Introduction
Gabriel Garcia Marquez is a Colombian Nobel prize winner commonly regarded as one of the best authors of the 20th century (Echevarría). His works famously blend elements of fantasy and realism to explore solitude, violence, and the human condition (Echevarría). A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings is a short story by Marquez that follows the disruption caused by the sudden appearance of a mysterious old man with wings in Pelayo and Elisenda’s courtyard. Marquez uses these two main characters to illustrate humanity’s inability to recognize or appropriately deal with the sublime once it arrives in their lives.
Main body
Characters are arguably the most crucial part of any literary work because they move the plot forward and make it compelling. Authors imbue their characters with certain personality traits and force them into conflicts against themselves, others, or society. Their subsequent actions and interactions shape the storyline and reveal the work’s overarching theme, either for the edification or entertainment of the reader. Some characters are vividly described and distinct from any other, while others are simply placeholders for general humanity. The ultimate lesson they have learned — or failed to learn, in some cases — is the principal meaning behind the work the author was attempting to express.
Marquez uses indirect characterization to portray Pelayo and Elisenda as ordinary members of the working class. There is no explicit description of their identity, thought process, or general life situation. They are vague outlines for readers to project themselves onto. The only information provided by the author in the opening paragraph is that they have been throwing crabs back into the sea because their newborn is ill from the stench. From these context clues, it is understandable that they are from a lower socioeconomic stratum of society. This is further solidified by the statement that Elisenda has a twisted spine from sweeping garbage in the marketplace. However, their attempt to fight the crab infestation shows them as still willing to take action and improve their life circumstances.
After discovering the mysterious winged man, Pelayo and Elisenda become active agents that move the plot forward. Pelayo is the one that finds the old winged man in their courtyard and locks him in the chicken coop once a neighbor proclaims that the old man is a lost angel. Then, Elisenda decides to take advantage of the crowd’s interest and charges a five-cent admission rate to see the “angel.” The couple builds a “two-story mansion with balconies and a high garden” for profit, leaving the man to rot in the coop (Marquez). Elisenda and Pelayo are religious people, but they only treat the intruder as a profitable circus act despite his possibly divine origins. Through their actions, Marquez reveals humanity’s tendency to ostracize and exploit the unknown rather than express any compassion or understanding.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Pelayo and Elisenda’s actions shape the storyline and reveal the underlying message of Marquez’s work. Their sparse biography and characterization make them general representatives of humankind rather than distinct personalities. Therefore, their cavalier and exploitative attitude towards a possible angel is ultimately an indictment of human cruelty. Instead of reacting with awe or trying to understand the old man’s origins, Pelayo and Elisenda treat him as a commonplace source of income. Ultimately, it must be concluded that miracles must be happening all the time, but humanity has not learned to recognize them.
Works Cited
Echevarría, Roberto G. “Gabriel Garcia Marquez.” Britannica, Web.
Marquez, G. G. “A very old man with enormous wings.” Translated by Gregory Rabassa. NDSU, Web.
Inclusion And Diversity: What Do We Mean?
Diversity across cultures is a phenomenon that threatens the ideal approach to handling interactions among Americans. On the one hand, dynamism in cultural practices enhances an optimal interaction and exchange of information that improves appreciation of the global population and demographics. On the other hand, the evolution of human society fostered the influence of institutional systems and constitutional frameworks that promote capitalism. As a result, a significant percentage of individuals from certain ethnicities attain superiority based on wealth accumulation over other races (Feigelson, 2013).
The marginalization of racial groups based on superiority and inferiority rendered the emergence of critical race theory that addresses perspectives to alleviate discriminatory practices based on ethnic assortment. As an individual from Eastern Asia, it is essential that I interrogate and comprehend the critical factors of my cultural traditions and their contrast to other customs. The interrogation of a person’s way of life is a technique that provides a solution within critical race theory as a mainframe for adjusting and appreciating multicultural diversity.
