Aijaz Ahmad’s essay in response to Frederic Jameson’s thoughts on how to view and understand Third-World Literature is now a time capsule to a world that is unfamiliar to younger generations. The term Third-World is known to younger generations. They know it refers to a group of developing nations that do not have the luxuries of First-World nations. Ironically, that was not really the definition of a Third-World nation when Ahmad’s essay was published in the late 1980s.
The term “Third World” was created in 1952 by the French demographer Alfred Sauvy. He used the term to refer to nations that were not aligned with the First-World (United States) or the Second-World (Soviet Union). A Third-World nation before the fall of the Soviet Union could have referred to Mexico, Saudi Arabia, India, or Sweden. Four nations with almost nothing in common culturally then or now. The term Second-World all but disappeared when the Soviet Union fell but the other two terms are still known to younger generations. The terms have lost their geopolitical meanings. They have transformed into wealth and economic categories that fail to tell you anything substantial about a nation. When reading Ahmad’s essay today, the reader must imagine a world in which every international topic was dominated by the Cold War and everything else was grouped into the other category. This reduced the ‘Other-World’ into simplistic travel destinations that could be easily understood with a single-narrative and the meaningless term “Third-World Literature” according to Jameson.
Judith Ortiz Cofer’s “The Story of My Body” is a story of identity formation which is the development of a strong and stable sense of self during adolescence. Rather than give a standard birth-to-success biography of her life, Cofer gives the reader a glimpse into how she grew to understand herself with stories of societal views in the context of her physical appearance. The period of adolescence is the time when people begin to think about how they are viewed by other people. This is the beginning of identity formation. There are two types of identity. The first is self-identity which is how we define ourselves. The second is social-identity which is how others define us. Social-identity is typically transient and dependent on the environment. Cofer shows that at a young age she begins to realize that there are many versions of herself depending upon the situation. All of them have one thing in common. They are physical characteristics. Her hair, skin color, skin texture, athletic ability or lack thereof, body shape, and height. In some situations they are valued and in other situations they are not valued. As Cofer progresses to young adulthood she realizes that her self-identity is constant. She is smart and capable of using her to brain to create compelling pieces of writing. This is what has garnered respect among her peers. Self-identity will eventually find an enriching environment that embraces our innate qualities and abilities.
Citation:
“Adolescent Identity Development.” ACT for Youth, actforyouth.net/adolescence/identity.cfm.
Ahmad, Aijaz. “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the ‘National Allegory.’” Social Text, no. 17, 1987, pp. 3–25., doi:10.2307/466475.
Andrews, Evan. “Why Are Countries Classified as First, Second or Third World?” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 23 Sept. 2016, www.history.com/news/why-are-countries-classified-as-first-second-or-third-world.
Arnold, Mary Elizabeth. “Supporting Adolescent Exploration and Commitment: Identity Formation, Thriving, and Positive Youth Development.” Journal of Youth Development, jyd.pitt.edu/ojs/jyd/article/view/171204FA001.
Cofer, Judith. “The Story of My Body.” Seeing and Writing. Ed. Donald McQuade and Christine McQuade. New York, Bedford/St Martin’s, 2000. 208-214.
“Fredric Jameson and the Controversy over ‘Third-World Literature in the Era of Multinational Capitalism.’” Global South Studies, U.Va., globalsouthstudies.as.virginia.edu/key-thinkers/fredric-jameson-and-controversy-over-%E2%80%9Cthird-world-literature-era-multinational.
Kroger, Jane. “Identity Development in Adolescence and Adulthood.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology, 27 Feb. 2017, oxfordre.com/psychology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.001.0001/acrefore-9780190236557-e-54.
Solarz, Marcin Wojciech. “‘Third World’: the 60th Anniversary of a Concept That Changed History.” Third World Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 9, 2012, pp. 1561–1573., doi:10.1080/01436597.2012.720828.
The physical characteristics bringing a sense of value in certain parts of an individual’s life (in the Judith Ortiz Cofer’s “The Story of My Body”) sheds a light on many items today. When we usually think of an olympic athlete we usually think of someone who is athletic in the sense that they are thin, lean, defined, etc. As a distance runner myself, I think there are many spectators and runner’s themselves who feel they (the runners) have to look the part in order to have an identity of being fast. Without looking the part and having that identity, that person’s confidence may be lower and therefore they don’t perform how they want to just based on overall self-esteem. In the reality of things, a distance runner doesn’t need to be skinny and long legged to be fast! From personal experience I have seen many who are quite the opposite and are still amazing athletes. The same goes for athletes in different sports, I know several athletes who look somewhat overweight and are fantastic athletes. Further many college and high school athletes will come to realize that in other areas of their lives, including the workforce, bosses of cooperations could care less about your body type when hiring (unless it’s required in the position). At the same time, I am well aware that many people feel the need to look their best to feel the their best. Examples include a wedding or special event that the person wants to really impress.
