SUMMARY:
My proposal is for a political and philosophical fiction novel entitled ‘The State of Nurture’. At first appearance, the book is a children’s fable – a traditional western narrative articulating an underlying moral lesson. It is the story of a group of schoolchildren who are left unattended in class one day by accident. After some general misbehaviour, the group decides to draw up some rules based on what their teacher taught them. Disagreements ensue - and personality clashes soon escalate into trouble. Discovering they still have a lot to learn about right and wrong, some children take things too far, and in the end it’s only the intervening Head who can bring order and harmony.
The title itself is a pun on Thomas Hobbes’ concept of a ‘state of nature’. This is an underlying aspect of the book that becomes a densely symbolic allegory for the global anarchy characterising current international politics. Its application will demonstrate the way in which an international social contract might be our only way to avoid self-destruction. With each child representing a politically prominent country in the world, the absent teacher representing an undefined concept of God, and the intervening Head representing new world order, this is an exploration of various nations’ idiosyncrasies, their attempts to find meaning - and the way in which we, the human race, can all relate. While this book will in many ways espouse a western placed perspective, utilising western philosophy, and perhaps even coming to western conclusions, its aim throughout will be to animate global actors as they are, without bias, and to be sympathetic to their constraints and contingencies (be they physical, historical or other).
STYLE:
This book is at once a work of general fiction and a political/philosophical treatise. Written in the style of George Orwell’s Animal Farm or Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, the book will have a dual level narrative. At the surface it will be written in the easy reading style of a children’s fable, with both humorous and heart-warming elements. It will follow a familiar narrative formula of harmony, disharmony, heroes, villains, and a happy ending. It will not include judgements of good or evil, only misguided actions, and these will all be given cause. Introducing the characters as they each take a prominent place in the course of events, the story will switch between the classroom and to past snapshots of the characters personal lives. It will explore their inner struggles, desires, and the way in which they have been affected by such things.
Beneath this exterior narrative there will be a deeper, serious, and ambiguous meaning intended for reader interpretation and analysis. What this means, is that the characters and events in the book will be symbolic in a way that is never explicit or definite. Meaning needs to be produced by the reader, and may be produced in different forms. For example, the absent teacher would never explicitly be defined as its symbolic counterpart (God). Allowing for an open interpretation here will work more effectively due to the varying perspectives people hold about such personal concepts. Readers will be able to dismiss elements of this feature that do not fit with their own model of the term, and to accept any elements that do. In this way the allusions in this book should rarely appear incongruent to reader opinion.
FORM/STRUCTURE:
The main classroom narrative will be from the perspective of an omniscient narrator in an almost entirely linear time format. The opening chapter will set the scene, by depicting the culmination of the morning’s events, before the narrative returns to the beginning of the day and works in a chronological sequence. Each chapter will be focussed on a character or group of characters, based on their level of involvement with the current class affairs. Interlaced within the narrative of each of these chapters, will be brief escapes and flashbacks explaining the characters backgrounds, private thoughts, and experiences. These will be in thematic form, each from a different narrative perspective, and delivered in various writing styles. Modern mediums of communication such as Facebook chat and Twitter will be used here, as well as traditional forms of production like personal diaries and playground dialogues. All chapters will open with a quotation summarising the political or philosophical themes dealt with by that section. This is to provide context for the narrative that follows.
PLOT/CHAPTERS:
The story opens with a culmination of the day’s events. Ehsan (Iran) has attacked David (Israel) after David tried to overpower him with force. Michael (USA) has intervened, but Ehsan, being part of a minority group in the class, is armed and dangerous.
At this point the story returns to the beginning of the day and describes in chronological order the events that lead up to this violent conflict.
Cliques representing Eastern and Western nations emerge from the outset, and the conflict between these is a recurrent theme throughout.
As the story unfolds, it recounts allusions to historical epochs; such as European colonialism (Ch5), the Cold War (Ch8), and 9/11 (Ch12).
Once the opening scene is re-encountered, the story moves forth into a new phase where events are based solely on a speculation of what the future could be. This is placed in a world of no global anarchy, where a new world order (the Head) leads to authoritative, legitimate international law (the class constitution) accepted by all.
