Dear readers:
Welcome to my blog!
I am Richard, a student of Fudan University in China. This is my first blog in 20six.co.uk. You will see my writing portfolio here, which includes a series of works that contains my endeavor and accomplishment in the Academic Writing Course I took this semester.
The reason why I choose this course is a bit extraordinary. As my major is mathematics, a discipline alien to literate arts, Academic Writing is really a challenging course for me. Furthermore, when I first knew about this course in elective system, it was named Advanced English Writing, which sounded more forbidding. (I have never taken Intermediate English Writing) However, I like self-challenging and have a spirit of emulation by nature. With a sudden impulse that I could dabble in linguistics and succeed, I chose this course.
The portfolio includes one reading log, two draft essays and one final essay. In the first five week, I was scheduled to finish one reading log each week, then draft, amend and finalize my essay in the remaining semester. Although the process sounds simple, it yet involved twists and turns throughout the semester.
At the beginning, believing that reading log was simple for me for I could write whatever I thought of the story, I put more emphasis on using more accurate and flowery words and phrases. But it had bogged me down in a mass of details. I cannot write fluently because I would stop and think whenever I was unsatisfied with a certain word in my work. Furthermore, I often found my contention departed and forgot that the reading log should be composed by my own thought.
The condition changed at the third week, when my instructor Ron sent me email that my work should center on my own feeling because he cannot find one first person singular pronoun such as “I” or “me” in my work. Since then, I paid much heed to my self-expression by associating my work with a virtual conversation with my readers when I was writing.
In this way, I amended the first two reading logs I had finished. One named “Fate, not Fault” for the story “Necklace” was the only reading log chosen into my portfolio. “Necklace” is my favorite story and Mathilde, the heroine, is the most emotional character I have read. In brief, this reading log is centered on my admiration on her bravery, honest and hardworking rather than her any possible defects.
Besides, another reading log “A long-awaited but lethal ecstasy” for the story “The Story of an Hour” is my recommendation to you. This story is not among the appointed ones my instructor has ordered so I cannot select it into my portfolio. But it does give so much resonance to me when I first read it that I cannot help writing one reading log for it. Frankly speaking, it’s the easily and most spontaneous work I have done in this course. Anyone who is interested in it can leave message on my blog on 20six.cn.uk.
The experience of writing reading logs has rendered me much help to the sequent essay. Since then, I’ve realized that it’s much easier to write about something that can stir my emotion at heart. So I’m highly prudent to fix the topic of my essay. A basic request is that the topic should not be “too obvious” while there are still enough evidences in the story to support it. However, I attach more importance to finding one that can strike a chord with me. Thus, my essay can reflect my sincerity in full.
Finally, my topic is settled as “Ajit Babu’s optimism can never shake off his poverty” while the relative story is “The Grass-Eaters”. The general reason is that I find the characters in other three stories have all experience some heartbroken adversities. Mathilde spent ten years paying back her “accidental” debt. Shadrach Cohen went to great lengths to fight back the erosion of Americanization, while Micheal Obi affronted the taboo of local villagers and demolished his own achievement at one fell swoop. But from the whole account of Ajit Babu, I cannot find any grave setback but only simple optimism through his life. Thus I wanted to probe into his unchanging destitution.
It was not difficult for me to finish draft1. But the amendment racked my brain since I found my topic not prominent in my draft. Therefore I rewrote the beginning and ending of almost every paragraph to enhance its link to the major idea of the essay. In addition, I consulted several books with reference to the bygone Indian society---the background of the story--- so as to make my essay more persuasive.
During the amendment of draft2, I went to great lengths to improve the logic of the essay. Some paragraphs were rearranged and several conjunctions added. In this way, every reader could clearly discern the skeleton of my essay: from individual to society, then to the relation between them. Besides, the general content of each paragraph was clearer after recapitulative sentence was rewritten more strikingly.
In draft3, the final draft, I paid more attention on details, such as the removal the contractions and the avoidance of using first pronoun. One trying business was to avoid frequent long quotations from the story. Instead, I should extract a segment of quotation and embed it into my own interpretation. Sometimes it was not until my tenth amendment of a single quotation that it finally satisfied me.
In the end, I want to show my sincere gratitude to whoever has helped me in this semester, including my instructor Ron, who has enlightened me when I met the crossroad halfway, two classmates Carol and Purple, who shared me their techniques to quote cogent arguments properly, and my dear friend Athena, who has sent her elaborate manuscript essay remark and suggestion to me by letter. There is no doubt that this portfolio is not an accomplishment of my own. Of course, if you have any suggestion to my works, please leave your message on my blog in 20six.co.uk. Your support will be my strongest stimulus.
