What God Meant You to Be

In the short story Babette’s Feast we are presented many different ideas. One of these ideas that is consistently repeated throughout the short story is the one about what that the characters are “meant” to be in life. This concept is based on what characters think God meant other characters to be, which is obviously going to vary based on different character’s opinions. However, my question is if the characters ever questioned themselves about what they want to be instead of what they thought they’re meant to be.

One example of this idea is how the two sisters Martine and Philippa, after being raised by their father who instilled them with rigorous religious instruction, thought that they were meant to serve God. Throughout their entire lives all they ever worried about was serving God and staying away from worldly pleasures. They especially stayed away from any material goods because they thought “the earth and all that it held to them was but a kind of illusion, and the true reality was the New Jerusalem toward which they were longing” (21).

Philippa, the younger sister, even had a chance to become a great singer because of her amazing talent, but she rejected it because she thought that that wasn’t what she was meant to do. This is where my question of the characters ever wondering what they wanted to do comes in. Did Philippa ever question whether she wanted to be a singer? Or did she automatically discard that idea because she thought that’s not what she was meant to do? Also, if she did question herself about what she truly wanted, would the answer have been that she wanted to be a singer? And did she not go on with this desire of hers because she thought it would’ve been looked down upon because it wouldn’t have been what she was meant to do? My personal conviction is that she didn’t even question what she wanted because throughout her life all she was ever told was that she should serve God so there wasn’t even a question about what she should do. Serving God was all she knew.

This concept is repeated towards the end. There we see that to Babette cooking is an art. Because of this when she wins the lottery, she makes a great feast for the sisters and their guests. At first Martine and Philippa think that Babette wasted a fortune in preparing a simply dinner, but to Babette that was never a waste of money. She wanted to do it so she could express herself through her art. Before Babette hadn’t been able to do it because she hadn’t had the money to buy the ingredients that she needed for the feast, so when she finally had the money she did not think twice about spending it on that. After the feast is over, the sisters finally understand its importance to Babatte. At this point Philippa tells Babette, “Yet this is not the end! I feel, Babette, that this is not the end. In Paradise you will be the great artist that God meant you to be! Ah!” she added, the tears streaming down her cheeks. “Ah, how you will enchant the angels!” After preparing this feast we know that Babette fulfilled what she wanted to do with her life, the question is if the sisters ever achieved a sense of fulfillment.

Was an Alter Ego Needed?

After reading the play The Good Woman of Setzuan by Bertolt Brecht I have a better understanding of what satire is. What seems to be the main satirized idea in this play is that it’s impossible to be a good person because people will take advantage of you. Shen Te, the protagonist of this play, believes this so in order to keep committing good deeds she develops an alter ego, Shui Ta that does what’s necessary to protect Shen Te from those that want to take advantage of her.

The reason I think being a good person is what’s being satirized in this play is that I don’t believe that just because you don’t let people take advantage of you means you’re a bad person. I think its possible to have good people who help others but at the same time know how to protect themselves. However, this isn’t what Shen Te believed; she thought that if she wasn’t selfless and thought about herself once in a while she was a bad person. For example, when she came upon money she just handed it out left and right. When I think about her doing that I don’t think about her being a good person, I think about her dumb and squandering her money. This is a very foolish way to use her money because, beside the obvious reasons, she could be using that money to invest it and create more of it. By generating more money she could her more people. But Shen Te doesn’t think about this, she thinks that if she doesn’t extend her hand to the needy right away she’s being a bad person.

In order to balance some of those “good” deeds she made she created Shui Ta, which, like Kersia explained in her blog, isn’t a bad person, he only does what he feels is necessary and logical in order to help Shen Te. It wasn’t long, however, before she confessed the truth.

SECOND GOD: What have you done with our good woman of

Setzuan?

SHUI TA: I have a terrible confession to make: I am she!

SECOND GOD: Shen Te!

