I went into the reading for this
week blind, meaning I didn’t look up anything about the author, or book. I
wanted to let it unfold itself to me. Kincaid’s point of entry was jarring. I
wasn’t expecting her to open her book that bluntly. In the beginning, I felt
that she was attacking people for being a tourist, or going on a holiday. I am
sure her goal was not to attack someone for being a tourist, since most of the
people that will read this book have been tourist, will be tourists or are
currently tourists. Yet, it was so blunt, so filled with passion. It made me
wonder why she chose such a bold way to start her book.
I think Kincaid was aware that
numerous tourists would read her book, but how would she get their attention.
Tell them they are a hated group may do it. Her description of a tourist was
interesting as well: white, from either North America or Europe and so excited
to have a change. I thought this description was hilarious. Yes, the average
tourist is going to be white from America or Europe, but that’s not the only
type of tourist, I’m sure. I felt Kincaid limited her idea of a tourist, but
this may have been her intention. I think she could have been inclusive of the
different types of tourist, since I have been a tourist, but I’m not white. So
was the tourist critique for me too?
Whomever the critique was directed
to, it made me think I’ve never thought of myself as tourist, but I am – I’ve
been one, and I will be one again. She made me feel bad for being a tourist.
I’m aware this wasn’t her sole intent. I understand that she wants tourists to
be aware that they are going to another country where people actually have to
live and survive; they aren’t there for vacation too. You have to, as a
tourist, be aware of the condition of the people that live in the area you are
vacationing. The way she used the oblivious tourist made a very resounding
point, people don’t care about the area they are touring.
Her use of the library to critique
the government was creative as well. It was interesting that the government had
done nothing to restore the library, but had an airport named after the prime
minister. When Kincaid started talking about governmental dealings and actions,
I started to think of Trouillot. It was interesting that the European government,
at the time, didn’t want to believe in the Haitian Revolution. Yet, they didn’t
try to reclaim the island, and it has been acknowledged in history that the
governing body of Haiti has been black since the revolution. It was interesting
to see some parallels between Kincaid and Trouillot. The most notable is the
way in which Europeans and North Americans interact with the countries that
have a black body governing. They are not treated in the same manner as other
places, they are limited in what they trade and invest in those areas. Which
leads to a corrupt body of government because there aren’t enough imports and
exports to sustain the country, so officials give up and begin stealing things
for themselves. It’s a horrible, vicious cycle that leads to critiques such as
Jamaica Kincaid’s. It is sad that what happened to Haiti happened to Antigua.
I was glad to know how Kincaid
related to Antigua, but there were things that I would have liked included in
the book. To better understand Kincaid’s Antigua of 1988, I would have liked
more of a history on the island itself, since I am not very familiar with
Antigua. I think she did a great job of listing her grievances with the government
and travel industry, but how did it get there? I think it should have been
somewhat longer so she could better explain some of the issues, and where they arose.
No comments:
Post a Comment