Cordially,
Richard Deng
Ajit Babu: A Foredoomed Grass-Eater
The life of the people of Indians was plunged into abyss since the colonial administration rooted there. Different religions collided bitterly and stirred up numerous riots and killings, while most people of lower estate suffered an unimaginable destitution. They never had stable living necessities like clothes or meals, let alone a decent job or political rights. Some authors managed to raise the awareness of the wretched lives many Indians leaded at that time. Ajit Babu, the hero of the story “The Grass-Eaters” by Krishnan Varma from India, was a vivid reflection of them then.
In the story, Ajit Babu recounts his “eventful life” (59) with a calm tone. He and his wife have no fixed shelter and grass is his maple food. However, compared with his extremely wretched life, his optimism to affront the reality is more characteristic. Several segments in the story reveal it: pipe could be his most “comfortable” (56) residence than any of his previous homes. A whole wagon “with doors which could be opened and shut” was his “heaven” (57) and he even felt “I was god”. (57) But in fact, even if his optimism can make him feel like God, his optimism can never shake off his poverty.
For all Ajit Babu’s confidence in his impoverished circumstances, he does not present any motive to pursue a higher living standard. He describes his “eventful experience” with these sentences:
The events, of course, were not always pleasant. But, does it matter? We have survived them. And now, we have no fears and anxieties. We have a home made of coal tar drums. We eat two square meals of grass every day (59)
This narration implies that in his view, having somewhere to live and something to eat is almost enough. He has abandoned himself to a pride of survival without a foresight of his life, not to mention his resolution to get out from under.
At the beginning of the story, Ajit Babu confesses that he is “a tutor to a spherical boy for some time several years ago” (56) and has “taught in the municipal primary school…” (57). From these sentences we can learn that he once had a decent job---teaching. But what happens later? Regretfully, he doesn’t even mention it. A decent job may act as a ladder, by which he can climb out of poverty. But in fact, he has never paid attention to it.
His contented mind also reflects on his attitude to his “fourth” son, who is presumed to “look after him in his old age, to do his funeral rite when he died” (59). The reason he wants to get a baby is doubtless just to have someone look after them when he gets old. But he never takes into account that how a more baby will burden his life, and what can he do to overturn his baby’s inherited destitution. It clearly shows that he is satisfied of maintaining the status quo and has no further expectation.
Once as a teacher in a municipal primary school, Ajit Babu still lives as an unbelievable “grass-eater” (58). Can his lack of ambition to free him from destitution explain all? No! Compared with his personal defect, an abnormal society the author has portrayed is far more than he could conquer to shake off his poverty.
In the story, Misrial, the father of one spherical boy who is then tutored by Ajit Babu, once asks him, “Why don’t you move into one of my buildings?” (58). This question casually reveals Misrial’s affluence. Comparatively, is it reasonable for a “school master (57)” to inhabit “a cement concrete pipe” (57)? The paradox just gives a hint of the huge gulf of fortune among different people then, or more explicitly, the acute imbalance in Indian society at that time.
Another scene is more deplorable but thought provoking, which comes from the reactions when Misrilal and his wife learn about his “pipe” circumstance. “Misrilal looked exceedingly distressed” (58) and “His wife was near to tears” (58). These combinations clearly imply that in India, people of any other estates had never cared about lives of the poor like Ajit Babu, let alone rendering them their assistance. On the other word, Ajit Babu has no choice but to survive on his own in this emotionless society.
To make the matter worse, the Indian society was chaotic as well as imbalanced and emotionless. What is the scourge? The author describes in several angles:
Firstly, “Hindus and Muslim were killing at East Bengal” (56). This statement confirms the acute conflicts between different religionists. However, the victims of these collisions not only include religious zealots, but secular civilians.
Next comes “The woman very nearly scratched out my eyes…the woman’s husband, a hill of a man, whirling a tree over his head, roaring.” (56), which reflects the violent clashes between the poor, who will take no hesitation to fight for a tiny s living room at all cost.
Then begins “if a tram conductor stops someone getting up on its roof, the passengers beat him up, set fire to tram…loot nearby ships, break street lamps…”(58). It reveals people’s highly discontent and indignation towards the local regime, therefore implying the flaming confrontations between the masses and the governors.
At last, different forces such as “British imperialism, American neo-colonialism, the central government, capitalism and socialism” (59), all denounced by the masses, indicate a complex inner collision in the dominion of Indian government, which therefore aggregate the turbulence of Indian society.