SHEN TE: Shen Te, yes. Shui Ta and Shen Te Both./Your injunction/ To be good and yet to live/ Was a thunderbolt:/ It has torn me in two/ I can’t tell how it was/ But to be good to others/ And myself at the same time/ I could not do it/ Your world is not an easy one, illustrious ones!/ When we extend our hand to a beggar, he tears it off for us/ When we help the lost, we are lost ourselves/ And so/ Since to not eat is to die/ Who can long refuse to be bad? (102)

After doing some research I found evidence that explained Shen Te’s multiple personality disorder. In the article “split Personality” a Rapidly Growing Psychotic Disorder I found that “Typically a patient's primary identity has the person's own given name and is passive, dependent, guilty and depressed. Meanwhile, other personalities - or alters - that surface at different times are more likely to be hostile, controlling and self-destructive.” This exactly how it is with Shen Te. She herself was too giving, too selfless, so she created a more hostile, more controlling alter ego to defend her true self. If she hadn’t thought that not letting people take advantage of her meant that she was a bad person Shen Te wouldn’t have had to create this alter ego.

Work Cited

Brecht, Bertolt, and Eric Bentley. The Good Woman of Setzuan. Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota, 1999. Print.

"split Personality€ a Rapidly Growing Psychotic Disorder." Free Articles Directory | Submit Articles - ArticlesBase.com. Web. 19 Apr. 2010. .

Don't Be Prejudiced

Something that has really been frustrating me about the play we are currently reading, The Good Woman of Setzuan, by Bertolt Brecht is that I don’t understand the satire that it presents. I think that part of this is due because I tend to associate satire with comedy. Although satire can be comic it isn’t all the time; also what I think is comic depends on my own personal taste.

So basically, as I’ve been reading the play, I’ve been looking for examples of satires. The only one I’ve recognized, though, is the one that Susan pointed before we started reading the play: how Wong the water seller of Setzuan is looking for a good person to take the Gods in for a night and that good person ends up being a prostitute, Shen Te.

This is a satire because the author is showing us through irony how people are stupid in having a preconceived idea of what a good person is. Unfortunately society tags people and places them into very broad categories, two of these are good and bad. People like prostitutes are classified into the bad category. However, its unfair to tag someone as being a bad person simply because they live this kind of life style. Sure, you could argue that even if they are extremely poor they could find other ways to make money, but that still doesn’t make it ok to judge them without even knowing them. The following scene proves that Shen Te, in spite of being a prostitute is a good person:

WONG: Godless rascal! Have you no religion, gentleman of Setzuan? Patience, illustrious ones! There’s on ly one person left. Shen Te the protitute. She can’t say no. Shen Te! Shen Te, it’s Wong. They’re here, and nobody wants them. Will you take them?

SHEN TE: Oh no, Wong, I’m expecting a gentleman…Oh very well! I’ll hide till my gentleman has come and gone. Then I’ll take them. (8)

Wong the water seller meets the Gods when they are entering the city of Setzuan. They tell him that they need a place to stay and Wong says

WONG: The whole town is at your service. (6)

However, Wong asks many people to take in the Gods and they all decline. Shen Te on the contrary accepts. She also does this in spite of having to work. She knows that she has to work in order to eat but she chooses to not send the Gods away. Now that we know this we can easily see how Shen Te is a great person in spite of being a prostitute. This shows us that we should never judge a person before we get to know them.

Works Cited

Brecht, Bertolt, and Eric Bentley. The Good Woman of Setzuan. Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota, 1999. Print.

Ahmad’s Regrets

Throughout Naguib Mahfouz’s novel, Palace Walk, we see how Ahmad treats his family with detachment and harshness. Although he does feel affection for his loved ones he does not show it. He acts like this because he believes that if he shows any sign of agreement toward them, they will begin to disobey him. Because of this Ahmad appears to never be pleased with anything his family does no matter how good it is. Ahmad acts detached and indifferent towards his family until his son, Fahmy, dies and he realizes that he was always too strict with them.

The reason Ahmad acts so strict towards his family is because he is thinks that if he shows that he’s pleased with anything they do, they will immediately start disobeying him. Yesenia describes Ahmad’s thinking perfectly in her blog entry, “Disobedient”. She says, “Ahmad is a typical father who forces his entire family to be submissive to him. He is strict to the point where he manipulates the way his wife and children act. The reason why Ahmad doesn’t show affection towards his own family is because he believes that if he does then they will take advantage of him.” Because of this fear he has of losing control over his household, Ahmad is very demanding of his family. Nothing, even anything his best son, Fahmy, does, is ever good enough.

