Our Common Text 2004-2005
ROUGHLY EDITED COPY
ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
OCTOBER 6, 2004.
COMMON TEXT SERIES.
PRESENTERS: BABAK ELAHI, ELENA SOMMERS, CHRISTINE KRAY
********
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
********
>> GOOD EVENING.
I'M LINDA REINFELD FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND
LITERATURE AND THIS YEAR CHAIR
OF THE COMMON TEXT COMMITTEE.
I'M HERE TO INTRODUCE THE
FIRST OF THREE EVENTS
ACCOMPANYING OUR READING OF
THIS YEAR'S COMMON NOVEL
REQUESTING HOUSE OF SAND AND
FOG" BY ANDRE DUBUS III.
TONIGHT WE'LL HEAR A PANEL ON
THE IMMIGRANT EXPERIENCE.
NEXT WEEK, AGAIN WEDNESDAY
NIGHT AT 7:30 BUT IN INGLE
AUDITORIUM, PROFESSOR MARK
PRICE WILL LECTURE ON
ADAPTATION AND TRANSLATION,
THE NOVEL AND FILM OF "HOUSE
OF SAND AND FOG."
ON WEDNESDAY NIGHT, OCTOBER
20th, AGAIN IN INGLE
AUDITORIUM, THE AUTHOR
HIMSELF, ANDRE DUBUS III WILL
BE HERE TO TALK TO US ABOUT
HIS WORK.
BEFORE HIS TALK, ABOUT 7:00 IN
THE LOBBY OF INGLE, HE WILL BE
AVAILABLE TO SIGN BOOKS, SO
DON'T MISS THAT HAPPY
OCCASION.
WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, LET ME
INTRODUCE TONIGHT'S PANEL.
BABAK ELAHI, WHO HOLDS A Ph.D.
FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF
ROCHESTER, IS ASSISTANT
PROFESSOR IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.
HE STUDIES CULTURAL AND
LITERARY REPRESENTATIONS AS
IMMIGRATION, ETHNICITY AND
RACE.
BORN IN IRAN, BABAK SPENT HIS
EARLY CHILDHOOD IN BRIGHTON,
ENGLAND, AND GREW UP DURING
HIS TEENS AND TWENTIES IN SAN
DIEGO, CALIFORNIA.
PROFESSOR ELAHI IS NOT ONLY A
RESPECTED SCHOLAR BUT A GOOD
TEACHER, AND THIS IS ONE WAY I
PERSONALLY KNOW.
WHEN I HAD TROUBLE LEARNING TO
PRONOUNCE HIS NAME, HE SAID I
DON'T KNOW IF THIS WILL HELP,
BUT HOW ABOUT YOU TRY SAYING
"BA-BACK-RAN."
SO WELCOME TO THE CHAIR OF
THIS PANEL, BABAK.
ELENA SOMMERS MOVED HERE FROM
RUSSIA 11 YEARS AGO.
IN ADDITION TO HER Ph.D. IN
COMPARATIVE LITERATURE FROM
UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER, SHE
HOLDS TWO MASTERS DEGREES, ONE
IN ENGLISH AND FRENCH FROM THE
MOSCOW STATE TEACHER TRAINING
UNIVERSITY AND ONE IN
INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT
RESOLUTION FROM THE UNIVERSITY
OF NOTRE DAME.
ELENA HAS BEEN TEACHING
WRITING AND LITERATURE, WOMEN
IN LITERATURE AND RUSSIAN
LITERATURE OF THE 20th
CENTURY.
SHE LOOKS HARMLESS ENOUGH, BUT
I'M NOT SURE.
SHE LISTS MERMAIDS AS ONE OF
HER AREAS OF RESEARCH, AND HER
FAVORITE COURSE TO TEACH IS
ENTITLED "DANGEROUS TEXT."
CHRISTINE KRAY HOLDS HER Ph.D.
IN ANTHROPOLOGY FROM THE
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA AND
IS CURRENTLY A MEMBER OF RIT'S
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND
ANTHROPOLOGY.
HER FOCUS IS ON CULTURAL
CHANGE FROM THE CONTEXT OF
GLOBALIZATION, ESPECIALLY
OFFSHORE MANUFACTURING,
RELIGIOUS EVANGELIZATION AND
INTERNATIONAL TOURISM.
SHE CONDUCTED TWO YEARS OF
FIELDWORK IN THE MAYA REGION
OF SOUTHERN MEXICO, INCLUDING
RESEARCH IN THE NATIVE ONEIDA
LANGUAGE.
AT RIT SHE TEACHES COURSES ON
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS OF THE GLOBAL
ECONOMY, IMMIGRANTS OF THE
UNITED STATES, CULTURES OF
LATIN AMERICA, AND THE HONORS
CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY COURSE.
THANK YOU, CHRISTINE, FOR
AGREEING TO ADD YOUR
ANTHROPOLOGICAL INSIGHTS TO
THIS LITERARY PANEL.
PLEASE JOIN ME IN WELCOMING
THIS EVENING'S SPEAKERS.
(Applause)
>> GOOD EVENING.
I FOUND MYSELF WRITING VERY
PERSONALLY AS I STARTED
PUTTING MY THOUGHTS TOGETHER
FOR THIS PANEL, AND SCRIBBLING
OUT WHAT I HAD WRITTEN,
STARTING OVER.
YOU KNOW, WE TALK TO YOU GUYS
ABOUT PROCESS A LOT, AND I
CAME FACE TO FACE WITH HOW
DIFFICULT THAT PROCESS CAN
SOMETIMES BE.
BUT I FOUND THAT WHAT I CAME
UP WITH A COMBINATION OF
REFLECTING ON MY OWN PERSONAL
EXPERIENCE AS AN IRANIAN WHO
GREW UP IN THE UNITED STATES,
BECAME AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, AS
IS PRETTY MUCH ASSIMILATED
INTO AMERICAN SOCIETY, BUT
ALSO LOOKING AT BROADER
QUESTIONS OF WHAT IT MEANS TO
BE IRANIAN IN THE UNITED
STATES.
SO WHAT YOU'LL GET TONIGHT IS
A MIX OF SOME STATISTICS THAT
MIGHT HELP YOU, SOME
INFORMATION ABOUT, YOU KNOW,
WHAT-- HOW IRANIANS ARE
CATEGORIZED.
ARE THEY EXILED, ARE THEY
IMMIGRANTS?
BUT ALSO A GOOD DEAL OF
AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL DETAIL.
UNFORTUNATELY I SAY VERY
LITTLE ABOUT THE BOOK, SO YOU
MAY WANT TO THROW YOUR
QUESTIONS AT ME ABOUT THE BOOK
LATER.
THE TITLE OF MY TALK TODAY IS
"COMPLETING THE PICTURE,
IRANIANS IN AMERICA."
TRITA PARSI, AN IRANIAN
AMERICAN REVIEWER OF THE FILM
ADAPTATION OF ANDRE DUBUS
III's "HOUSE OF SAND AND FOG"
WRITES THE FILM IS A STEP IN
THE RIGHT DIRECTION IN TERMS
OF THE POPULAR MEDIA'S
PORTRAYAL OF IRANIAN
AMERICANS.
PORTRAYALS, SHE WRITES, ARE BY
NATURE SUBJECTIVE AND
INCOMPLETE, BUT AS
REPRESENTATIONS GO, THIS FILM
AND THE BOOK UPON WHICH IT IS
BASED MOVE AWAY FROM POPULAR
STEREOTYPES OF IRANIANS AS
TERRORISTS AND TOWARD THE
CREATION OF IRANIAN CHARACTERS
THAT ARE COMPLEX INDIVIDUALS,
DESPITE THE IMAGE'S SUBJECTIVE
AND INCOMPLETE NATURE.
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE.
THE BOOK AND THE FILM IMAGINE
IRANIANS WITH SENSITIVITY TO
CERTAIN POSITIVE CULTURAL
TRAITS, SUCH AS COHESIVE
FAMILY, AS WELL AS LOOK AT
SOME MORE NEGATIVE TRAITS THAT
CAN BE EITHER PERSONAL TO THE
CHARACTERS OR CAN BE CULTURAL,
SO FOR EXAMPLE EXCESSIVE
CONCERN FOR MATERIAL
APPEARANCES.
I CAN TELL YOU GROWING UP IN
SAN DIEGO THAT WAS PART OF THE
CULTURE I GREW UP IN.
THE COLONEL'S PRIDE.
I ALSO SAW THAT IN THE IRANIAN
COMMUNITY IN WHICH I GREW UP.
WHAT I WANT TO DO IN THE NEXT
SEVERAL MINUTES IS TO MAKE THE
PICTURE A BIT MORE COMPLETE.
SO THIS REVIEWER SAID THE
NOVEL IS GOOD, THE FILM IS
GOOD BUT IT'S NOT COMPLETE.
I'D LIKE TO ADD TO THAT, TO
COMPLETE THE PICTURE FOR YOU A
LITTLE BIT.
FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, MY POINT
OF VIEW IS ALSO SUBJECTIVE AND
ALSO INCOMPLETE, BUT I THINK,
SUBJECTIVITY IS SOMETIMES
GOOD, TO ANNOUNCE THE POSITION
FROM WHICH YOU SPEAK, TO LET
PEOPLE KNOW THAT YOU YOURSELF
ARE INFLUENCED BY CERTAIN
EXPERIENCES, BY CERTAIN
INSTITUTIONS, BY CERTAIN
FAMILY STRUCTURE, BY CERTAIN
NATIONAL BACKGROUND AND SO
FORTH.
HOW DO WE COMPLETE THIS
PICTURE?
WELL, FIRST IMAGINE YOU HAVE A
SATELLITE'S EYE VIEW OF
IRANIANS IN THE U.S. AND
ACROSS THE WORLD.
WHAT DO WE SEE?
FROM OUR SATELLITE, WE-- WHERE
DO WE FIND IRANIANS?
HOW MANY OF THEM ARE
CONCENTRATED IN CALIFORNIA,
FOR EXAMPLE?
THE QUESTION OF IRANIAN
POPULATION IN THE U.S. HAS
BEEN A DIFFICULT ONE TO ANSWER
BECAUSE, AS ONE SOCIOLOGIST
HAS NOTED, IRANIANS IN AMERICA
DON'T LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN
SURVEYS AND PUBLIC RESEARCH.
BUT THERE ARE SOME GUESSES.
ON THE LOW END, THE IRANIAN
STUDIES GROUP OF M.I.T.
ESTIMATES THAT THERE ARE
600,000 IRANIANS IN THE UNITED
STATES.
THAT'S ONE OF THE LOWEST
ESTIMATES I COULD FIND.
ON THE HIGHER END, THE IRANIAN
CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION-- YOU
SHOULD CHECK OUT THEIR WEB
SITE.
IT'S INTERESTING.
(Chuckling)
PUTS THE NUMBER AT 1.5
MILLION, OUT OF THE TOTAL OF
4.1 MILLION OVERSEAS IRANIANS
WORLDWIDE.
OF THESE, IT IS ESTIMATED THAT
PERHAPS 500,000 OR 600,000
LIVE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA;
BUT EVEN HERE THE NUMBERS
RANGE AS LOW AS 100,000.
ARE THESE IRANIANS IMMIGRANTS
OR EXILES?
THAT MIGHT BE THE NEXT
QUESTION THAT COMES TO MIND,
AND WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?
MOST SOCIOLOGISTS WHO STUDY
IRANIAN AMERICAN CULTURE REFER
TO IT AS A DIASPORA.
WE CAN DEFINE DIASPORA AS MASS
MIGRATION OF A PEOPLE FROM A
NATIONAL OR EVEN REGIONAL
CENTER TO FOREIGN PERIPHERIES.
THIS DISPLACED GROUP HOLDS
ONTO MEMORIES AND CREATES
MYTHS, OFTEN UNREALISTIC ONES,
OF THE OLD COUNTRY.
THEY SOMETIMES FEEL UNACCEPTED
IN A HOST COUNTRY AND ARE
USUALLY COMMITTED TO RETURNING
HOME AND REESTABLISHING AN
OLDER POLITICAL AND SOCIAL
ORDER.
THEIR EXPERIENCE IS MARKED BY
NOSTALGIA, LONGING AND OFTEN
UNFULFILLED DESIRE.
MY OWN EXPERIENCE IS THAT I
HAVE BECOME AN IMMIGRANT, AND
THE IMMIGRANT AS OPPOSED TO A
MEMBER OF THE DIASPORA IS
SOMEONE WHO, TO BE BRIEF,
ASSIMILATES INTO THE HOST
SOCIETY, COMMITS TO THE CIVIC
AND CULTURAL EXPECTATIONS OF
THE HOST CULTURE, AND SEVERS
ANY SUBSTANTIVE TIES TO THE
HOMELAND.
WHILE IMMIGRANTS MAY
TRANSPLANT AND TRANSFORM
CULTURAL ASPECTS OF THE OLD
COUNTRY, THEY DO SO IN A WAY
THAT FITS INTO THE DOMINANT
CULTURE OF THE HOST COUNTRY.
HOWEVER, AS ONE SOCIOLOGIST
HAS PUT IT, NILOU MOSTOFI AND
I HAVE A WORK SITE AVAILABLE
AFTER THE TALK.
THIS SOCIOLOGIST HAS SUGGESTED
IRANIANS ARE DIVIDED BETWEEN A
PRIVATE SENSE OF NOSTALGIA FOR
IRAN AS IT EXISTED BEFORE THE
1979 REVOLUTION OR EVEN AFTER,
AND ON THE OTHER HAND PUBLIC
INTEGRATION INTO AMERICAN
SOCIETY.
