Does Language Equal Power and Does It Define You as a Writer free essay sample

With language, we can communicate who we are and what we think. Without language, we would be isolated. We would have no discipline, no past, no present and no future. To understand how meaning works, then, is to understand part of what it is to be human . Ultimately language is a necessary means of life, which some say that language derived from grunts and groans and evolved into the complex form that we know today. As a writer you choose the direction you will follow when communicating to your reader . To a degree you hold the â€Å"power† of defining yourself. Should you allow others to dictate you’re identity We have three writers Kincaid, Fanon and Anzaldua, all with similar viewpoints, however all electing to communicate their story differently through language. All expressing their beliefs differently (between there tone, and careful choice of words), all speaking about events they have either witness and or experienced throughout their lives. All seem to be obsessed with their topic choice. Question that I have is if these writers are similar, expressive and passionate about what they do, then what makes one writer work seem more appealing, more impactful, and more powerful to a reader then the other? Is it the dialects the writers utilize that has the reader prone to one writer over the other? Is it the way the writer’s language translates to paper, and does that solely play a role in distinguishing them as a writer? Perhaps it is where they receive their education, which allows them to get their point across in a comprehensible way and keep the attention of the reader? By the way that Fanon, Kincaid and Anzaldua choices to convey language fuels them with the power, whether it is power that they receive from the reader, the power that is self-inflicted, or the power that is forced upon them. They all receive, utilize and gain from their power as writers. Just as knowledge is power so is language. We have Fanon, a Negro, a Doctor, a Man, an Object (he, himself, not really aware of what title he will represent on what day) seeming to be imprisoned in his Black Man’s body but living in a White Man’s World ( Fanon wants to be looked at as man, a person, not by the color of his skin). Although Fanon himself is trapped he continues to criticize every writer that he references within his book (why reference them if you’re going to solely criticize them). How is it that you could feel trapped in your own human skin, however chapter by chapter criticize those that have made a stance for what they believe. We have Kincaid, a Negro, a Women, and a Native; (she never really referencing herself by a title, nor does she disclose detailed information about herself in this book, at one point the language she uses makes it difficult to determine even her sex) Kincaid uses language to express her bitterness, fury, and resentment at colonists and the Antiguans for failing to fully achieve their independence. Lastly we have Anzaldua, a Teacher, a Chicano, and a Woman (a person that has learned to embrace all three titles) who wants her readers to be able to comprehend the problem that she has faced with her own language. If we look at Fanon, Kincaid and Anzaldua they all have one thing in common, they all have referenced language in their own way. They also have one thing in which they go in different directions with, which is the verbatim that they use to convey the message to the reader. Kincaid begins her book â€Å"A Small Place† utilizing a peaceful direction of language; however she quickly rises to a bitter, angry writer. I believe revisiting Antigua was the beginning to her fueled bitterness. â€Å"T H E A N T I G U A that I knew, the Antigua in which I grew up, is not the Antigua you, a tourist would see now. That Antigua no longer exists. †[23] Kincaid remembers the area around her where she grew up, no longer exist due to â€Å"the bad minded English†[41] when she reflect back, her anger infuriates her. Kincaid’s introduction begins with â€Å"If You Go To Antigua as a tourist, this is what you will see. Kincaid’s introduction to A Small Place has me question, at first, the direction that she is taking the book in. Is she questioning whether you will travel to Antigua because it’s a small place, or is her reason for leading with this phase her way of warning the reader? It has me believe that by continuing to read this book you will no longer want to travel to Antigua, or that Antigua has become such an ugly place that the writer wouldn’t want you to travel to Antigua. My assumption for this stems from the word â€Å"IF†. Although she leads with a phase that you nstantly question, you understand it, you may question the â€Å"IF† but you understand what she is saying. The vocabulary and language that she uses throughout the book is one that reflects simplicity, uncomplicatedness, and straightforwardness. In Kincaids book I found myself only wondering how was I to tie this book into previous books that we read in the past. Unfortunately I am unable to state that for all. Black Skin White Mask begins with a little history of Franz Fanon; he was born 1925, in the French Colony of Martinique. Fanon left Martinique in 1945, when he served in the French Free Army in World War II, Fanon decided to stay in France where he would study medicine and psychiatry in Lyon; this is where Fanon would shape his psychological theories about race and culture. Fanons first chapter focused on the â€Å"colonist subjugation† of a Negro. Fanon seems to comply with the dominant language philosophy of his day when he boldly declares that â€Å"a man who has a language consequently possesses the world expressed and implied by that language’’ [14]. Of