GES Indiv Exegesis

Individual Exegesis

Initially, My group had intended to do the research project, but because our schedules could never match, by the time we tried to visit the Peranakan Musem, it had already been closed for renovation. Initially, I expected the project to be easy, as I have personally read quite a few SingLit books comprising prose, poetry and theatre. I thought it would be a very straightforward formula of (in order), picking characteristics of Singapore, linking them together, then forming characters to specifically portray these characteristics (so as to make the exegesis easier to organise and write). However, it seemed very artificial of me to do this, so instead I focused on trying to dramatise certain events in my own life and exploring the ways in which these cause-effect pairings were related to what i learned in the module. I had also played around with the idea of writing it from Noah’s point of view, but decided that to do that might have made the story less realistic (and therefore relatable) since I was born and bred in Singapore. Furthermore, the text would be more open to interpretation based on the amount of knowledge the reader had about Singapore, especially in terms of the instances of Chinese and Singlish.

The story and exegesis was mostly written by me, mostly due to the fact that English was not my groupmates’ first language, and I was the only one with vaguely any English Literature experience. Initially, it was very frustrating for me to deal with this unequal distribution of work, given that I did not feel the quality of writing by my groupmates was not up to par. However, I found their contributions helpful when I asked them questions to try to get the point of view of a non-local to take inspiration from, for Noah’s character. It was extremely difficult for me to balance having realistic characters, but also representing Singapore, as I tended to fall into streotypes a little too easily. However, I tried to mitigate this by making the dialogue between the characters as authentic as possible, changing the register and vocabulary for each character to (hopefully) make it obvious who was speaking, and the nature of the dynamics within the family.

The story was largely based on my own encounter when i brought someone close to me who was not a local to my house for Chinese New Year. I specifically included relatively unknown (to non-locals, and even some Singaporeans) foods to capitalize on this, and add some depth to the story. I also wanted to highlight that although no one was being explicit about how they felt about this potential new inclusion to their family, their body language and subconscious word choices dictated a lot about their views about outsiders. It is important to note that the family was not meant to be overtly xenophobic in any way, but rather, unconscious subscribers to narratives which had been told to them by the government and/or media (eg. The discussion about migrant workers).

I also experimented with the idea of having Noah subvert one of the family’s expectations, but decided against it in the end, as I could not find a way to incorporate it in, which did not make it look like an overt cariacature (eg. the family being surprised at him being able to use chopsticks). Instead, I left it to little hints in the story for readers to pick up on (should they too have these subconscious biases) such as the notion of Noah, as an American, playing many video games when he was younger as opposed to Harry and May Wan’s disappointment/attempted enforcement of Ian’s study habits.

In particular, I found that one of the major differences between my non-local friends and I-and sometimes even between my parents and I- is this idea of a reputation, or mianzi to be held accountable for. Culturally, there seems to be a discrepancy in things that Singaporeans consider to be a marker of status, and non-locals’ considerations. For example, one of the first questions Auntie Wendy asks is what Noah’s major is and whether or not he is ready to settle down. This reflects what she, as a Singaporean, feels is needed to pass judgement on Noah’s character. This echoes the Singaporean mindset of pragmatism and the constant search for stability, not only for one’s self, but also for the people around us.

The contension between Harry and Ian is also important to note, as I feel this reflects a large portion of east-meets-west conflict in Singapore. Harry’s desire for his son to only focus on his studies- going so far as to imply that he might have needed a second son to fulfil him where Ian could not- is juxtaposed against Ian’s search to find meaning in his actions, especially during these teenage years.

Honestly speaking, my submission for this project did not exactly meet my expectations, as, upon reflection, I realise that in my story, I was trying to tackle too many issues at once. I also ended the story fairly abruptly, and did not put in as much imagery and literary rhetoric as I initially wanted to.

I also have realised that representations (be that of Singapore or anything else) can be political even when one does not have a specific intent to sway the audience a certain way, due to the author’s own subconscious bias. Merely recognising a bias is not equal to mitigating it, and therefore to write an entirely ‘objective’ story would be impossible, similar to how, in Cinematic Spectacle Theory, it is physically impossible for a spectator (in its strictest definiton) to judge the film. In the same way, the reader’s subjectivity lends itself to be manipulated based on the triggers an author chooses to (strategically) place in the story (eg. Muffin the dog’s reaction perhaps echoing that of the family’s).

Word count: 978 words