SO OFTEN THIS SENSE OF THE
DIVIDED SELF.
I ACT ONE WAY AT HOME.
I ACT A DIFFERENT WAY IN
PUBLIC.
AGAIN LOOKING AT THE BROAD
DEMOGRAPHIC VIEW, WHAT DO WE
SEE AMONG IRANIANS?
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IRANIANS
ARE MOVING AWAY FROM BEING
EXILED TOWARDS BEING
IMMIGRANTS.
MANY OF US CAME HERE FEELING
EXCLUDED FROM OUR HOME COUNTRY
AND UNACCEPTED IN AMERICA, BUT
OVER THE PAST 20, 25 YEARS,
THAT HAS CHANGED QUITE A BIT.
AGAIN LOOKING AT THE BROAD
DEMOGRAPHIC VIEW, WHAT DO WE
SEE?
ACCORDING TO ONE JOURNALIST
WRITING FOR A POPULAR
AUDIENCE, AND A SOCIOLOGIST
WRITING FOR AN ACADEMIC
AUDIENCE, THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF
THE IRANIAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY
ARE CLEAR.
IRANIANS IN LOS ANGELES BY AND
LARGE ARE WEALTHY ELITES WHO
TEND, ESPECIALLY IN THE SECOND
GENERATION, TO SLIDE EASILY
INTO HIGH-PAYING JOBS,
ENTREPRENEURIAL ENTERPRISES OR
PRIVILEGED POSITIONS IN
ACADEME, GOVERNMENT OR
BUSINESS.
I'M STILL WAITING FOR THE
HIGH-PAYING JOB BUT I'LL LET
THAT SLIDE FOR NOW.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IRANIANS
ARE OFTEN COMPARED TO MIAMI
CUBANS, WHOSE SYMPATHIES LIE
WITH A DEPOSED U.S.-BACKED
REGIME, BATISTA IN THE CASE OF
THE CUBANS AND REZA SHAH
PAHLAVI IN THE CASE OF THE
IRANIANS.
ETHICALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY
IRANIANS IN L.A. ARE DIVERSE
INCLUDING ETHNIC TURKS, CURDS
AND ARMENIANS, CHRISTIANS,
JEW, Bah '¡s AND ZOROASTRIANS
AND MUSLIMS AND SPEAKERS OF
TURKISH AND GILAKI, WHICH IS A
NORTHEASTERN DIALECT WITHIN
IRAN.
SO TO GO BACK TO OUR SORT OF
SATELLITE VIEW, THERE'S QUITE
A DIVERSE GROUP OF IRANIANS IN
THE U.S.
MANY OF THEM ARE STILL
CONSIDER THEMSELVES EXILES AND
FEEL OPPOSED TO THE REGIME IN
POWER IN IRAN NOW AND FIND IT
DIFFICULT TO BECOME
FULL-FLEDGED AMERICAN.
WHILE OTHERS, ESPECIALLY IN
THE SECOND GENERATION-- I'M
THINKING HERE OF ESMAIL IN
"HOUSE OF SAND AND FOG"-- CAN
BECOME FULL-FLEDGED CITIZENS
AND ARE MOVING MORE TOWARDS
BECOMING IMMIGRANTS AS OPPOSED
TO BEING EXILES OR PART OF A
DIASPORA.
OKAY.
BUT THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH WE
CAN LEARN FROM THIS SATELLITE
VIEW OF IRANIAN EXILE AND
IMMIGRANT SOCIETY.
FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF A
PASSENGER JET WINDOW, WE CAN
SEE HOW PEOPLE LIKE ME GOT
HERE AND HOW ATTACHED OR
UNATTACHED WE ARE TO THE
AMERICAN SOIL OR THE IRANIAN
SOIL.
SEVERAL RECENTLY PUBLISHED
MEMOIRS BY IRANIAN AMERICANS
BEGIN BY EITHER DESCRIBING A
FLIGHT FROM IRAN TO AMERICA OR
FROM AMERICA TO IRAN.
AIRPLANES AND AIRLINES ARE
HIGHLY CHARGED CULTURAL SPACES
FOR IRANIANS AND CAN BECOME
HIGHLY SYMBOLIC IN LITERARY
REPRESENTATIONS.
THE FACT THAT COLONEL BEHRANI
FOR EXAMPLE FLED IRAN IN A
MILITARY PLANE AND THAT HE
DEALS IN THE EXCHANGE OF
FIGHTER JETS BETWEEN ISRAEL,
IRAN AND THE UNITED STATES IS
SIGNIFICANT.
I WON'T GO INTO IT HERE.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT
ISSUE LATER, WE CAN DISCUSS
IT.
HOWEVER, IN MANY OTHER IMAGES
OF PASSENGER AIRLINES, AND
THEIR CIVILIAN PASSENGERS,
WHAT AT FIRST SEEMS FAIRLY
MUNDANE CAN BE HIGHLY CHARGED
AND SIGNIFICANT.
FOR EXAMPLE STEVEN SPIELBERG'S
FILM "THE TERMINAL" STARRING
TOM HANKS IS BASED ON THE REAL
LIFE EXPERIENCE OF AN IRANIAN
REFUGEE, MEHRAN KARIMI
NASSERIA, WHO HAS BEEN LIVING
IN THE CHARLES de GAULLE
AIRPORT FOR THE PAST 16 YEARS.
INITIALLY BECAUSE OF A
BUREAUCRATIC MISUNDERSTANDING,
BUT LATER BECAUSE OF HIS OWN
DETERIORATING MENTAL STATE.
IN ANOTHER STORY INVOLVING AN
AIRPLANE'S EYE VIEW OF IRANIAN
MIGRATION, AN IRANIAN MAN
HIJACKED A PLANE.
HIS FAMILY'S ON BOARD, AND THE
HIJACKING IS HIS DESPERATE
ATTEMPT AT GETTING THEM ALL TO
AMERICA WHERE THEY HOPE TO
JOIN OTHER RELATIVES.
THE HIJACKER'S WIFE AND KIDS
BEGIN TO ARGUE ABOUT WHERE
EXACTLY TO FLY THE PLANE.
ANOTHER YOUNG IRANIAN BEGINS
TO BECOME CONCERNED.
HE HAS NEVER LEFT IRAN AND
COMES FROM A HUMBLE
TRADITIONAL FAMILY.
HE SAYS "IF ANYTHING HAPPENS
TO ME, MY LAST WISH IS THAT MY
BODY BE BURIED IN LOS
ANGELES."
THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A
LAUGH THERE.
THANKS, DAVE.
YOU GOT IT, RIGHT.
THIS IS NOT A JOKE.
OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T
LAUGH.
BUT THE SCENARIO IS A FILM
TITLED "LOW HEIGHTS" OR "LOW
ALTITUDE" BY IRANIAN DIRECTOR
EBRAHIM HATAMIKIA.
AT THIS POINT, I WANT TO SHIFT
INTO MORE SORT OF PERSONAL
DETAIL.
ONE WAY TO NARRATE ONE'S LIFE
IS TO THINK ABOUT THE PLANE
TRIPS YOU'VE TAKEN.
I TRIED OVER AND OVER AGAIN TO
SORT OF GIVE YOU MY BIO IN
THIS, AND THIS SEEMED THE BEST
WAY TO DO IT.
AGAIN, A PASSENGER PLANE'S
VIEW OF WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN
IRANIAN MIGRANT.
MY OWN FAMILY'S HISTORY CAN BE
NARRATED THROUGH THE VEHICLE
OF OUR FLIGHTS ON PASSENGER
JETS.
THE FIRST TIME I RODE IN A
PASSENGER JET, I WAS FOUR,
1969.
MY MOTHER, AT THE REQUEST OF
HER TWO OLDEST SONS, THEN 15
AND 16 YEARS OLD, PUT HERSELF
AND HER CHILDREN ON AN IRAN
AIR FLIGHT TO ENGLAND, WHERE
MY OLDER BROTHERS WOULD
EVENTUALLY ATTEND COLLEGE.
MY FATHER STAYED IN IRAN TO
WORK.
WE LIVED IN ENGLAND FOR A
LITTLE LESS THAN SEVEN YEARS,
AND DURING THIS TIME I WENT ON
ONE ROUND-TRIP FLIGHT WITH MY
MOTHER TO IRAN AND BACK TO
ENGLAND IN 1974.
THAT WAS WHEN I WAS NINE.
ON A SIDE NOTE, AT AGE NINE, I
ALREADY FELT MORE WESTERN THAN
IRANIAN.
WHEN VISITING THE GOLDEN DOMED
SHRINE OF IMAM REZA-- THIS IS
IN A TOWN CALLED MASHAD IN
IRAN-- VISITING THE SHRINE, MY
MOTHER AND I WERE STOPPED BY A
GUARD WHO TOLD MY MOTHER SHE
SHOULD MAKE SURE HER DAUGHTER
IS WEARING A VEIL.
AFTER MY MOTHER CORRECTED THIS
ERROR, HE TOLD HER TO GIVE ME
A HAIRCUT.
TWO YEARS LATER, I WENT ON MY
NEXT FLIGHT WITH MY MOTHER AND
ONE OF MY THREE BROTHERS, THIS
TIME TO THE UNITED STATES IN
1976.
WE FLEW INTO WASHINGTON D.C.
BUT FLEW AGAIN WITHIN A WEEK
TO SETTLE IN SAN DIEGO.
MY PARENTS DIVORCED DURING THE
IRANIAN REVOLUTION.
YOU CAN IMAGINE IT WAS KIND OF
A TRAUMATIC TIME FOR ME,
RIGHT?
(Chuckling)
BEFORE THE DUST HAD SETTLED.
FOR PERSONAL REASONS THAT I
NEED NOT OUTLINE BUT ALSO FOR
AN INABILITY TO ASSIMILATE
INTO AMERICAN CULTURE IN HIS
LATE 50s, MY FATHER RETURNED
TO A COUNTRY WHOSE SOCIETY WAS
BEGINNING TO REBUILD ITSELF.
HE WENT BACK IN PART TO SAVE
SOME LAND WE OWNED ON THE
SHORES OF THE CASPIAN SEA.
WE WERE BEHRANI'S NEIGHBORS,
RIGHT?
BUT HE ENDED UP LOSING IT TO
THE ISLAMIC REGIME.
MY MOTHER TOOK FEWER PLANE
RIDES, BUT SHE, TOO, HAS
RETURNED TO IRAN TO CARE FOR
AN ELDERLY SISTER.
SHE HAD PLANNED ON MOVING BACK
AND FORTH FROM HERE TO IRAN IN
ORDER TO BE ABLE TO WATCH HER
GRANDCHILDREN GROW UP, BUT SHE
NOW FINDS HERSELF STUCK IN
IRAN, NOT BECAUSE OF POLITICAL
REASONS BUT BECAUSE OF HER
SISTER'S AND HER OWN HEALTH.
HOPING TO SEE HER SOON.
(Chuckling)
MY PARENTS' FLIGHT TO THE
UNITED STATES WAS ALSO A
DESCENT.
THEY ENDED UP LOSING A LOT OF
MONEY.
THEY ENDED UP NOT MANAGING
THEIR FINANCES AS WELL AS THEY
COULD HAVE, AND BY THE TIME
THAT MY MOM LEFT THE UNITED
STATES TO GO BACK TO IRAN, SHE
HAD GONE FROM BEING THE
HOUSEWIFE OF A FAIRLY
PRIVILEGED ARCHITECT-- MY
FATHER-- TO WORKING JOBS LIKE
MANAGING A BAGEL STORE OR
WORKING AT A MOVIE THEATER.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THESE KINDS
OF STORIES DO HAPPEN.
YOU KNOW, I'VE LIVED THROUGH
THIS.
AND A LOT OF IT HAS TO DID--
AND I'M GOING TO GET TO THIS
TOWARDS THE END OF MY TALK--
HAS TO DO WITH FAMILY
DYNAMICS, AND I WANT TO GET
BACK TO THAT LATER.
MY TWO OLDEST BROTHERS HAVE
PERHAPS LOGGED THE MOST
FREQUENT FLYER MILES.
MY OLDEST BROTHER, HUMAYUN
MOVED TO SAN FRANCISCO FOR
AWHILE WHERE IRONICALLY HE
REDISCOVERED HIS HOMELAND AND
HIS RELIGION.
WE ARE GENERALLY AN AGNOSTIC
AND SECULAR HOUSE HOW WOULD
BUT HE FOUND THAT BELIEF IN
ALLAH ANSWERED A CERTAIN
LONGING AND FILLED A CERTAIN
EMPTINESS HE HAD BEEN FEELING
SINCE HIS CHILDHOOD.
IN THE EARLY 1990s HE FLEW
BACK TO IRAN TO STAY FOR A
PERIOD OF THREE OR FOUR YEARS,
WHERE HE WORKED AS A BANKER,
MARRIED AND FATHERED TWO
CHILDREN.
BUT HE AGAIN RETURNED TO THE
UNITED STATES.
HE HAD GONE TO IRAN WITH THE
HOPE OF FITTING IN SOMEWHERE.
HE IS A DEVOUT MUSLIM AND WAS
SUPPORTIVE OF THE IDEA OF AN
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC.