All combination of these statements suggests that riots, killing and chaos are lurking at every corner of the Indian society at that time. All are disastrous for those poverty-stricken people such as Ajit Babu, for how can such an instable local regime, which even turn a blind eye to its social security, pay close attention to them?
On summary, Ajit Babu’s personal defect and the abnormal society conspire to give rise to his destitute fate. But what if he resumes his ambition of pursuing a higher living standard? Could he negotiate all the hardship from such a despairing society? Not necessarily so. In a society full of passing scene as “a tram burning, a man stabbing another man, a woman dropping her baby in a garbage bin” (59), he has no choice but to remain unemotional and unaspiring. He has already paid the price: “minus one ear” (56) when evading the attack by a woman and “lose one leg” (58) after a fall from the roof of a tram. The author adds these segments to prove that, for the poor like him, survival is more a question of not being injured or killed than one of not being starved or frozen. So it’s understandable that his lack of motive to pursue a higher living standard is partly driven by this monstrous society.
Thus the author depicts a dilemma on Ajit Babu. The abnormal society gives rise to his unaspiring attitude towards life, which aggregates his destitution. Meanwhile, his exacerbating living standard in reverse intensifies the imbalance of society, which will become more abnormal. Finally, this vicious circle foredooms his lamentable grass-eating destiny.
Through the story, everyone can see how an optimistic person is firmly fettered in an extremely destitution unconsciously. He is contented with the status quo. Furthermore, he has done his best to find a more suitable habitation for his wife’s confinement and his son’s living environment. But his optimism can never shake off his poverty. Ajit Babu is one, but not the only victim of that era. For all those impoverished people who want to pursue a more decent life, even if they were full of ambitions, an imbalanced, merciless and chaotic Indian society is their formidable enemy.
Work Cited
Varma, Krishnan. “The Grass-Eaters.” 1985. Rpt. in The International story: An Anthology with Guidelines for Reading and Writing about Fiction. Ruth Spack.
New York: St. Martin’s, 1994. 56-59
A Pot-holed Road
The life of people in Indian was plunged into abyss since the colonial administration rooted there. Different religions collided bitterly and stirred up numerous riots and killings, while most people of lower estate afflicted an unimaginable destitution. They never had stable living necessities like clothes or meals, let alone a decent job or political rights. Ajit Babu, the hero of the story “The Grass-Eaters” by Krishnan Varma from India, was a vivid reflection of the poor in India at that time.
In the story, Ajit Babu recounted his “eventful life” with a calm tone. Grass is his main food and he has no fixed shelter. However, none of those deep poverties had plunged him into desperation. Instead, his optimistic attitude emerges in every corner of the story: “With a piece of sack cloth hung at either end, we had found it far more comfortable than any of our previous homes (56)” “A whole wagon to ourselves –a place with doors which could be open and shut– … it was heaven. I felt I was God” But in fact, even if his optimism can make him feel like God, it can never eventually shake off his poverty.
Despite Ajit Babu’s confidence in his impoverished circumstances, he did not present any motive to pursue a higher living standard. He was just satisfied with “a home made of coal tar drums and two square meals of grass every day (58)”. In his view, having somewhere to live and something to eat was almost enough. He describes his “eventful experience” with these sentences: “The events, of course, were not always pleasant. But, does it matter? We have survived them. And now, we have no fears and anxieties.” This narration implies that he has never thought how he can live better but only abandoned himself to a pride of survival.
From the story, we also learn that he once had a decent and prospective job—teaching, for “For some time several years ago, I was tutor to a spherical boy… (56)” and “I thought of suggesting the municipal primary school where I was teaching at that time…(57)”. But what happened later? Regretfully, he didn’t even mention it. A decent job might act as a ladder, by which he could climb out of poverty. But he never paid much attention to this.
His contented mind also reflects on his attitude to his son. “Our fourth child… Would the baby be a boy? I felt no doubt about it; it would be. Someone to look after us in our old age, to do our funeral rites when we died.” His motive of owning a baby is only to have someone look after them when he gets old. But he never takes into account that how a more baby will burden his life, and what can he do to get rid of his baby’s destitute fate. It clearly shows that he is satisfied of maintaining the status quo and has no further expectation.
