Staying True to Self: Examining the Elements which Hinder Assimilation in Sherman Alexie’s Reservation Blues and Tyehimba Jess’ Leadbelly

Friedrich Nietzsche discussed the Apollonian and Dionysian philosophies in the essay Apollonianism and Dionysianism, by contrasting and comparing them he was able to create concepts that can be tied down to how an individual chooses to live and the outcome they will create with the lifestyle they carry. He believes that the two forces of Apollonianism and Dionysianism can be unified to have a diversity of characteristics in a person and that way the “artist” is born. Nietzsche portrays

The theory of Assimilation was introduce in the article of Trucios Haynes and its basically talks about immigrants coming to America and that they need to be force to give up on their own culture and assimilate to the American culture. Throughout the reading, I have learned that the theory of Assimilation has been present in this country for many years and how impactful it can still be. Since America was built around immigrants, the first people who came in to this country has already establish a certain life style and whoever would come after them, those immigrants are force to be like the current W.A.S.P. Assimilation in essence is a concept that the first immigrant’s created for forcing other immigrants to adapt to their own culture and forget their own culture to be an American. If you choose to not assimilate, then you will have a tougher time in gaining the benefits in living in this country and chasing down the idea of the American Dream.

What is assimilation you might ask. Well i'd be glad to tell u. It means the process of adapting or adjusting to the culture of a group or nation or the state of being so adapted. I think assimilation is okay as long as it's not forced assimilation. Here are a few reasons why i think forced assimilation is not okay the first reason is if they're not willing to learn a new language and my second reason is what if they don't want to leave then your taking away someone's liberty. Those are two reasons why i think force assimilation is bad and shouldn't be

Fredrickson means that assimilationism tries to force one culture into accepting the “superiority, purity, and unchanging character of the dominant culture.” He gives an example of the “Native American cultural genocide” in regards to assimilationism. I agree, Assimilationism can force a culture to throw away part of its identity, values, and traditions.

mmigration is a subject that everyone is talking about. Specifically, assimilation during immigration. Should people keep their culture or assimilate into society? In all fairness to both sides of this argument, assimilation is necessary for everyday life to run smoothly for all americans, not just the immigrants. This is because immigrants will usually not adhere to our food, religion, or language at first. They then accept that adapting is the only way to survive.The reasoning behind assimilation is fairly simple. While one could attempt to blend their culture and ours, if only given the option of one, there is no question. Hardly anyone can function in a society without adapting to their environment, which boils down to the very most basic

As the beginning the definition of Cultural Assimilation is when a community or a community are integrated into a majority group (dominant) and have the opportunity to acquire the same characteristics or habits. So, the community that integrates most end up losing or relegating its specificity.

By definition, cultural assimilation is “the process whereby individuals or groups of differing ethnic heritage are absorbed into the dominant culture of a society. The process of assimilating involves taking on the traits of the dominant culture to such a degree that the assimilating group becomes socially indistinguishable from other members of the society.” During this process, ethnic individualities, characteristics, and traits of the minority population can disappear. Unfortunately, this is the opposite of multiculturalism, which stresses the significance of promoting different cultures, ethnicities, and races within a single jurisdiction. While multiculturalism promotes diversity among society, assimilation can and does morphs us into much of the same mold. However, assimilation also opens new doors, opportunities, and experiences to those that may never have experienced them otherwise. Ultimately, assimilation to some degree is seemingly unavoidable, as those from different countries must learn to adapt to their new surroundings. This leads to the question of whether cultural assimilation should be viewed as a positive or negative experience. Should being “American” require immigrants as well as international students to feel pressured to integrate and conform to the culture? Does this process of integrating come naturally, or is it forced upon them? In short, do we really want immigrants to assimilate?

Cultural assimilation is the process in which the immigrants adopt or integrate their values, beliefs, and attitudes to fit better into the host nation (Scott, 2014). It is can include acquiring a new language, a new understanding of cultural framework, and learning appropriate behaviour expectations. The process of assimilation does not have to mean a complete replacement of the older culture. Instead, the process can be used in varying success by the integration of various parts of the host culture that can facilitate adoption into the mainstream society (Mukherji, 2005).

Cultural assimilation is when an individual or individuals adopts some or all aspects of a dominant culture (such as its religion, language, norms, values etc.). Cultural assimilation is a process of socialization. It can be a voluntary process, but can also sometimes be the result of involuntary political decisions (Wikipedia, 2015).

What is assimilation, and what does it mean to me, especially; in today’s world. “Assimilation is a process of ethnic boundary reduction that may come about when two or more ethnic groups come into contact with each other” (Kelly & Williams, 2016, pg. 71). What this means is, cultural groups take on the identity from that of another cultural groups; such as their cultural norms, values; and beliefs; which is better known as acculturation. Meaning one, or more of these groups take on the similarities that match their cultural beliefs, and combined them with that of homogeneity to fit into society where they practice their own cultural beliefs; and norms. This usually takes place when both ethnic groups have similar qualities, and physical characteristics

As the definition states, Assimilation can be seen as a process in which ethnic groups from different backgrounds start absorbing the dominant culture of the new country they are residing on. This is commonly seen in any ethnic group that starts living in a new country for a long period of time. One that I relate to is the Mexican heritage. Both my parents and family members migrated here from Mexico. Even though they have lived here for many years, their culture and traditions have not fully changed, however, they have change in a way that our family in Mexico view it as different. For example, Christmas for us means

Changes are normally considered what push human society forwards, but some sudden and radical changes can be disastrous if people fail to adapt to them quickly. Fanon and Lear both discuss certain shifts so drastic as to shaken, if not destroy, people’s identity. Fanon discusses that after the transition from a colonized society to one that is independent, the colonized, without the common enemy, fail to define themselves as before. Similarly, Lear focuses on the confinement of an Indian tribe, the Crow, that deprived all the meaning of the Crow’s life. This paper will investigate the similarities and differences between the two transitions. Then, it will focus on the responses to such abrupt transition, by exploring how in each case the group

The thesis will employ certain literary critical theories such as the Postcolonial theory, Race theory, and Cultural theory to discuss the issue of cultural displacement and the role of the Minority family in saving their children’s cultural identity. American Indian Stories by Gertrude Bonnin (Zitkala-Sa), Out Of Place: A Memoir by Edward Said, and The Woman Warrior: A Memoir of a Girlhood among Ghost by Maxine Hong Kingston will be employed as primary sources to support my argumentation. Secondary sources that listed in the references will be used to enrich the thesis.

Nietzsche’s good will of appearance requires the maximum amount of honesty and courageousness in the face of truth. Having this expression of good moral sense brings us to Nietzsche’s modest view on art. The key to Great Art and even Greek Tragedy comes from the dichotomy of the Apollonian and the Dionysian. Nietzsche’s views of the Apollonian are classified more as visual arts such as dreams and illusions while his views on the Dionysian are more intoxication, such as getting caught up in the oneness with nature. Although his views conflict, they are intertwined. For example, without the Apollonian, the Dionysian lacks structure, and without the Dionysian, the Apollonian lacks the necessary energy and passion found in Great

What changes is rather the understanding of art's content what in the late stages of his work Nietzsche calls the ‘Wisdom of Dionysus’, an expression he already employs in BTlvii. However, now this wisdom is not a source of consolation anymore, but rather of an attitude pushing toward the affirmative overcoming of oneselflviii. This wisdom, flows from a proper metaphysical understanding of life, which is now finally unbounded by any suspect metaphysical duality. Hence, I hold that it is not too daring to see in this wisdom a new ‘unblinded metaphysics’ that the author resorts to herald in his 1880’s writings, and which also springs from the Will, now conceived as Will-to-Power. If now the tension of Apollo and Dionysus falls in the field of ‘Socratism’, we can still see in the satyrs' chorus an anticipation of Nietzsche's later themes as he himself aknowledges toward the end of the Attempt to Self-Criticismlix. Simply, the affirmation of existence now takes place without any reference to some metaphysical framework smelling of Socrates or even Hegel, but rather in the drive of the Will to