Analysis compilation

Title and name of the author: Kill to eat by Oodgeroo Nunukul

Setting of the story:

The place in which the story occurs could be Australia, because it is mentioned that the
characters live in an island that is under the influence of a Government that is not their own,
it belongs to the United Kingdom since the white-men settlers answer to a Queen that almost
certainly is The Queen of England. Also, in the story is mentioned a kookaburra and a
bandicoot which are a bird and a marsupial, respectively, that are natives to Australia and
New Guinea.

Concerning the time in which the story is set, it could happen between the late 18 th century
(when the territory of Australia started to be colonised by the UK) and 1901 (when Australia
became an independent nation). This fact could be inferred since it is mentioned in the story
that the aboriginal people receive a small wage and rations from white people for working
under their instructions in the island. Moreover, it is acknowledged that the aborigines
receive a special plum pudding with their rations when the Queen’s Birthday festival is
celebrated.

Finally, regrading the atmosphere, the narrator lives with her family (composed by her
father, mother and 6 siblings) in what it seems to be a tropical climate from Australia by the
description of some plants such as gum-trees and flowering gums, and animals as
bandicoots, parrots, lorikeets and kookaburra. Also, the characters appear to feel oppressed
by the white men because they have to follow their rules, eat the food that they give them.
The aborigines try to resist this oppression by hunting and recollecting their food in an
“aboriginal-style” (setting traps, using sling-shots, etc.) and preserving their rules and beliefs
as a way of conserving their culture.

Character chosen: The narrator of the story, the third-eldest daughter whose name is not
mentioned.

Centre: At the beginning of the story, the storyteller’s identity has some distinguishable
characteristics. On one hand, she dislikes the white-men settlers that occupy her territory,
and hate the rations of food these men gave to her family since they were very scarce. On
the other hand, she and her family are very creative and try to adapt to the presence of the
settlers. The aborigines catch more food apart from the one that is given to them by the
white-men by using discarded materials of the latters. Finally she and her whole tribe follows
aborigines’ rules such as using weapons only to gather food and not for the sake of killing,
and not eating the kookaburra because he is considered their brother and a friend.

Decentre: Almost at the end of the story, the oldest brother of the storyteller kills a
kookaburra after he failed a shot to his prey and the bird appeared to be laughing at him. He
breaks a strict rule of the aboriginal law by doing that, the members of the tribe only kill when
it is needed to gather food not because of anger and resentment.

At this point, the narrator’s identity changes and fractures due to the fact that she is part of
this crime in a way, since first she laughs at her brother when he fails the shot (just as her
other siblings) and secondly she is not capable of stopping him before he kills the bird. She
is morally conflicted as she knows that her parents are going to punish them all. Even when
she does not want to be punished she knows that it is fair for the crime that they committed.
Another part of the storyteller’s identity is taken with the sanction that her brothers, sisters
and her receive, they cannot hunt or use their weapons for three months and they could eat
only the white man’s hated rations, this changes her lifestyle completely. They are hungry all
the time and they cannot do anything about it.

Recentre: At the end of the story, she admits that in her dreams she still remembers the
sad, suffering eyes of the kookaburra even though it seems that the killing of the bird
happened a long time ago. In the story is not mentioned how many years have passed since
this important point in her life, maybe she is an adult or an older adult we are not sure about
that. Also we do not know if she still lives in the same place she grow up, if she still hunt and
gather food as she used to do as a child, if she get used to the presence of settlers in
aborigines’ lands, but we know for certain that her identity has recreated herself. She is not
the same person as she was before the incident, she still feels guilty about being part of the
killing of an innocent creature and breaking one of the most important rules in her tribe in the
process.

Binary oppositions in the story:

Black and white: The narrator describes the British settlers as white-men so by opposition
she recognizes herself and her tribe as non-white or black skin people.

First world and Third world: The aborigines that live in Australia were and still are
classified as Third world people because their economies, education and health system is
considered of a low quality compared to the First world. Otherwise, the white settlers come
chiefly from the UK so they are considered First world citizens and have more privileges than
aborigines and have power over them politically, economically and socially.

Mental activity and manual activity: The storyteller reckons that her father works for the
Government in a project to build roads, loads and unloads the supply ships, and does
various manual tasks around the island. Hence, it can be inferred that the settlers do mental
activities or intellectual work they plan and organise activities and the aborigines carry them
out.

Christian and heathen: The aborigines could clearly be classified as heathens because
they do not belong to a widely held religion such as Christianity and Judaism. In opposition,
the white settlers that come from the UK are part of Christianity in their majority.

Western beliefs and Aborigine beliefs: The aborigines have some rules and beliefs that
are not part of Western civilisations, they have a rule of only hunting to gather food not for
amusement or revenge, also they consider the kookaburra a friend and brother so they could
not kill the bird. In contrast, Western beliefs do not prohibit killing animals for pleasure until
not a very long time hunting them was an admired and celebrated activity, at the same time,
western culture do not have such an intimate relation of adoration, companionship,
preservation to animals as other cultures.

