The Thief and the Dogs - Chapter 3 passage analysis

A servant switched on the chandelier, and Said's eyes were dazzled by its size, its multitude of upturned bulbs, its stars and crescents. The light that spread throughout the room was caught in mirrors at the corners, reflecting the brilliance. Objets d'art on gilt stands were displayed as if they had been salvaged from the obscurity of history for that sole purpose. The ceiling, he saw looking up, was richly decorated, while all around him comfortable chairs and cushions were casually disposed among vividly patterned carpets. His eyes rested last on the face of Maitre Ilwan, now round and full, a face he had loved, whose features he had long ago learnt by heart, having gazed at it so often while listening to Rauf speak; and, stealing occasional glances at the objets d'art, Said went on examining that face while a servant drew back curtains and opened French windows to the verandah overlooking the garden, letting a breeze heavy with the perfume of blossomy trees flow into the room.

The mixture of light and scent was distracting, but Said observed that Ilwan's face had become cow-like in its fullness, and that despite his apparent friendliness and courtesy, there was something chilly about him, as well as an unfamiliar and rather disturbing suavity, a quality that could only have come from a touch of blue blood, despite Rauf's flat nose and heavy jaw. What refuge would be left if this only surviving support also collapsed?

A pivotal scene from within the narrative, Said’s meeting with Rauf may be characterized by its vivid use of imagery and the manner with which it emphasizes the notion, that Said’s world is no longer the one he knew. Opening in grand fashion, readers are transported from the narrow streets of Cairo to the palatial halls of Rauf’s mansion. Other than providing Mahfouz, the opportunity to let on, on his compressive knowledge of interior design- French windows and all- the choice of wording in this scene bears credence to newfound life and demeanor of Said’s former ally. 

Having risen from the depths of obscurity, Rauf is no longer the impoverished writer, rather as the passage makes known he is now a wealthy journalist, so well of in fact that he might employ servants. For that matter all of Rauf’s possessions, reflect this change and Said is left ‘dazzled’ and in awe. A specifically interesting detail would be that of Rauf’s chandelier. An impressive piece of workmanship, the chandelier and its description draw heavily upon the heavens and associated imagery. Its ‘multitude of upturned bulbs,’ are seen by Said as being ‘stars and crescents,’ and the possible meaning of this is twofold. For one stars are commonly associated with reaching past one’s limits, and for this reason Said’s interpretation may be seen as symbolic, emblematic of the infinite possible now available to him following his rebirth. Secondly, crescents are typically associated with the Muslim faith, and therefore this notion of boundless opportunity might also be seen as divinely ordained, the ‘light’ spread across the room, a literal representative of Said’s bright future.

No detail in ‘The Thief and the Dogs’ is unintentional and therefore, the incorporation of French words in the narrative, ‘d’art’ could serve as a throw back to the Egypt’s colonial past, and the notion of bourgeoisie capitalism that once entrapped it.

Mahfouz capitalizes on this opulent vibe, by now directing the reader’s attention to Rauf’s character. Indirect characterization, once more owed to Mahfouz’s use of imagery, makes known that Ilwan’s lavish lifestyle had caused him to become cow-like in appearance. What’s more, the mention of Rauf’s ‘flat nose and heavy jaw,’ stand in direct contrast to his ‘blue blood,’ and mark of noble birth. The importance of this is that it makes known, to both Said and the reader, that Rauf was in no way born in, or forced into this position, but rather he chose to willingly take on and adopt the mantle. Having learnt that the last connection to Said’s past has been severed, readers are left to contemplate what their ill-fated hero will now do.

Stream of Consciousness

It is by means of realism and stream of consciousness that Naguib Mahfouz brings to life the many characters of ‘The Thief and the Dogs,’ especially his narrative’s fiery protagonist, Said Mahran. An antihero by any account, Said sets himself apart from the throng of Robin Hood-esque characters who have gone before him in that he driven by personal gain and vendetta.

As per the conventions of his time, Mahfouz makes full use of the psychological instability that surrounds the actions and life philosophy of the everyday person. From the very moment we meet Said, outside the prison walls, we the reader are placed front stage and center to the war raging within him, and while Said might be able to fool those he is around, his innermost thoughts lay bear his true intentions.

It is this psychological projection of the character that allows for the fusing of the traditional hero and villain moniker. The heroism of Said’s character is steadily undermined as the reader gains further exposure to the extent to which is willing to go, so as to exact his revenge. This sentiment reaches a climax when Said attempts the murder of his former mentor, only to kill an innocent bystander, so that by the end of the novel Said no longer remains the black and white hero he once was.

And this sentiment ties into the notion of duality that is so heavily imbibed into the novel. Be it the manner in which all the people in Said’s life change, appearing one way only to turn out another, or the manner in which Said masks his ill will, under the false pretense of manner and decorum, duality serves as a defying characteristic of Mahfouz’s narrative style and the means by which he a fleshes out his characters.

