Blindness as a metaphor was both used in Blindness and Seeing. In the novel Seeing, blindness was a significant event that happened four years ago. At first, we can think about the real blindness, the medical condition
Download 15.84 Kb.
|
Ayşe-Şevval-Raylaz Assignment 2, ENG102 Final, IR231 1, adm1122, Adm1122 midterm
|
In the novel Seeing, written by Jose Saramago, many metaphors had been used to convey some messages to the reader. Primarily referring to his former novel “Blindness,” ministers and government authorities in Seeing talk about “blindness and the case that happened four years ago.” Blindness as a metaphor was both used in Blindness and Seeing. In the novel Seeing, blindness was a significant event that happened four years ago. At first, we can think about the real blindness, the medical condition. But blindness describes how people become unable to perceive what is happening around them. The society where people who are so insensitive to their surroundings alienated from the society they live in, and eventually, they lost their humane character. Seeing is also used as a metaphor in the novel Seeing. A woman, who is also one of the characters of the novel Blindness, was the only one who could see during the event that happened four years ago when everyone lost the ability to see. This woman acted as one small group’s protector, fed them, protected them, and guided them. As it can be understood from the woman’s acts, seeing is used to point out “the ability to see the reality, what is happening in the society and those who can see knows the truth and guide the society.” In Seeing, this woman was seen by government authorities as dangerous and someone who pushed the people of the capital city to vote blank. The government perceived a strong link between this woman, who is the exception in blindness cases, and this authority challenging the wrong blank voting act as this woman is the only one who could see the reality. Blank Vote is another metaphor used in this novel. At first, due to heavy rain and storm, authorities thought that no one would come to vote. After the rain stopped, the number of voters was still low. In the first elections, 70% of votes were blank. In the second elections repeated by the government's concerns, the number of blank votes rose to 83%, meaning that some of the political parties lost votes in the repeated elections. Blank voting can be seen as an indicator of people’s dissatisfaction with current political parties and their actions. Furthermore, as voting is one way to give legitimacy to the government and their rule, people chose not to give legitimacy by voting blank. Saramago criticizes the liberal democracy by not advocating the people's freedom and serving the interests of the capitalist class. Capitalism and democracy contradict. Property rights were distributed unequally under capitalism, while civil and political rights were distributed fairly under democracy. Furthermore, their methods of legitimization vary, with profit-driven trade in capitalism and majority decision-making in a democracy. Distribution and use of property rights cause an accumulation of wealth in the hands of minority capitalists, which allows them to increase their political power and pressure. In the US and Eastern Europe, fewer people are participating in the elections, which makes the legitimization those representatives and governments questionable (as cited in Merkel, 2014, p. 11). In the novel, blank voting is strictly criticized and perceived as something hazardous to the government's legitimacy. Public elections are one of the ways that democratic societies give legitimacy to their governments. Therefore, voting and participation in the elections are the cores of these processes, and one of the primary duties of a citizen should be voting. When the percentage of blank votes increased to 83% in the second capital elections, the government was concerned that this act would affect the whole country and even maybe the whole world gradually. Because liberal democratic government in the novel could not get the legitimacy that it needed from the people of the capital city, the government used various ways that can be considered as undemocratic, like arresting people randomly, investigating them without any evidence, a law draft in which blank voting is regarded as illegal, etc. From my point of view, banning blank voting is highly undemocratic. People should not have to choose between current parties, and blank voting is also a way to express a want for change in the status quo. To tell the people of the capital that the situation is wrong, unacceptable, and immoral, the government was taken out of the capital city; police forces left the city and entries and exits to the city were banned. The government hoped that disorder and riots would happen in the city as there is no governmental authority. People would realize that they need government, but the situation was the opposite. People lived normally, no police forces were required, and this made the government even angrier. A bomb was planted in the city by the government, and it was written in the media that the blank voters made this attack on purpose. Starting from this event, we see that the government, especially the minister of interior, acted as Machiavellist, using every way to justify the wrongfulness of blank voting, and finding someone to blame. Some of the ministers were resigned because they saw that the condition is irreversible, severe, and irrepressible. Moreover, because the minister of justice and minister of culture resigned, these duties were undertaken by the prime minister and later he dismissed the minister of the interior. Prime minister obtained more power, which can be even more dangerous for the freedom of society. To summarize, Saramago in his novel established a strong relationship between citizenship, voting and legitimacy as the novel tells a story about what happens if the blank voting increases and citizens see blank voting as their constitutional right. What happened is obvious that the government needed legitimacy and to get that legitimacy, it resorted to undemocratic means. References Merkel, W. (2014). Is capitalism compatible with democracy? Democracy and Crisis, 253-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12286-014-0199-4 Download 15.84 Kb. Share with your friends:
|