An Open Letter to the Universe
Dear World:
I acknowledge that the word "Creole" has many, many implications. Among them, a lot of questions about what, exactly, the fuck "Creole" actually means. (Courtesy of my Trans-Anglo lit class, I have discovered that, occasionally, it is totally academically acceptable to use the phrase "academic what-the-fuckery" in a sentence. At 8 AM.)
I also acknowledge that, when one starts a pretty new discipline in the world of literature, one must invent a fair heavy amount of vocab for it. This is quite understandable. The Western literary tradition and the Eastern literary tradition are not so much "far removed" as they are "holding lightsabres to one another's throats and muttering dire imprecations about what one's mother was to be found doing with one's sister just last evening."
They really do require different words for the same idea. No, really.
What I do not get, and refuse to acknowledge the neediness/worthiness/pointliness of, is why in all the academic what-the-fuckery your Creole-studying Trans-Anglo literary analysis really needs with "Creolization", which is "creolization" when not starting a sentence, or "creolize" when referring to the act of making Creoles. Which is not to be confused with copulation, intermarriage, or forcible rape, even though, historically, those actions have all resulted in Creoles. No, here, we apparently refer to the raping and pillaging of cultures, which, given that it is such a stately and mannerific thing, requires stately and mannerific words which cover up the fact that, hey, herp-a-derp!, we just gave these poor people the cultural equivalent of SYPHILLIS.
God help the universe if we ever do get to Mars.
In other news, I just finished an essay about the Creolisation of Jamaica, as viewed through the Shakespearean sonnets of Claude McKay, pursuant to the binary pressures of said process. Um. Yes.
I acknowledge that the word "Creole" has many, many implications. Among them, a lot of questions about what, exactly, the fuck "Creole" actually means. (Courtesy of my Trans-Anglo lit class, I have discovered that, occasionally, it is totally academically acceptable to use the phrase "academic what-the-fuckery" in a sentence. At 8 AM.)
I also acknowledge that, when one starts a pretty new discipline in the world of literature, one must invent a fair heavy amount of vocab for it. This is quite understandable. The Western literary tradition and the Eastern literary tradition are not so much "far removed" as they are "holding lightsabres to one another's throats and muttering dire imprecations about what one's mother was to be found doing with one's sister just last evening."
They really do require different words for the same idea. No, really.
What I do not get, and refuse to acknowledge the neediness/worthiness/pointliness of, is why in all the academic what-the-fuckery your Creole-studying Trans-Anglo literary analysis really needs with "Creolization", which is "creolization" when not starting a sentence, or "creolize" when referring to the act of making Creoles. Which is not to be confused with copulation, intermarriage, or forcible rape, even though, historically, those actions have all resulted in Creoles. No, here, we apparently refer to the raping and pillaging of cultures, which, given that it is such a stately and mannerific thing, requires stately and mannerific words which cover up the fact that, hey, herp-a-derp!, we just gave these poor people the cultural equivalent of SYPHILLIS.
God help the universe if we ever do get to Mars.
In other news, I just finished an essay about the Creolisation of Jamaica, as viewed through the Shakespearean sonnets of Claude McKay, pursuant to the binary pressures of said process. Um. Yes.