Names of the members of the group: Victoria Tapia, Camila Ortellado, Brenda Toledo and
Ángeles Riquelme.

The author: Oodgeroo Nunukul (1920-1923), formerly Kath Walker, spent her childhood on
Stradbroke Island. Her book Stradbroke Dreamtime, from which Kill to Eat is taken records
her own childhood as well as new and old stories within Aboriginal folklore tradition. She was
active in presenting the case of dispossessed Aborigine people to the Australian and other
world governments.
Title and name of the author: Crime and Punishment by R. K. Narayan

Setting of the story:

-Place: It can be inferred that the story is set in India because it is mentioned that the
teacher was paid 30 rupees for teaching the boy. As it is commonly known, rupees are the
official currency of India.

-Time: The time setting could be in the 20th century because the author lived in that period of
time, although there are no other elements within the story that confirm this conjecture.

-Atmosphere: The story takes place in the house of the boy who is being taught by the
teacher. The place seems to be an opulent house, because the boy’s parents are rich, both
have degrees and in the story it is mentioned that they have ample money and buy
expensive toys and furniture for their only child. In the narrative, the atmosphere is full of
tension since the beginning, the teacher feels oppressed for the parents of the child and the
last is under the power of his tutor as well. Then this conflict evolves when the child is
slapped by his tutor, the power dynamics invert: the child has the power now; he blackmails
his instructor with telling his parents the situation.

-Character chosen: The teacher of the boy, the adult who narrates the story.

Decentring:

Centre: The teacher presents the following characteristics at the beginning of the story:

-He is a man whose occupation is being a teacher, he may belong to the working class
because he is hired by people from an upper class than his.

-He thinks that his student is a spoiled, mischievous, wicked boy who does not want to learn
what he is being taught.

-He feels oppressed by an order that the boy’s parents declared: “You must never set up any
sort of contrariness or repression in the child’s mind”. He is extremely opposed to this idea of
education, but he does not contradict them because he is well paid.

-The teacher seems to belong to a traditional education practice that consists in applying
punishment and physical violence to the students if they do not learn the knowledge that
their tutors are teaching them.

-In the power dynamics that the teacher participates in, he is the one with power over the
child but he is also oppressed by the authority of the boy’ parents.

Decentre: The moment in which the identity of the teacher fractures is when he slaps the
boy in the face, he commits a crime and he knows that he is going to be punish for that.
When the boy blackmails him with telling his parents that he has slapped him, the teacher
gives in and does everything that the child asks him to do.

At this point, the identity of the teacher is characterised by the next elements:
-He feels desperate, because he has committed a serious crime, he broke the rule that was
imposed on him.

-He punishes the boy in the way the wanted to for a long while but now he feels appalled by
it (shock, horror), he knows that for this action he also is going to be penalized.

-Now, in the power dynamics that the teacher participates in, he has lost all the authority he
had, now the child uses his power over him (makes him stop the lesson and play with him)
and he continues under the control of the boy’s parents.

Recentre: At the end of the story, the identity of the teacher still conserves some of their
original characteristics but some of them have changed when the parents discover the child
playing instead of studying.

-He is still a man, a teacher, and belongs to the working class.

-He may still think that his student is a spoiled, mischievous and wicked boy but when the
teacher sees how pathetic and desperate his student seems when he is questioned by his
parents he does not give the kid away.

-He still feels oppressed by the control that the parents have over him, he fears to be
punished by them; this is also the reason why he doesn’t report how badly his student has
behaved. They come to a sort of truce between each other.

-The teacher learns that applying physical punishment as an educational practice is not
always the best way of treating students, at least not with this child, the tutor has suffered his
blackmailing enough to know it.

-In the power dynamics that the teacher participates in, he is the one with power over the
child and he is still oppressed by the authority of the boy’ parents. But the teacher knows
now that he cannot punish his student violently without facing a punishment too, he is going
to be either blackmailed by the boy or dismissed by his parents.

Binary oppositions:

Young/adults: In the story it can be seen the power dynamics between the boy and the
adults (his parents and his teacher), the young are always under the control of the adults.
The child is also perceived by his parents as defenceless, innocent and good because of his
young age. While his tutor sees him as an ill-bred, disrespectful, bad behaved boy for the
same reason: because he is young.

Working class/high class: In the narrative it is hinted that the teacher belongs to the working
class while the boy’s parents, who hired him, are part of the high class. The tutor does not
like his job because the parents’ views about education do not align with his own point of
view on the matter, but he continues teaching the boy since he really needs the payment.
This shows the power that one social class has over the other.

