Post by Hiba Rashid on Oct 28, 2015 2:26:25 GMT
To me, one of the most interesting practices carried out in Kappaland is the one performed at the time of Kappa childbirth. Just before the child is born, the father kneels on the floor and places his mouth to the mother’s vagina to question the unborn child. He asks the child “Is it you desire to be born into this world, or not? Think seriously about it before you reply” (pg. 61). Kappa children are born with the ability to speak, so if they express an unwillingness to live, they are then killed (although this process is not described as a killing).
This practice and Dr. Chak’s words towards the narrator mock the modern world pro-choice movement which argues that women should have the choice to an abortion, if desired or necessary. Abortion privileges the parents’ circumstances over the life of the unborn child. The Kappas argue that abortion is a selfish choice for the parents think about themselves (their finances, future, etc) before the child. The Kappas seem to believe in empowering the child for it is essentially his/her life -- a child’s life does not belong to anyone but the child himself/herself. However, I do not completely agree with this practice and its criticism of humans. In some cases, abortion can be immoral. But in other cases, if the impregnation is caused by rape or if the parents cannot afford to raise a child, it becomes necessary. The parents’ current circumstances can possibly prevent a child from having a good life.
I further believe the Kappa custom of slaughtering workers who lose their jobs to prevent “the bother of suicide or death by starvation” (pg. 84) contradicts the childbirth one. The childbirth believes in giving a voice to the unborn child and a choice to live or not. But this custom just assumes that the loss of a job will lead to suicide and without being given the choice, the workers are killed by the State. Then, their flesh is used as meat. If the Kappas do believe in giving the individual Kappa the choice over his/her own life, they should not enforce the killing of workers. After a Kappa loses his job, he may still have the desire to live. Even though Kappa customs and practices rightfully criticize those of humans, it seems that even Kappaland is as dystopian as the human world. It is not a perfect world where everyone is happy and all things are fair. It is just an alternative way of living to modern human life.
Discussion Question: Why do the other Kappas keep referring to Tok the poet as self-centered, after he commits suicide? What is the significance of his suicide (to this story and to the author, Ryunosuke Akutagawa)?
This practice and Dr. Chak’s words towards the narrator mock the modern world pro-choice movement which argues that women should have the choice to an abortion, if desired or necessary. Abortion privileges the parents’ circumstances over the life of the unborn child. The Kappas argue that abortion is a selfish choice for the parents think about themselves (their finances, future, etc) before the child. The Kappas seem to believe in empowering the child for it is essentially his/her life -- a child’s life does not belong to anyone but the child himself/herself. However, I do not completely agree with this practice and its criticism of humans. In some cases, abortion can be immoral. But in other cases, if the impregnation is caused by rape or if the parents cannot afford to raise a child, it becomes necessary. The parents’ current circumstances can possibly prevent a child from having a good life.
I further believe the Kappa custom of slaughtering workers who lose their jobs to prevent “the bother of suicide or death by starvation” (pg. 84) contradicts the childbirth one. The childbirth believes in giving a voice to the unborn child and a choice to live or not. But this custom just assumes that the loss of a job will lead to suicide and without being given the choice, the workers are killed by the State. Then, their flesh is used as meat. If the Kappas do believe in giving the individual Kappa the choice over his/her own life, they should not enforce the killing of workers. After a Kappa loses his job, he may still have the desire to live. Even though Kappa customs and practices rightfully criticize those of humans, it seems that even Kappaland is as dystopian as the human world. It is not a perfect world where everyone is happy and all things are fair. It is just an alternative way of living to modern human life.
Discussion Question: Why do the other Kappas keep referring to Tok the poet as self-centered, after he commits suicide? What is the significance of his suicide (to this story and to the author, Ryunosuke Akutagawa)?