Culture is a framework that significantly contributes to an individual’s social identity. Therefore, it is important to understand the norms and background of customs to enhance personal moral and ethical code. However, such concepts as capitalism negatively impact multicultural diversity within the society mainly due to the focus on socio-economic status. The researcher argues that despite the measures to curb racism, the figures show the contradiction based on the inequitable distribution of resources (Feigelson, 2013).
On the one hand, the researcher depicts that the ratio between Whites and African Americans, and Latinos will eventually decrease. On the other hand, the author stipulates that the ideal solution to racism is integrating critical race theory with therapeutic practices to assert the balance of power, issues of oppression, and cultural strength. The distinction between the statistical foundation and the cultural theorem interactions enhances a coherent interrogation of inclusion and multiplicity.
It is crucial to learn and comprehend the dynamism of cultural practices to acquire insights based on the best approaches to utilize during interactions. Racism is a topic that faces significant controversies across different institutions in America. An excellent example is establishing a task force within an organization that trains the staff regarding multicultural diversity and the necessary interaction techniques. Ethnicity contributes to the development of social identity.
Therefore, the violation of the cultural code of an individual affects their service experience with the company. In this case, it is essential that staff members, despite recognizing other challenges such as ableism, heterosexism, and sexism, it is vital that the personnel implement the practical aspect of the critical race theory (Feigelson, 2013). Although racism is a factor rendering the inequitable distribution of resources and privileges, the core element to enhance is the deep understanding of multicultural diversity and its significance.
The importance of multicultural diversity entails fostering harmony in coexistence among individuals from different ethnicities. It is an approach that renders proficiency in boosting the social identity and appreciating the ideal constructs based on moral and ethical code of behavior. The primary duty of all personnel enshrines assessing the cultural background and understanding the power dynamics without establishing either superiority or inferiority complex. Racism is one of the issues threatening peace and harmony among communities within American society (Feigelson, 2013). Therefore, it is the responsibility of all stakeholders to integrate the frameworks with significant elements such as capitalism and organizational culture to ensure the equal distribution of resources and privileges, an example being job promotions.
There are different types of oppression that highly influence productivity among people. One of the frameworks is ideological, which enshrines the belief that one group is superior to the others and hence possesses autocracy control regarding the dynamic engagements. It is an approach that attributes to the emergence of extreme characterization aspects. One setting upholds strength, normalcy, and advanced performance (Feigelson, 2013). The second team’s personality is lazy, backward, incompetent, and worthless regarding completing a particular task.
Institutional oppression is the mainframe for assigning dominant rights between groups, such as the dispute between masculinity and feminism. It is an issue that highly affects social growth and development due to the significant hindrance concerning the coordinative efforts to boost economic performance (Feigelson, 2013). An excellent example is the institutionalization of sexism cause of a woman’s attempt to seek a leadership position against her male counterparts. Therefore, the framework revolves around the aspect of influencing the subjective and perceptive spectrum within a community.
Interpersonal oppression is an approach encapsulating institutionalizing a group that is dominant over other entities while empowering individual personalities. In this case, a sect member easily discriminates against people from the distinct, identifiable team. An excellent example of racism between African Americans and Whites (Feigelson, 2013). The Non-Hispanic Whites consider the Blacks as a minority hence the justification for the inequality during the distribution of national resources. The phenomenon affects the social identity development among characters cause of the relative effect on the living quotient.
Internalized oppression involves the long-term consequence of discrimination that proficiently impacts the nature of interactions and quality of living. The primary goal of the superior entity engulfs negatively influencing the minority against accessing certain privileges through the establishment of specific notions. As a result, the affected group members get accustomed to the mythological mainframe across the nation.
Reference
Feigelson, M. (2013). The Inclusion Dividend: Why Investing in Diversity & Inclusion Pays Off. People & Strategy, 36(3), 56-57.