HOWEVER, HE SOON CONFRONTED
THE BUREAUCRATIC NIGHTMARE
THAT IRAN IS AND BEGAN TO FEAR
FOR HIS WIFE'S SAFETY IN A
COUNTRY WHERE RELIGIOUS LAW
OFTEN ARBITRARILY UNDERMINES
SECULAR RULE OF LAW.
HE RETURNED TO THE U.S. IN THE
MID 1990s AND HE NOW LIVES IN
SAN DIEGO WHERE HE TEACHES
ECONOMICS AT NIGHT AND DRIVES
A CAB BY DAY.
MY SECOND-OLDEST BROTHER,
FARHAD, FOUND A DIFFERENT KIND
OF RELIGION, ART.
AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE AND
ARTISTIC CREATION HAVE GUIDED
HIM ALL HIS LIFE, AND IN EARLY
1980s HE LEFT THE U.S. NOT TO
GO HOME, BUT TO MOVE TO
FLORENCE, ITALY, WHERE HE
LIVED FOR NINE YEARS.
AFTER FAILING TO EARN A LIVING
AS A PAINTER, JEWELRY MAKER
AND FASHION DESIGNER, MY
BROTHER RETURNED TO THE UNITED
STATES.
FARHAD NOW TELLS ME THAT HE IS
THINKING OF MOVING BACK TO
IRAN, BOTH TO WORK AND TO LEND
HIS VOICE TO THE GROWING
REFORM MOVEMENT IN THAT
COUNTRY.
THESE FLIGHTS WITHIN MY FAMILY
DEMONSTRATE THE WAVES IN WHICH
IRANIAN IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES
ARE LINKED BACK TO IRAN.
EVEN FOR PEOPLE WHO ASSIMILATE
INTO AMERICAN SOCIETY.
A PAIR OF SOCIOLOGISTS, FISHER
AND ABETTI, DESCRIBE THE
IRANIAN DIASPORA IN
MATERIALS-- TERMS OF A WEAVING
PROCESS.
LIKE THE PROCESS OF WEAVING A
PERSIAN CARPET, IRANIAN
CULTURE IS CREATED BY THE
MOVEMENT OF A SHUTTLE BACK AND
FORTH ACROSS A LOOM.
ONE END OF THE LOOM IS
SITUATED IN IRAN, THE OTHER IN
AMERICA OR IN OTHER CASES IN
EUROPE.
FIRST PHYSICALLY, ON PASSENGER
JETS; NOW VIRTUALLY ON THE
INTERNET AND CERTAINLY
CULTURALLY AND EMOTIONALLY IN
LESS TANGIBLE WAYS, IRANIAN
CULTURE IS WOVEN INTO ITS
UNIQUE GLOBAL DESIGN, LIKE A
PERSIAN CARPET.
MY OWN EXPERIENCE CONFIRMS
THIS MODEL.
MY MOTHER IS NOW IN IRAN, AS I
SAID, AND WE ADD OUR OWN
THREAD TO THIS LOOM THROUGH
INTANGIBLE AS WELL AS TANGIBLE
WAYS; FROM PHONE CONVERSATIONS
TO THE PACKAGES OF DRY GOODS I
OFTEN RECEIVE.
MY CHILDREN HAVE ACQUIRED A
TASTE FOR THINGS THAT THEIR
FRIENDS FIND UNUSUAL,
INTERESTING AND OCCASIONALLY
VERY DESIRABLE.
ONE OF THEIR FAVORITE FOODS,
FOR EXAMPLE, IS THIS THING
CALLED LAVASHAK AND IT'S THIS
DRIED FRUIT SPREAD THAT'S
REALLY VERY TART.
IT'S GREAT STUFF.
ANYWAY, MADE WITH POMEGRANATES
AND PLUMS.
IT IS ONLY THE BROTHER CLOSEST
IN AGE TO ME, SIX AS OWE POSED
TO TEN OR TWELVE YEARS MY
SENIOR, WHO SETTLED DOWN IN
SAN DIEGO AND LIVES THERE
STILL, EXCEPT FOR A ONE-YEAR
HIATUS IN BOISE, IDAHO.
FARSHID AND I BOTH MARRIED
AMERICAN WOMEN AND TOOK FEWER
JOURNEYS BY PLANE THAN OUR
OLDER BROTHERS.
PERHAPS ONE REASON I FEEL LIKE
AN IMMIGRANT AS OPPOSED TO AN
EXILE, AN IRANIAN AMERICAN
RATHER THAN AN IRANIAN EXILE
IN AMERICA, IS THAT I'VE TAKEN
MANY MORE ROAD TRIPS AND FEWER
FLIGHTS THAN THE REST OF MY
FAMILY.
IN 1992, MY WIFE AND I LOADED
UP OUR HONDA WITH MOST OF OUR
STUFF, SENT THE REST OF IT
U.P.S. TO HER PARENTS AND
DROVE FROM SAN DIEGO TO
ROCHESTER.
BEING ON THE ROAD, TRAVELLING
BY CAR RATHER THAN PLANE.
PERHAPS THIS WAS BOTH
MATERIALLY AND SYMBOLICALLY
THE LAST STEP IN THE LONG
PROCESS OF MY ASSIMILATION
INTO AMERICAN SOCIETY.
IT'S IRONIC, THEN, THAT
AMERICA'S CONTROL OF IRANIAN
POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC
SELF-DETERMINATION IN THE MID
20th CENTURY IS IN PART WHAT
ALLOWED ME TO DRIVE ACROSS
COUNTRY AFFORDABLY.
OKAY.
WE'VE GONE FROM A SATELLITE
VIEW OF IRAN AND SOME
STATISTICS TO JETLINER WINDOW
VIEW, BUT PERHAPS THE MOST
TELLING WAY TO UNDERSTAND
IRANIAN CULTURE IS TO BE THE
FLY ON THE WALL IN AN IRANIAN
FAMILY, AND I JUST WANT TO
CLOSE BY FOCUSING ON THAT
ASPECT AND GOING BACK TO THE
NOVEL, I SHOULD SAY SOMETHING
ABOUT THE NOVEL.
ONE OF THE THINGS I FIND
FASCINATING ABOUT THIS NOVEL
IS THE WAY IT PLAYS AROUND
WITH AGE, WITH GENERATIONS.
ONE ALTERNATE TITLE FOR MY
TALK TONIGHT WAS "TALKING
ABOUT MY GENERATION," AND IT
IS PRECISELY PEOPLE MY AGE WHO
ARE LESS REPRESENTED IN THIS
BOOK.
WE HAVE BEHRANI'S POINT OF
VIEW, OF COURSE.
HE LEAVES IRAN IN HIS LATE
50s, MAYBE IN HIS 60s.
HE LEAVES BEHIND PRIVILEGE.
HE LEAVES BEHIND WEALTH, AND
AS HE SAYS, HE LOOKS BACK AT A
SOCIETY THAT'S BEEN TOTALLY
DESTROYED.
FOR IRANIANS IN EXILE, THE
IRAN THAT THEY LEFT NO LONGER
REALLY EXISTS.
IT ONLY EXISTS IN SOME
IMAGINARY PLACE.
AND THAT WAS TRUE FOR HIM.
AT THE OTHER END, YOU HAVE
ESMAIL, HIS SON, WHO WAS AN
INFANT WHEN HE LEFT IRAN.
NOW CLEARLY, IN THE NOVEL WE
SEE HIM HAVING SOME
DIFFICULTIES WITH HIS FATHER.
HE WANTS HIS FATHER TO SELL
THE HOUSE BACK.
HE HAS CERTAIN SYMPATHIES WITH
THIS WOMAN, KATHY NICOLO AND,
YOU KNOW, SOME OF THAT IS
PERSONAL.
SOME OF IT IS PERHAPS
CULTURAL, THAT BEHRANI,
BECAUSE OF HIS UPBRINGING,
COULD NOT ALLOW HIMSELF TO
HAVE THIS HAPPEN.
A LOT OF IT I GUESS HAS TO DO
WITH THE FACT THAT HE'S THE
HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD OF
COURSE AND HE KNOWS THEIR
FINANCES BETTER THAN HIS SON.
AT ANY RATE WHAT YOU DON'T GET
IS A MORE COMPLETE PICTURE OF
THE DAUGHTER, SORAYA, AND OF
HER HUSBAND.
HER HUSBAND IN PARTICULAR IS A
CARICATURE.
HE'S VERY MATERIALISTIC.
HE'S INTERESTED IN VIDEO GAMES
AND THAT'S ABOUT ALL WE KNOW
ABOUT HIM.
AS SOMEONE WHO'S ALMOST 40
READING THIS BOOK, I THOUGHT,
WELL, WHERE AM I?
WHY AM I NOT HERE?
THE REASON I'M NOT THERE, I
THINK, OR THE REASON PEOPLE MY
AGE AREN'T THERE MORE
SIGNIFICANTLY IS THAT I DON'T
THINK DUBUS COULD HAVE PULLED
THAT OFF AS EASILY.
OR HE COULDN'T HAVE PULLED
THAT OFF IN THE WAY HE DID THE
GENERATION OF BEHRANI.
AN IRANIAN MY AGE MIGHT HAVE
BEEN ABLE TO SEE KATHY NICOLO
IN A DIFFERENT LIGHT, MIGHT
HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO THINGS
DIFFERENTLY IN THAT SITUATION
THAT BEHRANI COULD NOT.
NOW TO SHIFT AGAIN TO MY OWN
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, PEOPLE OF
MY GENERATION ARE OFTEN
REFERRED TO AS "1.5 GENERATION
IMMIGRANTS."
WE'RE SORT OF IN BETWEEN.
IN MY BROTHER'S CASE, MY
OLDEST BROTHER'S CASE, THAT'S
ESPECIALLY TRUE.
THEY WERE 15 WHEN THEY MOVED.
THEY HAD ALREADY BEGUN TO
ESTABLISH THEMSELVES SOCIALLY
AND EMOTIONALLY IN IRAN AND
ARE PLOPPED INTO ANOTHER
CULTURE.
FOR BOTH OF THEM WHAT I SAW
WAS MEN, YOUNG MEN WHO FELT
ABANDONED BY BOTH SIDES OF THE
EQUATION.
ONE IRANIAN SAYING THAT BOTH
SIDES OF THE STICK WERE DIRTY.
ONE END WAS ROTTEN; THE OTHER
ONE WAS FORGOTTEN.
AND I SAW THAT.
I SAW THAT ON A VERY PERSONAL
LEVEL.
ONE CLOSING ANECDOTE THAT KIND
OF DEMONSTRATES THE
DIFFICULTIES AND MAYBE BRINGS
BACK THE FAMILY DYNAMICS TO
POLITICS IS AN EXCHANGE I HAD
WITH MY OLDEST BROTHER WHEN HE
FIRST BECAME VERY DEVOUT
MUSLIM.
AT THE TIME I HAD STARTED
DOING THINGS LIKE READING KURT
VONNEGUT.
I READ "CAT'S CRADLE" AT THE
TIME AND IT KIND OF BLEW MY
MIND.
I THOUGHT, OKAY, HERE'S A
CRITIQUE IN PART.
I HAVEN'T REREAD IT RECENTLY
SO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG,
BUT HERE'S A CRITIQUE OF
ORGANIZED RELIGION, EQUATING
IT IN MANY WAYS TO CULTS.
AND MY BROTHER CAME BACK FROM
SAN FRANCISCO AND I WENT UP TO
HIM AND I SAID, "I READ THIS
BOOK.
THIS IS AMAZING.
THIS IS A GREAT PHILOSOPHY.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?"
HE HAD BECOME A DEVOUT MUSLIM.
I WASN'T COMPLETELY AWARE OF
WHAT THAT WAS ALL ABOUT.
AND AT THAT POINT THERE WAS A
SORT OF-- I FELT THIS LULL,
THAT HERE WAS A MAN WHO I
LOOKED UP TO.
HERE WAS SOMEONE WHO HAD
GUIDED ME, VERY MUCH IN A
SECULAR WAY UP UNTIL THAT
POINT, AND SUDDENLY THERE WAS
THIS SPLIT.
I THINK IT'S COMPLEXITIES LIKE
THAT THAT ARE DIFFICULT TO
REPRESENT IN A NOVEL LIKE
THIS.
AGAIN I GO BACK TO THE
BEGINNING OF MY TALK.
CLEARLY IT IS A STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION IN TERMS OF
PORTRAYALS OF IRANIANS.
IT'S COMPLEX AND IT'S
INTERESTING.
BUT AGAIN IT'S NOT COMPLETE,
AND IN TERMS OF FAMILY
DYNAMICS, I DON'T THINK IT
DEMONSTRATES THE KINDS OF
COMPLEXITIES AND ISSUES THAT
WE FIND IN IRANIAN FAMILIES IN
UNITED STATES.
THANK YOU.
AND I WILL TURN IT OVER TO...
(Applause)
...CHRISTINE KRAY.
>> Christine: HELLO, EVERYONE.
I'M REALLY PLEASED TO BE HERE
AS AN ANTHROPOLOGIST.
THE ONLY SOCIAL SCIENTIST ON
THE PANEL, AND BABAK KIND OF
STOLE THE THUNDER.
NO, NO, NO.
I'M JUST KIDDING.
I WAS GOING TO POINT OUT-- HAD
BEEN PLANNING ON POINTING OUT
THE DIFFERENCES AND SOCIAL
SCIENTIFIC AND LITERARY
PERSPECTIVES, BUT SO MUCH FOR
THAT.
