Like the asynchronous work for Week 3, you are going to offer a critical response to your peers work by commenting on their blog responses for this week. You will writetwo comments(each comment should bemin. 150 words), one for each text (one on Tagore, another on Chopin). To do so, you will have to read all 6 responses from your peers. Once youve read them, youll choose 2 responses to respond to (again,one for each author) based on what youre interested in or what you think can be further expanded. In addition, you should make reference to a quote theyre citing or bring a quotation yourself to support your comments.

A good comment critically engages with something specific that the response is discussing and further expands or illuminates some of its ideas. Commentsare not your own blog response. The comments should bethoughtful, substantive, and respectful, and should specifically engage with things that are said on the post, rather than paraphrasing what they have already said.

BLOG RESPONSE BELOW:

Kabuliwala by Rabindranath Tagore is a short story about the relationship between a Bangladeshi family, their daughter Mini, and Rahamat, an Afghani immigrant. The moral of this short story is about finding commonality between oneself and others, despite our differing life experiences. Tagore teaches this lesson of commonality by forging a contrasting groundwork of alterity, or otherness. This otherness is created using character world views, actions, nationality, and speech patterns.

The world views of the characters and their actions reinforce a sense of alterity. The mother is generally distrusting of the world that she inhabits, while the father is not. The mother believes that the world is filled with thieves and drunkards. Describing her suspicion of Rahamat and Minis friendship, the mother rhetorically asks Are children never kidnapped? (Tagore, 3). In contrast, the father enjoys his conversations with Rahamat, as he deems them enjoyable and transporting. These contrasting world views of the parents are both correct and incorrect. Rahamat goes on to murder a man who owed him money, which is in congruence with the mothers worldview. Yet, he returns many years later with gifts for Mini on her wedding day. This reminds the father of their common love for their daughters. The mothers worldview and Rahamats heinous crime reinforce otherness, but there are also more subtle examples.

Otherness is also created by Tagores use of character national identity. Several times throughout the story, Rahamat is made to represent otherness, by his non-native speech or even by the content of his speech. When Mini asks Rahamat about the treats he is carrying in his bag, he says Hanti! (Tagore, 3). This is a mispronunciation of the Hindi word for elephant. Although it is subtle, it reminds the reader that Rahamat is attempting to assimilate, but is not always successful in his efforts. Another example of this mispronunciation to reinforce alterity was when Rahamat refers to Mini as Khonki, Khonki, you must never go to your in-laws house. (Tagore, 3). Khonki is a mispronunciation of a Hindi term of endearment. In addition to the mispronunciation, this also touches upon the difference in personal values between the family and Rahamat. Although it is normalized in Bangladesh, the father mentions that they do not have conversations with their young daughter about her future husband for the sake of progressiveness. This leads the reader to believe that Rahamat is more traditional and does have conversations like these with his daughter. Both what Rahamat says and how he speaks, create a palatable difference between himself and the family.

When we interact with individuals who speak, think, and act differently than ourselves, we are reminded of our glaring differences. This short story reminds us that we should also look for our commonalities. This short story may even suggest that people are better than the worst thing they have ever done. Do you believe that Minis initial fear of Rahamat was reinforcing otherness? Why or why not?