1. The End – Part 1
David lies bleeding on the floor as Ehsan threatens to cause Michael serious harm too
2. The Prefect
The prefect passes by to tell the children their Teacher won’t be in today. The Head is also supposed to be notified so that a substitute can be organised, but when the prefect gets waylaid, so does the message...
3. David
The Teacher’s favourite student David, reminds the class of how Teacher would expect them to behave.
4. Cristian
Cristian thinks the rules need altering and sets to work on altering and enforcing the rules. Not everyone agrees
5. Jack, Camille, and Lucia
Jack, Camille and Lucia use questionable tactics to recruit members for their gangs
6. Max
Max wants control and group fighting soon breaks out – the outcome is a brawl to end them all.
7. Michael
Michael uses his strength and popularity to stop the fighting, but makes significant enemies along the way.
8. Ivan
When it seems that Ivan is popular too, a big rivalry emerges. But who will win the race to dominate the class?
9. Tara and Imran
There isn’t much left of Jack’s gang, and when Tara and Imran fall out, it looks like he’s left looking up to Michael.
10. Aya
Aya did bad things earlier in the day, and resolving never to be so bad again, finds a new way to gain influence in the class.
11. Kian
Kian isn’t that popular, but he’s strong and he has things his classmates want. Can he tip the class balance in his favour? It’s starting to look that way.
12. Muna, Ehsan, Omar
When Michael is attacked, Jack and a few others rally round to point the finger at a Muna, Ehsan, Omar and their friends.
13. The End – Part 2
When Ehsan uses a bat to hit David, and Michael decides to intervene, Ehsan threatens to cause Michael serious damage. Jack, Aya, and Max sound the alarm and call for outside help.
14. The New Head
The New Head arrives to calm everyone down. No-one has seen the New Head before and no-one knows what to expect. Everyone is scared and wonders what will happen to them.
15. The Beginning
The New Head thinks the kids need a class constitution to determine their behaviour towards each other, and gets everyone working on it in a team. Enemies soon earn new respect for each and everyone starts having fun – could this be a new beginning for all?
LENGTH:
The book will be around 50000 words/160 pages in length.
The book will be around 50000 words/160 pages in length.
RATIONALE:
To my knowledge, there is no work that anthropomorphises the nation-state in a manner such as my proposal. What this approach allows, is for an exploration of how nation-state personalities develop, why they are often misinterpreted, and how they can be justified in the way they do things, even if outsiders may not understand or agree with their customs and behaviours. It is my hope that people who attempt to read this work may be able to humanise foreign nations, and realise that even ostensibly repugnant laws, customs, traditions etc… have some basis in inescapable and influential historical factors that, once experienced, are embedded stubbornly and difficult to shake. My intention is that this should reflect the way in which, as individuals, all humans have behaviours which may seem peculiar to others, and are manifestations of that person’s experiences and personal history. Nations are defined by their physical attributes, their people, and their history. This book aims to characterise these attributes in the form of individuals. This is all a stage for the book’s ultimate motive: to demonstrate (what I perceive to be) the absurdity of staunch nationalism. We are psychologically all very similar to start, yet our physical structure, interactions with others, and our experiences, all mould this similarity into something unique. Similarly, borders are mere human inventions, and we are divided from others only by custom, culture, and historical events.
To my knowledge, there is no work that anthropomorphises the nation-state in a manner such as my proposal. What this approach allows, is for an exploration of how nation-state personalities develop, why they are often misinterpreted, and how they can be justified in the way they do things, even if outsiders may not understand or agree with their customs and behaviours. It is my hope that people who attempt to read this work may be able to humanise foreign nations, and realise that even ostensibly repugnant laws, customs, traditions etc… have some basis in inescapable and influential historical factors that, once experienced, are embedded stubbornly and difficult to shake. My intention is that this should reflect the way in which, as individuals, all humans have behaviours which may seem peculiar to others, and are manifestations of that person’s experiences and personal history. Nations are defined by their physical attributes, their people, and their history. This book aims to characterise these attributes in the form of individuals. This is all a stage for the book’s ultimate motive: to demonstrate (what I perceive to be) the absurdity of staunch nationalism. We are psychologically all very similar to start, yet our physical structure, interactions with others, and our experiences, all mould this similarity into something unique. Similarly, borders are mere human inventions, and we are divided from others only by custom, culture, and historical events.