I had no previous knowledge of the changing of the use of the term “Third World” nations. As the word has already changed over the course of a short time span, I feel that it will continue to change in not only the meaning of the term, but also the nations considered under the term “Third World” due to how each country is doing economically in the coming years.
-Karter Tow
It’s interesting to see how the meanings of terms can evolve as time passes. Something that stood for the alignment of countries during the Cold War has now evolved to differentiate countries by economic status. I think the greater difference between the terms “first” and “third” compared to “first” and “second” also creates a larger gap between countries who fall on opposite ends of the spectrum. When a country is categorized as a third or first world country that is the label and status that is given to it by other countries, their “social identity” in a way. I think as time continues to pass the meaning will continue to change just as the economic and political situations of countries around the world change as well.
Although adolescence is often the period when people start to really develop a sense of self and notice how people view themselves, childhood can also be an important time frame of when views are shaped by outside influence. When kids are exposed to toys such as Barbies that look a certain way or see Disney princesses that all have the same body shape, that can start to make them feel like that’s how they should look as well. When we’re only exposed to one type of body shape or look from a young age, that’s the only context we’ve seen and as a result that can heavily influence body image and self identity.
I find it very interesting to see how the definition of terms can change with time. Personally, I was never taught the original meaning of the terms “First/second/third world countries” and how they actually tie in to how countries aligned themselves with/against the Soviet Union. With this, I’ve only been exposed to “first world” and “third world” countries, altering my perception of what makes a country successful solely based on the modern definitions involving wealth and economic power. By completely erasing the use of the term “second world,” there is seemingly no middle-group between wealthy, modern countries and poorer countries with less economic and technological power. This creates the worldview that people are either only rich or poor and that the poor are beneath the rich.
I find the evolution of terms overtime interesting in a sense that a term like “third world” can complete change meaning and overall concept in this case. To just think about how a term can move from a concept of literature to alignment and finally to simply a tag place upon your economic development as a country to me is extremely interesting. As a person who was born in 2001 I agree with your statement of kids today not knowing what its original meaning was meant for because quite honestly I didn’t even know that until the readings. Perhaps in another 10 years the term third world won’t even exist given that today the term “second world” is rarely used now. But for this to even have a chance of occurring third world countries that exist today will have to catch up with the first world countries which is nearly impossible given all the technology changing literally by the day.
Throughout my life, I have only heard of the terms “first/third world”, which I had believed was with respect to a country’s economic status and overall wealth. I was unaware that these terms would originally be tied to the alignment of countries to the United States or the Soviet Union. To add to my surprise, the term “second world” was completely unfamiliar to me and it is interesting that it has lost its meaning so much so that our generation does not realize that the term even existed. The meanings of these terms over time has changed in today’s society, no longer tying them to the alignment of nations, but rather as a way of identifying a country. Personally, I had been taught that a “third world” country was a developing one, with less money compared to others; and that a “first world” country was one of the most luxurious and ideal countries one could live in. I feel that this would be the same for most in today’s society as well. With my Vietnamese background, I thought I understood that a third world country– a poorer, underdeveloped country– was where I came from, but after the readings, I now know that that’s not how I should see it.
I was definitely surprised to find out the true origin of the term “third world”. I would have never thought it was a cold war term, and always assumed it just referred to countries with poor economic status. This reminds me a lot about what Adichie talked about in her ted talk. My whole life I never once read about third world countries in a cold war context, which is a small example of a single story.
For the Cofer reading, I find the relationship between self identity and social identity very interesting. Many adolescents growing up rely on this “social identity”, or what others think of them, to determine how they feel about themselves. In reality I think it should be the opposite. If you accept your identity and are confident in your unique abilities, other people will notice. Once other people notice you are confident in yourself , and they see you show off said abilities, they will in turn create a positive social identity for you. No matter what your physical appearances look like, if you establish your self identity first, social identity will follow.
The term Third World is an assumption about people outside the First World and I think that when you say “Four nations with almost nothing in common culturally then or now,“ this makes a really strong point about how these countries that were all considered “third world” really were not all that distinctly different to classify them as third world. I never really knew exactly what the term social identity meant, but this helped me realize the difference between self-identity and social identity. As we grow up we are all searching for our identities relying on other people and how they see us, especially our outer appearance. As we grow up though, we realize how to appreciate our self-identity and be happy the way things are inside and out and learning new things and even being more accepting and loving of not only yourself but of the people around you.
