Blog 9

Identity, in the poems we read for this week, is crafted in distinct ways.  This crafting proves in itself that the formation of identity is highly structural and situational.  In “Deathsleep,” Al Mahmud creates a dazed an dreary tone- he tells the story of a man fractured from his family because he is a distanced father and husband, sleeps all day and night and overall has difficulties relating to other humans.  His identity hinges on the opinions of others- namely his wife.  Six stanzas (almost half of the poem) are spent recounting his wife’s opinions on his condition.  Mahmud writes “my married wife/ has no doubt that/ I am not a real human” (403).  Although I believe these lines are supposed to be metaphorical or an ironic statement on the nature of the relationship between the speaker and his wife, they also demonstrate that the speaker’s identity and humanity directly hinges on the opinions of his wife (a person presumed to have normative sleeping patterns).  One might wonder if, because Mahmud is so annoyed by his family, his slumber is self-induced so as not to deal with anyone.  The discourse around identity presented in this poem surrounds avoidance and other people’s construction of one’s own identity. 

In “Ma’reb Speaks” by Abd Al-Aziz Al-Maqalih presents a speaker whose identity is made up of everything they read, the landscape, history and politics of the Yemen and the Arabian Peninsula.  Because the speaker is supposed to encompass all of Yemen, the speaker is both rich and poor, oppressed and free.  Al- Aziz Al- Maqalih references poverty and imprisonment several times, with “prison”, “shackles”, “I own no gold”, “feat are bare”, “naked head”, “hunger rivets me” (425).  The speaker also claims to be “the descendant of nobility,” displaced for political rhetoric and outspokenness (425).  The “Arab sun” leads the speaker’s journey of negotiating their identity.  The speaker understands that the “Arab sun” led their ancestors to greatness and will lead the speaker on the correct path, whatever the correct path is supposed to be.   

In part one of Willie Perdomo’s “Writing what you Know” details a young man named Papo’s experience on a school field trip to the library.  In this prose-poem, the speaker takes a lot of creative liberties.  The speaker gives the audience clues that Papo might not fully comprehend at his age about Puerto Rican identity and it’s formation.  Papo sees a book with his “block on the cover” (28).  He runs to it, instinctively, because he sees himself represented in the library.  The teacher tells him, inadvertently, that what the librarian is saying is more important than whether or not he sees himself in literature.  This could actually be a huge deterrent for Papo in regards to reading (sorry, early literacy advocate).  To me, the way that we engage in literature is reading about what interests us.  If a kid likes to read about power rangers or the town/ neighborhood they are from, it’s important that they are allowed to engage with books that talk about those things- so that they can read fluently and consistently.  The things one has an affinity for have a lot to do with one’s positionality in society and the traditions that they come from.  As an educator, it can be very hard to find the balance between making sure students understand classroom expectations and guidelines and making sure they are able to engage with education in a way that encompasses who they are and challenges them to grow (but does not deny or disparage their identity).  Classroom rules teachers are expected to enforce are not conducive to what is natural to students (i.e. limiting mobility and speech).  Teachers are often in a vulnerable position as well, they can lose their jobs if they do not comply with rules that they understand do not work for most learners.  I can understand why the teacher may have asked Papo to listen to the librarian.  However, I feel for Papo in that he craved intellectual stimulation and wanted to engage with reading in a way that would have strengthened his relationship with learning in the long run.  Ultimately, I think this portion of the poem is saying that identity is constructed by structures and individuals who tell us what we can and cannot do from an early age.