BUT I GUESS IT'S APPROPRIATE
BECAUSE, WHEN I BEGAN COLLEGE
I BEGAN AS A LITERATURE MAJOR.
LITERATURE WAS MY FIRST LOVE,
AND THE REASON I LOVED IT SO
MUCH WAS BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT
GAVE ME AN ENTREES, A KIND OF
WINDOW IN OTHER CULTURES.
AND OF COURSE I DISCOVERED
ANTHROPOLOGY WHERE I COULD DO
THE FIELDWORK ON MY OWN BUT
STILL I HAVE THIS GREAT LOVE
FOR LITERATURE.
SO TODAY, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
THREE MAIN THINGS.
I WANT TO TALK-- THE FIRST TWO
THINGS I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
ARE COMMON EXPERIENCES AMONG
IMMIGRANTS THAT ARE REFLECTED
AS WELL IN THE NOVEL.
DOWNWARD MOBILITY AND BUSINESS
ENTREPRENEURSHIP.
AND THEN I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
CULTURE AS A WEB OF MEANINGS,
AS A SYSTEM OF MEANINGS AND
VALUES.
AND THEN TAKING THAT
PERSPECTIVE ON CULTURE, SEE IF
WE CAN ANALYZE THE NOVEL FROM
THAT PERSPECTIVE.
SO FIRST ABOUT DOWNWARD
MOBILITY.
THE STEREOTYPICAL IMMIGRANT IN
THE UNITED STATES,
STEREOTYPES, RIGHT, IS THE
MEXICAN WETBACK AS A PERSON
WHO WORKS IN MEXICO WITH
FARMERS.
I HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF
AFFECTION FOR MEXICAN FARMERS,
BUT THEY ARE NOT IN FACT THE
TYPICAL IMMIGRANT IN THE
UNITED STATES.
IN FACT BEHRANI IS MORE
TYPICAL.
AND THAT IS BECAUSE THE FIRST
GROUP FROM ANY NATION THAT
IMMIGRATES INTO THE UNITED
STATES TENDS TO COME FROM AN
UPPER-MIDDLE-CLASS BACKGROUND
OR ABOVE, HAS A VERY HIGH
DEGREE OF EDUCATION AND
USUALLY WORKS IN PROFESSIONAL
JOBS.
IN FACT ACCORDING TO THE NEW
IMMIGRANT SURVEY, QUOTE, "THE
MEDIAN YEARS OF SCHOOLING FOR
LEGAL IMMIGRANTS IS 13 YEARS,"
WHICH IS ONE YEAR HIGHER THAN
THAT OF THE U.S. NATIVE BORN.
THAT INCLUDES ALL IMMIGRANT
GROUPS, INCLUDING IMMIGRANT
GROUPS THAT HAVE BEEN COMING
TO THE UNITED STATES FOR A
MUCH LONGER PERIOD OF TIME.
IRANIANS ARE PART OF ANOTHER
GROUP OF IMMIGRANTS THAT ARE
OFTEN CALLED "THE NEW
IMMIGRANTS."
THERE WAS A MAJOR IMMIGRATION
ACT ENACTED IN 1965 CALLED THE
HART-CELLAR ACT, WHICH OPENED
UP THE UNITED STATES FOR
IMMIGRATION TO MANY COUNTRIES
WHICH HAD BEEN VIRTUALLY
EXCLUDED UP TO THAT TIME,
INCLUDING MOST ASIAN NATIONS.
SO BEHRANI AND HIS FAMILY
COMING IN THE 1980s, I GUESS
WE'RE LED TO BELIEVE,
REPRESENTS THAT FIRST WAVE OF
IMMIGRANTS FROM THAT COUNTRY.
BUT WHY IS THAT THE CASE?
WHY IS IT THAT THE FIRST GROUP
TO COME FROM ANY NATION HAD
THIS UPPER-CLASS HIGHLY
EDUCATED PROFESSIONAL
BACKGROUND?
PARTS OF THE REASON HAS TO DO
WITH VISA REQUIREMENTS.
MOST OF THE VISA CATEGORIES
AVAILABLE GIVE PRIVILEGE TO
PEOPLE FROM THOSE BACKGROUNDS.
IN ADDITION, IN ORDER TO
FINANCE THE TRIP ITSELF, TO
HAVE THE ENGLISH SKILLS,
LITERACY SKILLS, THE SKILLS OF
WORKING THROUGH INTERNATIONAL
BUREAUCRACIES, AGAIN PEOPLE
FROM THOSE KINDS OF
BACKGROUNDS ARE PRIVILEGED.
HOWEVER, ONCE THEY ARE HERE,
MOST OF THE PEOPLE EXPERIENCE
A DOWNWARD MOBILITY RATHER
THAN UPWARD MOBILITY.
THEY MOVE DOWN IN SOCIAL
CLASS, DOWN IN THEIR ECONOMIC
WEALTH, INCLUDING MANY WOMEN
WHO HAD MAIDS AND NANNIES AND
COOKS IN THEIR HOUSEHOLDS,
IN THE HOME COUNTRY BEGAN TO
WORK AS MAIDS AND NANNIES AND
COOKS IN AMERICAN HOMES.
THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE.
AND WE CAN BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND
THAT THROUGH A COUPLE OF
ANALYTICAL CATEGORIES CALLED
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL CAPITAL;
CAPITAL OF COURSE REFERS TO
SOMETHING THAT IS INVESTED IN
ORDER TO REAP PROFIT.
WE TEND TO THINK OF ECONOMIC
CAPITAL: MONEY, TOOLS,
MACHINERY THAT ARE INVESTED IN
A BUSINESS VENTURE.
BUT THERE'S ALSO SOCIAL
CAPITAL AND CULTURAL CAPITAL,
AND FOR IMMIGRANTS, THEIR
SOCIAL AND THEIR CULTURAL
CAPITAL ARE GENERALLY
MEANINGLESS WHEN THEY COME TO
A NEW COUNTRY.
THEIR SOCIAL-- CULTURAL
CAPITAL ARE ROOTED IN THE HOME
COUNTRY.
SOCIAL CAPITAL INCLUDES ONE'S
SOCIAL CONNECTIONS, WHO YOU
KNOW THAT CAN WRITE YOU A
LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION; A
BUSINESS CONTACT THAT YOU MEET
AT THE COUNTRY CLUB OR GOLF
COURSE; SOMEONE WHO CAN GIVE
YOU AN INTRODUCTION TO A
POTENTIAL EMPLOYER.
ALL OF THESE SOCIAL CONTACTS
THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE SPENT A
LIFETIME DEVELOPING IN IRAN
ARE MEANINGLESS WHEN COMING TO
THE NEW COUNTRY.
CULTURAL CAPITAL INCLUDES
ONE'S EDUCATION, SOCIAL SKILLS
AND MANNERS AND LANGUAGE
SKILLS.
AGAIN, VERY OFTEN IMMIGRANTS,
CULTURAL CAPITAL IS
MEANINGLESS IN THEIR NEW
ADOPTIVE COUNTRY.
THEIR EDUCATION MAY NOT BE
RECOGNIZED.
EMPLOYER WILL LOOK AT THE
R‚SUM‚, NOT RECOGNIZING THE
NAMES OF DIFFERENT
UNIVERSITIES OR MAY QUESTION
WHETHER A DEGREE FROM THAT
COUNTRY REPRESENTS THE SAME
THING AS A DEGREE FROM HERE,
AND THAT SEED OF DOUBT IS
ENOUGH TO DENY THAT IMMIGRANT
A JOB.
IN ADDITION, THEY MAY NOT BE
FLUENT SPEAKERS OF ENGLISH,
BUT EVEN SO, A SLIGHT ACCENT
MAY GIVE A HINT, MAY SUGGEST
THAT THE PERSON'S COMMAND OF
THE LANGUAGE IS LESS THAN
PERFECT AND SO THAT PERSON
WILL BE DENIED HIS JOB.
AND SO AS A RESULT PEOPLE WHO,
IN THE HOME COUNTRY, ENJOYED
RESPECT, ECONOMIC SECURITY,
STATUS, HONOR AND JOBS THAT
ALLOWED THEM TO USE THE FULL
ARRAY OF THEIR SKILLS AND
TALENTS, IN THE HOST COUNTRY
OFTEN END UP IN JOBS THAT THEY
CONSIDER FAR BENEATH THEM IN
SOCIAL STATUS, ECONOMICALLY
AND PROFESSIONALLY.
ESPECIALLY IN THE BIGGER
CITIES, SUCH AS NEW YORK AND
MIAMI, YOU HAVE NURSES WORKING
AS HOTEL MAIDS; ENGINEERS
DRIVING TAXI CABS; AND LIKE
BEHRANI, AIR FORCE OFFICERS
PICKING TRASH AT THE SIDES OF
THE HIGHWAY.
SO WHAT DO SOME IMMIGRANTS DO?
WELL, A VERY COMMON ROUTE FOR
NEW IMMIGRANTS TO REGAIN THEIR
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL STATUS IS
THROUGH ENTREPRENEURSHIP,
STARTING THEIR OWN BUSINESS.
SO WHEN THEY FIND THEMSELVES
SHUT OUT OF GOOD-PAYING JOBS,
THEY'LL START A BUSINESS
INSTEAD.
IMMIGRANTS IN FACT ARE MORE
LIKELY THAN NATIVE-BORN
AMERICANS TO START THEIR OWN
BUSINESSES.
AND THESE STATISTICS ARE A
LITTLE BIT OLDER, BUT THEY DID
SUGGEST A TREND.
IN 1995, 12% OF THE FASTEST
GROWING CORPORATIONS IN
AMERICA WERE COMPANIES STARTED
BY IMMIGRANTS.
AND IN FACT IMMIGRANTS HAVE
BECOME FAMOUS FOR THEIR
BUSINESS ENTERPRISES IN THE
UNITED STATES, AND SO
BEHRANI'S DESIRE TO START HIS
OWN TINY BUSINESS OF BUYING
AND SELLING HOMES TO REGAIN
ECONOMIC SECURITY AND SOME
STATUS FOR HIS FAMILY JUST
REPRESENTS ONE COMMON STRATEGY
OF CHASING THE AMERICAN DREAM.
NOW I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
CULTURE AS A SET OF MEANINGS
AND VALUES.
WHAT IS CULTURE?
CULTURE'S A SYSTEM OF BELIEFS
AND BEHAVIORS DERIVED FROM
THOSE BELIEFS AND I PLACE
EMPHASIS ON THE WORD "SYSTEM."
THESE BELIEFS AND VALUES THAT
COME FROM OUR CULTURE GIVE
MEANING TO OUR LIVES.
THEY PROVIDE OUR PHILOSOPHY, A
REASON FOR BEING, LIVING AND
ACTING.
TO QUOTE A FAMOUS
ANTHROPOLOGIST, ONE OF MY
FAVORITES, CLIFFORD GEERTZ, HE
WROTE THAT, QUOTE, "MAN IS AN
ANIMAL SUSPENDED IN WEBS OF
SIGNIFICANCE HE HIMSELF HAS
SPUN."
AND I TAKE CULTURE TO BE THOSE
WEBS.
SO THINK ABOUT A SPIDERWEB.
THINK ABOUT HOW EACH STRAND IS
A MEANING, AND ALL OF THAT
TOGETHER REPRESENTS OUR
CULTURE.
THEY GIVE MEANING TO OUR
LIVES.
BUT ALSO IMAGINE THAT WEB AS
BEING FRAGILE, ONE OF THOSE
STRANDS BREAKS AND THE MEANING
OF LIFE KIND OF FALLS AWAY.
SO THESE IDEAS, THESE MEANINGS
FROM OUR CULTURE GIVE US HOPE.
THEY TELL US THAT LIFE IS
WORTH LIVING, THAT THERE'S A
REASON TO GET OUT OF BED IN
THE MORNING AND PICK TRASH BY
THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY.
BUT WHEN THESE WEBS OF MEANING
BREAK AND THERE IS NO WAY TO
LIVE LIFE MEANINGFULLY, THEN
SUICIDE BECOMES AN OPTION.
SO LOOKING AT THESE
CHARACTERS, WHAT GIVES MEANING
TO THE LIVES OF COLONEL
BEHRANI AND KATHY NICOLO?
AND IN TRYING TO ANSWER THIS
QUESTION, I CAME TO THE
CONCLUSION THAT FAMILY IS
ACTUALLY CENTRAL FOR BOTH OF
THEM; BUT THE WAYS THAT THEY
IMAGINE FAMILY ARE COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT.
BEHRANI THINKS THAT HIS ROLE
AS A FATHER IS TO PROTECT THE
FAMILY'S HONOR, SAFETY AND
HAPPINESS.
SO HE COMMITS TO SPENDING
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS EACH
MONTH ON AN APARTMENT THEY
CAN'T AFFORD, LEAVING THE
HOUSE EACH DAY DRESSED IN A
SUIT, ONLY TO CHANGE HIS
CLOTHES IN THE BATHROOM, ALL
TO ENSURE THAT SORAYA FINDS A
GOOD HUSBAND.
THEN HE HIDES FROM NADEREH AND
ESMAIL THE TRUTH ABOUT THE
HOUSE FOR AS LONG AS HE CAN.
HE WANTS TO PROTECTS THEM.
THE HOUSE REPRESENTS HIS LAST
CHANCE, THE LAST OF HIS LIFE
SAVINGS, HIS ONLY REMAINING
OPPORTUNITY TO SEND ESMAIL TO
COLLEGE.