Ultimately we all have the same needs/drives, and if we can overlook our historically contingent differences, then we may work together for a collective good with values shared by all. Hobbes’ theories deemed that we give up freedom to obtain liberty, and that we do this because it benefits us all. This may be a Western construct, but in seeking to explain relationships and personalities through historical events and inner psychological conflict, this book aims to provide an unbiased understanding of why each nation-state has their own sense of morality, and to show that we don’t have to sacrifice personality or culture to work together towards international liberty.
AUDIENCE:
I think this work will appeal to multiple audiences, and may in fact have the capacity to appeal in different ways at different times (or when read in different contexts). It is aimed at all readers of fiction, and at students (of all ages) with an interest in political/philosophical theory. The work is ultimately intended to be an entertaining read. I would hope that a casual reading, with no analysis, will still keep the reader engaged throughout. With this perspective in mind, the book is aimed at everyone from children to adults; regardless of creed, nationality, or allegiance. The deeper message is intended for inquisitive minds; those who wish to understand the international political system from an original vantage point, and who could use the work as a theoretical framework for assessing and predicting the behaviours of global actors in our world today.
I foresee two challenges in successfully achieving this wide appeal. Firstly, I must ensure the characters portrayed are not stereotyped, or based solely on extant characteristics. This will achieve no more than an obvious and clichéd perspective, resulting in dismissal by large groups of readers. Secondly, the deeper political message must be carefully balanced between being hidden and being interpretable. It should never be explicit as this will destroy the intended feel of the book. I want the initial impact of the book to be its explicit relationships and narrative, and the interpretation/analysis to come after. This is so readers can attach themselves to the characters prior to casting judgement, and before bias or preconceived opinions have had a chance to guide understanding. Hopefully this will situate some readers in an unexpected position – one they did not, and could not, envisage prior to reading the book.
AUDIENCE:
I think this work will appeal to multiple audiences, and may in fact have the capacity to appeal in different ways at different times (or when read in different contexts). It is aimed at all readers of fiction, and at students (of all ages) with an interest in political/philosophical theory. The work is ultimately intended to be an entertaining read. I would hope that a casual reading, with no analysis, will still keep the reader engaged throughout. With this perspective in mind, the book is aimed at everyone from children to adults; regardless of creed, nationality, or allegiance. The deeper message is intended for inquisitive minds; those who wish to understand the international political system from an original vantage point, and who could use the work as a theoretical framework for assessing and predicting the behaviours of global actors in our world today.
I foresee two challenges in successfully achieving this wide appeal. Firstly, I must ensure the characters portrayed are not stereotyped, or based solely on extant characteristics. This will achieve no more than an obvious and clichéd perspective, resulting in dismissal by large groups of readers. Secondly, the deeper political message must be carefully balanced between being hidden and being interpretable. It should never be explicit as this will destroy the intended feel of the book. I want the initial impact of the book to be its explicit relationships and narrative, and the interpretation/analysis to come after. This is so readers can attach themselves to the characters prior to casting judgement, and before bias or preconceived opinions have had a chance to guide understanding. Hopefully this will situate some readers in an unexpected position – one they did not, and could not, envisage prior to reading the book.
EXCERPT:
The End – Part 2
"[If we are to avoid a nuclear war] a system of world order - preferably a system of world government - is mandatory ... The proud nations someday will see the light and, for the common good and their own survival, yield up their precious sovereignty."
Walter Cronkite: A Reporter's Life (1997)
Michael stared at the bat. David was crying, but still Michael didn’t dare move to help him. Ehsan fixed his stare. He was defiantly challenging either of them to move.
“Tough guy want it too? Always giving it the big ‘I am’ - come on then! You’re not going to boss me around Michael. I’m giving my brother back his chair whether you like it or not. I warned David, and I warned you.”
Michael’s brow was moist and he was worried. He was sure he could win this fight, but would Ehsan swing the bat first, and hit him in the process? He looked over Ehsan’s shoulder at the other children who had stopped dead and were staring. He searched for some indication of oncoming help, but everyone was stunned frozen. Ehsan felt enmity united within him. He hated Michael and his gang, but he knew he couldn’t beat them. The class looked on with disapproving glares and he felt a knot of guilt well up within. All the days’ threats and words had been in earnest, but part of him wished he could take it all back right now. It was Jack who first broke the silence.
