Absurdity, Camus, and My Future College Debt

The topic of "the meaning of life" has come up multiple times through out our discussions in AP English, and the responses have been varied; it appears that the majority of the class (and the world) believes that their life has a personally ingrained meaning given by some sort of creator who propels them towards a predesignated future where every action, event, and twist and turn of life is meaningful in some way. While I take no issues with people viewing their lives through any lens that they see fit, my world has never felt so perfectly planned. Just as a certain Algerian philosopher and writer would put it, my experiences with the world have all felt rather...unplanned? Not totally rational? Perhaps the word I'm looking for is...absurd? How's that sound, Albert?
The struggle with the "absurdity" of life, as Camus coined it, is reflected  throughout the whole of his landmark work The Stranger. Mersault's entire trial for the murder of the Arab can be seen as absurdity in action. Both the defense and prosecution attempt to give Mersault's killing a grander societal meaning and motive as they try to make sense of the non-conformist that he is. Despite serving him with a death sentence, which many of those involved feel is "justice", their attempts at giving meaning to the situation fail. Ultimately, Mersault's reason for murdering the Arab is unknown, or at least lacks the rational thought that his society feels must come along with a crime of that magnitude. His acts are beyond explanation, and this fact alone unsettles the public more than the crime itself. Although Mersault takes a certain pride and fulfillment in being a symbol of hate, he also feels comforted by the overall absurdity of all of his life's events: his job is absurd as his mother's death is absurd as his affair with Marie is absurd and so on and so forth. The world is free to attach any meaning they wish to his actions or lack thereof (not crying at his mother's funeral, beginning an affair the next day, etc.), but their explanations are all for naught in a world that does not operate by the meaning, logic, and rules that society attempts to assign to it.
As my senior year of high school comes to a close, I've been forced to make some choices that society (including my parents, friends, and teachers) constantly reminds me will determine the entirety of my future forever and ever: the college I choose, the major I pursue, the scholarships I apply for, etc. As I grapple with these choices, I constantly wonder whether my choice will make a difference in the end. Society tells me that if I work hard, go to a prestigious school, and graduate at the top of my class that I will find some sort of job at the end of the collegiate tunnel. But in a world where jobs are dwindling and college debt is booming, is there really any logical order to how to come out on the other side successful? At least to my current self, the adult world awaiting me seems messy, void of rhyme or reason, bleak, and (surprise, surprise) absurd.
While I fall into a similar philosophical camp as thinkers like Camus and Sartre, I know that while the things that happen to me and the course of events in my life may be random, without order, and in the grand picture completely meaningless, I can still prescribe personal meaning to what happens. Just as Mersault is able to find peace in the label society gives to him, despite his knowledge of the absurdity that rules the universe, I, too, am able to find peace in the random order of life that had joined me with so many people, interests, and things that I hold so dearly. Maybe I can't do anything to guarantee my success as an adult 100%, but I can try my best to enjoy the random twists and turns of life. The universe may be void of meaning and completely indifferent, but there will always be people and things there who make the absurdity worth it, whether it's a best friend, a job, or a death sentence.

January Blog- A Thousand Splendid Suns and Gendercide

Reading A Thousand Splendid Suns (hereafter referred to as ATSS because I’m lazy) was an intense emotional experience; whether it was the graphic portrayals of emotional and physical abuse, the inequality within Afghanistan that Meriam and Laila experienced, or the seemingly never-ending string of awful events that the characters had to endure, I was crying through 75% of it. Some of the moments that struck me the most, however, were scenes depicting the vastly different treatments Zalmai and Aziza received from Rasheed due to their genders. Upon learning of Meriam’s first pregnancy, Rasheed only considers that the baby could be a boy, and is not at all interested in the thought of a girl child. When Laila gives birth to Aziza, he is obviously not pleased; he refuses to help with Aziza’s care and is constantly complaining about the typical newborn behavior that Aziza exhibits. However, when Zalmai is born Rasheed becomes a different parent entirely: he is loving, enthusiastically involved, and even buys Zalmai a TV on the black market. Of course, this behavior is extended to Zalmai only; at one point, Rasheed suggests to Laila that Aziza should join the other children that beg on the streets for money. One could say that this is due to the loss of Rasheed’s son from his first marriage, who drowned, and his desire to have this son back that makes his treatment of Zalmai so starkly different from that of Aziza. However, there are a myriad of societal and cultural disadvantages working against Aziza and millions of female children across the world: girls are not only seen as undesirable children to have, but as drains upon their families that are to be avoided by any means necessary. And although Aziza’s mistreatment is awful, in many cases for girls born in third world countries they are subject to an even harsher fate: death at the hands of their parents.

