way, the translation process could end up seeking to ensure that the text remains as faithful as possible to the original text while at the same time allowing for the comprehensibility of the text once the translation process has been completed. Therefore, texts are often translated in a manner that helps target readers comprehend the text that they are reading.

One of the most significant considerations that have to be made by translators is that different cultures tend to influence the way that members of that society perceive the world. This is an important principle when it comes to translation because it ensures that the translator is able to effectively convey the message from the source text to his audience (Maasoum and Davtalab, 2011). In this case, it is essential for all translators to ensure that they have some knowledge concerning the diverse translation strategies that they can apply towards the development of a comprehensive text that not only remains faithful to the original, but is also able to convey the intended message to the audience. Undertaking to translate culture specific items is pertinent to the overall comprehensibility of the text because it allows the translator to capture the original meaning of the text and come up with means through which to promote the cultural meaning of the words that are used. It is also essential for the translator to take note of those culture specific words that are important for the achievement of a true capturing of original meanings (Schmied, 2017). Culture specific words tend to be exclusive to their respective cultures and under these circumstances; the translator has to be extremely careful when rendering translations because they could end up completely changing the original meaning of the text that are translating. Therefore, even though there are words and concepts that are common to all languages, they tend to be expressed differently in certain cultural contexts, meaning that the translator has to follow a strategy that retains its faithfulness to the original text.

One of the main duties of a translator is to select an appropriate means of handling culture specific words and items because it is an essential means of making sure that the translation takes place effectively. The diversity of methods of translating culture specific items is important because they help translators come up with appropriate translations that reflect the cultures that they are referencing (Braçaj, 2015). There are instances where translators have a hard time finding words that completely correspond to the culture specific items or words that are found in original texts. It therefore becomes essential for them to come up with appropriate words that are essential in the advancement of the translation process, and these often either involve undertaking to translate them to their closest approximations, or maintaining the original form while at the same time providing an explanation based in the cultural context of the original text. A consequence of such a situation is that it leads the translated text to have instances where the original text is changed from the original one in order to adapt to the cultural context within which it has been translated (Newmark, 1988). Therefore, the achievement of a translation that essentially remains loyal to the original text, while feasible, can also be elusive because of the different cultural contexts involved in the language. It all depends on the methods used by the translator to come up with the most appropriate translation possible that makes it easier for the reader to understand the text.

Translations can be subject to change from the original text because of cultural differences. This is especially the case considering that languages tend to be subject to their respective cultures, meaning that it would be extremely difficult for the translation of certain items to be translated effectively (House, 2014, Katan, 2014). A consequence is that translators end up in a situation where they are forced to ensure that they convert the text into language that corresponds to the culture that the text is being translated to. There are a number of ways through which a translator can ensure that he conducts an effective translation of the text. The first of these is through the use of borrowing or undertaking a transference procedure. This is a process that involves the use of words or terms that essentially maintain the original forms of the words without any direct translations. In addition, there is the adaptation of two cultural words, which essentially involves a situation where the translator makes the decision to make use of words that correspond to the original words on the original text. Finally, the translator can adapt a procedure where rather than attempting to either use transference or adaptation; he or she can undertake a procedure of describing the cultural word (Wahid and Sukur, 2012). The description of the cultural word is an extremely effective means of making sure that the translation remains as close to the original in meaning as possible.

Ontology

 

One of the most significant factors concerning ontology is that it involves the study of the nature of reality, and its categories. It is a philosophical concept that seeks to determine those entities that exist, and how these entities can be categorized or grouped. A consequence of this grouping is that it brings about a situation where they are placed within a hierarchy of beings, which can be studied in such a way that determined their similarities and differences. A consequence is that entities that are believed to exist are placed under examination to such an extent that they come to be defined based on their nature. This is an important aspect of ontology because it shows it as an essential means of providing meaning to those definitions of reality that involve things. In this paper, there will be an attempt to examine ontology based on a social perspective, arguments against it, and how it has formed a symbiotic relationship with other disciplines.

A definition of ontological arguments is that they involve a situation where they make assumptions concerning the social reality. This is especially the case where it defines claims of what exists, how these entities look like, and how they interact with one another. In essence, ontology is an attempt by philosophers to better understand what human beings believe is essential aspects of their social reality (Schaffer, 2015). An advantage of ontology is that it can be applied in such a way that makes it possible for both an objective and subjective approach to be applied to a situation. This ensures that there is the advancement of definitions of a diversity of beliefs without having to determine them in the same way. Instead, social phenomena can be analyzed in as thorough a manner as possible based on the current need. Therefore, an objective approach is one that defines social phenomena and what they mean in a manner that creates a level of independence from social factors that would otherwise have made it difficult to achieve a definition. The subjective approach to ontology, on the other hand, seeks to show that social phenomena and their meanings come about because of the actions of social actors, who essentially ensure that they provide the meanings that make these phenomena essential aspects of their lives. In this way, objectivity and subjectivity are essential to ontology because they help in the achievement of a better understanding of social phenomena based on different contexts.

Despite the arguments that have been made above concerning the importance of ontology as a means of interpreting social phenomena, there are a number of objections to it that have been proposed. Among these arguments is that existence is not a predicate, essentially suggesting that the belief in existence does not necessarily translate to reality. In addition, there is the argument that the existence of such a being as god is one that is essentially meaningless and incoherent and despite the best ontological arguments cannot be proven. There is also the assumption that ontological arguments are essentially answers that are yet to be proven, meaning that they set out observations or presuppositions before they are proven to actually exist (Proops, 2015). These arguments, however, fail to consider the validity of the ontological approach as an essential means of making sure that there is a better understanding of reality. This is especially considering that they all seek to advance the belief that ontology is obsolete based on the assumption that it is not scientific. They are a means of seeking to destroy the reputation of ontology without providing the evidence that the arguments being made are actually not based on reality. By attempting to beat up ontological arguments of social phenomena, the objections seem to fail to provide proper arguments that can be accepted with good conscience. Therefore, the objections can be considered to be faulty in their assumptions because they take on a hostile approach to ontology without coming up with feasible arguments to counter the claims made by this concept.

One of the most important aspects of ontology is that it has been able to form a symbiotic relationship with other disciplines. This is the case where this approach is one that varies according to the extent to which the individual applying it wishes to place a reliance on other disciplines. The nature of the disciplines that one wishes to rely on is also important because it determines the direction towards which the ontological arguments that are intended to be made will head. Among the most important ontological methods that are applied is the logical or linguistic method, which essentially places a reliance on theories of meaning (Howarth, 2013). A consequence of this approach is that it brings about an understanding of the manner through which entities that exists are determined and defined. It can be applied to either natural languages or to artificial logical languages in an attempt to determine the kinds of entities that exist. Consequently, the discipline that is adopted as a means of supporting an ontological assumption has the ability of making sure that it points the direction towards which the arguments for it will head. This can be considered an advantage because it allows for the achievement of a level of diversity when it comes to the development of assumptions, and this is in such a way that makes the connection between ontology and different disciplines more feasible.

In conclusion, the ontological approach to the definition of entities that are an essential part of social phenomena is important in the achievement of their understanding. The above discussion, which has sought to bring about an understanding of ontology based on a social perspective, arguments against it, and how it has formed a symbiotic relationship with other disciplines, is essential in showing how this approach is quite effective. This is especially the case considering that the above arguments have brought about a situation where ontology can be considered a most feasible means of understanding social phenomena without the restrictions placed by assumptions based on science.