I also was initially surprised to find out the original meaning of the term “Third World.” However, when I think about it, it’s not so surprising because it fits into the pattern of the themes we have seen so far: the master and the slave, a single story, and the “other.”
If I was not aware of the two types of identity (self and social), I would have simply said that Cofer’s self-identity changed over the years as she dealt with social expectations of physical appearance. Since Cofer distinguishes between self-identity and social-identity, it makes sense why she would say her self-identity remained constant (because her social-identity was what was changing).
I was also shocked to find out that the terms first, second, and third world originally classified countries into capitalist, socialist, and colonialism. Growing up, these categories seemed to describe the economic condition of those countries. In today’s world, we misuse these labels to a dangerous extent, in turn implying a negative connotation of Third World countries. In truth, most of these countries have all the business and resources as “First World” countries.
One question I still have about Cofer’s work is why she feels her self-identity is not changing. Although I can understand why her societal identity is changing based on her milieu, kin my eyes your societal and self indemnities would go hand in hand. If not, I am impressed with Cofer’s ability to compartmentalizations these parts of herself.
I find it very fascinating that the definition of the term, “Third World,” has changed and will likely keep evolving. I feel it’s more fitting to say that the word’s definition doesn’t change itself, but we, as a human population, change the word’s definition. We alter its meaning in a way that fits how we want to perceive those that identify as Third World nations. As Ahmad implies numerous times, the term has no basis, and this is just one of the reasons that Jameson’s argument was flawed. The fact that the term has no basis means who and what we call Third World will continue to change depending on our (i.e. those with power) preferences and what we would like the term to mean. The evolution of the word’s definition, I feel, is just another example of ‘othering.’ It began as a way to identify countries by their political ideology and now is a way to exclude countries or make them appear as less competent, and this is the definition that our generation (and others before us) grew up with. During my senior year of high school, a group of students and I discussed how the African continent, as a whole, is described as less fortunate, unstable, and altogether, a Third World nation and more importantly, why these assumptions we have about Africa are inaccurate. One of the students was working on a project that demonstrated how parts of Africa are actually more developed than parts of America, and that using the term, “Third World,” to describe Africa is simply inaccurate. She was right, and her reasoning was because we label Africa and the countries in Africa as Third World nations as a way to draw pity to the nation, make it appear as oppressed and valuable, and to simply give the “First World” nations a larger sense of power. I personally believe that if we aren’t going to utilize the term, “Third World,” as a way to identify countries by their political ideologies (which isn’t entirely necessary anymore), then the word shouldn’t be utilized at all.
I definitely agree with you, our period of adolescence is the time period when we start to think about how others view us. And not only do we think about it, but it becomes a huge focus for us. This is because during our adolescent years, we start to develop adolescent egocentrism, that is, the idea that once an individual reaches adolescence, they start to believe that their peers are highly attentive to their own appearance and behaviors. This happens to everyone and likely diminishes once an individual reaches early adulthood. I feel that this is one of the reasons that Ortiz Cofer chose to focus on her physical appearance and aspects of her body solely during her teenage years. Once she reached the adulthood phase of her life, she gradually started discussing her internal traits and the roles they played in her experiences. This is an important distinction, I think. When we are teenagers, we are constantly told to focus on what’s on the “inside,” not what others see on the “outside.” However, this is very difficult to do during this part of our lives for psychological reasons and can sometimes be out of our control. Although it’s unfortunate that Ortiz Cofer faced differing struggles solely based on her physical attributes, it makes sense that this is what she paid attention to during her teenage years.
In the world today, it comes to a shock whenever you hear the true definitions of words that you thought you knew the meaning to. I thought I knew the meaning of “first and third world” but I was wrong. We as people have changed the definition into something that misconstrues the meaning of the words and ultimately erases the history of the words as well. I would have never guessed that “First World” and “Third World” as well as “Second World” were Cold War terms. We see these things happen all the time, meanings of words get changed because definitions get loosely translated and words get thrown around and it can be negative.
I definitely agree that our time of adolescence is when we start to care about what others think about us and how they are viewing us. I think it is very important to realize there are two identities, self and social. I also believe that it is okay for both identities to change throughout your life.
