Discussion Questions 4/8

“I imagine he has done for the Caribbean what Synge did for Ireland, found a language woven out of dialect and literature…” (Heaney 5). Is it fair to compare Walcott to Synge? Did Walcott “find” this language or was he a part of it because he actually grew up on the island speaking the language?

“From the beginning he has never simplified or sold short.
Africa and England are in him” (Heaney 6). Is this a fair statement? Is Heaney claiming that Walcott has never misstepped in his depiction of his hybridized identity? Would Heaney even know if Walcott was selling his identity short? Do you think that Walcott is selling Heaney’s hybridized identity short by claiming that only Africa and England are in him?

How does Caliban compare to Ariel? What do we get out of their relationship in this version that we do not in the original? Ariel has a non-violent approach to gaining her freedom, but Caliban seems to be centered on violent revenge. Does the play champion one over the other because of this?

What is Eshu’s purpose? What does he bring to the play? The Master of Ceremonies remarks that Eshu, a black devil-god, will “fit like a glove” (Cesaire 1). What does this say about the other gods, that they fit into the same category as this “devil-god?”

 

Discussion Questions (4/8)

How should we view Ariel’s freedom in A Tempest? He uses the approach of non-violent submission and Prospero frees him at the end. Is the Césaire’s model of countering oppression? How does colorism play into this situation?

Why does Césaire add Eshu to the play? What purpose does he serve?

Heaney writes that “For those awakening to the nightmare of history, revenge… can be a kind of vision (6).”  In The Schooner Flight, Shabine encounters History but, as Heaney asserts with Walcott’s writing, there is no seeking for revenge. What is history and why should it be approached in such a passive way?

4/8 Discussion Questions

Ariel and Caliban, though now directly identified as slaves, have significantly more vocal agency in A Tempest compared to the original play and speak much more freely about their situations and displeasure with them.  How does that change their characterization and role within the play?

Caliban (and by extension Cesaire) brings up the erasure of identity that comes from being called a name that is not your own or one that is forced upon you.  Walcott talks about this power of naming in “The Schooner Flight” as well.  Though Caliban brings up this point to Prospero and wishes to be called X instead, his character is only referred to as Caliban, even by Caliban himself.  What point does Cesaire make in maintaining Caliban’s false naming?

When Heaney describes Walcott, he says that Walcott “never simplified or sold short. Africa and England are in him.” In view of everything we’ve discussed in our course this description in and of itself seems like a simplification on Heaney’s part of the hybridity we were discussing on Monday. Did anyone else read that the same way?

(Did anyone else chuckle when Heaney pondered Walcott’s “large appropriations,” especially in light of our discussions last week about “Strange Fruit”? I may have misread his point, but I found it ironic.)

4/8 Discussion

  1.   Is Prospero’s condescending tone towards Caliban, despite his intelligence and clear ability to speak well, a sign of imperialist attitudes, as he treats the native Caliban as a lesser being, even one he might consider “never ready” for modernity?
  2.  How do Ariel and Caliban’s arguments over the right to violent or non violent protest tie back to our discussion of Uptight, considering they came out around the same time?
  3. What is Cesaire’s attitude about the play’s ending? How does he intend for Caliban’s “freedom” to read for the audience?

4/8 discussion questions

  1. When Heaney describes Walcott’s writing, he uses the word “benign.” Walcott uses the same word in his interview with Bill Moyers to describe his life in a colonial situation – “benign.” Does Walcott give power to this word or does it lessen the power of his works?
  2. How does A Tempest confront Walcott’s thoughts about Caliban?
  3. What alterations between The Tempest and A Tempest stood out most to you? Even beginning with the title..?

Useful Web Links

Abby found a pdf version of A Tempest. I posted it on Sakai as well.

Also, I mentioned on Monday the work of Matthew Reilly. His work might be particularly of interest to Abby, as he is an Anthropologist doing Black & Green Atlantic work. However, the rest of class might get something out of his work as well.