HE HANGS ONTO THE HOUSE,
THEREFORE, EVEN TO THE POINT
OF TELLING HIS SON TO POINT
THE GUN AT LESTER'S HEART.
THAT'S KIND OF INDIRECTLY
CONTRIBUTING TO HIS SON'S
DEATH.
WE CAN DEBATE ABOUT THE
ULTIMATE MEANING OF THAT, BUT
THAT'S I THINK ONE WAY TO READ
IT.
KATHY IS ALSO DRIVEN BY A
VISION OF FAMILY, BUT FAMILY
FOR HER EVOKES A DIFFERENT SET
OF IMAGES.
FIRST SHE WANTS ROMANTIC LOVE
WITH A MAN.
IT'S A ROMANTIC KIND OF LOVE
THAT SHE'S SEEKING.
SO WHEN SHE THINKS ABOUT NICK
AND WHEN SHE THINKS ABOUT
LESTER, SHE-- WHAT DOES SHE
FOCUS ON?
SHE THINKS ABOUT MOMENTS OF
LOVEMAKING, AND SHE IMAGINES A
BOND THAT'S FORMED BETWEEN
THEM THROUGH THOSE ACTS.
WHEN SHE'S NOT WITH LESTER,
SHE WANTS TO BE WITH HIM, TO
KISS HIM AND TO MAKE LOVE TO
HIM.
SO BEHRANI EXPRESSES HIS LOVE
THROUGH PROTECTION; KATHY
THROUGH SEXUAL AFFECTION.
BUT THEN ALSO SHE HAS THIS
DESIRE FOR A CHILD.
AND IN FACT THE BREAKING POINT
IN HER MARRIAGE WAS THE FACT
THAT SHE WANTED A CHILD AND
NICK DIDN'T.
THEN AT THE END OF THE BOOK, I
DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAUGHT SOME
OF THIS, BUT I WAS FASCINATED
BY SOME OF THIS-- THESE
IMAGES.
THE END OF THE BOOK WHEN SHE
WAKES UP IN THE HOSPITAL,
AFTER HAVING WATCHED THE FILM,
I DIDN'T THINK SHE WAS GOING
TO WAKE UP IN THE HOSPITAL, SO
THIS WAS SURPRISING.
SHE WAKES UP IN THE HOSPITAL,
AND THE VERY FIRST THING THAT
CATCHES HER ATTENTION IS A BOY
NEXT-DOOR.
THERE'S A HOUSE NEXT TO THE
HOSPITAL AND SHE'S LOOKING
DOWN IT BELOW.
THERE'S A BOY NEXT DOOR
PLAYING IN A SANDBOX; AND
BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE
DECK, QUOTE, "A CHILD'S
PLASTIC WADING POOL COULD HAVE
HAD WITH SMILING, SPOUTING
BLUE WHALES, AND I WATCHED
FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
FENCE, TWO STOREYS UP, EACH
SWALLOW, A HOOK IN THE
STITCHED BELLY OF MY THROAT."
THAT'S PAGE 348.
SO WHAT'S HURTING IS HER NECK
WOUNDS, BUT ALSO HER PAIN IS
CONNECTED TO THAT BOY AND THE
WHALES.
IT'S A HOOK THAT'S SINKING
INTO HER NECK.
THE FACT-- THEN THE MOTHER
GOES OVER TO THE BOY.
SHE LAUGHS WITH HIM, GETS THE
SAND OUT OF HIS HAIR.
THE BOY THEN, QUOTE, "THE
LITTLE BOY SAT WITH HIS BACK
TO THE FENCE AND THE HOSPITAL
ON THE OTHER SIDE."
SO THE BOY HAS HIS BACK TO
HER.
SHE'S LOOKING AT THE BOY'S
BACK.
THAT WAS KIND OF A SYMBOL OF
THE FACT THAT SHE REALIZES
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING SHE'S
EVER GOING TO HAVE.
THEN, WHEN SHE LEAVES THE
HOSPITAL, WHEN SHE'S BEING
TAKEN AWAY IN HANDCUFFS, THAT
BOY IS HER LAST IMAGE.
WHERE IS IT?
QUOTE, "HIS MOTHER SMILING
DOWN AT HIM."
THIS IS PAGE 357.
"SHE WIPES THE SAND OFF HIS
HANDS AND LIFTED HIM ONTO HER
LAP.
THE DOOR OPENED BEHIND ME AS
THE POLICEMAN COMING IN, BUT I
DIDN'T TURN AROUND."
SHE'S SO FOCUSED ON THE BOY.
"THE OFFICER," QUOTE, "TOOK MY
WRISTS AND SLIPPED THE COOL
METAL OF HIS HANDCUFFS ONTO
THEM.
I COULDN'T SEE THE BOY'S FACE
ANYMORE, AND IN THE HOURS AND
DAYS THAT FOLLOWED, I WOULD
THINK OF HIM."
THOSE ARE THE LAST IMAGES--
THE MOMENT SHE WAKES UP IN THE
HOSPITAL AND HER LAST IMAGES
OF LEAVING THE HOSPITAL BEFORE
GOING TO PRISON.
NOW THE HOSPITAL'S ALSO A
SYMBOL OF HER FATHER.
WHILE HER MOTHER AND HER
BROTHER JUDGE HER, SHE STILL
HANGS ONTO THIS IDEA OF HER
DECEASED FATHER.
WHEN SHE WAS A CHILD, HE
DIDN'T HAVE MUCH TIME AND
ATTENTION FOR HER.
SHE APPEARS TO BE TRYING TO
HANG ONTO HIM AND THE
AFFECTION SHE NEVER GOT FROM
HIM BY HANGING ONTO HIS HOUSE.
SO WHEN THE WEBS OF
SIGNIFICANCE THAT GAVE MEANING
TO THEIR LIVES BREAK AND THEIR
LIVES NO LONGER HAVE PURPOSE,
SUICIDE IS THE OPTION FOR BOTH
OF THEM.
BEHRANI CAN NO LONGER PROTECT
ESMAIL; HE'S DEAD, AND HE
CANNOT PROTECT NADI FROM WHAT
WOULD SURELY BE THE GREATEST
SADNESS OF HER LIFE, HAVING
LOST HER SON.
KATHY'S CRASH COMES EARLIER.
SHE BEGINS TO FALL INTO A
SLUMP WHEN NICK LEFT HER.
SHE'S GIVEN HOPE AGAIN WHEN
SHE MEETS LESTER, BUT WHEN SHE
THINKS THAT HE'S RETURNED TO
HIS FAMILY, SHE DESCENDS INTO
THIS BLACK PIT OF DESPAIR AND
SHE TRIES TWICE TO KILL
HERSELF.
BUT CULTURE DOES MORE THAN
GIVE MEANING TO OUR LIFE'S
PROJECTS.
IT ALSO SHAPES HOW WE VIEW
OTHERS.
SO IT'S LIKE A SORT OF LENSES
OVER YOUR EYES.
CULTURE GIVES MEANING TO
THINGS OUT THERE, SO WE SEE--
WE INTERPRET OTHER PEOPLE'S
BEHAVIOR IN TERMS OF THE
MEANINGS THAT WE HAVE OVER OUR
EYES.
SO BEHRANI AND KATHY
REPEATEDLY MISUNDERSTAND ONE
ANOTHER BECAUSE THEY DON'T
UNDERSTAND THE MEANINGS BEHIND
ONE ANOTHER'S ACTIONS.
SO BEHRANI, FOR EXAMPLE, HIS
LIFE IN IRAN AND HIS
EXPERIENCES-- THE AIR FORCE
GAVE HIM A SENSE THAT A GOOD
LIFE IS A LIFE OF DISCIPLINE,
SO HE SEES AMERICANS'
OVERWEIGHT BODIES AND
TELEVISION VIEWING AND
CONSUMERISM AND HE VIEWS THEM
AS WEAK AND UNDISCIPLINED AND
GREEDY.
THERE'S THAT GREAT QUOTE ON
PAGE 124 ABOUT WATCHING
AMERICANS-- SEEING AMERICANS
WATCH TELEVISION, AND THIS
PERHAPS, QUOTE, "EXPLAINS THE
FACE OF AMERICANS, THE EYES
THAT NEVER APPEAR SATISFIED.
THESE PEOPLE HAVE THE EYES OF
VERY SMALL CHILDREN WHO ARE
FOREVER LOOKING FOR THEIR NEXT
SOURCE OF DISTRACTION,
ENTERTAINMENT OR A SWEET TASTE
IN THE MOUTH."
AND WHEN HE SEES KATHY IN
PARTICULAR, HE SEES A WOMAN
THAT LACKED THE DISCIPLINE
NECESSARY TO HANG ONTO HER
HOUSE, AND HE SEES A WHORE,
QUOTE-UNQUOTE, A WOMAN WEARING
CHEAP MAKEUP, SHORTS, NO SHOES
AND HAVING AN AFFAIR WITH A
MARRIED MAN.
SIMILARLY KATHY MISUNDERSTANDS
BEHRANI.
SHE CALLS HIM AN ARAB.
SHE CONSIDERS HIM CHAUVINISTIC
FOR HIDING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE
HOUSE FROM HIS WIFE.
SHE SEES WHAT SHE CALLS HIS
TEMPER AND ENCOURAGES LESTER
TO GO THROUGH WITH THE PLAN TO
FORCE BEHRANI TO SELL THE
HOUSE BACK TO THE COUNTY.
THAT POINT IS-- IF YOU
REMEMBER LESTER'S PULLING
BACK.
HE SAYS WE CAN'T GO THROUGH
WITH THIS, AND SHE SAYS, NO,
YOU HAVEN'T SEEN HIS TEMPER.
HE WON'T LET THIS GO.
SHE SEES HIS ACTIONS AS
STEMMING FROM GREED RATHER
THAN A DESIRE TO PROVIDE FOR
HIS FAMILY IN THIS LAST-DITCH
EFFORT.
SO ULTIMATELY THE CHARACTERS
ARE DOOMED TO A HORRIBLE
ENTANGLEMENT.
EACH HOLDS ON TO THE HOUSE AS
A SYMBOL OF ALL OF THEIR
DESIRES, BEHRANI TO PROTECT
AND SUPPORT HIS FAMILY AND
KATHY, STRUGGLING HARD TO WIN
THE LOVE OF A MAN, HER FATHER,
NICK, LESTER, THIS DREAM OF A
SON, ANYONE.
THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE
MEANINGS BEHIND THEIR ACTIONS;
THEY IMAGINE THE WORST OF ONE
ANOTHER, AND THEY STRUGGLE TO
THE DEATH.
THAT'S IT FROM ME.
(Applause)
>> Elena: CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
BETTER.
OKAY.
AT THE BEGINNING, I WANTED TO
SHARE SORT OF A PIECE OF
GOSSIP WITH YOU.
RUMOR HAS IT THAT THE AUTHOR
DUBUS BECAME FAMOUS.
HE WAS APPROACHED BY 150 FILM
DIRECTORS ASKING FOR HIS
PERMISSION TO TURN "THE HOUSE
OF SAND AND FOG" INTO FILM,
AND HE TURNED ALL OF THEM
DOWN.
WHEN ASKED FOR AN EXPLANATION,
HE SAID TWO THINGS.
FIRST, HE DIDN'T THINK HOW HE
COULD DO A GOOD JOB, AND MOST
IMPORTANTLY HE SAID HE DIDN'T
WANT THE FILM TO BE REDUCED TO
A DIGESTIBLE BIG MAC VERSION
OF THE BOOK.
AND SO IT WENT.
UNTIL ONE DAY HE GOT A PHONE
CALL FROM A YOUNG AND
COMPLETELY UNKNOWN DIRECTOR,
VADIM PERELMAN, A FILM SCHOOL
DROPOUT, ACTUALLY, AN
IMMIGRANT FROM THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION.
THEY TALKED FOR AN HOUR AND A
HALF ON THE PHONE, AND
SOMETIME LATER A WONDERFUL
FILM WAS BORN.
WHY AM I TELLING YOU THIS?
WE ARE NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT
THE FILM, AND PROFESSOR MARK
PRICE IS GOING TO DO THAT NEXT
TIME.
BUT THERE'S A POINT TO MY
STORY.
WHEN ASKED WHY HE LIKED THE
NOVEL SO MUCH, THE RUSSIAN
DIRECTOR, PERELMAN, SAID:
"THIS NOVEL IS ABOUT BEING AN
IMMIGRANT IN A NEW COUNTRY AND
FEELING LIKE AN IMMIGRANT IN
YOUR OWN COUNTRY."
AND THIS QUOTE I THINK
CHARACTERIZES THE NOVEL VERY
WELL.
I HAVE TO SAY I WAS AMONG THE
GROUP OF FACULTY WHO
RECOMMENDED THIS NOVEL FOR RIT
STUDENTS.
SO IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU
CAN BLAME ME.
WHY DID I ADVOCATE FOR IT?
AFTER ALL, THERE WERE QUITE A
FEW VERY LEGITIMATE CONCERNS.
THE NOVEL IS RATHER DARK AND
DISTURBING.
THERE IS DESPAIR, DEPRESSION,
DRUGS, ALCOHOL AND PORN
ADDICTIONS, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
AND FINALLY MURDER AND
SUICIDE.
THERE IS CERTAINLY NO LIGHT AT
THE END OF THE TUNNEL, AND YET
PRECISELY FOR THESE VERY
REASONS THAT THE NOVEL
APPEALED TO ME.
