As the novels goes by we can clearly
identify the sense of fear or resistance to changes.
It has been proven that changes are necessary
in several aspects, for instance society needs changes in order to move forward
and improve life quality, relationships need change in order to keep the
sparkle alive, and human beings as a raze need to being in a constant mutation
otherwise the sense extraordinary would eventually pass away.
It is completely natural being afraid of
changes or the unknown, but at the same time is absolutely natural to overcome
those fears and cross the line, even though it may be an awfully painful and
perhaps traumatic process, the result or the product will always be worth. It
is believed that changes are highly necessary throw away what is not longer necessary
and to bring up new things that will add much more.
“Change, however, is inevitable, and those
species and people unable to adapt tonew circumstances are left behind. For
Okonkwo to survive he would have needed to reconstruct his beliefs but instead
self-destructed; based on how passionate and determinate Okonkwo was in his
early life, his resistance to change was complete and irreversible. It was his
final downfall. As the Ibo was changed, Okonkwo resisted such transformation and
died with the old traditions”.
I see your point, Diego, and I could not agree with you more. What's more, we can also see those changes in the southern states of USA, where people had to adapt their way of living, for instance, from making money through their farms to become slightly industrialised. Anyway, I've heard that "every change is for better", so let's hope things keep changing for better.
ResponderEliminarAlthough to change is not in itself bad I don't think we can say that it is good either. I do believe that it is a neutral term, but we still can determine if a change is "good" or "bad" depending on the consequences it carries. Even though changes are necessary in terms of adaptability they are not always good nor worth it.
ResponderEliminarIn Things Fall Apart tribes from Nigeria had to adapt to an imposed culture and abide to their rules to survive. That change can be consider natural,because if you are conquered changing equals surviving. I think they gained a lot as they learned to read and write. But this change brought another element which is corruption. Through the novel that element was non-existent until the British imposed their laws. So it is hard to say that they changed for the better when there are so many aspects to be considered.
The same applies to the South of the US. Faulkner and Williams express how change is unavoidable and altough there is gain, the loss of values and honor is terribly bitter for them.
hi!... ammm I'm kinda agree with all of your opinions... but since we consider that "change" is necessary, why should it be negative? If something is negative, then it shouldn't be necessary.
ResponderEliminarThe way that I see it is that consequences of a change can be negative or positive, and what happen after "the change" can be judged. For instance colonization (as "the change") is not bad or good, but all the destruction that came after is negative. But maybe it brought something positive, and that depends on each person's view.
To wrap up, for me a change is always necessary, but that doesn't implies that it will bring us only positive features, it may bring some darkness behind, but at the end something positive has to come up. So even though we cannot trust 100% in how good a change would affect our lives, it cannot make us afraid of taking risks.