I was still new here, new to the U.S. I definitely was struggling with all of the social nuances that are second nature where you grew up but are definitely lacking in a foreign country. Me and a friend from “back home” were a bit tired of staying in the apartment and decided to chill on the parkway (Eastern Parkway) near the train station. The expectation was as we do home, relax in the open as we observe the other people of the neighborhood. We selected benches near one of the entrances of the train station and commenced to have conversation. We soon noticed that there was a uniformed police strolling on the parkway and walking in our direction. Initially we just ignored it. Coming from Barbados, encounters with the police, even in strained situations are mainly casual. It did not take long for me and my friend to come to the conclusion that the officer seemed to taking a special interest in us. He was by the way black. So my friend and I began to debate between ourselves, what he could possibly be thinking. We went form such positive thoughts as, he is thinking those guys look so relax if he was not in uniform he would come over and join us, to the negative, maybe those guys (my friend and I ) are criminals and just sitting, deciding on who should be there next victim of the night. As most of the thoughts were absurd we were having a merry time laughing. To further exacerbate the situation and ignoring his “authority” over us, we two precocious early twenties, black men found ourselves engaged in a virtual stare down, which to us was very humorous.
As fortune would have it, it was not too long before he was joined by his white partner. This seemed to embolden the young, black cop. He looked no more than twenty eight to us. After a brief conversation with his newly arrived partner, a conversation we can only speculate on, he approached our position and not with the body language of relaxation and openness. He in as calm an unstrained voice as he could muster, said good night and proceeded to ask, and I paraphrase, what are we doing here. With mischief still in our minds and having no real fear of police and still fresh from being teenagers we playfully replied, “What do you think we are doing?” This was not met with amusement. I could see his body stiffened, reflected in the change of his gaze. The conversation soon became a mental joust, with him trying to remain calm but obviously being flustered by our answers and our responses. Eventually I grew tired and just told him point blank, “You are black in your own neighbourhood, see two young black men sitting on a bench. Instead of coming over and having a casual conversation you chose to engage in a staring match although you are obviously the authority figure. To make matters worse, you waited until your “white partner” showed up before you confronted us. What are you afraid of? What is that about”. I believe the boldness of our actions and words threw him off guard, he relaxed and somewhat ashamedly asked us to have a good night and not to loiter too long outside the train station.
I came away thinking, it is loitering to relax in your own neighborhood in the view of the general public on a busy thoroughfare! How easily it was for him to reduce us to the binary of black/non-white, and likely criminal. Is this that racist America we had heard rumored and warned about by countless family members and other friends who resided here much longer than us two? Are we even assumed criminals in our own neighborhood by our own kind? Was it not Audrey Lorde in her novel Age, Race, Class and Sex:Women Redefining Difference who chided us about the fallacy of using lazy binaries to categorize individuals!

The novel Americanah by Chimanda Ngozi Adiche is written in third person limited omniscient and simultaneously being subjective and objective. It is subjective when the main characters are mentioned but generally objective in the assessment of the other characters unless seen through the eyes of Ifemelu or Obinze. At no point do we see a sentence start with I unless it relates to what a character is saying. We are privy to the full spectrum of Ifemelu’s and Obinze thoughts and emotions. It is through these two main characters that we see the world they live in and are introduced to the other supporting characters. The thoughts of the other characters are filtered through the thoughts of either Obinze or Ifemelu.
Because we are experiencing the story through these characters and at that point the author is omniscient we are more connected to these characters. We are not just more connected but all of their assertions are assumed true and as we are viewing the world as they are, we are empathetic to whatever situations they experience.
Having two main characters that share similar scenes together gives an effect of validating and bringing three dimensionality and verification of the objectiveness of the author. With each of the main characters not contradicting each other’s account of events, it gives events legitimacy. Knowing we can trust both characters and the author’s views roots the novel as an accurate account of events and aligns your judgments with the point of view of the author.
Having this point of view affects all of the characters in the novel resulting in only Obinze and Ifemelu being effectively round and dynamic. The other characters are relegated to being mainly flat and being less dynamic if dynamic at all. We see “Aunty Uju” and “Dike” change somewhat and they could even be considered as round but those are the exception.