Gendercide, or the mass killing of girl children at birth or shortly after, is a phenomenon that has occurred since the birth of many cultures, and can even be traced back to 200 B.C. Greece. In modern China and India especially, where in the former there is a one child per family policy that is strictly enforced and in the latter there is much poverty and the expense of paying a dowry to the family of the man their daughter will eventually marry. In more traditional societies, sons are seen as the children who will carry on the family name and be able to take up a job or trade that will bring income to the family, whereas girls are a drain upon family resources who cannot contribute nearly as much to the family income or legacy as a boy could. To the women in these situations, it is often seen as a practical choice to have a sex selective abortion, to murder their baby girls within days of birth, or to abandon these babies.

The details of female infanticide are brutal and sickening, but not shocking when you consider the social climates that foster these beliefs that female children are inherently less worthy of love or life due to their gender and society’s ideas of what they could accomplish for themselves and their families based on this. And it is in this belief that lies the real problem, and the thing that must change if an epidemic like this is to end. The lives of girls and women must be valued on an equal level with those of boys and men, and this belief must be promoted. Although women are most often the perpetrators of these infant murders, women like Laila who value their children no matter the gender exist and are working tirelessly to change the immensely damaging culture that they are forced to raise their daughters in and the policies that condone and turn a blind eye to this epidemic. It is my hope that within my lifetime this practice of female infanticide, and infanticide in general, will be only a devastating chapter in our world’s past. We need all of the Lailas and Meriams that we can get in this world.

Cultural Relativism and Heroism

            Since the beginning of human history, the cultures of other groups has been infinitely fascinating and mysterious, and at times confusing or even horrifying. Some people, having come into contact with the unknown, differing elements of a foreign culture are quick to judge and scorn, while others with a more open mind see these differences as just that: different ways of behaving that should not be judged as either “right” or “wrong”. The latter viewpoint reflects the tenants of Cultural Relativism, which is the beliefs that different societies will naturally hold to different moral codes and that there is “no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another”(“The Challenge of Cultural Relativism”, Page 53). The article presents the argument that while Cultural Relativism does maintain important and valid points of consideration, it also contains fallacies in its beliefs that there can be no definitive moral truth and in the exaggeration of actual differences between many cultures.

            In the literature we have read so far in our Nature of the Hero and Villain unit, we have been introduced to many cultures’ idea of a heroic character. As you can imagine, each culture’s definition of a hero is different due to the varying morals held by that society. For example, the epic hero of Beowulf is a true embodiment of the Geat’s beliefs regarding heroism; he is physically unstoppable, stoic and void of fear, and strives to bring infamy to his name. While he perfectly fits the bill of a hero in terms of his own cultural programming, the society in which we find Hamlet would see Beowulf as a sort of impolite brute. Hamlet’s brand of heroism is found in his respect for the individual man and his thoughtful investigation of his uncle before determining that he did indeed murder Hamlet’s father. While Beowulf and his fellow Geat’s would see Hamlet’s reflection a procrastination and waste of precious time, Hamlet and the Danish would see Beowulf’s style of immediate action as brash and uncalculated. When we discussed in class our personal definitions of a hero, few of us included the traits that are found in either Hamlet or Beowulf, but even though our culture differs from theirs we as students can still see the validity in their heroism.

            When it comes to cultural relativism gone wrong, I think of the laws that have recently been passed in France that have outlawed facial coverings, including those of Muslim women who practice hijab (modesty) through the wearing of the niqab headdress. France is a secular nation, and therefore their cultural standard of “right” would see this law as an aid in maintaining a secular environment in schools and in public spaces. For the Muslim women who willingly don the niqab, this is a violation of their cultural and religious standard of “right”, which includes a standard of modest dress that is very important to their faith. These laws are an example of the dominate culture of an area forsaking the idea of a lack of moral right or wrong that is found in cultural relativism and choosing to deem another culture’s way of life immoral and unethetical.

            Personally, I can see the validity of the criticism that James Rachels provides in this article, especially that of cultural relativism providing a protection of cultures taking part in cruel practices such as slavery or anti-Semitism from criticism. However, I also agree with Rachels that cultural relativism does teach important lessons in not solely believing that our home culture is the only one that is morally sound in its ways. In the end, it appears that humans operate with many of the same common goals, and have found many different ways of accomplishing these goals based on what that culture has to offer. As long as you aren’t eating my dead father, I can’t really complain.

The Downsides of "Passion"

I have a confession to make: Way back in seventh grade, I was a fan of a certain vampire romance book series. Within this book series (which will remain unnamed), the lovesick, damsel in distress protagonist had a favorite book by the name of Wuthering Heights. Being an enthusiastic 13 year old who liked to take on challenging reads, I decided that I, too, would read Emily Bronte’s famous Victorian romance. I mostly just wanted the book to be over when I read it due to the lack of modern day English and the extraordinarily dry storytelling, but none of the content overwhelmingly alarmed me at the time of this initial read. However, when it came time to read Wuthering Heights in AP English I experienced a good amount of face palming and shaking of the head in response to the behavior of the characters. The “romance” of Heathcliff and Catherine is clearly nothing more than unhealthy mutual obsession and what comes very close to an abusive relationship upon a more mature reading of the text. While very few real life people are personalities as extreme as Heathcliff and Cathy, an overwhelmingly high amount of relationships in the United States are built on similarly abusive and out of control relationships such as Hatherine. 

