So did anybody have anything to add that they didn't get to say in the discussion yesterday? It was a very profound talk yesterday and vet interesting. Perhaps we should go on more
I thought that the image of the train remaining on a circular path was interesting. I liked how it was interpreted as symbolism for the way that society was stuck in a constant, oppressive cycle.
The only thing I wanted to add to that was how it was mentioned that a part of the train fell off after the lion was bought. I kinda thought of that as a representation of a possibility of a break from that cycle. Now that the woman was aware of the gap between the rich and the poor, maybe that knowledge would turn into something bigger. Maybe she'll become the spark that sets a change in motion
Or it could just be a representation that not everyone is on board (haha get it?) with the socially imposed barrier.
I think that too much prior knowledge of Apartheid is what jaded my analysis. Was I wrong however, in saying that the couples issue can make way for more issues to come, then later divorce? It was not uncommon
I could go on with the symbolism in the train or the chocolate, but I think it has all been said. I just wanted to comment how powerful the woman's realization was to me. The whole situation was so realistic, so human. It began with the woman harmlessly looking at the merchandise with the shield of ignorance she's probably lived with all her life. She's almost subconsciously lured by the lion and we were described to the moment her world of comfortable white supremacy has been shattered. It was ironic how she initially turned it away for its price, but another comment I have is that the whole ordeal was practically symbolic to how we turn our heads away to things we don't want to see. She ignorantly looks for another trinket to buy when she is surrounded by poverty and turns the other cheek when she is offered the only way she could have an effect on this issue. How often do people do this? We've even defined it and label it as a social psychological phenomenon. I see it as the rest of the people in that train falling victim to the (as Alejandra Salinas always tells me about) bystander effect.
I thought that the image of the train remaining on a circular path was interesting. I liked how it was interpreted as symbolism for the way that society was stuck in a constant, oppressive cycle.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I wanted to add to that was how it was mentioned that a part of the train fell off after the lion was bought. I kinda thought of that as a representation of a possibility of a break from that cycle. Now that the woman was aware of the gap between the rich and the poor, maybe that knowledge would turn into something bigger. Maybe she'll become the spark that sets a change in motion
Or it could just be a representation that not everyone is on board (haha get it?) with the socially imposed barrier.
I think that too much prior knowledge of Apartheid is what jaded my analysis. Was I wrong however, in saying that the couples issue can make way for more issues to come, then later divorce? It was not uncommon
ReplyDeleteI could go on with the symbolism in the train or the chocolate, but I think it has all been said. I just wanted to comment how powerful the woman's realization was to me. The whole situation was so realistic, so human. It began with the woman harmlessly looking at the merchandise with the shield of ignorance she's probably lived with all her life. She's almost subconsciously lured by the lion and we were described to the moment her world of comfortable white supremacy has been shattered. It was ironic how she initially turned it away for its price, but another comment I have is that the whole ordeal was practically symbolic to how we turn our heads away to things we don't want to see. She ignorantly looks for another trinket to buy when she is surrounded by poverty and turns the other cheek when she is offered the only way she could have an effect on this issue. How often do people do this? We've even defined it and label it as a social psychological phenomenon. I see it as the rest of the people in that train falling victim to the (as Alejandra Salinas always tells me about) bystander effect.
ReplyDelete