Social Identity And Multicultural Solidarity
Today, when societies become more and more multicultural, the issue of national solidarity becomes especially relevant. Many countries strive to preserve their unique cultural and social identity by adopting stricter immigration laws, social policies and creating economic barriers in the way of migrants. However, the processes of globalization can only be hampered but not altogether terminated as these processes have become an inherent part of today’s society. The article “One for all and all for one” looks upon the problem of social identity and suggests how multicultural solidarity can be created in our global world. This paper hypothesizes that while the author’s arguments for building multicultural solidarity are correct, in practice, the idea can hardly be brought about in modern society. At present, there are too many diversities and centrifugal forces that threaten to tear apart the soft tissue of multicultural solidarity.
Social solidarity can be determined by many factors, among which religious identity, the state’s social policy, cultural properties, and the societal vision of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ developed throughout centuries. Taylor (2010) argues that instead of fighting people who think and believe differently, governments and societies should embrace an approach to allow these people to become full-fledged participants of society. While this approach finds support at many governmental and societal levels, there are many stumbling blocks not mentioned by the author due to which the creation of multicultural solidarity may fall apart.
Many governments openly admitted that the attempts to integrate migrants in their respective societies failed due to these people’s uncompromising beliefs. Taylor (2010) mentions mutual respect as a basis for creating multicultural solidarity but does not indicate how this mutual respect should be developed. Today, many people come to Western societies searching for a better life and blatantly disrupt the existing democratic institutions, trample civil freedoms, and bully citizens into keeping silent. Taylor (2010) names democratic institutions as central pillars for creating multicultural solidarity but is not aware that democratic principles are not shared by all the cultures. Some cultures and societies are, in essence, profoundly patriarchal and are not ready to adopt basic democratic principles such as equality of men and women, equal access to education, and the freedom of speech. If these principles are imposed from above, it may cause a severe backlash, resulting in terror acts, mass murders, and kidnappings. If they are compromised and not universally upheld, the essence of multicultural solidarity can be questioned.
However, globalization is on the march, and societies should find ways to incorporate multiculturism into citizens’ everyday lives. Among the means to do this, Taylor (2010) names seeking a solution through dialogue and opinion exchanges. These means can be very effective when adopted at all levels, from governmental sessions to street conversations; however, proper initiation of such debates may pose a problem. Indeed, Taylor (2010) says that it is much easier to stick to one’s point of view than to admit that confronting opinions may suggest alternatives better suited to face modern challenges. Taylor (2010) rightly notes that people are self-centered and not willing to compromise their comfort but suggests no ways to make people willing to embrace dialogue. Governmental efforts to create a common multicultural identity often fail because people are not ready to engage in cross-cultural conversation.
National identity is the notion usually used to differentiate between different cultures and societies. Taylor (2010) suggests redefining social identity to embrace outlooks that run counter to the adopted values by including them into the system of societal values. However, not all outlooks can be successfully incorporated, raising questions about why some values are adopted and others not. Moreover, central believes in certain cultures run counter to previously adopted societal values, which poses questions about successful incorporation.
In addition, the strength of the proposed redefined solidarity can be questioned since different groups where people belong may be seen as more authoritative than newly-established values. For example, Muslim leaders have exceptional influence in Muslim communities. If some of their expectations are not met, they may ask the congregation not to identify with newly established solidarity principles.
The idea of creating cross-cultural solidarity is not new and, in recent years, has been widely discussed. The article suggests ways through which compromise may be established, and the process of societal redefinition be brought about. However, the practical realization of his initiatives, such as making the democratic institutions the central pillars of a new identity, may be questioned since the democratic vector is not universally accepted as a basis for social norms and values. While globalization dictates the necessity of engaging in cross-cultural dialogue, many people are reluctant to compromise their beliefs and are not ready to embrace conflicting opinions and views. Stating the essential character of the cross-cultural identity, the article gives no real clues as to how such identity should be created, since the proposed democratization may not meet the ideals and expectations of all societal groups. The article, defining the problem of creating a new identity, leaves the readers room for thinking through which institutions this identity may be brought about.
Reference
Taylor, C. (2010). All for one, and one for all. Globe and Mail.