Narayans Argument Is Stronger than Rushdies - Essay Example

? NARAYAN'S ARGUMENT IS STRONGER AND MORE VALID THAN RUSHDIE'S ENGLISH ESSAY SUBMITTED TO- SUBMITTED BY- Narayan's argument is stronger and more valid than Rushdie's Introduction The field of literature is inhabited by the idea of being relevant to culture. It has occupied the central theme in many of the writings of a number of prominent writers. This is essential to the fundamental premise of literature. The current composition also tries to comprehend this idea of culture, albeit; from a different view point. There are two contrasting viewpoints that are central to this piece, one is the idea of Narayan, and the other one is the idea of Rushdie. While, Narayan’s argument is based on the premise that the writers who are no longer a part of their homelands, tend to lose their cultural identity and tend to become “cultural” orphans. However, the view point of Rushdie is tangentially different and emphasizes on the other extreme. This one is based on the fact that the writers attain a broader understanding of culture. Having carefully seen both the arguments, let us try to analyze the basis of these arguments. In order to understand the basis of these arguments, it is vital to comprehend the meaning of culture. Culture has a lot of dimensions, which have a residual impact on the functional element of the basic understanding of one’s surroundings. Fundamental premise Culture has a number of definitions that is used across contexts. However, the primary definition of culture can be seen as a pattern of shared behaviors and their interactions, the use of cognitive kind of constructs, and the effective kind of understanding that is learned through the process of socialization. It also consists of s shared set of customs, norms and beliefs. The culture is not a singular entity and may have other kinds of dimensions as well (Andrew 96). This may comprise of a definitive culture being present in one part of a country and the absence in another. Together, they form a part of the common understanding of culture. From the point of view of the debate at hand and the two contrasting opinions, we can draw up a form of comprehension of different kinds of factors that can be used to explain all of these. Now, let us take each of the points and understand the factors that shall be helpful in defining the context of this discussion. Narayan has mentioned about the fact that the individuals who live away from the homeland tend to suffer from a cultural disconnect. Let us comprehend the definition of culture in a more refined manner and de-construct the argument. The definition of culture shall help in explaining the finer points of this argument. Culture is an amalgam of shared patterns. This implies that the formation of the initial belief structure is fomented by the exposure to indigenous culture. But, for any individual living in foreign land or an adopted country, the patterns of shared behavior tend to become diffused in nature. There is an enforced behavior that gains prominence when compared to the generic behavior. The cultural patterns of shared behavior in any country are different from the others leading to a change in the perception. Each culture has a distinctive style of imparting a means of understanding the needs of a society. It channelizes the different forms of behavior in humans as a part of the society. The levels of cognition are varied according to the learning as different parts of the society. This forms an essential degree of difference among the various elements. The cognitive understanding of culture varies among different countries. So, in case of any individual has lived away from their homeland or their ancestral land, they tend to develop a dissociated sense of cognitive construct (Keleman 233). According to Parsons, the social construct of any individual consists of the following components. They are as follows- The process of biological needs that are defined by the behavioral system of any culture or place. The “personality system” of an individual gets affected by the functions around the social world. This impacts their understanding of the culture and people. The social system of the patterns and the roles in a system. This tends to be diffused in case of any individual in living in any foreign lands (staying away from their homeland). Analysis All these factors are central to the idea of understanding the concept of cultural alienation or being “a cultural orphan”, as being discussed by Narayan. On the other hand, the point that Rushdie discusses, is the richness in terms of experience that an environment (in this case, not being in the homeland) brings. The exposure to a different culture tends to formulate a mixed understanding of the cultural sets or identities. But, the exposure to different identities has an effect on the conception of culture and surroundings. We shall analyze the argument in terms of the suggested readings. First of all, let us analyze the composition named as “A Passage to America”. This essay is an indicative of the understanding of culture that is borne by the writer. This essay is a representation of the situation of the Indian immigrants in the American society. This essay can be studied from two different fundamental points. Firstly, the topic of the essay is based on a subject that is very distinct. On very careful reading, the second point is the level of analysis of American culture and role of Church in the perspective of the situation of Indian immigrants in that society. Some of the lines are very pragmatic and tend to draw a vivid picture of the American society. There are many lines that can be discussed in this context, but some of the points in this composition are well worth mentioning. As for example, Narayan says” "Ultimately, America and India are profoundly different in attitude and philosophy, though it would be wonderful if they could complement each other's values. Indian philosophy stresses austerity and unencumbered, uncomplicated day-to-day living. America's emphasis, on the other hand, is on material acquisition and the limitless pursuit of prosperity. From childhood, an Indian is brought up on the notion that austerity and a contended life are good; certain otherworldliness is inculcated through a grandmother's tales, the discourses at the temple hall, and moral books. The American temperament, on the contrary, is pragmatic. The American has a robust indifference to eternity " (3).In a way, his writings offer a certain degree of insight into the conflicts being faced by the Indians in America. This feature is extremely well crafted, as it shows a diametrically opposite side to the popular conception of Indian Americans. On further analysis, the typical American has been painted as an individual who does not care about the afterlife. On the other hand, an Indian, although enjoys a physical level of prosperity; cannot synchronize with this mindset of the Americans. Thereby, although they enjoy all the fruits of the labor; they tend to have a life of conflicting values. This can be alleviated by the second generation of the Americans or by people coming back to India. This insight has been possible due to the cultural upbringing in India: that is completely different from the one in America. On the other hand, a writer like Rushdie, having grown away from the homeland, hardly could come with same degree of precision or analytical finesse. Again, the same depth of comprehension can be found in the work of Narayan called as “A Horse and Two Goats”. It depicts the stark poverty of Muni and the opulence of an American. Even the language serves as a metaphor for the lack of collusion between the cultures. Whilst Muni tries taking in Tamil, the American talks in English. They are both unaware of the language of one another. The urge of the American to buy the statue is a way of expressing likes towards materialism, whilst Muni’s idea is based on survival. It also speaks of the stark differences among the civilizations. In his work, “Imaginary Homelands”, he deals with a pertinent issue of migration. It deals with the aspect of losing one’s homeland, people, language and other essentials. The continual metaphor used here is metamorphosis. It is a repository of various kinds of conflicts being faced by the urban society. It deals with all of these subjects with eloquence. But, one has to look into the subject to understand the point made by Narayan. The topic of the work is indicative of the veracity of his statement of being a cultural orphan. Conclusion He does not show the same degree of incision in the subjects, or neither makes an observation in terms of cultural perspective. It is made clear in the opening sentences of Salman Rushdie’s work which say,” The past is foreign country ‘ is the famous opening line of L P Hartley’s novel, ‘The Go-Between”,’ they do things differently’. But the photograph tells me to invert this idea; it reminds me that it’s my present that is foreign, and that the past is home, a lost home in a lost city in the mists of lost time”(9). At the conclusion, I concur with the argument of RK Narayan. References "A Passage to America." A Passage to America. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Nov. 2012. . "Balubara€™s Weblog." Balubar's Weblog. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Nov. 2012. . "http://philosophy.ucsc.edu/news-events/colloquia-conferences/Rushdie1992ImaginaryHomelands.pdf." . N.p.. Web. 6 Nov 2012.  R. J., Andrew . Comment on The Essential Morphological Basis for Human Culture. New York: Penguin, 1987. Print. Keleman .Comment on The Essential Morphological Basis for Human Culture. London: Current Anthropology ,1997. Print. Read More