Throughout the novel we can compare and contrast how different Fahmy and Yasin are. One of those moments in which we can see how different they are is the way the way Yasin reacts versus the way Fahmy reacts when they find out the truth about their father, Al-Sayyid Ahmad. In their eyes their father had always been a proper, honorable, and pious man. However, they then find out that he has been going to parties to sing and drink and has been having affairs with various women. Yasin and Fahmy react very differently when they learn this truth. Fahmy condemns his actions and Yasin praises him. We get a glimpse of what they about their father’s actions on the third and fourth paragraphs on page 271.

The first of these paragraphs show Fahmy’s thoughts. He says, “‘My father doesn’t differ at all from Yasin except in having sunk lower…. There must be something I don’t know… My father hasn’t done anything wrong…. He can’t do anything wrong (271).’” To Fahmy his father was a true hero, so much so that when he learned this he believed it was a lie. When he finally accepted it as the truth the image he had of his father was marred. He no longer regarded him with the same respect and admiration. He believed he was even worse than Yasin. When Fahmy learned this truth he was appalled and condemned his father’s actions.

In the second of these paragraphs we see the way Yasin thinks. He says, “’He sings. So what’s wrong about singing? He gets drunk, and believe me, drinking is even better than eating. He has affairs and so did the Muslim caliphs…. Our father isn’t doing anything sinful (271).’” Yasin always held his father in the highest esteem. However, when he learned about this truth he became even admirable to him. Yasin thought it was great that his father acted the way he did. He thought that there was nothing wrong in having many affairs and objectifying women.

This contrast of what Fahmy thought versus what Yasin thought about their father’s actions is just one example that shows how Fahmy is a better son than Yasin. Everything Ahmad has taught Yasin has been to no avail. Yasin still drinks, wastes his money foolishly, has lovers, and if that weren’t enough he praises his father when he learns he does this. Fahmy on the contrary is a proper, honorable, and pious young man; everything his father always wanted his sons to be. However, does Ahmad praise him for this? No. All he ever has to say to his family are negative things. Although Fahmy was a much better son and overall person, he never received any kind of praise from his father.

Another example of how Fahmy is a much better son than Yasin is the way Yasin tried to rape Umm Hanafi. With this incident we saw what a savage animal Yasin is. His brutal sexual desires are well described here: “He was blinded by lust. What kind of lust was it? A lust kindled by a woman simply because she was a woman, not because of any of her qualities or associations. It was a lust that loved beauty but would not turn away from ugliness. In these crises, everything was equivalent. He was like a dog that eagerly devours whatever scraps it finds” (277). This is something Fahmy wouldn’t have even thought of doing.

Another incident that greatly angers Ahmad is when Yasin sleeps with his wife’s personal maid, Nur. When this occurs Ahmad is enraged but not so much at the fact that Yasin has slept with a woman that isn’t his wife; he’s more enraged because of whom that woman is. He explains why giving us examples of his own affairs

Just as he loved beauty in the abstract, he loved it in its glittering social framework. He liked to be noticed and to have a widespread reputation…. This social use of his love did not require him to sacrifice beauty, for in his circle beauty and reputation went hand in hand, like an object and its shadow. Beauty was most often the magic wand that opened the door to reputation and noteworthy status. He had been the lover of some of the most famous entertainers of his time. Not one of them had disappointed his yearning for beauty or his craving for loveliness. For these reasons he thought scornfully of Yasin’s conquests. He repeated disapprovingly, “Umm Hanafi! … Nur! … What a beast he is (391)!

With these statements Ahmad is basically saying that he disapproves of Yasin’s conquests because they weren’t beautiful, distinguished, or influential. Yasin had no criteria to choose his mistresses; when lust blinded him he would be content to lie with any woman. And this was exactly what enraged Ahmad; he didn’t like that his son was a savage willing to sleep with any woman regardless of what she looked like or who she was. Here we see how much Ahmad disapproves of Yasin’s actions.

These reproachful actions, however, aren’t reason enough for Ahmad to value what a good son Fahmy is. Like Marixa says in her blog entry “Wake-Up Call”, “Unfortunately Ahmad only realizes where he has gone wrong when he learns that Fahmy has died while at a demonstration. This is the turning point in Ahmad’s life. It becomes the wake-up call that Ahmad needs to realize that he is not the almighty and that he is human just like everyone else.” It’s at this point that Ahmad realizes that he had a great son and that all he ever did for him was point out his flaws.

