Saturday, September 19, 2009

Blog 3- The Joys of Motherhood

In Buchi Emecheta’s novel, The Joys of Motherhood, one may come to realize that micro-financing would be most beneficial to societies in Nigeria. There are many situations in the book where Nnu Ego, the main character, must struggle on her own to provide for her family. Throughout the book, she takes on many small trading jobs to ensure the survival of her immediate family, as well as for her husband’s other wives along with their children.

In the beginning of their marriage, Nnu Ego’s second husband, Nnaife, was barely able to provide enough money for their small family. So Nnu Ego started her own business selling cigarettes and matches beside the road. But after the death of her first child and the birth of her newest, Nnu Ego decides to devote all her time to motherhood instead of making the extra income at her market stall. But when Nnaife lost his job due to his employers moving back to England, the Nnu Ego must resume her local trade in cigarettes. When Nnaife secures another job that takes him far from home, Nnu Ego and her two sons begin to suffer in poverty. So once again, Nnu Ego had to search for more cigarettes to sell. Luckily, Nnaife returned with much money from his previous job. So with that money, Nnu Ego secured a permanent stall at the market, while Nnaife went searching for yet another job. Around the same time Nnaife finds a new job, news of his brother’s death reaches their compound and as a duty, Nnaife takes ones of his late brother’s wives to marry himself. Nnu Ego and the new wife become pregnant around the same time. There were more mouths to feed with less money to provide them with. Nnaife was forced to fight in World War II and Nnu Ego had his savings account to live by. However, Nnu Ego discovered she had not been receiving Nnaife’s yearly stipends and the family was becoming impoverished. Shortly thereafter, Nnaife spends his entire windfall, impregnates Nnu Ego as well as Nnaife’s brother’s eldest wife and brings home a new bride.  Later on, Nnu Ego, with all her children fulfilling their own aspirations, dies alone on the roadside.

There were many circumstances within Emecheta’s novel that micro-financing would have proved both beneficial and essential. Had micro-financing been an option for Nnu Ego, she would never have had to struggle for the survival of her family. Although Nnu Ego already owned a small business of her own, the economic stability from an outside source would have been easier to work with. While micro-financing might seem beneficial to all of Ibo society, I feel this only holds true under certain circumstances. For example, micro financing would have worked most for people like Nnu Ego, mothers in society that were dedicated just to motherhood and the survival of her family. This is a traditional lifestyle to lead. However, that role for women began to shift in Ibo society with the next generations. Nnu Ego’s children were all fixated on their own self-fulfillment, opposite to original Ibo society traditions, where families stay together and take part in traditions such as arranged marriages. Nnu Ego’s mother, Ona, too, might not have been so interested in becoming a part of something so dependent on another source. So overall, micro-financing would be most beneficial to societies that have yet to adopt colonialism.

The only other alternative ending I could imagine would be Nnu Ego not dying alone. But the only way this ending would be possible is if colonialism had not affected her children in the way that they wouldn’t feel compelled to fulfill their individual ambitions before returning to the close-knit family lifestyle. Unfortunately I feel that this path would be hard to steer away from.

Thursday, September 3, 2009

Entry #2- Media Articles

In comparing articles from Al Jazeera, The Guardian and New York Times, I was able to make analyzations based on the articles provided that led me to believe each media source was quite biased on worldly issues. 
In reading the English version of Al Jazeera online, I observed that the majority of news was based on politics and violence. A top story was over the killing of an Afghan official. In other parts of the world, it mentioned an earthquake in Indonesia which killed many people, as well as killings in Sri Lanka. There didn't seem to be much information in other world issues that involved subjects other than politics or death. In Africa, it mentioned talks of the Rwanda Genocide, whereas Europe's biggest article was on bombings which took place in Greek cities. Pakistani's killed members of the Taliban in Central/South Asia. And there was a section on just the Middle East, which mentioned Iran preparing for nuclear talks. As far as the US goes, Al Jazeera's only bit of information that I found to be relevant was its criticisms in American concerns in Afghanistan. Some other top stories included a Pakistan minister who was wounded in an attack. Also, it seems that Al Jazeera sources the UN alot in their articles. So basically, what I have gathered from this media outlet consists of stories based mainly out of the Middle East, and biased in the sense that they make it out to seem as though Americans are the "bad guys" and that the inhabitants of the Middle East are the ones who deserve the sympathies of the disasters that occur there from day to day.
In Britain and Europe's media source, the Guardian, I found a much friendlier website that didn't leave me to assume immediate favoritism. Right away I noticed how this news source was very different from Al Jazeera in that it had more options and variations of articles. It offered information in many categories, such as education, literature, entertainment, health, politics, business, athletics and technology. The top stories were not all about politics and violence linked to the ongoing war in the Middle East, opposite of Al Jazeera's top articles. In comparison to Al Jazeera, the Guardian also had far more information on the US, even though I didn't take it to be biased. In fact, I took the Guardian's article on the CIA unlawfully experimenting on prisoners to be quite opposite of  biased. Overall, I'd agree that the Guardian was a better source of information than Al Jazeera.
As an online US news source, I read over the New York Times. Although I was sure to see an array of international news, I was surprised to see mostly US news. Some of the top stories were on things happening in individual states. The home page was like the Guardian in that it didn't give off many top stories of violence, unlike Al Jazeera. Like the Guardian, the NY Times offered various articles on various subjects. However, it wasn't as international as I had hoped to see for NY Times standards. The top articles were on politics and business within the US. And the world news was mostly on the war in the Middle East. Towards the bottom of the home page, there were a few articles about Asia. Like Al Jazeera, the NY Times was completely biased as a media source and it is obvious to me that it wants Americans to look on the Middle East negatively and on the US positively. 
As an American myself, I can only agree that, I too, am quite biased and will tend to believe the one-sided stories I read in the newspaper, as well as online. I have made this realization because of this assignment. Fortunately, now I feel as if I can read an article and look past the words and favoritism to form a better opinion of it myself, as an individual, without all the bells and whistles added by the media.