I ADMITTED TO MYSELF THAT MY
CHOICE WAS AFFECTED BY THE
FACTS OF BEING AN IMMIGRANT
MYSELF.
I CAME HERE FROM RUSSIA ELEVEN
YEARS AGO, AND I JUST HAVE TO
TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
RUSSIANS AND THE WRITERS.
RUSSIANS LOVE THEIR WRITERS.
THEY ELEVATE THEM TO THE STATE
OF PROPHETS, ASSIGN THE TASK
OF CARRYING THE WORD, THE
TRUTH TO THE PEOPLE.
DURING THE YEARS, THE
GOVERNMENT USED THE WRITER'S
VOICE FOR PROPAGATING ITS OWN
POLITICAL GOALS.
IT OFFICIALLY MADE THE WRITERS
ENGINEERS OF HUMAN SOULS.
AND SO THE WRITERS WERE
REQUIRED TO PRESENT LIFE
THROUGH A CERTAIN REQUIRED
ARTISTIC METHOD, WHICH WAS
CALLED SOCIALIST REALISM.
IT MEANT FALSE IDEALIZATION OF
SOVIET REALITY, BUT NOT ALL
THE WRITERS COULD BRING
THEMSELVES TO EXCHANGE MORAL
AND ARTISTIC INTEGRITY FOR A
LAVISH LIFESTYLE THAT THE
SOVIET GOVERNMENT WAS SO READY
TO BESTOW UPON THEM.
SO THOSE WHO COULDN'T HAD
THREE CHOICES: SILENCE, FORCED
LABOR CAMP, OR DEATH.
AND SO MOST CHOSE TO WRITE IN
A REAL WAY.
SO WHAT IS IT THAT THEY WROTE
ABOUT THAT CARRIED THE
HARSHEST CRIMINAL PENALTY IN
THE SOVIET UNION?
THEY WROTE ABOUT UNIVERSAL
THEMES, SUCH AS HUMAN
WEAKNESS, ABSURDITY AND PAIN.
THEY WROTE ABOUT PEOPLE'S
ISOLATION AND MUTUAL
INCOMPREHENSION, AND TO SOME
EXTENT THAT IS WHAT I FIND IN
"THE HOUSE OF SAND AND FOG."
I'M SURE YOU DISCUSSED IN YOUR
CLASSES THAT ANDRE DUBUS USES
BEHRANI AS A VEHICLE FOR THE
CRITIQUE OF AMERICAN CULTURE,
CULTURE OF INSTANT
GRATIFICATION.
IT SHOWS THAT KATHY, WHO
APPEARS TO BE SADLY AND
HOPELESSLY IGNORANT.
IT IS VERY SIGNIFICANT THAT
SHE IS THE ONLY CHARACTER IN
THE ENTIRE NOVEL WHO
CONTINUOUSLY MISPRONOUNCES THE
BEHRANIS' LAST NAME AND REFERS
TO THEM AS ARABS, IRANIANS OR
ISRAELIS, ALL OF WHICH ARE THE
SAME EMPTY NOTIONS TO HER.
OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE WORLD,
ALIENATED FROM EVERYTHING AND
EVERYONE, KATHY LEADS ON THE
FRUITS OF HER PARENTS'
GENERATION.
I FIND THAT SHE ALSO PERFECTLY
ILLUSTRATES MANY CULTURES'
FAVORITE PSYCHOANALYTICAL
LOOPHOLE: BLAMING YOUR MOTHER
FOR EVERYTHING THAT GOES WRONG
IN YOUR ADULT LIFE.
(Laughter)
KATHY ENJOYS THE VICTIM MODE.
SHE BLAMES EVERYONE ELSE FOR
HER MISFORTUNES WHILE MAKING A
VICTIM OF EVERYONE IN HER
PAST.
BUT THE NOVEL IS OBJECTIVE AND
IT'S BALANCED.
IT SHOWS BEHRANI ABSORBED IN
THE TYPICAL IMMIGRANT PURSUIT,
CHASTISING HIS NEW FELLOW
COUNTRYMEN FOR THE SAME THINGS
HE HIMSELF IS GUILTY OF.
A POPULAR SELF-DEFENSE
MECHANISM OF SOMEONE UPROOTED
AND TRANSPLANTED TO THE NEW
SOIL, THAT NO MATTER HOW HARD
ONE TRIES DOES NOT FEEL QUITE
THE SAME.
AND SO "THE HOUSE OF SAND AND
FOG" ALLOWS US TO GET AN
INTIMATE VIEW OF THE LIVES OF
THREE VERY TROUBLED HUMAN
BEINGS.
HE ALSO SHOWS THAT NO MATTER
WHAT OUR GEOGRAPHIC, ETHNIC OR
CULTURAL ROOTS ARE, WE TRAVEL
THE SAME DIFFICULT ROADS OF
DEPRESSION, ADDICTION,
SELF-DOUBT AND UNDERESTIMATION
OF OUR SELF-WORTH.
COMMENTING ON "THE HOUSE OF
SAND AND FOG" SAYS, IT SHOWS
WE ALL FALL INTO BAD
RELATIONSHIPS AND FAIL TO WORK
ON THE GOOD ONES, THAT WE NEED
OUTSIDE APPROVAL AND RESPECT;
WE NEED TO BE LOVED, AND WE
ALL SET INFLEXIBLE LIFE GOALS
THAT WE FEEL COMPELLED TO MEET
OR RISK BEING LABELED A
FAILURE.
WE USUALLY ALL UNDERESTIMATE
OUR SUCCESS IN LIFE AND FAIL
TO GIVE OURSELVES CREDIT FOR
THE INSURMOUNTABLE HURDLES
THAT WE SOMETIMES NAVIGATE TO
GET THERE.
AND SO BEHRANI, KATHY AND
LESTER FOUND THEMSELVES UP AND
DOWN THOSE ROADS.
AND THERE IS A COLLISION, A
DESTRUCTIVE COLLISION, THAT
ENDS ALL HOPE FOR A REMOTELY
HAPPY ENDING.
AS A READER, YOU KNOW THAT YOU
IDENTIFY WITH EVERYONE AND NO
ONE.
THE CHARACTERS ARE NOT
PARTICULARLY LIKABLE, BUT THEY
ALL SEEM WORTHY OF SYMPATHY,
IN PART BECAUSE THEY REMAIN
CAPABLE OF SHOWING IT.
BEHRANI, LESTER AND KATHY ALL
HOLD ONTO COMPASSION AND
DECENCY AND EVEN SHOW THE
SIGNS OF A WILLINGNESS TO
RELENT.
AND SO THE NOVEL SEEKS TO
UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS THAT THE
STORY COMES DOWN TO SUCH A
CATASTROPHIC RESULT.
AND I THINK IT SHOWS VERY WELL
THAT WHAT WREAKS HAVOC IS
MISGUIDED BEHAVIOR AND NOT A
MALIGNANT ONE.
SO THE NOVEL COMES TO THE END,
AND IT PUTS THE READER THROUGH
THE TORTURE OF WITNESSING
ESMAIL'S DEATH AND BEHRANI'S
UNIMAGINABLE GRIEF.
ANDRE DUBUS LEAVES US
COMPLETELY ON OUR OWN, WITHOUT
SUGGESTING ANY KIND OF
OTHERWORLDLY OR EMOTIONAL WAY
OUT.
WITH HUMAN SUFFERING, THE
NOVEL SEEMS TO LET THE READER
DOWN AS IT PROVIDES NO REAL
CLOSURE IN REGARDS TO VIOLENCE
COMMITTED AGAINST THE MOST
VULNERABLE AND INNOCENT.
I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW A
PARALLEL HERE.
THERE IS A NOVEL CALLED "BEND
SINISTER."
THE NOVEL WAS WRITTEN BY THE
RUSSIAN-AMERICAN AUTHOR
NABOKOV.
IN THE NOVEL, THE FATHER LOSES
HIS YOUNG SON.
HE'S MUTE WITH GRIEF, JUST
LIKE BEHRANI AT SOME POINT,
AND HE LOOKS AT HIS CHILD'S
LIFELESS BODY.
IN THE RUSSIAN NOVEL, HOWEVER,
THE AUTHOR COMES TO THE
FATHER'S RESCUE AND
MERCILESSLY ALLOWS HIS
CHARACTER TO LOSE HIS MIND.
HIS INDUCED MADNESS TAKES THE
FORM OF REALIZATION THAT HE
AND HIS WORLD ARE MERELY THE
INCONSEQUENTIAL CREATIONS OF
THE AUTHOR, WHO IS SHAPING THE
NARRATIVE.
AND THUS THE NOVEL IS
MERCIFULLY AND ABRUPTLY
INTERRUPTED.
BEHRANI IS NOT AWARDED THIS
LUXURY, AND HE FINDS HIS OWN
WAY, THE ONLY ONE HE THINKS OF
AT THE TIME, AND THE ENDING IS
UNSETTLING.
WHAT DOES ANDRE DUBUS THINK OF
THE ENDING?
HE SAYS, QUOTE: "IT'S A TRAGIC
ENDING.
IT'S BRUTAL AND IT'S HARSH,
AND I THINK IT'S PROBABLY EVEN
AN OFFENSIVE ENDING, BUT I
THINK ONE OF THE JOBS OF THE
WRITER IS TO TAKE US THROUGH A
NIGHTMARE WE DON'T NECESSARILY
HAVE TO LIVE OURSELVES."
AND I THINK THE NOVEL DOES
ACCOMPLISH THAT.
HAUNTING OUR IMAGINATION WITH
THE GRAPHIC IMAGES EVERY
SUICIDE, THE NOVEL URGES US TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE ISSUE OF
SUFFERING CANNOT AND SHOULD
NOT BRING EMOTIONAL OR
INTELLECTUAL CLOSURE.
THERE'S A LINE FROM HEMINGWAY
THAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU.
HEMINGWAY AT SOME POINT SAID,
"THE JOB OF THE WRITER IS NOT
TO JUDGE BUT TO SEEK TO
UNDERSTAND, AND SEEKING TO
UNDERSTAND IS WHAT I HOPED MY
STUDENTS WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM
THE NOVEL.
THANK YOU.
(Applause)
>> WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS.
>> OR COMMENTS.
IF ANYBODY WANTS TO SAY WHAT
THEY THOUGHT ABOUT THE NOVEL
OR DISAGREE WITH ANYTHING THAT
WE MIGHT HAVE SAID OR SHARE
SOMETHING NEW.
>> I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL SO
MUCH FOR HELPING ME PREPARE MY
LECTURE FOR NEXT WEEK.
(Laughter)
SO BEHRANI...
>> AN EXILE IN THE PROCESS OF
TRYING TO BECOME AN IMMIGRANT.
THAT'S, I THINK, PRECISELY
HIM.
>> ...YOUR COMMENT ABOUT KATHY
BEING RESPONSIBLE... SO MANY
OF YOUR IDEAS, ELENA
(Inaudible)
BUT...
>> I THINK BEHRANI WAS
ACTUALLY HOLDING ONTO THE IDEA
OF THE HOUSE--
>> YOU MENTIONED KATHY.
>> RIGHT.
RESPONSIBLE FOR UPPING THE
ANTE OF THE TRAGIC
CONSEQUENCES OF THE STORY.
>> OH, ABSOLUTELY.
YEAH, I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO
TALK ABOUT LESTER.
BUT IF I WERE TO SAY WHAT'S
GOING ON WITH LESTER, IT WOULD
BE SOMETHING ABOUT THE GUILT
HE'S FEELING FOR LEAVING HIS
FAMILY AND HIS DESIRE TO SAVE
THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS.
HE'S GOT TO RECUPERATE HIS
NOTION OF HIMSELF AS THE HERO
IN HIS OWN LIFE, SO HE'S GOING
TO SAVE THIS DAMSEL NO MATTER
WHAT IT TAKES.
>> IF WE COULD JUST HAVE
ANYBODY ASK ANY QUESTIONS, IF
YOU COULD JUST RAISE YOUR HAND
FOR THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE THE
CAPTIONIST CANNOT HEAR.
WE ASK YOU TO USE THE
MICROPHONE.
IT'S ALSO BEING RECORDED.
SO IF YOU GUYS COULD JUST
RAISE YOUR HAND AND I'LL BRING
THE MICROPHONE TO YOU.
>> FIRST YOU HAVE TO RAISE
YOUR HAND.
>> YEAH.
>> THANK YOU, OF COURSE FOR
THE VERY INTERESTING
PRESENTATIONS.
WHAT KIND OF COMPELLED ME TO
ASK THIS QUESTION WAS THE
NOTION OF SOME KIND OF
MOVEMENT THAT YOU EXPERIENCE
AS YOU GO FROM ONE PLACE TO
ANOTHER AND CONFRONT DIFFERENT
WAYS OF LIVING AND IN VARIOUS
PLACES.
PROFESSOR KRAY WAS KIND OF
TRYING TO POINT THIS OUT AS AN
ANTHROPOLOGIST, CULTURE, TOO,
PERHAPS SUPER IMPOSE DIFFERENT
VIEWS THAT WE ACCRUE OVER TIME
AND IN DIFFERENT PLACES.
I REALLY ENJOYED PROFESSOR
ELAHI'S KIND OF, YOU KNOW,
ETHNOGRAPHY, SPEAKING ABOUT
HIS EXPERIENCE MOVING THROUGH
THESE DIFFERENT PLACES.
AND I THINK ALL THREE OF YOU
PROBABLY CAN GIVE FASCINATING
TRANS-NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON
WHAT IT MEANS TO BE SO MOBILE
AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21st
CENTURY.
