tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3354814281006350164.post3745033716025462683..comments2023-03-23T21:44:30.265-04:00Comments on ENG L371 Critical Practices: "Equipment for Living" (in uncertain times): Identification and Re/Presentationtgrabanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16913401531606867135noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3354814281006350164.post-84336301621157561902011-11-21T01:41:09.556-05:002011-11-21T01:41:09.556-05:00Your question about "who can represent who&qu...Your question about "who can represent who" is an important one. It addresses the issue of what makes us different, testing the boundaries of the line between gender and race.<br /> One of Cooper's passages that caught my eye was when she said, "What I hope to see before i die is a black man honestly and appreciatively portraying both the Negro as he is, and the white man, occasionally, as seen from the Negro's standpoint" (383). <br /><br />I see Cooper's essay as an encouragement to create new representations. After this essay I got the feeling that Cooper's exigency is the reality that an entire portrait of a race has been distorted. "They forget that underneath the black man's form and behavior there is the great bed-rock of humanity..." (382). This points to not only the misrepresentation of black people in art and literature, but also to the "they" as a separate kind. Cooper brings up the art of "thinking one's self imaginatively into the experiences of others" (382). To me this suggests an openness of mind and pursuit of disenchantment from our stereotyped world. <br /><br />With the first statement, it's like she's saying, if black people have been put in this portrait, wait til you see how blacks perceive white people. From Cooper we can understand how difficult it is to represent the other, but also how it must inevitably happen in literature.Gabe Huanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15613954692295788572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3354814281006350164.post-50500593300920520182011-11-21T00:22:09.875-05:002011-11-21T00:22:09.875-05:00Bringing McLoud into the picture is an interesting...Bringing McLoud into the picture is an interesting tactic in discussing universal representation. I agree with many of your points, and this comment will give me a much needed rest from Burke and his terministic screens. In terms of identity, the question of who can represent who is a decent question that casts agency into an awkward light. Cooper and Butler both have a problem with a gender or race being constructed or represented in a way that does not (and seemingly cannot) capture the identity of an entire population of similar people. But I feel that this pitfall comes from both the social and cultural constructions of race and gender, as well as the individuality complex of all human beings. Grouping and categorizations are based on broad associations, not individual identity. Your post made me truly question whether or not "universal representation" can exist, because it brings about another paradox that is tied closely to identity, and that is mis/representation (see my last post!). <br /><br /> Can a presenter universally group together and capture identity, or is their construction of such an identity undermine their efforts. I think that this is where Butler is coming from when she states that, citing Luce Irigary, "women constitute a paradox, if not a contradiction, within the discourse of identity itself...within a language pervasively masculinist...women constitute the unrepresentable" (Butler 13).Daniel E. McKassonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02460348389806722348noreply@blogger.com