I agree with what this person stated above. I apologize, I can only see the name.# so I do not know their name. Anyway, I agree that it was very interesting to learn the meanings of these words and understand that they were not exactly what I thought they were. I would like to pose this question though: How can a country transition from third to first world? I ask this because when I read the article from Ahmad, I was caught up on the part about India. My biggest question I kept asking myself was if these terms evolve over time and the definition can be changing or countries can become more developed, as the countries develop they are all moving forward so can a country really transition from one world to another or will they always be considered a part of the original world they were placed in as everyone advances at the same time? I never really came up with an explanation to this so if anyone has any thoughts, I would love to hear them. I can also agree with Manar down below and I believe it ties in well to what I just asked. I thought about it in a similar way like the idea of the “single story.” We discussed how people have these ideas of “single stories” because we are only exposed to that one point and therefore believe it to be the only point, the truth. I think that we have these preconceptions that Third World countries will always be just that, Third World countries, because as I stated above, everyone will continue advancing and our definition for Third World will change until maybe one day, the First World of today will be the Third World to our descendants in the future.
I would just also like to add that I enjoyed the context presentation from this week and I appreciated the example as mine is due this weekend so great job!
I didn’t realize that a Third-World nation before the fall of the Soviet Union would mean differently compared to after. It is interesting how overtime terms can have different meanings or be used in different contexts. This reminds me of the Ted Talk we watched in the first week about the dangers of telling a single story. Similar to how the economic categories don’t tell us anything substantial about a specific nation, it can be argued that a single story doesn’t either. Cofer has important realizations about self-identity. She tries to tell anecdotes from different perspectives or sides of herself (using physical characteristics). It can be difficult for someone in their childhood or adolescence to have perspective due to their lack of experience in life. I also think it’s important to understand the difference between social-identity and self-identity which can ultimately help us understand ourselves and others better.
After reading Aijaz Ahmad’s essay in response to Frederic Jameson’s on understanding the third world literature I was shocked to find that my understanding of first world and third world nation was separate to that of the reading. My definition of third-world was based almost solely off the economic status of these nations, but I came to learn the terms first/second/third world came about during the Cold War. The terms were given to regions based on their position with the Soviet Union and the United States. Although the term second world no longer exist, it was a term that described a region aligned with the Soviet Union. After the fall of the Soviet Union the term seem to almost disappear, and first world countries became only know as the “superior” countries that were developed and third world countries became know as “inferior” undeveloped countries.
In “The Story of my Body” reading, I felt a connection to Cofer’s experience in developing a sense of self during adolescence. I had a similar experience in high school with me being a petite girl trying to play basketball. I had to develop a mentality that I could not let people dictate my abilities.
I think it is really interesting to learn that the term “3rd world” was coined in 1952. I would have expected it to be much earlier since large economic differences between countries have been around since the beginning of humans. I think the term “3rd world” has to much of a negative connotation that it creates a false view of underprivileged countries. Third world countries are not nearly in as much poverty as painted out to be. Mexico also has running water and cities and cars, not the way certain movies paint it out to be.
I was so surprised and intrigued by your context presentation this week, I found it so interesting to learn more details and in-depth about the words of First, Second, and Third world terms. Before reading your presentation I was surprised to find out that the Second World took place during the time of the Soviet Union, that is something that was completely new to me. It also came as a shock that the term Third World was apart of the Cold War era, I always thought of the term Third World as countries that are less fortunate with poorer communities. See, right there is a single story that we all believe the Third World is about poor communities when in all reality the term originated from the Cold War.
In the readings of Cofer, I felt what you wrote about the period of adolescence and how everyone goes through a period of worrying about what others think about physical appearance; I connect to that especially during the transition from middle school to high school.
I was surprised that before there was a term for second world and how all of this connects to the Cold War era. While reading Ahmad’s essay I saw the word Second World and was a little confused but this presentation cleared it up. I find it interesting how now in modern days when talking about first vs third worlds, we tend to categorize them based on economic and wealth. It’s strange how older generations definition of these words are different than ours and how it reminds them of the political tension during the cold war. Now we tend to mash all third world countries together as you said even though they have nothing in common due to their political stance in a war.
What I found interesting about this interpretation of Cofer’s experience concerning her perception and the perception others have of her own personal traits is its optimistic ending. Usually, a large portion of writings and interpretations of the human experience conclude with either a bittersweet or largely negative view of human interaction and self-perception. The need for writers to induce sadness or pessimism in the reader is reminiscent of the “if it bleeds it leads” doctrine employed by mass media providers. For whatever biological reason, human beings tend to be attracted to negative stories more so than uplifting stories, so the impact of a positive conclusion is surprising but welcomed.
Furthermore, the explanation about the origin of the relatively recent phenomenon of conveniently referring to countries which do not fit the mold of developed liberal democracy or Soviet republic as a “third-world nation” provides much needed context. Many people seem to use these terms without investigating their origin or even understanding the sociopolitical reasons for the creation of the terms. I cannot be the only one excited to discuss many of these controversial topics as a class; hopefully many of the touchy subjects don’t devolve into a shouting match full of ad hominem attacks.