With that in mind another merit of Mahfouz’s narrative style, is that as these moments the narrator all but disappears, as the reader submerges themself into the character’s thought and emotion. As any person in the real world could attest to, interior monologue allows for the laying down of all private ideas and feeling. The way a character thinks provides clues to their mental condition and emotional stability, and only by harnessing theses is an author able to deliver on an immersive and authentic literary experience. 

Drawing upon a specific instance from the novel’s first chapter, one might also note how access to Said’s internal experiences enhances the reader’s understanding of his external reality.

In the novel’s first chapter Said thinks of his daughter Sana: “I wonder how much the little one even knows about her father? Nothing, I suppose. No more than this road does, these passersby or this molten air.”

An experienced robber, Said would have been accustomed to the unknown and unexpected yet; he is ultimately unprepared for the child’s refusal of his affection. Moments later he second-guesses himself, “Doesn’t she know how much I love her?” Having born witness to Said’s nervous anticipation and his eventual reaction to Sana’s rejection the reader is provided with all the clues as to how Said will react to challenges he faces later on in the narrative.

Through stream of consciousness writing and internal monologue, the reader is able to attest to Said’s struggle to control his circumstance. As his all consuming drive for revenge carries him closer to self-destruction, his thoughts become increasingly radical, his emotions increasingly volatile.

For all the merits of stream of consciousness, one might argue that it deprives the reader of a holistic understanding of the novel. Privy to only the thoughts of Said, readers are unable to gage events in an object manner, from the perspective of characters such as Nabawiyya or Rauf, who would have had entirely different insights to that of Said, regarding the narrative’s events. What’s more tying this into Chinua Achebe’s ‘Things Fall Apart,’ one can see note Achebe’s usage of differing perspectives, presented a far more impartial view on proceedings, allowing his the readers to reach their own conclusions- possessing all the facts, both good and bad- regarding the narrative’s progression and the parties involved.  

Literature in translation

The study of literature in translation bears as many benefits as it does drawbacks, and in my own life I have come to find that one can only judge the matter, on the basis of its impact on their own life, be it positive or negative.

At the very onset an obvious argument for translated work would be that it allows for the spreading of ideas, allowing people who would otherwise have no access to a story or work, to have access to it.

Literature has long served as a medium for radical innovation and growth, and it this sentiment that gave way to expressions such as the pen being mightier than the sword. If the literature of a single people can lead to a paradigm shift in society how much more the combined insight of all the world’s authors, past and present.

What’s more such exposure allows for a fresh appreciation and perspective on life, as readers are enabled to view life through the eyes of a different people, culture, race and creed.

That being said it is in this convenience and all inclusiveness that problems begin to arise. Languages are highly diverse in their execution and form, and for this reason how could one expect to accurately translate a text written in Khmer, a language with 74 letters, to a language such as English, which only has 26 letters. Countless details would be undoubtedly lost in the process, whole words and phrases, and the original meaning of the text would be forever different to that of the translated work.

It is for this reason that translated works can be seen as false emulations, parodies if you will that water down the tenor and essence of their original works.

Be that as it may, I am of the belief that something is better than nothing, and even if literate in translation does provides insights that were not intended by the author, they still provide content that would otherwise be nonexistent.

Practice Paper 1

Written in 1922 and 2007 respectively, Text A an advertisement by the United Fruit Company Steamship Service, and Text B a business article written by Benjamin Shores for the Miami Herald, present conflicting views on America’s expansion into the Caribbean over the past century. In keeping with the cultural norms of their time, and by playing to the idiosyncrasies of their target audience-affluent members of western society-both articles lay bear the wanton desire of self-indulgence that has come to define the American dream. This argument is made all the more apparent when cross-examining these texts under the lens’ of audience, purpose and mood. 

The message of any text is molded and shaped around the qualities of its target audience. For this reason one might recognize that the target audiences’ of both texts share a number of similarities: they are of the same socio-economic standing and their interest in the Caribbean is founded in matters of their own self-gain. Text A, addresses it’s audience in plain fashion, the use of ostentatious statements such as ‘only first class passenger carried,’ establish them as wealthy members of the middle class. The reason for this detail is founded in the article’s emphasis on value, despite promoting itself as an exclusive offer. Statements such as ‘reduced rates,’ and ‘cost you no more than your annual vocation,’ make it clear that the text targets members of the working class and not those of the highest echelons of 20th century society. Text B’s identifies it’s target audience in a similar fashion, it’s subject matter and placement within the business section of the Miami Herald, reveals its audience to also be members of the middle class, aware of their capability to invest abroad. Despite these commonalities, on the grounds of material possession, one might note that the audiences of both tests are divided by a gap of nearly 100 years. For this reason, one might assume that the audience of Text B is more informed on the consequences of globalization, their knowledge of the Caribbean surpassing just that of geographical location and weather. That being said, though the audience of Text B may seem more globally minded than their post WW1 counterparts, their underlying need to gratify their own desires-even if it’s at the expense of another-still persists all these years later.

