'A danger of a single story Essay\r'

'Literature is something that social occasions. It has the indicant to inter potpourri and shape our minds and opinions. It has the part to change the perception of the world roughly us and to boost our imagi estate. excise us far out from the reality to the world of illusions and allow our minds flourished with imagi commonwealth. One might stand for how amazing it is, only allegory as it is here immediately may often matter much more than than(prenominal) than it is meant to.\r\nTED is a non-profit global community whose committee is to spread ideas unremarkably in the form of short slops which last no more than 18 minutes. TED began in 1984 as a conference, and today covers coarse range of topics †from science to doctrine to global issues †in more than 100 langu suppurates welcoming pot from e very(prenominal) discipline and finis who seek a deeper accord of the world. Both of the presenters whose ideas I forget mention ar novelists and composi tion tellers. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie is a Nigerian angloph wiz author who succeeded in attracting a untested extension of readers to African literary productions. In her novels, she is inspired by the tale of her nation and its tragedies that are bury by recent generation of westerners.\r\nElif Shafak is a Turkish novelist natural in Strasbourg, France who is the near astray read female generator in Turkey. Her books develop been translated into more than twenty-five languages. Ch. N. Adichie in her talk warns that if we hear only a wiz reputation near a nonher soul or country, we risk a sarcastic misunderstanding. Things are non usually salutary depressed and exsanguine and we contain to let every effort to aerofoil our minds and explore what is real. Elif Shafak dialogue about the insecurity into which writers from antithetical cultures are vest at; the pressure-that-makes-them-feel-as-a-representatives-of-their-cultures.\r\nShe makes a fortified di vision amidst metaphor and reality †illustration and nonchalant government. Although, two of the writers are of non-western line of credit which to some extend make them quite similar in terms of ethnical stereotypes, it seems that they do non share the similar view of function of a story in our lives.\r\n art object talking about the ethnic and social terra firma of these twain writers, there are more things in which they differ, although their smell journeys scram mevery in common. Ch. N. Adichie was natural(p) in Nigeria, Africa. She grew up in a conventional middle class family, her father was a professor and her mother was an administrator. She had a very happy kidhood in a very close family. However, a kind of semipolitical fear invaded their lives on the locate they live. However, Chimamanda was a happy child who was writing stories about blank population, fair(a) akin those who she was instruction about in books. On the other hand, Elif Shafa k; although, she has Turkish parents, was born in France, Europe and when her parents got separated she was bringing up by her mother and her grandmother in Turkey.\r\nHer position was quite unhomogeneous to Adichie’ as she was not funding in a atomic family. She grew up in a patriarchal environment where fathers were the heads of households. She was elevated as a single child by a single mother, which was; at those convictions, a bit unusual. Elif Shafak was an introverted child talking to her imaginary friends. She had a vivid imagination and distant Adichie, she was not inspired by stories that she had read, except she wrote about mint she had never seen and things that never actually happened. Nevertheless, their writing experience took spot at the said(prenominal) time. They both started to write around the age of 7; though, their style was different. Moreover, the life journey of these ii women seems to be quite similar. Just corresponding Adichie, Shafak also studied abroad. They have travelled the world and this do these women who they are nowadays. It made them cosmos experienced, open-minded and well-educated,- causalityful-women.\r\nThis leads me to the matter of stereotypes. As I mentioned, both writers have travelled a trade and during their lives they have experienced stereotypes on their own skin. Ch. N. Adichie mentions several ain stories from her life in which she pays care to the stereotypes. She talks about how her roommate in the USA was strike that she had learnt speak English so well, that she had not been increase in poverty, that music which Adichie was listening to was not different in any feature from mainstream one. Chimamanda focuses on African stereotypes that she experienced. As a result, she demonstrates that stereotypes are created by single stories, and the task with the stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are incomplete.\r\nAt the same time, Elif uses her personal experience as well. Like Adichie, she attended a school abroad as well, and she experienced heathen stereotypes. She talks about the clusters based on cultural identity. The school, which she attended, was multicultural. The only task was that each child was seen as a representative of his or her nation and every time something happened in fellowship to their nation they were ridiculed and bullied because of it. As Adichie experienced stereotypes concerning Africa, Elif Shafak came crosswise some cultural stereotypes concerning her nationality as well and these were politics, sess and veil. Doesn’t matter she had never been smoking before, or she had never been raised in a environment where a rule of eroding a veil was obligatory, she was pass judgment to do so because it was a general image of her nation and her culture.\r\nIn contrast, the notion of power is discussed from different points of view by these two writers. To clarify this, I will put eat both of them in sequence. The most significant difference is in context they use. On one hand, Adichie talks about the power as the magnate not just to tell the story, but also as the cogency to chose which story is being told, how it is told, who tells it; therefore, the ability to make from one story the definite one, the single story. She appeals not that much to writers, but to readers and people in general. She demonstrates how important it is not to see things just black and white; thus, try to open our minds and explore.\r\nWithout doubt, Elif’s viewpoint to the school principal of power is quite distinct. It seems to me like the other side of the create verbally when she; unlike Adichie, analyses the relation between power and writer not power and reader. Shafak puts into relation power with the notion of pressure. She demonstrates how writers are seen as the representatives of their cultures. In her talk, she manifests how world of politics affects the way stories are being written, reviewed and read. If you are a person with a particular cultural background you are evaluate to write informative and characteristic stories about your world and to press out manifestation of your identity.\r\nAs an illustration, Elif as a woman from a Muslim world is evaluate to write stories of Muslim women and preferably, the disquieted stories of unhappy Muslim women just because she happened to be one. And in connection to this, here comes the main tuberosity between their understanding of power. darn Adichie sees a story and fiction as tools for shaping our minds by which we can understand people, nations and things what they in reality are, Shafak thinks that when stories are seen as more than stories, they lose their magic; in other words, she says fiction is just fiction, not daily politics.\r\nIn both cases one moldiness admit that thoughts which were brought up were relevant. It doesn’t matter what is your cultural background; what is important it is your personal g rowth. These two women have stepped over the shadows of their cultural stereotypes. They pointed at a serious problem of nowadays in a context of literature and the credibility of information itselves. They both; however, in a different way, open people’s minds and let us think. And this is when a story matters.\r\n'