I think it is extremely fascinating how fairly new these terms are. When I have heard these terms being uses by academics or older figures in my life I have always pictured “First World” and “Third World” to be older terms to describe underdeveloped or poverish places in the world. These terms seemed extremely derogatory to me and I often times avoided using them. Now that I know their genuine connection it is interesting to see how they have been almost “twisted” throughout the years. Their connection to the Soviet Union and United States gives them an entirely different meaning that was not ever taught.
Throughout reading your presentation, I found it very interesting to hear about the term “Second World.” Before reading your presentation and you mentioning this, I have never once heard of this term before. It’s interesting to not only know what it meant at the time, but to know that it just completely vanished from a terminology standpoint, which is most likely the reason I was never taught or heard about it. I have heard many times about who are “First World” countries and whom are “Third World” countries, but to learn the true meaning behind them and how it came about is very fascinating. To also know after reading your presentation that what we were taught about “Third World” countries was not the original meaning or context for the term is intriguing. I have always associated the term “Third World” with countries who may be in a developing or rebuilding state, but to learn that it started out as a term that referred to countries who were not coordinated with the US or the Soviet Union is fascinating. Overall, I think this presentation was very good as I learned a lot of new information that I was not previously aware of.
It has been a long time since no one mentioned words such as first world, second world and third world, and even the concept of these words has begun to blur. In the previous definition, the United States is called the first world, the Soviet Union is called the second world, and other countries are considered the third world. This definition is based on the country’s wealth and international status. Now because of the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the term second world has slowly disappeared, and what remains is the first world and the third world. In my cognition, the developed countries are now regarded as the first world instead of just the United States. For the developing countries, they are collectively referred to as the third world. Therefore, the current definition is still based on the economic status between countries to determine these titles.
Before reading, I also do not know the difference in past and current definitions of the Third-World nation. It is interesting to learn how the definition changes. In the past, the term the “Third-World nation” not only indicates a country’s economy but also has a geopolitical meaning. Also since we now mainly consider the economy, the list of Third-World nations will fluctuate as the world keeps developing. Also, naming a country as a Third-World nation does not mean that all locations in that country have less wealth when comparing to cities in developed nations. There might be cases that in a country, there are few cities with plenty of wealth but others don’t, which lead to a relatively low average wealth.
The two types of identity are also new for me. As you mentioned, the social identity changes while the situation changes but one thing in common is that they all have physical characteristics. I wonder if there are social identities that are not physical, for example, the identity of one being a good or bad person.
For people of our ages, it is extremely strange for us to hear about the “first world” “second world” and “third world”. Throughout your presentation, I have a certain understanding of this definition. The first world countries refer to developed countries such as the United States and Europe, the second world countries refer to newly industrialized countries, the third world countries refer to low- and middle-income developing countries, and the fourth world refers to sub-Saharan backward countries. With the passage of time, the meaning of these definitions has slowly changed. For people of our age, we basically do not know the existence of these meanings, let alone imagine the connection with the United States and the Soviet Union.
I find the origins of the terms “First World” and “Third World” as outlined in this context presentation really fascinating. I have only ever heard these terms used as a means to define availability of resources and economic prosperity between countries. To learn that the origin of these terms is legitimately just a means to count “worlds” is quite eye opening and is reflective of our modern-day society. This aligns really nicely with Adichie’s TEDTalk and the concept of a single story. In her talk, she mentions how her white roommate in the US had a single story of Nigeria (and Africa in general) that it was full of poor, suffering, starving people. This is pretty much the exact connotation of the term “third world” today which further indicates how deeply engrained these singular stories are in American culture. Not once have I even questioned what “third world” exactly meant – I just went along with what the rest of society thought and became guilty of perpetuating this single story. This context presentation has been helpful in prepping me for the week’s materials in several ways, particularly in that I am now going into the material with a conscious effort to consume multiple perspectives and question stories that don’t provide them.
I really liked your summation of the Ortiz Cofer essay. I think she really does a great way (as you did) to highlight how social constructions like color and gender can challenge how we even perceive ourselves and our places in society. It reminded me of one of my grandfather’s favorite episodes of the “The Twilight Zone.” The entire episode a patient, whose face is entirely wrapped in gauze, was the talk of the hospital. Doctors and nurses endlessly comment about how she is so unfortunate to have sustained such unbelievable facial development and that her disfigurement will truly alter her life forever. They try their best to fix her to restore her beauty but are unable. As they finally begin to show the unsuspecting viewer this truly horrible and frightening result of failed surgery they uncover a stunning woman. She looks at herself in the mirror and screams and is surrounded by the doctors and nurses-who all have faces of pigs. By our society standards, she was beautiful and attractive. By the standards of these “pig people,” she was utterly disgusting. I think we really need to be conscious about how we perceive others different than us and how our actions and reactions can be truly detrimental to our fellow humans.