SO MY QUESTION IS THIS: WHAT
DOES IT MEAN TO BE AN AMERICAN
WHEN YOU ARE AT THE CENTER, IN
SOME WAYS, OF THIS MOBILITY
FOR THE REST OF THE WORLD?
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE AN
IMMIGRANT-SLASH-CITIZEN?
AS MANY OF US ARE.
BUT I THINK FOR THE
NON-NATURALIZED CITIZENS, MANY
OF US ARE BEGINNING TO
CONSIDER.
AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21st
CENTURY, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
LOSING THEIR JOBS TO THE
GLOBAL ECONOMY ARE DOING SO AT
WAL-MARTS THAT ARE FUELING
THEIR OWN DEMISE.
THEY ARE LITERALLY TRAPPED
WITHIN A CYCLE OF CONSUMPTION
THAT IS MAKING THEM OBSOLETE.
>> SOMEBODY SAID, REALLY?
DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN WHAT
YOU MEAN?
I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE
GETTING AT.
>> WAL-MART.
WHO SHOPS AT WAL-MART?
(Laughter)
THE LARGEST CORPORATION IN
AMERICA THIS YEAR.
IT'S THE WORLD'S LARGEST
RETAILER.
>> LARGEST HERE OR IN MEXICO?
>> WHERE ARE THESE JOBS GOING?
WHERE DO THESE PRODUCTS COME
FROM?
WE'RE A POST-INDUSTRIAL
SOCIETY.
MANUFACTURING BASES HAVE
SHIFTED GLOBALLY.
>> I'D LIKE TO TIE THAT BACK
TO WHAT BABAK WAS POINTING OUT
ABOUT WHY HIS GENERATION IS
NOT REPRESENTED IN THE NOVEL,
AND I THINK HE WAS GETTING
AT-- HE MENTIONED ESMAIL WAS A
LITTLE MORE SYMPATHETIC TO
KATHY BECAUSE HE COULD PERHAPS
SEE THINGS FROM HER
PERSPECTIVE A LITTLE BIT.
IF CULTURE'S A SET OF LENSES
THROUGH WHICH WE SEE THE
WORLD, BUT NOW CULTURES ARE
BLENDING, COLLIDING, COMING
TOGETHER.
EACH OF US IS ABLE TO KIND OF
TAKE ON-- OR TAKE OFF AND PUT
ON OTHER LENSES, IF ONLY TO A
CERTAIN DEGREE.
WE SEE THEM THROUGH THEM
NEARSIGHTEDLY OR SOMETHING.
THIS IS GETTING TO BE A REALLY
EXTENDED AND GROSS METAPHOR.
BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, MAYBE--
MAYBE, AT TIMES AT LEAST,
WE'RE ABLE TO STEP OUT OF
OURSELVES AND PUT OURSELVES IN
SOMEONE ELSE'S POSITION AND
TRY TO SEE THE WORLD AS THEY
DO.
SO MAYBE WE END UP BEING NOT
CHAMELEONS BUT MAYBE
MULTIFACETED PEOPLE WITH
DIFFERENT-- WITH DIFFERENT
FACES, DIFFERENT SETS OF
PERSPECTIVES BUT THAT SHIFT
UNEVENLY.
IT'S NEVER GOING TO BE EASY.
NONE OF US CAN SAY THAT WE CAN
IMMEDIATELY JUST STEP INTO THE
PERSPECTIVE OF AN IRANIAN AND
WHAT'S THAT LIKE BUT MAYBE WE
CAN GET GLIMPSES OF IT.
MAYBE.
I DON'T KNOW.
THAT'S OPTIMISTIC READING.
>> IF I CAN KEY IN ON ANOTHER
THREAD OF WHAT YOU SAID, WHICH
IS THE WORD YOU BEGAN WITH,
MOVEMENT, AND ONE OF THE
THINGS I LEFT OUT OF MY TALK
THAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT AS I
WAS PUTTING IT TOGETHER WAS
NOT JUST THE MOVEMENT OF
IMMIGRANTS BUT THE MOVEMENT OF
CAPITAL IN THE ECONOMIC SENSE
AND OF, YOU KNOW, IN THE CASE
OF IRAN, IT'S NATURAL
RESOURCES, SO THAT, YOU KNOW,
I NARRATED MY OWN TRAVEL
ACROSS THE ATLANTIC TO ENGLAND
AND THEN TO THE UNITED STATES,
IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT
STRUCTURAL RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND
IRAN, RIGHT?
SO THAT, EVEN BEFORE I WAS
BORN, PROBABLY AROUND THE TIME
MY BROTHER WAS BORN IN '53,
THERE WAS AN EVENT THAT KIND
OF PUT IN PLACE WHAT WOULD
HAPPEN FOR THE NEXT 50 YEARS
IN IRAN, WHICH WAS THE COUP
D'ETAT AGAINST MOHAMMED
MOSSAD.
SO HOW IS IT I CAME TO THE
UNITED STATES?
PARTLY I KIND OF FOLLOWED THAT
PIPELINE OF PRODUCT.
NOT-- YOU KNOW, MY FAMILY
DIDN'T LEAVE BECAUSE OF THE
REVOLUTION BUT WE PERHAPS
STAYED BECAUSE OF THE
REVOLUTION, AND THE REVOLUTION
WAS A REACTION TO THOSE EVENTS
OF '53 AND SO, YOU KNOW,
MATERIAL CONCERNS LINK UP WITH
THESE CULTURAL CONCERNS, AND
SOME WOULD ARGUE STRUCTURE
THEN COMPLETELY AND THERE'S NO
WAY OUT.
OTHERS WOULD SAY, WELL, THEY
ARE POSSIBILITIES TO
CONSTRUCT, TO CREATE OTHER
STRUCTURES.
THE EXAMPLE OF THE WEB OF
CULTURE THAT PROFESSOR KRAY
USED AND THE LOOM THAT WEAVES
A CULTURE ACROSS DIFFERENT
SETTINGS THAT I BORROWED FROM
FISHER AND ABETTI.
YEAH, I DON'T KNOW.
IT'S A TOUGH QUESTION.
(Chuckling)
OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS?
WE MUST HAVE REALLY COVERED
ALL THE BASES.
>> Elena: I THINK MAYBE TO GET
YOU GUYS GOING A LITTLE BIT,
YOU COULD JUST SAY WHETHER OR
NOT YOU LIKED THE NOVEL, AND
IF YOU DISLIKED IT VERY MUCH,
YOU COULD SAY WHY, AND IF YOU
REALLY ENJOYED IT, YOU COULD
SAY-- GO AHEAD.
>> SHOW ME YOUR HAND.
>> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION
ABOUT THE CONNECTION BETWEEN
AIRPLANES AND IRANIANS.
WHERE THAT WAS COMING FROM?
>> IT WAS REALLY A--
>> NOT ALL IRANIANS ARE
TERRORISTS.
>> CORRECT.
IT WAS REALLY A GUIDING
STRUCTURE FOR MY TALK; BUT IT
TOUCHES ON THAT MOBILITY, AND
I WAS PLAYING A LITTLE BIT ON
YOUR EXPECTATIONS OF IRANIANS
AND AIRPLANES, BUT OBVIOUSLY
THERE'S A STEREOTYPE THERE.
>> ONE THING THAT I DON'T
THINK YOU MENTIONED DIRECTLY
BUT I KEPT THINKING AS THE
THREE OF YOU ARE GOING THROUGH
YOUR TALK IS THE FLEXIBILITY
OF CHILDREN WHEN THEY ARE
MOVING FROM ONE CULTURE TO
ANOTHER.
YOU COMMENTED ON THE SON BEING
A TEENAGER, HAD COME TO THIS
COUNTRY PROBABLY JUST AROUND
PUBERTY AND SEEMED TO BE ABLE
TO ASSIMILATE MORE EASILY AND
YET NOT LOSE HIS IRANIAN
CULTURE.
BABAK, YOU MENTIONED YOUR
OLDER BROTHERS SEEMED LESS
ABLE OR LESS COMFORTABLE IN
THE UNITED STATES THAN PERHAPS
YOU ARE.
SO I WONDERED IF YOU-- ANY OR
ALL OF YOU COMMENT ON THE
FLEXIBILITY OF CHILDREN AS YOU
SAW IT IN THE NOVEL OR AS YOU
SEE IT FROM YOUR OWN
EXPERIENCE GOING FROM ONE
COUNTRY TO ANOTHER?
>> CHILDREN, ESPECIALLY
PRELINGUISTIC CHILDREN, BEFORE
THEY'VE BEGUN TO SPEAK A
LANGUAGE, ARE CULTURAL
SPONGES.
YOU TAKE THEM OUT OF ONE
ENVIRONMENT AND POP THEM IN
ANOTHER AND THEY WILL
COMPLETELY ABSORB THE NEW
CULTURE THAT SURROUNDS THEM.
>> Elena: I WORKED AS A COURT
INTERPRETER FOR ROCHESTER FOR
ABOUT TEN YEARS, AND SO I
WOULD INTERPRET FOR THE
IMMIGRANTS, FOR THE RUSSIAN
IMMIGRANTS WHO NEEDED TO BE IN
COURT FOR A VARIETY OF
REASONS.
AND SO I CAME ACROSS QUITE A
FEW STORIES AS I DID MY
INTERPRETING.
AND SO WHAT I WITNESSED IS,
YES, PRELINGUISTIC CHILDREN,
ABSOLUTELY, THEY ARE SPONGES
AND THEY GET COMPLETELY
AMERICANIZED AND ARE QUITE
COMFORTABLE.
BUT AFTER A CERTAIN AGE, I
THINK OUTWARDLY, ON THE
SURFACE, IT APPEARS TO BE A
COMPLETE ASSIMILATION, BUT IT
COMES AT A VERY HIGH PRICE.
YOU SEE KIDS FROM PROFESSIONAL
FAMILIES WITH NO DISCORD OR
ANY KIND OF MARITAL PROBLEMS
OR PROBLEMS OTHERWISE TO DO
SILLY LITTLE THINGS IN ORDER
TO FIT IN WITH THEIR PEERS,
LIKE GOING TO WEGMAN'S AND
JUST BECAUSE THE KID SAID
STEALING A PACK OF CIGARETTES
AND THEN BEING ARRESTED AND
BROUGHT TO COURT, AND THINGS
ESCALATE FROM THERE.
I THINK THAT DESIRE TO FIT IN
SO MUCH COMES SOMETIMES AT A
VERY HIGH PRICE FOR THOSE
KIDS.
>> ARE YOU THE ONLY MIC?
>> YOU NEED ANOTHER
MICROPHONE.
>> THERE IS ANOTHER ONE.
>> BEING AN IMMIGRANT MYSELF,
I KIND OF HAVE PERSPECTIVE OF
MY OWN BUT I JUST WANTED TO
FINDS OUT YOUR POINT OF VIEW,
ASSIMILATION WITH A HOST
COUNTRY AND KIND OF BRANDING
INTO THE SOCIAL STANDPOINT,
YOU KNOW, FROM WHEN YOU COME
TO-- FROM A DIFFERENT COUNTRY
YOU HAVE TO SORT OF LIKE BLEND
IN, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.
WOULD YOU SAY THAT IT'S MORE
RELATED TO THE SAND OR TO THE
FOG?
>> OH.
WOW.
THAT'S DEEP.
>> AH.
(Laughter)
TOO METAPHORICAL FOR ME.
>> COMBINATION OF BOTH?
>> YEAH, YEAH.
WELL, HOW ARE YOU THINKING OF
THIS IN TERMS OF SAND AND FOG?
>> EXPLAIN TO US FIRST.
(Laughter)
>> PERFECT STRATEGY OF ALL
PEOPLE.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER A
QUESTION, WE THROW IT BACK TO
YOU.
>> WELL, I WAS THINKING ABOUT
A COMBINATION OF BOTH.
BASICALLY IT'S LIKE A COP BIN
NATION OF BOTH FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE BUT WITH A
DIFFERENT PROPORTION FOR EVERY
PERSON.
>> SO WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY SAND
AND FOG?
>> SAND AND FOG, THE SAND IS
LIKE A STRUGGLE, BASICALLY
THAT YOU CAN'T JUST GO THROUGH
IT EASILY, AND YOU GET SUNK IN
BY IT.
AND THE FOG IS BASICALLY THE
UNCERTAINTY AND THE KIND OF
LIKE BASICALLY YOU'RE GUIDED
ONLY BY HOPE AND YOU DON'T
REALLY KNOW WHAT'S AHEAD OF
YOU.
>> OH, WOW.
>> HAVE HIM TEACH OUR NEXT
CLASS.
>> YEAH, THAT'S GREAT.
THAT'S FANTASTIC.
(Laughter)
>> WELL, THE FOG, YOU KNOW,
THOSE ARE FLEXIBLE METAPHORS.
SOMETIMES THE FOG APPLIES TO
ONE CHARACTER.
OTHER TIMES A DIFFERENT
CHARACTER.
I MEAN THE WAY I READ THE SAND
AND THE FOG, I DON'T KNOW IF
IT NECESSARILY TOUCHES ON
THIS, BUT WHEN ALL HELL STARTS
TO BREAK LOOSE AT THE END, THE
FOG ACTUALLY LIFTS AND IT
BECOMES CLEAR.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO MAKE OF
THAT.