Freedom/repression: In the story, the parents give freedom to the child in many aspects
because they consider that this will help the boy to become a good person in the future. On
the contrary, his tutor believes that this goal will be achieved by strong discipline and
repression. Also, freedom is represented by the attitude of the boy who wants to play games
and not to study for his exam; and repression is portrayed by the tutor who violently slaps
the child in the face when he makes a mistake on an activity.

Powerless/powerful: In the narrative, the role of the powerless and the powerful changes
constantly. At the beginning, the child is powerless. He has to obey what his teacher tells
him to do, but then the roles invert. He is the one with power after his tutor slaps him and he
blackmails him by telling his parents the crime that his tutor has committed. The child is able
to do everything that he wants, he forces his powerless educator to stop the class and play
with him. But at the end, when the parents ask why the child is playing games instead of
studying, the boy losses his power, he again is at the mercy of his teacher who has the
choice of giving him up. However, the tutor does not do it since he also has committed the
crime and does not want to risk himself being caught up too.

Absolution/punishment: In the story, both of the main characters committed a crime and are
not punished; they are absolved by making a sort of a truce. The child avoids the
punishment that his parents could lay down on him after he did not study for his exam; and
the teacher is absolved from the crime that he perpetrated when he smacked the child,
because the kid did not expose him.

Nature/culture: In the narrative, nature could be represented by the games the boy play and
the lessons which portray knowledge and culture. The child seeks nature but is forced by his
parents and teacher to study to acquire the kind of knowledge that is accepted as civilised
and cultured.

Author: R. K. Narayan (1907- 2001) was born in Madras, South India. Many of his novels
and stories are set in the fictional territory of Malgudi, including An Astrologer’s Day. But, as
Narayan says, he can detect Malgudi characters “even in New York”. Graham Greene
described him “as the novelist I most admire in the English language”.

Title of the story and author: Warrior Woman by Nancy Chong.

Setting of the story:

-Place: The city of Toronto (Canada), old Chinatown is being demolished in order to
construct a new City Hall. The place is undergoing change. The streets are cracked and
covered with debris. (An indication that the old traditional ways are fading away and new
western ways are being adopted).

-Time: 1960

-Atmosphere: old Chinese traditions are being replaced by western traditions, Chinese
people accept the change and try to adapt. They want to be and live like Americans.
Character chosen: Mother

Decentre:

-Centre:

+Chinese woman

+ She is married and she is mother of two girls

+She rarely dressed up to go out (it’s an special occasion)

+Her type of make-up is a traditional one, typical of China

+She wears gold-and-jade jewellery, traditional from China

-Decentre:

+She takes one of her daughters to watch a Chinese movie (last contact with old traditions)

The movie is about a warrior Chinese woman who looks like her (make up), is completely in
Chinese language and it has Chinese subtitles.

+She falls asleep in the movie.

+She takes her daughters hand while they walk by the debris of demolished buildings
(culture)

-Recentre:

+ She never took her daughter to see a movie again, never took her by the hand. (the child
never took contact with the Chinese culture again, she tries to live an American lifestyle like
her cousins in Chicago)

Binary oppositions:

Young/adult

Women/men

Chinese culture/western culture

Barefaced/face with makeup

Construction/destruction

Chinese language/English language

Author: Nancy Chong (1955-) is a Toronto writer whose father emigrated from China in
1913 ten years before the Canadian Government stopped immigration from China. Her
mother, from rural China, came to Canada two years after the Exclusion Act was repealed in
1949. Nancy Chong’s autobiographical stories, exploring her intercultural identity, have been
published as part of New Writers’ Initiative.

Title of the story and author: The Easter hat by Nancy Chong

Setting:

-Place: Canada

-Time: 1960s

-Atmosphere:

Character chosen: Mother

Decentre:
-Centre:

+She is a woman

+She has daughters and sons who go to a Chinese United Church.

+She attends to church on special occasion as Christmas and Easter

-Decentre:

+On Palm Sunday she goes to Eaton’s for an Easter hat.

+She asks the saleswoman of the store for a discount, she cannot convince her.

+She took the Easter hat to attend to Easter services at the church

+Almost all women had this fine hats

+After the service she put away the hat in the hat box and a few days later she went back to
Eaton and ask for a refund

+Every Easter she returned the hat and got her money back.

Recentre: There is not recentre, she rejects the new culture, when she returns the hat every
Easter, she only does to keep appearances and fit in in the western culture. She rebels to
change in a way.