After Ahmad learns about Fahmy’s death he begins experiencing what, according to “Coping with Grief and Loss” an article in Helpguide.org a trusted non-profit resource, calls common symptoms of grief. He experiences the physical symptoms of grief, shock and disbelief, and guilt. His shock is apparent when he learns the news, “Although there was an unmistakable look of belief and dismay in his eyes, the father rejected the news, shouting, “Fahmy?” (495). And after the shock comes the guilt, Ahmad begin thinking of all the things he didn’t say or do for his son. He begins thinking about the last time he saw his alive, “Consider the memory of the quarrel they had had after the Friday prayer at al-Husayn or that of their conversation that morning, when Fahmy had appealed for his affection and he had reprimanded him –– how much of his heart would they consume? How many tears would they stir up?” (497). It’s very unfortunate, but Fahmy had to die for Ahmad to realize what a great son he was.

Works Cited

"Coping with Grief and Loss: Support for Grieving and Bereavement." Helpguide.org:

Understand, Prevent and Resolve Life's Challenges. Web. 31 Mar. 2010. .

Chavez, Yesenia, “Disobedient”. [Weblog entry.] Digging Even Deeper. The Chinquapin

School: AP English Class. 24 Mar. 2010. (http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/03/disobedient.html) 27 Mar. 2010.

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk (Cairo Trilogy). New York: Anchor, 1990. Print.

Rodriguez, Marixa, “Wake-Up Call”. [Weblog entry.] Digging Even Deeper. The Chinquapin

School: AP English Class. 30 Mar. 2010. (http://diggingevendeeper.blogspot.com/2010/03/wake-up-call.html) 31 Mar. 2010.

Kamal's Innocence

An important character that often gets overlooked in Palace Walk is Kamal. Kamal is very important because as a small child he is very innocent and in his innocence he says and does many things that affect greatly how some things play out in the novel. Like Dee explains in her blog, “Kamal was seen through my eyes as one of the characters that a lot of people blew off, but he offered an important role to a lot of the situation in the book that were significant to the over all theme of innocence and honor…We can see Kamal’s feelings when he says, “In that coffee hour Kamal frequently felt lost and neglected by his family. Hardly anyone paid attention to him” (53).”

I also agree with what Aby says in her blog, “Kamal seems to want to be like his dad and brother.” Like Dee and Aby say, all Kamal wants to do is be an adult, so he tries to act like a grown up and in doing this he says and does many things that have important repercussions throughout the novel. Although he has no intention to Kamal impacts greatly his family’s lives.

One example of this is how he becomes good friends with the soldiers that camped outside his house. Kamal is attracted very attracted to them because they are foreigners; he is especially interested in their appearance and the language they speak. Because of this Kamal begins talking to them and becomes acquainted with them. One day they give him a caricature they had drawn of him. Kamal looked at the picture and didn't think it looked like him. Then he saw that the men were laughing and realized that they were joking. However, when he showed the picture to Fahmy, he thought something else. Fahmy told him, "'O Lord, this picture omits none of your defects and exaggerates them . . . the small skinny body, the long scrawny neck, the large nose, the huge head, and the tiny eyes'" (438). He went on to say, "'It's clear what the secret of their fondness for you is. . . . They like to laugh at your appearance and foppishness. To put it plainly, you're nothing but a puppet to them'" (438). When Kamal saw this caricature of him he though it had simply been a joke between friends. However, when he showed it to Fahmy he learned otherwise. This episode could have fueled Fahmy’s anger towards the English, which eventually lead to Fahmy’s death. This innocent act by Kamal could’ve been a lethal consequence for Fahmy.

Another instance that shows Kamal's innocence is when he is telling a story at the evening coffee hour. He tells about how one day that he arrived at the encampment he saw Julian, one of the English soldiers, waving his hand to Maryam who was smiling at the her window. As soon as she saw him she left the window looking terrified. As soon as he finished relating the story he receives alarmed responses from everyone. Amina, incredulous, warns her son against making false accusations. However, Famhy commented, "'He's not lying. No sensible person would accuse him of lying about this. Don't you see that a person his age wouldn't be able to invent such a story?'" (439). As Fahmy said, Kamal in his innocence did not know what he was talking about. Although this was an innocent remark it led to Fahmy’s learning the truth about Maryam.