            As one might suspect, an advertisement and newspaper article do undoubtedly differ in regards to their intended purposes, one aiming to promote a product, while the other strives to relay information about important events.  An advertisement for the Great White Fleet, Text A employs imagery and manipulative claims, to convince its audience of their need to retreat to the Caribbean for their next break. Marketing the region under the guise of ‘cool’ weather and affordable travel, the text draws attention solely to the region’s physical properties and merits, rather than that of its inhabitants. No matter how Text B contends to convey this message, bringing to light the complications western expansion has wrought on Caribbean society. Playing upon the pathos of its audience, the text reveals how foreign investment has transformed a once languid haven for the ‘poor’, to nothing more than prime ‘oceanfront real-estate,’ for wealthy American investors. While Text A presents the matter of American expansion into the Caribbean in a superficially attractive and acceptable light, Text B calls attention to the depravity of the industry. The use of a first person account relays the extent to which speculators are prepared to go to, willing to use ‘any means necessary’ to earn that extra buck, even if it means tearing down the homes of hundreds of impoverished islanders.

All these elements culminate in the lasting impression the audiences of both texts are left with. While Text A delivers on its exotic and lighthearted mood through the use of geographical references and informal jargon, making mention of destinations such as Jamaica and Havana, and referring to the Great white fleet as “the coolest ships afloat,” Text B evokes a far more reflective and emotional tenor. The Text is able to achieve this by playing upon the emotions and pathos of its audience. As mentioned before the text’s employment of first person accounts, most notably the plight of Jimenez and his son-in-law Santos, work to elicit the intended sympathetic response from the article’s readers. What’s more while Text A’s use of bold fonts and ship- related imagery, make good on it’s intended purpose of convincing holiday to venture to the Caribbean, Text B’s sentimental accounts and succinct structure, being divided into 9 concise paragraphs, effectively convey the relevance and severity of it’s message. When placed together both text’s, though polar in their intended messages, provide a rounded outlook on the sybaritic ideal that is the American dream and its repercussions, not only an individual but global scale.

In closing Text A, an advertisement by the United Fruit Company Steamship Service, and Text B, a business article written by Benjamin Shores for the Miami Herald, provide conflicting views on America’s expansion into the Caribbean. Nonetheless in keeping with the social norms of their times, and by playing to the idiosyncrasies of their target audience, the wealthy western middle class, both texts lay bear the wanton desire of self-indulgence that has come to define the American dream.

Written Task 2 Introduction

Written in 1922 and 2007 respectively, ‘The Great White Fleet,’ an advertisement by the United Fruit Company Steamship Service, and ‘Squatters take on Developments,’ a business article written by Benjamin Shores for the Miami Herald, present conflicting views on America’s expansion into the Caribbean over the past century. In keeping with the cultural norms of their time, and by playing to the idiosyncrasies of their target audience-affluent members of western society-both articles lay bear the wanton desire of self-indulgence that has come to define the American dream. This argument is made all the more apparent when cross-examining these texts under the lens’ of audience, context and mood. 

Is deception just as bad as telling an outright lie?

The statement that “Deception is just as bad as telling an outright lie,” bears a number of social implications, in that it exists within what I like to call, the grey spectrum of morality. What this means is that whether it is in fact right or wrong wholly depends on the context in which it is used.  That being said, within the realms of media and communication, I am of the belief that deception no matter its magnitude is as bad as telling an outright lie. To lie, is to present an intentionally false statement with the motive of presenting someone a skewed version of reality so that you might advance your own intentions. For this reason deception falls within the same category of falsehood; though it might seemingly misconstrue the truth to a lesser extent, a lie is a lie, no matter how big or how small. What’s more, as countless government cover-ups would attest to, when found out deceptions can prove to me be most unpleasant. Relationships are built upon trust, be it between a married couple or a government and it’s people. When one of these parties deceives the other, regardless of their motives or incentives, the foundation on which their relationship was founded, truth is fractured, and is some cases completely severed. On this basis of this argument, one might see how deception is just as bad as telling an outright lie, the ends being just the same. A Real world out working of this perspective would be that of the Bush administration dealing’s with global media during the Iraqi conflict. In an effort to sway public opinion and boost support for the war, the Bush admiration resorted to manipulation of the truth, and deception in order to accomplish their objectives. Though this worked for a time, the truth was eventually uncovered, and the say of the world’s foremost power was forever undermined, bringing into question the ideals and principles of the entire western world. Lying and deception offer only a short-term remedy to any crisis and are never worth the fallout they bring about, rather as the writer of John suggests we should opt for the truth, for it is by this quality that all people are free.