“Ehsan, stop it.” He motioned to Camille and Max as if to infer they should be backing him up.
The distraction was enough. Michael grabbed the bat and threw his weight at Ehsan. The pair fell over with Michael smothering the smaller boy. As they wrestled each other’s arms, Michael was slapping, scratching, pulling and shouting.
“Think you’re a big boy cos you can grab a bat and make threats?”
Ehsan dropped the bat to free his hand. He grabbed an arm and bit hard into Michael’s finger, making him yelp. Jack ran over and kicked Ehsan in the side. Dropping to his knees he helped Michael restrain him. As David moved to help too, Michael rolled off and picked up the bat. He held it above his head with a maddened expression upon his face.
“Stop it or I’ll smash you with this thing I swear!”
Ivan picked another bat off the shelf and held it up ready to swing.
“What if I smash you first? Why are you getting involved? It’s David’s problem. Same old story, you can’t help but interfere. Throwing your weight around. Let them sort out their own issues!”
His eyes dared Michael to answer. Surprised, Michael turned to face Ivan, the bat now poised in his direction. Jack and David continued to restrain Ehsan.
“Here we are again. So we’ll settle our issues instead then? Once and for all?”
Max was close to tears. He thought they’d moved on from all this, but now it was worse than ever. Shaking his head in disbelief he looked first at Camille, then Aya, Sophie and Lucia.
“I’m going to get someone. Someone’s gonna get really hurt.”
He moved to the door. Michael frowned but kept his eyes on Ivan.
“Where are you going, Max?”
“I’m going to get a teacher, I don’t care what you lot say, you’re all stupid and out of control. Enough is enough.”
“Max don’t you dare!”
Aya had a look of disappointed despair.
“He’s right. You haven’t learnt anything. Every time the fighting kicks off you say that’ll be the last of it. Me and Max kept to our word, so why not you guys? Come on Max.”
Max pulled open the door open and hurried through with a few others. Michael desperately wanted to stop them, but daren’t move in case Ivan attacked. He couldn’t even risk turning his eyes away.
There was silence for what seemed like an eternity, until suddenly, in the distance, they heard the heels of an adults shoes coming down the corridor.
Clip, clop. Clip, clop.
Both their eyes widened in panic.
Clip, clop. Clip, clop.
Jack looked down at Ehsan.
“Gonna behave if I let you go?”
Ehsan nodded hurriedly, knowing he was in the worst trouble.
Clip, clop. Clip, clop.
As Jack released Ehsan and ran toward his desk, he reflected on a feeling of pride and shame. He’d been leader of class today, and fought like a hero. But like Michael, he’d thought too highly of himself. He’d thought he was better than everyone, but in reality was just a bully when he needed to be. Helping others only when it was in his interest. Now he was just Michael’s bruised sidekick. Maybe it was a good thing the class would go back to normal. He could be himself again, he thought.
Clip, clop. Clip, clop.
Ehsan picked himself up and scrambled back to his chair. He knew the others would blame it all on him, but he didn’t care right now. Michael and the others couldn’t hurt him once a teacher was there. He wondered whether he could tell the teacher about how they took his brother’s chair, but sighed as he realised the teacher wouldn’t care.
Clip, clop. Clip, clop.
Michael and Ivan quickly threw their bats to the corner. They held their stare for a moment and both knew it was over. There was no more hate. Maybe there never really had been. Fear, jealousy, and a difference of opinions was all. Their gangs were finished and so was their rivalry. Would they have ever really used the bats? Ivan smirked at the thought.
Clip, clop.
Michael and Ivan turned towards their desks.
Clop.
Everyone stopped as a strange brooding figure stood in the doorway, Max and the others either side. No one had seen the new Head before, and no-one knew what to expect. Every child was frozen and transfixed. Each felt apprehension, but with it, complete and willing submission. Relief washed over them as they lamented a loss of liberty and welcomed a promise of order and safety. The classroom was no longer theirs, but perhaps it never had been. No-one had had real control. Not until now.
No comments:
Post a Comment