As an avid reader of history, your thoughts behind the reformed definition of a “third-world country” come to my surprise and honestly couldn’t be truer. When I initially thought about what was then and is now considered a third-world country, my immediate thought directed to the idea of economic welfare status. This notion has become a reality for which the media has portrayed a picture for a far-distant country being nothing more than a exclusive travel destination. After my reading of the prompt, I never knew how countries were ranked accordingly to their regional counterparts (e.g. United States, Soviet Union). In recent memory, we still use the terms of “first” and “third” but have dropped the forgotten “second” world description.
Regarding your context study of adolescence identity development, I would have to agree with your notion of importance to find one’s sense of identity during this time of young age. In the course of adolescence, we manage to simultaneously look outward to see how others view us through perception (social-identity), while also looking inward to see how we define ourselves (self-identity).
Thank you for the summation of the text for the week. The backstory was helpful to getting a better grasp of the historical aspects of what was happening during the time that this literature was written. I was having a littler trouble deciphering whether Jameson’s interpretation of what constituted a “third world” was likely rooted in financial status or racial and ethnic factors, so it is helpful to know that it was likely at least predominately rooted in economic bias towards geographic regions which were wealthier–I find that very helpful and understanding the intent of the text.
I also agree with you on you description of Ortiz’s text. I think that the notion that our physical characteristics stay with us and do influence many aspects of our lives is very true. I think it is likely true that many people do find something that supports them and that struggling to do so, likely struggle with self identity.
This information was very informative and helped in understanding Ahmad’s perspective when writing about global relations. When reading any sort of literature, it is often difficult for us to see a story/opinion/perception outside of our own presence. By placing yourself in the time period and place as Ahmad, the reader can understand that the Cold War was shaping political beliefs and history as a whole. For example, someone 50 years from now may read literature written in 2020. They will need to understand the context of the literature (aka a pandemic) to truly define the meaning and development of the ideas at hand. I found it so interesting that the Cold War shaped the terms commonly used today, and how we pay little attention to the root or meaning of “First World” and “Second World.” It almost seems as though we are a bit ignorant as a population, and not only that, but have coined their meaning to be examples of global economic status – almost in a derogatory way. We have developed biases and assumptions based upon a construct with which we know nothing about.
Ever since I was young I was only taught about and heard about “first world” and “third world” and I only thought these terms were when discussing a countries economic status, not a Cold War term. So this was very helpful for understanding that the definition of “third world” continues to evolve over time. It makes me curious to see what the meaning of “third world” means 15 years from now, or it will be a different idea and termonalgoy. Reading about Ahmad’s perspective and the information above reminded me of the single stories we discussed a couple weeks ago because of my ignorance growing up to “third world” and “first world” countries.
Self identity and social identity are very interesting to discuss. It intrigued me when Cofer mentioned that her self-identity is not changing. This is because I feel like I am constantly learning new things about my self, changing things, or keeping certain aspects. I think that both social identity and self identity go hand and hand with each other, because if one is changing oneself for how others see them, they are essentially changing how they see themselves as well .
I liked the way Cofer told her story, instead giving a kind of “beginning to end” story of her life she really brought us into each instance that she really thought defined her and herself appearance at the time. She realizes later in life that it is not really about her physical traits that define her as a person but the fact that she is smart and can bring more to the table in those situations. During college she describes how she went through personal growth to become the great writer that she is.
I did not realize the real meaning of the First, Second and Third Worlds. I knew about the First and Third World but I was taught that those meant the wealthy countries versus the “poor and unfortunate” countries.
I liked Aijaz Ahmad’s essay in response to Frederic Jameson’s thoughts on how to view and understand Third-World Literature. Ahmad seemed to be very offended on Jameson’s remarks about Third-World Literature. Ahmad even argued with Jameson in his response paper. Ahmad questions Jameson, asking what defines a Third-World country? In the response Ahmad goes on to tell that “India has all the characteristics of a capitalist country.” Yet Jameson considered India as a Third-World country. Before reading the essay I did not know of the term Second-World, and though the reading I understood that in the time frame when Jameson made his claim, the Soviet Union Collapsed. After understand Second-World, I understood how Ahmad was using First-World and Second-World to describe Third-World as their other when comparing different countries.
