The Question of Conquest written by Mario Vargas Llosa addresses a key issue; are modern cultures able to overcome the effect of previous battles that they have encountered while keeping the basis of their religion stable? Indigenos people are suppressed to carry out their goals and visions. Freedom and Democracy addresses a similar issue where they are also suppressed from having freedom of thought, emotions and actions at a young age. Both documents focus on two main elements: freedom and authority.
One striking event that supports this is the battle between Inca and the Indians against the Spaniards. Inca is the leader and has all the authority and when he is captured the Indians think the best thing to do is to let themselves be killed. This is due to the fact that a) they do not have the ability to make decisions and b) there was a loss of leadership hence leading to confusion and will to fight.
In Freedom and Democracy, it mentions that we the people are powerless in our thoughts and are unable to think for ourselves. We let ourselves make decisions on consensus of the society. By not being different and giving up spontenity we are letting ourselves to be controlled by the expectations of others. This relates to the novel "We" written by Yevgeny Zamyatin because readers are able to see through the eyes of D-503 that having an imagination and having the ability to think is considered an illness.
Hi Monique!
ReplyDeleteThis is a pretty good post, but you should watch some of the spelling. Indigenos is misspelled. But the content is what is important, and I agree with what you are saying, but I think you could go into more depth. I believe you are just scratching the surface on the Inca issue, which I find pretty interesting. To me, I saw the Inca leader being the Benefactor. The people of the Incan Empire were like the humanized machines, they worked and spread the message of their beliefs. The people were only given enough food and supplies for what they needed. The people of the Incan Empire did not have any greed, and therefore, had no free will because they did not know there was anything more. This meant that the leader could have controlled them easier. For the second analysis of Freedom and Democracy, I also agree with you.I like your sentence, "We let ourselves make decisions on consensus of society." One aspect I think you could have gone into more detail was how we are conformed from a very young age. The author how what we are taught in elementary school actually hinder us more than they help. Lastly, your conclusion in which you connect the two previous articles to We could have been more detailed as well. You could compare the Table of Hours, the Benefactor, and other aspects of the novel to parts of the article.
Overall good job Monique
Asim