Kelly's post

I am initially struck by a couple of things that I think would be worthwhile to discuss tomorrow, concerning the articles we have read. The first is the idea of exile in the context of utopia versus dystopia. Perhaps exile is a very dystopian way of thinking, but it is also important to consider that while there appears to be a very anti-utopian element, which dominates the identity of the exile, there in consequence could be an expectation or ambition--a direction--towards utopian thinking. If the nation-state, for example, is a contradiction in and of itself, if our rights in the world, in which we live are determined not by some system of universal human rights, but by the rights guaranteed by the nation-state, is the exile--or the exile as writer--directing us as readers to the idea of, or to ponder the idea of, a better, utopian world? Or, are exiles, refugees, etc.--and therefore as writers--simply, strictly dystopian thinkers?

Second, I am particularly interested in the idea of responsibility. In all of the articles, we come across what I think is a very controversial idea of blame in the context of exile. In other words, as we see in Said's article, the condition of exile being created by exiles. How much can we attribute the idea of exile as created by a "new kind of human being" (Arendt)? Perhaps Vlad has already posed this question, but to what degree is exile strictly blameworthy of the 20th and 21st century world/global political system and to what extent is it actually a historical phenomenon?