Skip to main content

A Note to Readers of Purple Hibiscus and Skeptics:

"Father Benedict usually referred to the Pope, Papa, and Jesus- in that order." *Doubletake* Is this some sore sort of variation of the Holy Trinity?

As a Christian, reading Purple Hibiscus makes me uneasy. Papa, a pious Christian, physically abuses his wife. Aren't Christians supposed to be moral? Yes, I'm not close to being perfect (in fact, why I believe Jesus to be my savior), but seeing the blatant hypocrisy of Papa and many other church leaders is questionable. He may donate and be mentioned in the priest's sermons, but don't be deluded, that's not what Christianity entails.

I've seen it myself. In a Korean church full of tradition, there's a sort of order that must be kept. Bow to the pastors and highly esteemed elders. Invite church leaders for dinner. Give generously. Yet despite my performative respect I offer to such leaders, I've heard of the church politics, financial disputes, and personal stories behind facades. I hope I'm not deterring you from faith, though. The institution of religion is often corrupt (you've seen it with the Pope). But, true religion is personal faith, guided by a church's teachings. 

So if you ever decide to approach Christianity or read Purple Hibiscus, heed the dangers of a sole reliance on the church. The focus on the development of your personal relationship with God is what makes you religious, not just performance. So please don't perceive Christians as hypocritical performative abusers!

Now go on and read!

Comments

  1. Abby LiangFebruary 2, 2021 at 8:35 AM

    I love the personal connection you make in this blog post. Performative acts are super common, whether it's in activism or religious settings, so I'm glad you highlighted the importance of having a personal relationship <3

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Gray Area

As we discuss the roles of pictures and words in conveying a story, I become mildly conflicted in several aspects. First, and most obviously, which one does the better job? To me, both forms of storytelling allow for creativity and personal thought. But, while writing is both specific and yet very imagination-based, illustrations tend to be only the latter. A drawing calls for "broader topics" (McCloud 815) of assumptions. And while that may be seen as a good thing, I see it as a source of miscommunication. Because images are open to so many different interpretations, often, the author's intended meaning is not truly understood. Similarly, I regularly find myself wondering if, as readers, we also look too much into the text and find meaning when the author actually had none. What if the author didn't really have a specific theme in mind and just wanted to write an amusing story? Of course, I may just be too simple-minded and unqualified, but I find myself doubting t...
7 comments
Read more

Never Let Anyone Dull your Sparkle! (unless you're the 1920s)

Knowing that the Great Gatsby is set in the 1920s, I had been looking forward to reading the book for so long. This decade has always fascinated me because of its creation of a new society, which--for the first time in history--is relatable to ours. In my perspective, before the 1920s, history was bleak, the human lifestyle seemed near archaic, and nothing was the slightest bit comparable to the twenty-first century. But at the turn of a new decade, Roaring Twenties brought along the "New Woman" and the birth of mass culture, including a surge of trends and technology. A curtain for my car window? Of course, I'll buy it! However, in the Great Gatsby , I seemed to have forgotten that the book I was reading was about my favorite decade! Where's the excitement and innovation? Why aren't advertisements for the Model-T being shoved in my face? Needless to say, I was underwhelmed! But I don't think I was alone in thinking this. In fact, Fitzgerald's mess...
7 comments
Read more

War and Peace

Violence. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it as the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy. In most ways violence can seem very obvious because of its portrayal in movies, video games, and crime; you picture blood, weapons, and fighting. But there seem to be sources of violence that tend to be less physical.  While looking at an image of a young boy in the arms of, presumably, his father whose head was covered by a bag, it seems that most of us agreed that it isn't  a violent image. In disbelief, Mrs. Valentino exclaimed that it is actually violent. However, in my head, it came across as almost peaceful. Now, I do acknowledge the sadness of this image, but what I really saw was a boy reuniting with his father among the vastness of a desert. There was a stillness that was reflected by the picture instead of the usual chaos that physical violence entails. So what really is violence? We can almost all agree that there should be a line dra...
7 comments
Read more