Satire ad

Literary Debate

Before i start, i would like to say that they article was so ridiculously confusing. In the article by George Will, Carol Lannone was opposed by the Modern Association was mainly because of her ideologies which were different. This was a major conflict in the article. It seems as if Mr. Well believes that literary works were influenced by political agendas and even feelings. As for Stephen Greenblatt, he believes people are translating words and meanings of things and putting them in their own words which is corrupting the actual meaning to where at a point our culture seems to slightly be pushed away. There are many writers  who publish the same thing but for us, we cant expand it because we all just write the same stuff over and over. Those who include their own life into their own writing which also cause our culture to drift away because their is nothing new being used. I would have to believe that both articles are telling the truth but then they are not. There are pieces of writing that include many different pieces of culture. To me, every piece of writing is based on a piece of culture but most of them are the same which is not helping much to expand the cultures. I also believe that some literary works are based on political influence but not all are.

The single story explains the lives of different types of ethnicities in the world. It shows the lives of people as one thing and that is what they will become because that is what we were told Adichie uses as an example for Mexicans. Americans look at foreigners and believe they have no idea how to speak english or even live like an American because they are different. The best way to resolve the textbook is to produce one book that is told by people that have lived the past because they know what occurred, but is most likely impossible because most people who are in our history books these days are deceased. Anything put into the books should be written from the ones who lived the lives of their own ethnicity. Adichie explains how stories matter but dispossess and used to empower people along with humanize. They also break dignity of people but even repair them because of the different sides of stories told. Minority voices should be told but have 2 sides to it to explain its purpose. People can teach one simple thing in many different ways if they can invent a different way. The way of teaching gives the teacher their thought of what they believe should be taught over what shouldn't be taught, so they choose what they want to teach. Hitler may not have been a hero to many people but there may have been people who thought he was a hero and those are the people who are most likely left out because they are the minority. The reason single stories are difficult is because one story could be told and many people will believe it cause that is what they were shown leaving the rest of the told stories left out such as the other sides of the lives of people.