Work Cited

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk (Cairo Trilogy). New York: Anchor, 1990. Print.

Ahmad transforming Zaynab

Even though we are now more than halfway through the novel Palace Walk the way Ahmad views women doesn’t cease to amaze me. In this particular section what shows us how he feels about women is how he reacts when Yasin sleeps with his wife’s personal maid, Nur. When this occurs Ahmad is enraged but not at the fact that Yasin has slept with a woman that isn’t his wife; he’s enraged because of who that woman is. Also, he strongly critiques Zaynab’s reaction when she finds out that Yasin has cheated on her. He goes as far out as to say that the way Zaynab reacted was a greater mistake than that which Yasin committed by sleeping with her personal maid.

When Ahmad learns about the affair that Yasin had with Nur he is enraged but not because he has cheated on his wife, Zaynab. He is enraged because of who he cheated on her with. He explains why giving us examples of his own affairs

Just as he loved beauty in the abstract, he loved it in its glittering social framework. He liked to be noticed and to have a widespread reputation…. This social use of his love did not require him to sacrifice beauty, for in his circle beauty and reputation went hand in hand, like an object and its shadow. Beauty was most often the magic wand that opened the door to reputation and noteworthy status. He had been the lover of some of the most famous entertainers of his time. Not one of them had disappointed his yearning for beauty or his craving for loveliness. For these reasons he thought scornfully of Yasin’s conquests. He repeated disapprovingly, “Umm Hanafi! … Nur! … What a beast he is (391)!

With these statements Ahmad is basically saying that he disapproves of Yasin’s conquests because they weren’t beautiful, distinguished, or influential. Yasin had no criteria to choose his mistresses; when lust blinded him he would be content to lie with any woman. And this was exactly what enraged Ahmad; he didn’t like that his son was a savage willing to sleep with any woman regardless of what she looked like or who she was. He was not at all concerned with the fact that Yasin had just cheated on his wife.

Another notion that shows how low Ahmad thinks of women is how he disapproves of Zaynab’s reaction when she finds out that Yasin was cheating on her. He thinks, “It was not appropriate for a good wife to implicate her husband in a scandal as she had, no matter the circumstances. How she had wailed! How she had screamed! What would he have done if Amina had surprised him one day in a comparable situation? But what was she compared to Amina? …Yasin had made a mistake, but she had made an even greater one” (389). Here Ahmad makes it clear that he thinks Yasin was in his rights to sleep with Nur, and that Zaynab shouldn’t have complained at all. He compares Zaynab with his wife, Amina, who is very compliant with everything that Ahmad says and does. He believes that Amina is a good wife and all women should be like her. In Ahmad’s eyes, Zaynab made a greater mistake than her husband because she complained about his cheating on her.

Because of the way Ahmad views women I agree with Lauren's Blog when she says that it’s very difficult for Zaynab to adjust to living in her new home. Zaynab was raised in a household with more progressive views towards women so it’s difficult for her to adjust herself to the strict ways of Ahmad’s home. When she was younger she was allowed to go out and see the world with her father. Now she has to stay in the house all the time. This and the way Yasin’s affair with Nur was treated are examples of how Zaynab is being transformed into Ahmad’s image of a perfect wife.

Source Citation

Mahfouz, Naguib. Palace Walk (Cairo Trilogy). New York: Anchor, 1990. Print.

Yasin's view towards women

Throughout the novel Palace Walk there are moments that show many contrasts among its characters’ beliefs and actions. One of these contradictions is the way the way Yasin reacts versus the way Fahmy reacts when they find out the truth about their father, Al-Sayyid Ahmad. In their eyes their father had always been a proper, honorable, and pious man. However, they then find out that he has been going to parties to sing and drink and has been having affairs with various women. Yasin and Fahmy react very differently when they learn this truth. Fahmy condemns his actions and Yasin praises him. We get a glimpse of what they about their father’s actions on the third and fourth paragraphs on page 271.