IT'S JUST SOMETHING I'M
NOTING, AND MAYBE IT'S A KIND
OF CLARITY WHERE BOTH
CHARACTERS SIMPLY GIVE IN TO
THE EMOTIONS OF ALL THREE IN A
WAY.
YEAH.
EXCELLENT QUESTION.
>> HERE'S AN ARTICLE RIGHT
THERE.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO EXPAND ON IT
AND SEND IT OUT.
>> ELLIOTT HAS A QUESTION UP
THERE.
>> OKAY.
THIS WAS ACTUALLY INSPIRED BY
PROFESSOR ON THE RIGHT BUT I
DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR NAME IS.
I'M WONDERING, DO YOU THINK
THAT THE KIND OF-- THAT THE
WAY YOU SAID-- HOW DO I
EXPLAIN THIS?
OKAY.
I WROTE THIS DOWN.
WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO THE
COMMENT ABOUT THE KIND OF SOUL
WHICH FIND ITSELF IN A
DRAMATIC NOVEL AS ANY NORMAL
SANE PERSON, BEYOND THIS BOOK,
WOULD YOU BLAME PEOPLE
ANYWHERE IN NOVELS OR NOT THAT
COMMIT ATROCITIES OR ANYTHING
ELSE ARE NEW-- ARE FAULTED FOR
ANYTHING MORE THAN BEING
HUMAN, ASSUMING THAT THEY'RE
NOT INSANE OR PSYCHOPATHS?
>> (Laughing)
>> THERE YOU GO.
>> THAT'S GREAT.
IT'S GREAT.
>> Babak: WERE YOU SAYING
THAT-- AND I KNOW YOUR
QUESTION WAS FOR PROFESSOR
SOMMERS, BUT YOU'RE LINKING
THE FICTIONAL CHARACTER TO
REAL-LIFE HUMAN BEINGS OUT
THERE IN THE WORLD, AND WOULD
THE SAME THINGS THAT PROFESSOR
SOMMERS SAID ABOUT THE
FICTIONAL CHARACTERS KIND OF
HOLD TRUE?
IS THAT--
>> I GUESS I'M NOT READING--
TO AN EXTENT, NOT AS MUCH AS
SAYING TO REAL PEOPLE BUT THE
REASON THAT THEY DO THE THINGS
THEY DO AND WHY-- SHE SAID
THAT, IN A SENSE, THAT THEY
TRY TO REPENT AND BE GOOD AND
THAT THEIR ACTIONS COME AS A
RESULT AS THE SITUATION OR
THEIR LACK OF AWARENESS OF
THEIR SITUATION.
>> Elena: I DON'T KNOW IF I'M
GOING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION
CORRECTLY, BUT WHAT I THOUGHT
THAT I FOUND IS THAT EACH OF
THE THREE CHARACTERS HAS A
CERTAIN HUMANITY.
DON'T YOU AGREE THAT WE
DESPERATELY WANT THEM TO MAKE
THE RIGHT CHOICES, AND THEY
CONTINUE TO DISAPPOINT US, UP
TO THE LAST PAGE.
SO WE'RE NOT INDIFFERENT TO
THOSE CHARACTERS SO WE ARE
WITH THEM.
SOME STUDENTS SAY THEY HAVE TO
THROW THE BOOK DOWN ON THE
FLOOR A COUPLE TIMES AND THEN
THEY PICK IT UP AGAIN AND
CONTINUE READING.
SO THERE IS HUMANITY IN THEM.
WE FEEL FOR THEM, BUT THEN
THEY MAKE ALL THE WRONG TURNS
AND ALL THE WRONG DECISIONS AT
ALL THE WRONG TIMES.
SO THERE'S THE REALITY THERE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S
HELPING.
>> WELL, I'M WONDERING IF IT'S
SIMILAR TO THE WAY THAT REAL
PEOPLE MAKE THE WRONG
DECISIONS, BECAUSE A LOT OF
TIMES YOU SEE PEOPLE THAT,
LIKE, MAY DO THINGS, LIKE--
WELL, I CAN'T GIVE SPECIFIC
EXAMPLES BUT YOU KNOW, DRUGS,
ALCOHOL, ANYTHING PEOPLE CAN
DO TO REAL SCREW UP THEIR
LIFE.
THEY DON'T DO IT BECAUSE
THEY'RE MALICIOUS.
THEY DO IT BECAUSE-- THEY HAVE
REASONS.
>> COULD I STEP IN HERE?
PARTLY I THINK YOU'RE ASKING
ABOUT REPRESENTATION AND HOW
REPRESENTATIVE ARE FICTIONAL
CHARACTERS.
I MEAN I ADDRESSED THAT
QUESTION IN TERMS OF HOW
REPRESENTATIVE ARE THESE AS
IRANIAN CHARACTERS?
YOU SEEM TO BE ASKING HOW
REPRESENTATIVE ARE THESE
CHARACTERS AS NEUROTICS,
PSYCHOPATHS--
>> NO, NO.
>> I DON'T THINK HE WAS ASKING
THAT.
>> IS THAT RIGHT?
>> ARE THEY AS HUMANS, AND IF
WE'RE WILLING TO CUT SOME
SLACK FOR THESE CHARACTERS, DO
WE ALSO HAVE TO CUT SOME SLACK
FOR REAL HUMANS IN THE WORLD
WHO MAY HURT ONE ANOTHER
BECAUSE THEY'RE FOLLOWING
THEIR OWN DREAMS SELFISHLY OR
BLINDLY.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING?
>> YEAH.
ESPECIALLY IN THE ENDING
COMMENT YOU MADE ABOUT HOW
WRITERS AREN'T MEANT TO JUDGE
AS MUCH AS--
>> HEMINGWAY.
>> TO OBSERVE, WAS IT?
>> UNDERSTAND.
>> UNDERSTAND.
>> TRY TO UNDERSTAND.
>> Babak: COULD I REPHRASE
THAT QUESTION FOR EVERYONE TO
CONSIDER?
TO WHAT EXTENT IS THIS BOOK
KIND OF DETERMINISTIC MAYBE?
TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THESE
CHARACTERS FROM THE OUTSET
KIND OF DESTINED TO END UP
DOING WHAT THEY DO?
HOW MUCH DO THEY HAVE A
CHOICE, YOU KNOW, AND IS THAT
A STATEMENT ABOUT HUMAN
PSYCHOLOGY OUTSIDE THE BOOK, I
GUESS?
>> CAN I JUST STEP IN AND
CLARIFY.
>> PLEASE.
>> THE INITIAL IMPULSE OF THE
QUESTION BEFORE IT GOT PARCHED
OUT IN A VARIETY OF WAYS,
BECAUSE THIS IS A COMPLEX AND
INTERESTING QUESTION.
I LOVE THE COMPLEXITY AND THE
COMMENTARY AND THE EXCHANGE
WAS ILLUMINATING.
I THINK WHAT YOU WERE ASKING
INITIALLY, AND THE GIST OF
YOUR QUESTION IS THIS, IS THAT
THERE'S-- WE'RE AFFILIATING
VIA LITERATURE, RIGHT, WITH
SOMEONE WHO IS PERHAPS TRULY,
TRULY HEINOUS.
>> RIGHT.
>> THE PERSON WHO'S DRAWING
OUR SYMPATHY AND WHO WE KIND
OF AFFILIATE WITH AT THE END
IS CAPABLE OF ALL SORTS OF
HORRORS.
>> WAIT.
WHO ARE WE SYMPATHIZING WITH?
>> THE COLONEL.
>> BEHRANI.
>> SEE?
ISN'T THAT INTERESTING?
YOU SAID BEHRANI.
YOU SAID THE GIRL.
>> COLONEL.
>> OH, RIGHT.
OKAY, OKAY.
>> THE COLONEL.
>> OKAY, SORRY.
(Laughter)
>> A DISTURBING ASSET OF THE
SHAH OF IRAN AND OF THE EXODUS
OF PEOPLE FROM THAT SHAH OF
IRAN WHO HAD BENEFITTED FROM
THAT SHAH OF IRAN AND WHO, TO
THIS DAY, SIGNIFY THEIR
MATERIAL WEALTH IN INCREDIBLY
OSTENTATIOUS WAYS IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA.
DIRECTION IS MULTIPLE, LIKE
SOUTH FLORIDA.
BUT HERE THE QUESTION IS ABOUT
SOMEONE WHO IS POTENTIALLY A
TORTURER OR AT LEAST, YOU
KNOW, SOMEONE WHO DID
SOMETHING HORRIBLE THAT WE'RE
NOT ABSOLUTELY SURE WE KNOW
THEY DID THAT OR NOT, AND PART
OF WHY THEY DID IT WAS IN FACT
TO MAINTAIN AN ORDER OF POWER
AND OF GOVERNMENT THAT AT
LEAST AS AMERICANS BENEFITTED
US VERY WELL.
>> THAT LEADS ME TO A QUESTION
THAT I HAVE FOR THE PANEL, AND
THAT IS DO YOU WORRY THAT THIS
BOOK MISREPRESENTS THE
IMMIGRANT EXPERIENCE, OR MAYBE
EVEN STEREOTYPES THE IMMIGRANT
EXPERIENCE?
I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE IN
THIS COUNTRY HAVE A-- I GUESS
LOW IS THE ONLY WORD I CAN
THINK OF-- A DISTORTED VIEW OF
IRANIANS, AND THIS BOOK
DOESN'T PAINT A VERY LOVELY
PICTURE OR MAYBE EVEN A REAL
PICTURE.
DOES IT MISREPRESENT THE
IMMIGRANT EXPERIENCE?
>> Babak: IT-- I DON'T THINK
SO, ACTUALLY.
I MEAN, I WAS TRYING TO THINK
OF SOME WAY TO ANSWER THAT,
BUT MAYBE A STRAIGHTFORWARD
NO, IT DOESN'T MISREPRESENT
THEM.
IT'S A NARROW SLICE OF IRANIAN
IMMIGRANT SOCIETY, CERTAINLY;
BUT THE DESIRE FOR THAT
OSTENTATIOUS LIFESTYLE THAT
AHMIK WAS JUST REFERRING TO, I
SAW THAT EVERY DAY IN SAN
DIEGO.
I SAW IT IN THE HILLS OF LA
JOLLA, WHERE A LOT OF MY
MOTHER'S FRIENDS LIVED.
AND I WAS ALWAYS PUSHED TO
KIND OF PURSUE THAT, THOUGH,
YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO GIVE MY
MOM CREDIT HERE.
I DON'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW,
THINK SHE FELT THAT PRESSURE,
BECAUSE SHE WAS PART OF THE
SOCIETY.
BUT, AGAIN, I MEAN, YOU KNOW,
I ALSO SAW PEOPLE WHO TRIED TO
BREAK OUT OF THAT AND WHO
CHALLENGED IT.
NOW WOULD-- YOU KNOW, I
ACTUALLY KNEW A GUY IN SAN
DIEGO, WHO WE REFERRED TO AS
"THE COLONEL."
TO THIS DAY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT
HIS LAST NAME WAS.
WE JUST CALLED HIM THE
COLONEL.
NOW HE WAS A LOVELY MAN.
HE WAS GREAT TO HIS KIDS.
HE WAS FRIENDLY.
HE WAS NICE TO ME.
NOW, IF I HOLD UP THIS BOOK
AND REMEMBER MY FRIEND "THE
COLONEL," IT'S CERTAINLY A
MISREPRESENTATION, BUT ONLY IF
I TRY TO MAKE IT ONE-TO-ONE A
REPRESENTATION OF HIM.
I THINK IT'S REPRESENTATIVE OF
CERTAIN ISSUES.
ONE OF THE THINGS THE BOOK
DOES, IN A VERY SUBTLE WAY BUT
DOES IT WELL AND IT'S
DEFINITELY THERE, IS TO NOT
LEAVE THINGS LIKE THAT
UNEXPLAINED.
SO THE COLONEL'S CONNECTION TO
SAVAK IS THEN TEASED OUT WHEN
WE LEARN THAT LESTER'S WIFE
CAROL WAS A DEMONSTRATOR AND
ACTIVIST AND PROTESTED AGAINST
THINGS LIKE THE U.S.
INTERVENTION INTO IRAN IN
1953.
IT'S REVEALED THAT THIS GUY
BE-JAHN, THE COUSIN OR THE
NEPHEW OF THE GENERAL THAT
BEHRANI LOOKS UP TO, THAT HE
WAS TRAINED BY THE U.S.
NOW IS THAT A
MISREPRESENTATION OF THE U.S?
I COULD THROW THAT BACK IN THE
OTHER DIRECTION.
DO YOU THINK AMERICANS ARE
MISREPRESENTED IN THIS BOOK?
YES AND NO.
I THINK THERE'S SOME ACCURACY
TO THAT LINE, THAT WONDERFUL
LINE THAT PROFESSOR KRAY READ
ABOUT BEING GLUED TO THE SET
AND WANTING THAT SWEET TASTE
IN THE MOUTH, RIGHT?
DO YOU THINK THAT'S THE
ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF YOU
ALL AS AMERICANS?
MAYBE, MAYBE NOT.
>> I'M SORRY.
I HAVE MY VCR SET.
(Laughing)
>> I'M NOT SURE I CAN ANSWER
YOUR QUESTION, BUT YOU
CERTAINLY HAVE GIVEN US LOTS
TO THINK ABOUT AND RAISED THE
QUESTIONS THAT ARE WORTH OUR
ATTENTION.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ALL
THREE OF YOU, FOR BEING HERE.
(Applause)
Maintained by Susan Mee