-Mitchell Bachman
I want to start by saying that you did a great job in explaining these readings, summarizing the important aspects central to them, and outlining some interesting historical context that further helps in understanding them. I thought that Ahmad’s discussion of the term “Third World” was very interesting and it resonated with me because first world and third worlds are terms that I always considered to be slightly (if not, very) ridiculous terms to use. I mean ridiculous in the sense that they set out to generalize some of the most vast, historically rich, and culturally diverse parts of the world which would obviously be a fruitless undertaking – and yet, these terms are very much prevalent today. I think that the Cold War origins of these terms is very interesting, but not very surprising. The Cold War was an era of complete hysteria (on both sides of the conflict), punctuated by indiscriminate witch-hunting and seeminly apocolyptic “close-calls” (McCarthyism, Cuban Missile Crisis, etc.) It makes sense to me, then, that these terms stem from an era when everybody pointed fingers and were weary of the infiltration of foreign ideals. So then, if these terms are so clearly outdated (despite never being “up to date”) and marginalize so much of the world, why are they still so prevalent and widely accepted? I have always felt that the Cold War era – a huge part of global, specifically American, history was missed in history courses and just not really emphasized in general (most American history courses discuss and most Americans are familiar with the Revolution, War of 1812, Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, even more recent engagements in the Middle East, but seldom the Cold War). It seems that most knowledge of the Cold War stems from electing to take a specific Cold War related class, or through personal learning engagements. Perhaps the acceptance of the terms goes hand in hand with a general lack of knowledge of the era from which they stem? I realize this is a stretch but it is food for thought.
I enjoyed Cofer’s personal story on how she took her own experiences and negativities when it came to her body and broke it down into how she was viewed in puerto rico and the united states. I enjoyed reading your breakdown of the terms of third world, second world, and first world as it helps me further see how Cofer found herself searching for a sense personal identity and being able to find that and identity herself as a strong native puerto rican woman.
It is interesting and important how Ahmed said about the Third world nation. If I only heard Jameson, I would just subconsciously understand the third world countries as one. However, As Ahmed said All third-world countries, which are often developing countries have their own characteristics and uniqueness and it is important to see them as “collectivity.”
In Coffer’s adolescence, she has experienced a lot of feelings that others view her differently because of her different physical traits. It is important to notice that how she used the words “Social identity” and the “self-identity.” As we live in the society, we make up our social identity to fit in the society, but it is important to understand our Self Identity. And it is a happy thing for Coffer to accept how she is physically different.
Ahmad mentions that, “First and second world countries are defined by in terms of their production systems (capitalism and socialism) , whereas the third category-the Third World -is defined purely in terms of experience.” I totally agree with this statement. The term “Third World” has been coined by many as a developing country. I don’t necessarily agree with that definition. One’s experience in a rougher part of a certain country shouldn’t grant them freedom to coin the land as “Third world”. This is a great example of how a single story can be dangerous. Adichie’s ted talk ties perfectly into this example. Ahmad uses India as an example for a country that has been labeled as “Third World”. India has democracy, commodity production, and other characteristics of a capitalist country, but there are more pictures of cows roaming the streets in India than pictures of the beautiful landscape and houses. Someone’s single experience of a certain place, would not be a good enough representation to label a country as “Third World”.
I found the change in terms like the “third world” very interesting. I always saw terms like first world and third world described as a countries wealth status. Wasn’t aware these terms were used in the cold war.
In the Coffer reading, it was interesting to here about the “social identity” and “self identity” aspects. I can relate to this reading as a hispanic male. In the retail environment I work at this idea of how people see others is very true and is still happening. Also my mom grew up very similar to the story though for her she was white in a very hispanic community.
It’s funny that the term Third World started off as such because in my lifetime it has been nothing but poor undeveloped countries, and used as a joke like “oh first world problems”, when complaining about small problems that aren’t nearly as bad as some of the world’s larger problems. I was never aware that there was an alternate definition prior to my lifetime, and that it was so different from what it is now. I think it partially speaks to how centralized we have come about wealth and status.
With the Cofer reading, I loved how she broke it down by body parts. This was such a unique way to tell and progress a story of how she was discriminated. It kept the attention and provided different glimpses into each part of her life that a chronological storytelling method couldn’t have. The ending part with her telling how she was seen as exotic at school was a nice change but still left some distaste with me. Exotic instead of just desirable is an interesting distinction she chose to make to reveal how the world still viewed her.
As I began reading the essay by Ahmed and I read the term “Third world” I immediately thought of exactly what you defined the term as ” a group of developing nations that do not have the luxuries of First-World nations” and once I had that thought in my head it was hard for me to understand exactly what he was writing about. I had also never heard the term “second world” but through his explanation I was able to understand what each of them were and he gave examples of each of them that helped me as well.