course, this is just a theory, as many other factors come into play. If the theory held true independently, then consequently, the Negro would not be placed in the debilitate position of possessing an inferiority complex because he would possess the world of the white colonizer and share co-equal status. Throughout ever chapter Fanon has figured out a way to have the readers become lost in his words. It seems that transitioning from one chapter to another becomes more difficult when moving throughout the chapters. Fanon speaks about his observation that the isomorphic relationship between the races results in a massive â€Å"psycho-existential† [xvi] complex. A â€Å"cure† can only be had of one analyzes racism as a symptom. Fanon continues to argue that only a â€Å"psychoanalytic interpretation† can revolutionize the significance of the symptoms so as to make live more livable. â€Å"Why write this book? † â€Å"No one has asked me for it. † â€Å"Especially those to whom it is directed. † â€Å"Well? † â€Å"I reply quite calmly that there are too many idiots in this world. And having said it, I have the burden of proving it. † And with that perhaps this books unintentionally, becomes the mixture of conditional study, physiological analysis. olitical manifesto, an exploration of sexual identity and identifies and hovering at the center of Fanon’s own examination of himself . Fanon as I see him is a founding father of modern post-colonial criticism, who represents himself as French, however doesn’t want to be label or questioned (because French is considered the more cultura l language). â€Å"I was hated, detested, and despised, not by my next-door neighbor or a close cousin, but by the entire race. I was against something irrational. †[98], although Fanon come across that going against his own race would be ridiculous, he feels it necessary to defend himself. Fanon later states that â€Å"In no way do I have to dedicate myself to retrieving a black civilization unjustly ignored. I will not make myself the man of the past†. [201]. If Fanon feels as though he isn’t a man of the past, but is the man of the future then why does he feel it necessary to defend himself? Fanon must understand that in order to fix the future you must first understand and come to grips with your past. Fanon seems to be a lost searching for answers through the languages that he speaks; this is due to the French language and living under the French rule. Fanon feels as though if he speaks in such language then he will be more accepted amongst the â€Å"white â€Å"people, amongst French. They will no longer see a â€Å"nigga† walking the street they will see a doctor, they will no longer see a â€Å"negro† they will see a man equal in race. I believe that language can either block communications (which Fanon has managed to complete for some, based on the medical terms and language that he uses) or it can release the barrios that we have for communication. Language sets you identity. Gloria Anzaldua has taken language and her identity in a different route in â€Å"How to Tame a Wild Tongue. † Gloria begins with her in a dentist office; the dentist is complaining that her tongue is strong and stubborn. She thinks to herself, â€Å"How do you tame a wild tongue, train it to be quiet†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (75). Despite the fact that the dentist wasn’t referring to her accent, her reaction makes it obvious that the problems she has had with the way she speaks causes her to be constantly conscious of how other people view her. She believes her accent is something that defines her. Ultimately Gloria realizes that until she takes pride in her language, she cannot take pride in herself. She speaks about the problem she faced with her own language and how she represents herself through language. Gloria speaks about how Chicanas have a complexity expressing themselves and feelings. She feels that the reason for this, is they lack a native language, instead it is a mixture of different languages: Standard English, Working class and slang English, Standard Spanish, Standard Mexican, just to name a few. Gloira emphasizes the importance to having their own language, in order to keep the lines of communication open. However, most Chicans are afraid to communicate in their own language, due to them feeling as though they speak â€Å"Poor Spanish. † Gloria has embraced her language, she has embraced her identity. We return to the question that was first asked in this essay, does language equal power and does it define you as a writer. We have three writers, all with a purpose, to be defined. Kincaid writes â€Å"But no place could ever really be England, and nobody who did not look exactly like them would never be English† [24], However this is a quote that is true to Fanon. He doesn’t look as the standard Frenchman do, but he considers himself French. Fanon, â€Å"Very often the black man who has become abnormal has never come into contact with Whites. † [124], this is a statement that is true to Kincaid, is it possible that tourist is abnormal because they aren’t in contact with the natives, or true for Chicanas who haven’t come into contact with their own identity. We have Anzaldua, â€Å"A language which they can connect their identity to, one capable of communicating the realities and values true to themselves. †[77]. This quote can be tied into all writers. A â€Å"language† not a colour, government, or native holds the key to reality. All represents powerful quotes and meaning behind them. If you think about each quote can relay to the other writer. So does language hold the power? I say yes, it holds the power of defining you as a writer, it holds the power of defining you as a human, it holds the power to determine your identity.