Once as a teacher in a municipal primary school, he still lives as an unbelievable “grass-eater”. Can his lack of ambition to free him from destitution explain all? No! A sharp contrast can answer it. While Misrial, the father of a spherical boy who was tutored by him, once told him, “Why don’t you move into one of my buildings? (58)” It gives a hint of the huge imbalance, or abnormality of the society. Consider a wealthy family with several houses as property and a teacher with nowhere to live but a pipe. The huge gulf cannot necessarily be explained only by Ajit Babu’s own problem. The innate character of the society must be taken into account.
Another scene is more deplorable but thought provoking, which comes from the reactions when Misrilal and his wife learned about his “pipe” circumstance. “Misrilai looked exceedingly distressed (58)” and “His wife was near to tears (58)”. These combinations clearly imply that in India, people of any other estates had never cared about lives of the poor like Ajit Babu, let alone rendering them their assistance. So it’s obvious that the emotionless society also gave rise to Ajit Babu’s unchangeably miserable destiny.
To make the matter worse, the Indian society was chaotic as well as emotionless. It was depicted by the author in several angles. Firstly, “Hindus and Muslim were killing at East Bengal (56)”. This statement shows the acute conflicts between different religious sects. Secondly, “The woman very nearly scratched my eyes… Next came the woman’s husband, a hill of a man, whirling a tree over his head, roaring. (56)”, which reveals the violent clashes among the poor, who will fight with others without hesitation for only a tiny living room. Thirdly, “If a tram conductor stopped someone getting up on its roof, the passengers beat him up, set fire to tram…loot nearby ships, break street lamps, take out a procession, hold a protest meeting, denounce British imperialism… and set off crackers (58)” It reflects the flaming confrontations between the masses and governors. The combination of these statements confirms that the Indian society is tortured by riots and killing. For Ajit Babu, survival is not only a question of what to eat and where to live, for life is filled with accidents and dangers everyday. So the author ended the story with these sentences: “We have a home made of coal tar drums… We live very quietly, content to look at the passing scene: a tram burning, a man stabbing another man, a woman dropping her baby in a garbage bin. (59)” It implies that Ajit Babu’s unemotional and unambitious attitude of life is partly driven by the abnormal India society.
Through the story, we can see how an impoverished but optimistic person is firmly fettered in an extremely destitution unconsciously. He was sure to survive them and had even done his best to find a more comfortable habitation for his wife’s confinement and his son’s living environment. However his optimism can never shake off his poverty thoroughly. He is not the only victim of that society. For all those impoverished who want to pursue a more decent life, even if they were full of ambitions, a merciless and chaotic Indian society is their formidable enemy.
A Pot-holed Road
The life of Indians was plunged into abysses since the colonial administration rooted there. Different religions collided bitterly and stirred up numerous riots and killings, while most people of lower estate inflicted an unimaginable destitution. They never had stable living necessities like a cloth or meal, let alone a decent job or political rights. Ajit Babu, the hero of the story “The Grass-Eater” by Krishnan Varma from India, was a vivid reflection ofi the poor n India at that time.
In the story, Ajit Babu recounted his “eventful life” with a calm tone. He and his wife had changed their habitation from Chittarnanjan Avenue with crowds of refugees, to a freight wagon, which often bring them to another place the next morning but was still regarded as “heaven” by him, then from a cement concrete pipe to a flat roof. None of those deep poverties had plunged him into desperation, since he had “no fears or anxieties if he had survived them.” But would his optimism eventually shake off his poverty?Although Ajit Babu never lost confidence in his impoverished circumstances, neither did he present any motive to pursue a higher living standard. He just satisfied with “a home made of coal tar drums and two square meals of grass every day”. In his view, having somewhere to live and something to eat was enough. When he died, “his son did their funeral rites”, which seems to be his only expectation to his son. From the story, we learn that he had once worked as a tutor and teached in a municipal primary school several years ago. But what happened later? Regretfully, he didn’t even mention it. A decent job might act as a ladder, by which he could climb out of poverty. But it seems that he never paid much attention to this.
The emotionless society also gave rise to Ajit Babu’s unchangeably miserable destiny. Once as a teacher in a municipal primary school, he still lives as an unbelievable “grass-eater”. While Misrial, the father of a spherical boy who was tutored by him, once told him, “Why don’t you move into one of my buildings?” It gives a hint of the imbalance of the society. What’s more deplorable is that when Misrilal and his wife learned about his “pipe” circumstance, “Misrilai looked exceedingly distressed ” and “His wife was near to tears”. It shows that in India, lives of the poor like Ajit Babu had never been cared about by people of any other estates.