Binary oppositions:

Chinese person/American person

Young/Adult

Poor/rich

Heathen/Christian

Chinese religious traditions/western religious traditions

Chinese holiday/Western holiday

Delicate/crude Gentleness/ roughness

Full stop by Alecia McKenzie

Place: New York

Time:

Atmosphere:

Centre:
Carmen is a woman who lives with his husband in New York. She works in a hospital.
Her brother and her were raised by her extremely religious grandmother. She was
abandoned by her mother when he was a child, she hates her for that.
Carmen receives letters from her grandmother, when she writes she does not use full stops
in sentences.
She often sends money to her grandmother, she loves her.
Her grandmother asks Carmen in her letters to talk to her mother, to forgive her as the lord
does. Carmen refuses to do it.
Carmen is almost 30, she does not have children yet, but she wants to.
Her grandmother says that her mother is a fool when choosing men, and a snake in the
grass.

Decentre:
Carmen’s mother visits her in her apartment in New York. She treats her like a baby,
Carmen is puzzled by her behaviour. Her mother tells her that she left her and her brother
only for a few years with her grandmother, and that the old woman refused to give them up,
and hid them in St Thomas with some relatives. She said that her grandmother hated her
father for not going to church. Carmen is shocked, she cannot believe what her mother tells
her. If this is true her whole life was a lie.
Then, Carmen receives an answer from her grandmother that partially admits that her
mother’s story is true. The old woman did not want to return her grandchildren to her mother,
she said that she was not prepared for that, that God didn’t want them to be raised in
England. And that she turned out good because she was in her care.

Recentre:
There is no recentre in the story, because we do not know if Carmen believes her mother’s
story. If she did so, she would have forgiven her mother and hated her grandmother for
taking them apart, and lied to her her whole life.

Binary oppositions:
Young/adult
heathen/Christian
devil/god
Third world/First world
poor/rich
past/future
true/lies
Poinsettias by Beverley Naidoo

Place: The place where the story takes place is South Africa. The narrator mentions that
Marika's
parents' farm is in the middle of the Maggaleisberg. A small town nestled under a mountain
near Johannesburg, the largest city in South Africa.

Time

Atmosphere
Character chosen: Veronica Martin

Centre
Girl, only child, she lives with her parents in Johannesburg.
She apparently has descendant from a German family
She is friend of Marika, the daughter of a small holding owner The van Reenen
She is an upper class girl, she has a maid who is her friend, Rebbeca (black woman)
She likes to play “house”, she is very femenine compared to Marika who collected dead
animals in bottles
She wants to play with the boys,and prove that she is not a sissy nor a coward.
When she is dared to take a poinsettia from the property of a neighbour named Jan Venter,
she is extremely scared. The man is known for being violent and he threatens to shoot
anyone who transpasses his land.

Decentre:
She is almost caught stealing the flower.
She sees how her maid’s son is being punished for committing the same crime
She feels sick and worried.
Finally Mr Venter discovers her behind a bush she had used to hide. He doesn’t punish her,
he mistakes her with her friend Marika and lets her go with a soft pat in her head.
She is astonished, she feels relieved.

Recentring:
Veronica discovers that she can take everything she wants; she doesn't need to hide or run
from the property. She takes 4 more flowers, and thinks of taking some oranges from Mr
Venter’s orange trees.
She feels happy and safe, now she knows that she will not be punished as the servants who
are black people if she does something prohibited. She is white, her family is upper class,
she can do anything she wants.

Binary oppositions:
Black people/ white people manual work/intellectual work
Poor people/rich people punishment/exoneration
Natives/settlers powerless/powerful
Girl/boy Nature/civilisation
Robert and the dog by Ken Saro-Wiwa
Setting of the story:
Place: África
Time -
Atmosphere: In a situation of extreme poverty, the main character begin to feel how
unfair life is.

Character chosen: Robert, a steward.

Centre:
Robert is a steward, he is african, he has a wife and six children.
 He lives in “The Jungle”, in a one-bedroom apartment that is poor and always dirty.
Robert is extremely poor.
He works as a steward for a young medical doctor who is very manageable because he is a
bachelor. Robert feels happy because he can run the house as he likes without being
questioned. The doctor’s wife is also a good person and treats the steward with respect and
is interested in his African culture.
He is treated so well that he begins to feel like a human being. (Apparently, he does not
think of himself as a human)

Decentre:
The doctor’s wife brings with her a dog. Robert hates the dog, because it is treated better
than him and his family. The dog is spoiled, it is human food, has a comfy place to sleep, is
washed and cleaned, the dog is taken to a veterinarian when it is sick. He feels envy and
hatred at the dog because he and his family cannot have all these facilities being a human.
His children are sick and he cannot take them to a doctor. They eat Eba, a food that is barely
edible, they are always dirt.

Re centre: When his employers go on a holiday, he kills the dog after 2 days of taking care
of him. He tethers the dog to its settee and takes all the can-dog food and milk to give it to
his children.
He transforms into an animal completely, he kills a pet only for jealousy and anger like a
beast.
Also, by making his children eat dog food he turns them into animals too.
He loses the job he loves, and the friendship he has formed with his employers.

Binary opposition in the story: