A Citizen of the floating world

Alzheimer’s disease afflicts 24 million people worldwide; there has been no solidly known cause for the development of it. My brother worked as a lab assistant for scientist who did critical research on the disease. These scientists came up with a pretty strong theory for a main cause in the development of the disease.  Their theory was based on the lifestyles comparing target age groups that had potential to develop Alzheimer’s. They believed that the people who developed it did not critically exercise their brain throughout their life. They developed it because they did the same mundane tasks. They believed the best prevention method was always taking different methods to the same tasks; taking different paths home, taking a different perspective on the things that we always see in the same way.

I believe there is a connection to being one of the floating world, that is to be an artist of the “floating world” we must re-think, observe objectively and avoid a static fixed frame of mind. Throughout the semester we have critically examined authors who’s writings are commentaries on the floating world.

In the book An Artist Of The Floating World by Kazuo Ishiguro we see the character Ono stuck between narratives as an artist of the floating world. As the character Ono develops and the mystery behind him unravel we come to understand Ono’s purpose as an artist of the floating world.  Ishiguro displays through Ono the narratives that create our identity. When we first see Ono he is a man in the narrative of his past. He wants to be proud of the works he did for the Japanese government. But now years after the war he is stuck because post-war Japan culture would not allow him to hold pride for his work. Throughout the book we find see re-occurring themes that give us hint at Ishiguro’s philosophy on Narratives. Ishiguro portrays this through the use of the Hirayama boy; a character in a framed stuck identity. Ishiguro uses the Hirayama boy to portray the dangers of a stuck frame narrative. The Hirayama boy helps teach Ono that narratives must always be in change and not framed.

            Ishiguro demonstrates through Ono that the narratives that define our identity should always be in change. I believe Ishiguro also attempts to pick away at ego and pride through Ono. Before Ono understands the necessity of frameless narrative we see that he is stubborn with pride. His pride turns him away from the new culture; he is subjective and not able to look at things outside of his byst vision. It is because of a talk with his friend Matsuda that Ono is able to look at himself in an objective manner. Matsuda says that he feels they should be “able to hold our heads high about what tried to do… see my life’s efforts vindicated.” Pg 94. Matsuda helps Ono understand that in valuing their past work, they must observe it in an objective manner. This I believe is the central idea Ishiguro is trying to crack, that to be an artist of the floating world we must learn to be able to view all narratives in an objective point of view, especially our own.Ishiguro teaches us that a true artist of the floating world is to be open-minded. He shows us the way to do this is by learning to understanding other narratives around us. The narratives of Matsuda and the Hirayama boy help Ono break his framed narrative.

Salman Rushdie shows us how to be conscious artists of the floating world in his short story At The Auction Of The Ruby Red Slippers. We learn the narrative of a man who is obsessed with these slippers. His obsession is accompanied by thousands of others who will spend everything to win the slippers.  Rushdie examines vanity and how one with this quality cannot be a true artist of the floating world. All of the bidders are obsessed and caught in a flurry craze to obtain the possession of the slippers. Rushdie uses the slippers to portray consumerism. But I think Rushdie isn’t only focusing on consumerism. Many of his other writings such as the satanic versus are a satire on religion. His writings satire Obsession, he points out subjects where people get so caught up in their obsessive craze that they loose clarity.

            In the case of the slippers we find bidders putting endless amounts of energy to fill a hole that is missing, for the narrator, it is his individuality. Rushdie examines vanity through obsession. He satires how people loose their individuality and freedom of thought by loosing ourselves to an obsessive system whether it be consumerism or religion. Regardless of what system it he Rushdie shows that to be an true artist of the floating world one must be able to take a different view of symbols. In Rushdie’s The Prophet’s Hair the father switches his narrative from one of secularly words to one of godly words. This narrative switch ends up ruining his family life and ends his.

            In Rusdie’s writings we learn the necessity of understanding words or communication means of other cultures in order to not loose ourselves to our beliefs. Both Rushdie and Ishiguro show us how to be true artist of the floating world. They show us the need to be level headed; Ishiguro shows us by having a frameless objective outlook on ourselves. Rushdie invites us to take a different approach at looking at the systems or cultures we include ourselves in. Combined, both authors show the need to be able to step outside our normal viewpoints and force ourselves to perceive what we hold dear in a different light. This allows us to be conscious amounts the dangers of the world, and by dangers I mean the psychological trenches that are too easy to fall into. This also allows us to be more understanding of other cultures, which allows us to understand and feel for subalterns whom do not have power to make their mark on society. By doing these things, we will be true citizens of the floating world.