To make the matter worse, the Indian society was chaotic as well as emotionless. “Hindus and Muslim were killing at East Bengal” and “If a tram conductor stop someone getting up on its roof, the passengers beat him up, set fire to tram…loot nearby ships,break street lamps…”These statesments confirmed that the Indian society is tortured by riots and killing. How can a local government, which cannot even maintain its social security, pay close attention to those poverty-stricken people such as Ajit Babu?Through the story, we can see how a impoverished person optimistically faced all the hardship. He was sure to survive them. Meanwhile, he had done his best to find a properer habitition for his wife’s confinement and his son’s living environment. But how can his optimism shake off his poverty thoroughly? No way it seems. For all those impoverished who want to pursue a more decent life, even if they were full of ambitions, a merciless and chaotic Indian society is their formidable enemy.
The lost of the necklace is really a catastrophe to Mme.Loisel. But what if she had not lost it? No doubt great changes would have taken place on her life. By a successful ball with first-class people in the society, her amour-propre might be satisfied, her energy filled and her confidence enhanced. Could it last forever on the fact that the necklace did not necessarily belong to her.
Of course no. I cannot image that if there was a second invitation for her, she could resist her temptation to refuse it. She would probably be plunged into a grievance a second time. Maybe she could fulfill her amour-propre by borrowing a necklace or a diamond from another Mme. Forestier, but could her always succeed? From the passage, I can confer that Mme. Forestier seemed to be the only affluent dear friend. Can she brazen the borrowing, or more explicitly, the begging out for more than one time?
If she failed to borrow a valuable article that agreed with the ball, her own choice was to decline the invitation reluctantly. However, a peacock in her pride would soon lose her way when all the glories and adoration died away. In this way, her vanity would make her life gloomier, for a one-time success of showing herself will not cool, but increase her peacockery. She had to live under the enormous contrast between her cradle-to-grave dream with her unromantic reality.
I can imagine her life if that happened: She suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born for all the delicacies and all the luxuries. “I deserve it” She murmured, with her everlasting sweet memory of the successful ball, the dainty dinners, the shining silverware, the tapestry which peopled the walls with ancient personages. She was extremely afraid of encountering anyone she had accosted in that ball on the street or receiving their invitation. She had to conceal her real status of lowlife by drawing up ceaseless lies to all her acquaintances.
Compared with the ending of the story, she didn’t need to burden a 10-year debt, nor would she be reduced to poverty. But does it mean that the suppositional life will exceed the real one? No! For all the setbacks and hardships, her bravery, honest and hardworking would surely conquer it, just as the author wrote in the story: She had the ability to repay the debt! She succeeded!
In my eye, her spiritual agony of peacockery and the sequel unduly disappointment will be more catastrophic than her material poverty. So her life would have been even worse if she had not lost the necklace.
Fate, not Fault
One’s personality is not judged by dream, but reality.
It’s really a tragedy for Mathilde, who has lost her beauty, her dream and her precious decade. Instead of dubbing her as a “peacock”, I found myself extremely sympathized to her miserable experience, not least because her honest, virtuous and hardworking. What’s wrong with her? Her unrealistic and never-ending scrabble to a virtual ladder by which the underclass could squeeze into a higher class? Not necessary so！She just sought to show off a more graceful image in the public, a natural sense and wish among women. Why can’t she spend four hundred francs -- a budget for her husband to “shoot larks on the plain of Nanterre with several friends” -- on a gorgeous dress for an earnestly-dreamed ball? Why can’t she borrow a superb necklace from her friend just for some spruce-up?
Undoubtedly this superb necklace is her Pandora’s Box, but I’m fully convinced that it is utterly an accident, an unfavorable fate! As the author put it “how life is strange and changeful! How little a thing is needed for us to be lost or to be saved! ” She could blame for missing the necklace incautiously, but not necessarily for her pathetic ten years since then. On the contrary, she affronted her tough reality by earning and saving money sou by sou (with her husband). Never had she thought of buying a counterfeit necklace to fudge, nor had she forsook her husband and accost a bigwig by her charm to fulfill her cradle-to-grave dream. Once she cherished her illusory ambition and wish, but when it was overtaken by rigorous reality, she confronted it with bravery, honest and hardworking without a hesitation.
Her only fault lies on the cheat to her friend about the missing of the necklace. If she had told truth and begged a pardon, maybe nothing miserable would have happened to her. But I still believe that it was only a white lie with no malice at all, for she merely tried to give back an identical necklace by her own efforts. Just imagine that if we have lost something valuable borrowed from our friends, would we just tell the truth and beg a pardon, or manage to find it back or buy a new one for a clear conscious? In this case, we have no reasons to blame on her, but to clap for her.