Blog 4 of 12: "Speaking in Tongues"

Blog 4 of 12 “Speaking in Tongues” – Zadie Smith (Hitchens 179-194)

1)      On page 179 in the first paragraph, Smith says, “I went the other way.  Partly out of cowardice and…”.  Do you think Smith resents her decision to change the way she spoke during college?

2)      On page 180, Smith says, “Voice adaptation is still the original British sin.  Monitoring and exposing such citizens is a national pastime, as popular as sex scandals and libel cases.  If you lean toward the Atlantic with your high-rising terminals you’re a sellout; if you pronounce borrowed European words in their original style –even if you try something as innocent as parmigiano for “parmesan”—you’re a fraud”.  Does this hyperbole successfully drive home Smith’s point on the importance of multiple dialects?

3)      Smith finds President Obama inspirational because he can speak so many dialects.  On page 182, Smith states, “This new president [Obama] doesn’t just speak for his people.  He can speak them”.  Do you think that having the capacity to speak different dialects is an important trait?  Or do you worry you might offend someone trying to imitate their dialect?

4)      On page 184, Smith says, “Instead, citizens of Dream City prefer to use the collective pronoun ‘we’”.  What do you think of this declaration?  Do you think Smith’s declaration sounds too “communist”?

5)      On page 188, Smith claims, “I am not even proud to be human – I only love to be so”.  Do you ever think about what YOU are?  Do you appreciate who you are and are proud or do you relate to Smith?

6)      What is Zadie Smith’s thesis in the piece “Speaking in Tongues”?  Do you agree or disagree with Smith?  Why or why not?