The first of these paragraphs show Fahmy’s thoughts. He says, “‘My father doesn’t differ at all from Yasin except in having sunk lower…. There must be something I don’t know… My father hasn’t done anything wrong…. He can’t do anything wrong'" (271). To Fahmy his father was a true hero, so much so that when he learned this he believed it was a lie. When he finally accepted it as the truth the image he had of his father was marred. He no longer regarded him with the same respect and admiration. He believed he was even worse than Yasin. When Fahmy learned this truth he was appalled and condemned his father’s actions.

In the second of these paragraphs we see the way Yasin thinks. He says, “’He sings. So what’s wrong about singing? He gets drunk, and believe me, drinking is even better than eating. He has affairs and so did the Muslim caliphs…. Our father isn’t doing anything sinful'" (271). Yasin always held his father in the highest esteem. However, when he learned about this truth he became even admirable to him. Yasin thought it was great that his father acted the way he did. He thought that there was nothing wrong in having many affairs and objectifying women.

This contrast of what Fahmy thought versus what Yasin thought about their father’s actions is just one example that shows the way Yasin feels about women. Other examples are the way he describes women and how he tried to rape Umm Hanafi. With this last incident we saw what a savage animal he is. His brutal sexual desires are well described here: “He was blinded by lust. What kind of lust was it? A lust kindled by a woman simply because she was a woman, not because of any of her qualities or associations. It was a lust that loved beauty but would not turn away from ugliness. In these crises, everything was equivalent. He was like a dog that eagerly devours whatever scraps it finds" (277). When I saw the way Yasin viewed women as objects I asked myself, why?

After searching for the answer I came to the conclusion that the reason for this could be that Yasin’s mother’s marriage-divorce cycles affected him deeply. In fact, according to the Clinical Psychology of North Central Florida many children will eventually adjust to their parents' divorce, but some could continue to have problems into adulthood. Also boys tend to react to their parents' divorce becoming more aggressive and disobedient. This is the case for Yasin.

After seeing how his mother acted, getting married and divorced incessantly, he began to give marriage little importance. It was no longer a sacred union; it turned be something more like a game in which you played with a toy until you got tired of it. He also began thinking that all women were like his mother. He thought that if you gave them a chance they would all act the way she did. In this way he progressively lost respect for women until he viewed them as objects. He used them, turning to them for entertainment and pleasure while they, along with alcohol, began to be the way he coped with his pain. Because of these things Yasin began being promiscuous and celebrated his father’s promiscuity.

Source Citation

"Effects of Divorce on Children - Clinical Psychology Associates N.C. Florida, P.A." Clinical Psychology Associates of North Central Florida Gainesville Ocala Florida. Web. 24 Feb. 2010.

Amina's accidental Ahmad's reaction

This second section of Palace Walk has been very interesting. There have been many important things going on with every single character. One of the characters, Amina, experienced a particularly significant incident. This incident was how she got run over by an automobile after visiting al-Husayn’s shrine while her husband was out. While I was reading about this incident I kept thinking about how Amina’s husband was going to react when he learned about it. I thought that he might would probably beat her and hurt her more than the automobile had. However, his reaction truly surprised me. The passage that shows his reaction and that I will focus on begins on the forth paragraph on page 183 and goes on to the end of the next page.

After the doctor came to see Amina and assured everyone that she had just suffered from a fracture and would be completely healed in three weeks, everyone’s mind shifted towards what they were going to tell Al-Sayyid Ahmad. Yasin, who felt very responsible for the incident since he was the one who had proposed Amina take a walk, urged his mother to not worry. “’I assure you that we’ll think of something to tell him’” (178). Then Khadija proposed that they tell him Amina fell on the stairs. The family agreed this on and everything seemed solved.

However, when her husband arrived home and asked her what had happened to her, she froze. “At that moment all the ideas she had collected in her mind evaporated” (182). Feeling defeated se confessed the truth. This is when Al-Sayyid Ahmad gave us a surprising reaction. He stayed silent a while and then instead chastising her and shouting angrily he asked, “’What did the doctor say?…. How serious is the fracture?’” (183). Surprised with his reaction Amina assured him that there was nothing to worry about. Al-Sayyid Ahmad wanted to ask more questions but resisted his desire and left the room saying, “’Stay in bed till God heals you’” (184).