This reading intrigued me for similar reasons to you and several class members that have commented. I have always found the “first world, second world, and third world” connotations somewhat arbitrary, as there are no concrete criterion that I am aware of distinguishing them from one another. Additionally, I was not aware of the United States and Soviet Union ties to first and second world. I believe that the countries described by these connotations haver strengths and weaknesses that are so different that they should not be constrained by this arbitrary and shallow connotation.
It is very interesting to know that there are different definition of “First World” and “Third World” throughout history. From my perspective before reading Ahmad’s essay, I also refer to “a group of developing nations that do not have the luxuries of First-World nations.” The terms may evolve as time passes. However, I think how people view the difference between “First” and “third” is becoming more serious. The wealth and economic differences are obvious. Ahmad is using historical aspect towards the countries.
I also think of self-identity and social-identity while I was reading Ortiz’s work. I think self-identity is much more important than social-identity. Also, self-confidence will change how others view you. This innate qualities may be more valuable than appearance.
The idea about the identity formation intrigue me so much. From social psychological perspective, people gain self-esteem from internal factor and external factor, in other words, self evaluation and situational evaluation. People with low esteem are more likely to be influenced by surrounding, while people with high esteem pay more attention on their self. But the paradox is that people with high esteem tend to be recognized by surrounding, perhaps because of their race, their academic performance. Therefore, people with low esteem tend to be someone who are stigmatized and marginalized in an organization which is often regarded as “other” because of the stereotype in the society. But what can we do to enhance our self-worth? There are two possible solution: broaden horizon and try to ignore others’ evaluation and stay in a diverse and positive society in which people advocate the equality and admit the value of anyone no matter what race or gender they belong to.
I learn a lot from your post. In the beginning I don’t know why Judith Ortiz Cofer writes about her body parts. I thought the body parts give others the first impression toward the author, but I didn’t even think about the relation between the identity and body parts. What makes me feel impressive is the view that body part is the common section among various personal identities. I can infer that Cofer’s body parts form a impression or a stereotype in other’s view, but I don’t think the body parts are the most important factor of building a personal identity.
This post is very interesting to me because I never really thought about when exactly the term “third world” was coined. Additionally, as embarrassing as this may be, I didn’t even know that the term “second world” existed, and more-so that it referred to the Soviet Union. My question from this is then, what does/did the Soviet Union refer to the US as? Were we their “second world”? or did they not have any worlds at all? or is it just them and everyone else? My intuitions, especially after the One vs. Other reading, hints towards the latter of the USSR vs the world, especially considering their political standpoints in the past. Finally, what about these “third world” countries at the time the phrase was coined? Did they take offense to this term? Did they agree? Did they even know the difference in the first place?
I totally agree with your points. Before the end of the Cold War, “first world” refers to the united states and “second world” refers to the Soviet Union. These terms based on a nation’s alignment, economics and policital power. However, nowadays these terms were used to classify “developed countries” and “developing countries”. This way is an example of single story.
Comment from Fox: “Before this reading, I was completely unaware that there was two different meanings for “Third World Country”. I find this very interesting that instead a this term along with first world and second world have to do with other countries relations to either the United States or the Soviet Union. My whole life I have been taught that third world countries were those that were underdeveloped and not as wealthy or advanced as first world countries. This ties into the TEDTALK we listened to in the first week, as we see a single story in how these terms are used to describe different countries around the world. When reading the essay, we are able to have a broader use and understanding for the term that we used to perceive differently.”
O1 Visa Lawyer – The O1 Visa: How to Prove Exceptional Ability and Obtain Approval
https://visashelps.com/o1-visa-lawyer/
Maximizing Your Chances of Success: An O1 Visa Lawyer’s Guide to Preparing a Strong Application
The O1 visa is a highly coveted visa category for individuals with extraordinary abilities in the arts, sciences, education, business, or athletics. The O-1 visa lawyer is a professional who specializes in helping clients navigate the complex and often confusing process of applying for this visa.
E1 Visa Lawyer – E1 Visa Eligibility and Application Made Easy
https://visashelps.com/e1-visa-lawyer-maximize-your-e1-visa-success-with-a-lawyer/
Experienced E1 Visa Lawyers: Your Key to Deal Merchant Visa Approval
The E1 visa, also known as the Treaty Trader visa, is a type of nonimmigrant visa that allows individuals from a treaty country to come to the United States to carry out substantial trade between the U.S. and their home country. The E1 visa is designed for individuals who are engaged in international trade and are essential to the success of the business. The E1 visa is a popular option for those in the import/export industry, but it is also available to those who are self-employed or work for a company that is based in their home country.
Our youth is very special to the community. https://phcasinoauthority.com/