Nuance and Stereotype in The Informer and Uptight

The Informer and Uptight both tell rather similar stories, yet the majority of our class found Uptight to be a better production than its predecessor. This is surprising to me not only because the opinion was almost universal among the class, but also because The Informer is praised by critics while Uptight is almost ignored. I believe that Uptight builds off The Informer in a critical way that allows the film to succeed in the modern era while its predecessor fails. The black revolutionaries in Uptight are nuanced and are historically framed in the time period shortly after Martin Luther King Jr.’s death. But the characters in The Informer lack nuance of opinion and blend together in a film that does not present much historical context to explain the situation of the characters.

The Informer divides the Irish into two main groups that are ultimately stereotypes of Irish culture. First there are the revolutionaries who are depicted as violent and unrelenting, shooting and killing whoever they deem harmful to a revolutionary movement that is not given any context. Then there are the rest of the Irish and Gypo, who are depicted as a crowd of drunks. Gypo is depicted as a complex character, but the people he associates with throughout his evening ultimately use him as a tool to consume more alcohol while he uses them as a tool to feed his ego in a strange drunken symbiotic relationship. The film’s choice to divide the Irish into sober revolutionaries and drunken manipulators furthers the stereotypes of the Irish being violent and drunk. Gypo serving as the protagonist complicates this perpetuation of Irish stereotypes because he serves as an intersection between the two groups of Irish in the film, and thus fits both the stereotype of violence and drunkenness.

Uptight on the other hand does not place its characters into crowds, and works to build arguments for black civil rights from a multitude of perspectives. At first glance, the film could be viewed as a conflict between violent revolutionaries and non-violent revolutionaries. But many of the characters intersect between the two perspectives, and voice opinions that are far more complicated than being solely violent or solely non-violent. Tank is a former member of the violent side who chooses non-violence in the wake of Dr. King’s movement, but is eager to change sides once again when he needs money. Teddy is a white man fighting for black civil rights that believe the two races must unite in order to defeat oppression. Clarence is gay and cooperates with the police, but also listens to various records by black artists, thus partaking in black culture without being a revolutionary. And one member of B.G.’s violent movement remarks that he wouldn’t have resorted to violence as a method of protest had whites not done it first. This blending of different opinions in Uptight gives each character a unique personality and perspective, thus making the ability for the audience member to stereotype characters in the film far more difficult. The nuance of political opinions in the film allows the characters to be viewed both as individuals and members of a group, which is why I believe the film is an improvement from The Informer; Uptight uses the plot line of The Informer to paint a narrative of the American black civil rights movement, but eliminates the elements of its predecessor that could lead to the stereotyping of its characters.

 

4/6 Discussion Questions

  1. Walcott depicts the sea as a deadly force in both readings, yet the characters are still drawn to it. Is this out of a love of the sea, necessity for living, or something else?
  2. The Schooner Flight focuses heavily on race while The Sea at Dauphin focuses heavily on age. Do Walcott’s views on race and age intersect at any point and if so, how?

Discussion Questions

One question I had was, is Maria Concepcion actually Shabine’s wife, or is she a personification of something more? It seemed as though she may have been an abstract idea at times, but also more solid at other times. I wasn’t sure what to make of this idea.

Another question I had was concerning Sea at Dauphin. I see quite a few similarities to Synge’s Riders to the Sea, and as we saw in Alexis’s presentation Synge was one author who influenced Walcott’s writings. My question is, is this play supposed to be serving the same function that UpTight! did when compared to The Informer? Or does it only happen to have similar themes?

4/6 Discussion Questions

My first question is about the sea and the role it plays in The Sea at Dauphin.  We’ve encountered other stories of great losses at sea, in Riders and John Redding that seemed to speak to loss of place and community.  In this play, Afa remarks that the sea forgets.  How does that fit with the sea as we’ve seen it in those other works? Does the sea forget, or does it just not care?

In “The Schooner Flight” Walcott talks about naming and mimicry saying “we live like our names and you would have to be colonial to know the difference.”How does identity play into naming and memory and what pain can be stored in names as well?

How does the representation Creole in The Sea at Dauphin compare to other representations of dialect we’ve encountered? What (and whose) histories are encoded in language and its literary representations?