The question that comes to my mind when I think about Al-Sayyid Ahmad’s reaction is why? Why did Amina’s husband react like this when many other times, for the smallest incident he would grow angry? Why when he learned that his wife had disobeyed him, left the house when he was away when he can’t stand for anyone to look at his wife even when he is with her, did he react so graciously? One possible answer is that when he learned about the incident Amina had he overlooked her mistake and prayed to God that she recover. Even though he does treat her very harshly, Al-Sayyid Ahmad loves Amina and when he learned that she was injured he was genuinely concerned. Another thing that could’ve affected his reaction was that the reason Amina had left the house was because she had visited al-Husayn’s shrine. She wasn’t doing anything immoral, on the contrary she was doing something to express her faith. Although Al-Sayyid Ahmad usually acts as a very strict and harsh man, here we see a different side of him.

Women's Role

So far this book has been pretty interesting although nothing has really happened. Up to this point the author has been basically been giving us background information about the society in which this family lives. As with the novel we read previous to this, An Artist of the Floating World, I experienced a little culture shock when I learned some of the customs and traditions of this society.

I already knew certain things about this culture from geography class before I began reading this book, but after I did begin reading it, I realized that things weren’t exactly the way I thought they were. What I’m referring to specifically is the way women are treated in this society. Before reading this book I thought women in this society were treated in a very restricted kind of way; they were forbidden to do many things and their only role in society seemed to be submissive to and serve men. But I also thought that although they were supposed to be submissive to men they were respected in way; for example, it seemed to me that in certain occasions in which they were forbidden to do certain things it was because they were too highly regarded; too good to do it. However, after beginning to read this novel I found that I was wrong. I still saw the restriction women were subject to that I had learned in previous classes but I didn’t see any respect for them. Instead I saw many instances and comments made about women that disrespected them. The level at which they were disrespected was what gave me the culture shock that I received when I began to read the novel. Since we were asked to pick a certain passage, and concentrate our response defenses on it I picked one that exemplified this disrespect for women. This passage is the first full paragraph on page 9.

The first thing I would like to talk about in this paragraph is this quote: “She returned to the room, closed the door, and pulled a pallet form under the bed. She placed it in front of the sofa and sat crossed legged on it. In a good conscience she did not think she had any right to sit beside him (9).” The woman speaking is Amina; she is telling us about one of many, very frequent, occasions in which her husband went out partying and returned home very late, and intoxicated. Instead of speaking about how disgraceful, immoral, and vulgar behavior this is, she speaks of it like it’s a very normal activity for her husband to do. She also tells her about her ritual in which she wakes up in the middle of the night, waits for him until he gets home, and helps him get ready for bed. As if this weren’t enough she tells us that she sits on the floor because she did not think she had any right to sit beside him. To me this is what crossed the line; I was expecting submission and restriction but a woman not being able to sit next to her husband because she doesn’t think she’s good enough, that’s a whole another level. This makes women not even seem human, it makes them seem like dogs, like filthy dogs that can’t sit next to their owner because they don’t have a right to.

Another thing I would like to talk about in this passage is the following quote: “Time passed without her speaking. She waited until he invited her to speak; then she would (9).” In this quote Amina shows us another example that how women in this society are not respect at all, in fact they don’t even seem like members of a society. When I hear members of a society I picture people who are actively involved in their community and trying to change it (if it needs change) for the better. As we can see from this quote, women can’t even speak without permission; what kind of members of society are they? Also, this whole don’t-speak-until-you-are-spoken-to-thing seems even stranger when we remember the fact that the person Amina is speaking about is her husband. How is it possible that a woman can’t have a carefree conversation with her husband? A woman’s husband is supposed to be her partner in life to whom she can talk to about anything. This makes it seem like women in this society are married to perfect strangers.

After reading this first part of the book I realized that even though I understand that the way I view other societies is shaped by the one I live in, it’s still harder for me to step in the shoes of a person living in other society because our societies are so different. To me it seems like a complete abhorrence the way women live in this society but to them their lifestyle is completely normal. However, this makes me wonder if the only reason these women are ok with their society is because their used to it, and if they were exposed to a society in which they were unrestrained and not submissive they would like it. This curiosity is strengthened even more when I think about my own society a couple of years ago; it didn’t have a lot of rights for women. I guess I just can’t get around the idea in my head about the way they live.

If you would like more information about women's role in Islam see this Wikipedia article.