In The Color Purple by Alice Walker a prevalent theme is dominance. Dominance in this instance is defined as those having the final say on the well-being of those physical, socially, mentally or economically “inferior” to the dominant party. As an expression of this dominance, the will of the dominant person is imposed in any form of expression that they choose. In the case of Celie’s step-dad and then her husband this dominance is expressed violently( Is dominance ever expressed benignly?).
Celie’s stepdad not only rapes her, he beats her, impregnates her, takes the children of this incestuous union against her will and demands her silence. As an effort to further restrict Celie’s voice, her stepdad denies her a continuing education further retarding her ability of expression and articulation of her dire circumstances. The sex act for Celie is an expression of violence and domination and not of love, affection or tenderness. Never does her uninvited partner show any real concern or attention to her feelings and just engage in the act for their own selfish gain.
Harpo, Celie’s stepson, learns from his father that his role as a man in a relationship is one of dominance and for his voice to be heard and followed he should employ regular beatings to his female partner. Unfortunately for him, Sofia, his wife, is more than equal to the task. She is not only physically his superior but also possesses a will, temperament and history that has prepared her for those who would dare attempt to dominate her. Harpo so much wants his voice to be the dominant voice and to fulfill his role as a man in the early twentieth century American society that he ignores his already loving relationship in pursuit of this role. Sofia is too accustomed to speaking her mind and doing what she wants, it proves a combustible situation. His attempts to silence Sofia are futile and to his own detriment and only succeeds in chasing her away.
Shug Avery has learnt to wield her sex appeal as a tool as dominance and empower her voice. She is an independent woman and has to be. She is equally admired and despised by her contemporaries but as long as she draws breath she would be the one dispensing sharp barbs in the way of pointed remarks especially to those she knows are receptive to her will, namely Celie’s husband.
Celie having only experienced sex under the threat of violence and from men, has no desire to be with them sexually. Maybe she always was homosexual but as we progress through the book Celie is increasingly aware of her attraction to women, in particular Shug Avery. Furthermore it is only with women that she is comfortable voicing her fears and her history and confides in both Sofia and Shrug the circumstances of her relationship.

Works Cited
Walker, Alice. The Color Purple: USA, First Harvest.2003. Print

outline_essay1

Garcia Waldron English 2160
Professor Westengard 9/29/2016
Proposed Outline of Argument for Essay #1

Main Thesis statement
I. Brief historical context of the era in which the The Bell Jar was written
a. Detail prevailing social issues current to the time of the novel
b. Detail impact and influence of the social issues
II. Definition of specialized terms and statements made in thesis statement
a. Analysis of quotes, arguments and terms from other sources related to the thesis statement.
b. Analysis of quotes , argument from The Bell Jar that support my thesis assertion
III. Provide examples and analysis of characters and situations that illustrate thesis argument.
a. Proof of thesis statements through analysis of characters from The Bell Jar.
b. Proof of thesis statement through analysis and interpretation of events in The Bell Jar.
c. Proof of relevance and relation of outside materials to the analysis and interpretation of characters and events in The Bell Jar.

IV. Exploration of counter arguments to thesis statements.
a. Alternative interpretations of character’s actions
b. Alternative interpretations of characters motivation and state of mind.
c. Alternative use of secondary sources to support counter arguments

V. Brief analysis of present day society.
a. Mention what if any significant changes are noticeable between 1950’s and present day values.
b. Mention on how the characters of The Bell Jar might fair in present day society
c. Mention who is best adapted to transition into present day society
d. Mention who least suited and would have the most difficult time living in present day USA

VI. Summary and Conclusion of analysis and interpretation of thesis statement.
VII. MLA quotation of source material

In “The Bell Jar” by Sylvia Plath, there is virtually no mention of race or at least the major races. Yes, Esther as her character is expressed, is very descriptive, detail oriented and is sometimes apt to mention other immigrants’ origin of birth. But in general it is not until she is committed to an asylum that we actually have Esther’s first-hand account of her interaction with someone not of her race. It is as though they are non-existent, not recognized or just not privy to Esther’s sphere of existence, reality or awareness. One can argue this is a stark example of Esther’s “white privilege.”

We all know Esther is not by any stretch of the imagination rich. She is envious of Doreen and the other females who are so privileged that they have matching pocket books for each outfit. Yet as economically challenged as she is, she is still able to “rub shoulders” with those higher up the economic ladder than her and seemingly avoid or ignore interaction with in particular those of African descent. One must ask themselves can Esther spend time in New York for an extended time in the 1950’s and not encounter or felt the need to mention any interaction or observations of people other than other Caucasian people.

During her brief encounter with seemingly non-white people, in her fast deteriorating mental state, she mentions that she has doubts as to their profession not only because of their age but having “suspicious, fake names (The Bell Jar,p202). To further exacerbate her seemingly only definable interaction with a “black person” and perhaps as a foreshadowing of changing times; she first remarks “ Usually it was shrunken old white men that brought our food, but today it was a Negro” so as to bolster my claim that she was not in regular contact with Negroes. Furthermore she goes on to eventually assault the seemingly innocent, hospital worker who was only doing his job, kicking him for no good reason (p205-206).What is somewhat strange is her comment afterwards, telling him “That’s what you get” (Plath p206). Was she taught that is the way to treat Negroes? In her state of mind it is hard to say one way or the other if she is racist or just plain mad and he just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

As Audre Lorde mentioned in her article (Audrey Lorde: Age, Race, Class and Sex )on the complexities of assigning people narrow, confining labels, Esther is at many intersections, female, white, young, poor, educated, mentally unbalanced and God knows what else. So it is not easy to decipher her actions and place them in simplistic, binary categories