While both Cathy and Heathcliff claim to love the other, many of their actions are taken solely to hurt the other in some way. Heathcliff marries Isabella, Edgar’s sister, simply so that he could mistreat her and get back at Catherine’s husband. He ruins any chance at happiness that Cathy and Edgar could have by constantly interfering in their lives, rather than taking satisfaction in knowing that the “love of his life” was living a fulfilling life. The couple also refuses to acknowledge themselves as a "couple" at all; instead, they declare themselves to essentially be the same person, so in love that they are indecipherable from the other. Of course, it is terribly unhealthy to be lacking in a certain amount of autonomy from your partner. Relationships that are consuming of all facets of someone’s life are anything but good news, and they can lead to something more: both mentally and physically abusive relationships.

According to a 2011 poll done by Glamour magazine, a whopping 29% of women surveyed in the United States said that they had been in an abusive relationship, while nearly 60% of women had experienced some kind of abuse. 94% of those women experienced emotional abuse, which I would say Cathy dealt with to a degree from Heathcliff. By staying in her life through unwanted and less than decent ways despite Cathy’s marriage to Edgar, he basically guarantees her a life of misery and unhappiness. Catherine is ultimately driven close to insane and dies after childbirth, never able to have a truly enjoyable life due to the man that she loved. And, sadly enough, love was given as the number one reason that women stayed with their abusive partners in the Glamour survey. 23% of the women who had experienced abuse were the victims of physical assault such as being slapped or punched. While it is only implied, the reader can conclude that Isabella Linton most likely suffered a more physical form of abuse from Heathcliff, her husband. Having married her solely to get back at Cathy and Edgar, he treats her awfully, keeping her confined and beaten down in dreary Wuthering Heights. She wants desperately to leave and make some sort of contact with Nelly and the outside world, but Heathcliff reminds her of her marriage vows and insists that she must stay. Considering that he has no problem hanging Isabella’s dog before they take off to elope, it is rather safe to assume that she was forced to deal with more brutality than just Heathcliff’s bad attitude. Far too many women now and then have been trapped in abusive relationships, and I wonder how much portrayals of “love” such as that in Wuthering Heights contribute to unhealthy relationships being perpetuated and accepted in society. Especially when the famous undead teen couple in the aforementioned vampire books idolize such a relationship, causing young people to wish to emulate these “passionate” relationships as well. We need more models of healthy, balanced relationships, although I suppose those aren’t nearly as compelling to write about as psychopaths in love.

In Stone or In Chaos?

The complex concept of fate has been heavily discussed within the walls of Mrs. Burnett’s AP classroom over the past several weeks. Hearing my fellow students discuss fate in terms of plays like Oedipus Rex, the movie Run, Lola, Run, and as they feel it applies to their own lives really forced me to think about how I see my life unfolding, especially within the pivotal fall months of my senior year. Falling on the more existentialist side of the spectrum, I find the concept of a fate set in stone rather silly; sure, we are predisposed to certain things that may sway our lives one way or another, but choosing to allow the circumstances of our lives to cosmically define us and feel that nothing can be done is incorrect, and simply a choice as far as I’m concerned. People often don’t take notice of the real power they have to choose their own “fate” per say, or at least step in whichever direction they decide they will move their life towards.

Lola, the titular character of Run, Lola, Run, seems to understand, or at least believe, that she can control the outcome of her life, even within a life or death situation. When her boyfriend Manni gets in deep with violent drug dealers and must accumulate 100 thousand Marks in 20 minutes, Lola snaps into action and decides to seize control of her life, even if it takes 3 tries to get the timing right. The film was also an interesting demonstration of the concept of the infinitely fascinating Chaos Theory; while it may appear slightly ridiculous upon initial investigation that something as small as a butterfly flapping its wings could lead to a hurricane somewhere else in the world, learning about the theory is an interesting exercise in examining the subtile and remarkable ways that human beings interact and influence one another simply by being in the same environment. The idea that the way that Lola moved past a woman pushing a baby could lead to multiple futures, such as addiction, winning the lottery, and becoming connected to a religion. While I’m not sure that the way I walk past anyone in the hall drastically affects their day, I do believe that we unconsciously make small decisions on a day to day basis that impact the long term more than we may initially realize. 

Reading Oedipus Rex was interesting due to my disbelief in fate, especially one as totally set in stone as Oedipus’. However, the more we spoke about fate in terms of Oedipus in class, the less I believed that his future as father killer and mother lover was set in rather than an unfortunately specific self-fulfilling prophecy. If Oedipus’ parents has confronted the prophecy head on by keeping their son and instilling in him from a young age the instructions to not murder his dad or get intimate with his mom, the whole situation probably could have been avoided. Instead, a slew of cowardly moves later by both Mr. and Mrs. Rex, Oedipus’ adopted parents, and Oedipus himself later, we have a self-blinded and exiled incestuous king. Ew.