Sophie's World - a personal reflection by Al-Gassim Sharafuddin
 |
| Book Cover |
Before I continue, I would like to also state that there were two major things in my mind while reading this novel. First, although the writer's intention is to illustrate the importance of philosophical thinking and learning from history, it only takes a little bite of what is out there. It took only the Western philosophy and history, missing out major accounts of philosophical ideas in the rest of the word and history. It is something concerning however when the general people of the west don't draw from the rest for the cultures. I, for example, have many inspirational and knowledgeable people and sources to draw from who come from a more familiar history and culture such as Imam Ali and Ahl-Albayt and the poets of the Arabian Culture, yet I refuse to enclose myself there. Just as it is important to learn from history, it is equally important to learn from other cultures which is something that author didn’t seem to bother even hinting just a little about. Second, the novel is translated from Norwegian language which seemed to weaken the writing style. I am sure I would have been intrigued if I was reading the original. In fact, before I decided to read the English translation since this book is translated to more than 40 languages, I thought I would get the Arabic version instead especially that I have two of my friends reading the Arabic version. However, when I read the translation of the title of the first chapter (The Garden of Eden) wrongly translated, I decided to read in English as it was the first translation. I wonder how much of the meaning is missing now after the translation, and I am curious to give it sometime then read the Arabic one too.
"He who cannot draw on three thousand years is living from hand to mouth" a quote written by the German poet Goethe that the book began with. I honestly laughed when I read that quote thinking of how tiring it would be to draw all the way back to three thousand years to find the answer to some of my questions. Just before this I was vehemently wondering why truth in itself wasn’t something as organic as our breathing. Not knowing that the same questions the book began with were the same questions asked in the end. It’s a humble thing however, after drawing all the great thinkers of history and exemplifying how the same questions were asked over and over again rather it would be hideous to conclude with answers.
I have been seeking deeper answers about the world and reality, and one of the most pressing questions I've been having is wanting a genuine answer to not what reality is or what and how we should live and what for either, but really, why? It might be easy for you to rush with an answer, but just as Aristotle demanded a ‘formal cause,’ I am seeking for a ‘formal reason.’ That is to say whatever ‘reason’ you’ll answer me, you ought to further question with why.
Frankly, I feel that its for me a mix of fear and courage to be asking these questions. It's easy to accept things handed down from others as the author illustrates in the story rather than always deeply reflecting upon what is being said and purposed rather than reflecting on what one's life is. It's not only easy no to 'think philosophically,' but empowering as well because to hold into a certain 'idea' is somehow more assuring even if temporary rather than the stressful feeling of being 'angst.' 'Angst' a philosophical term, used by many philosophers (Freud, Sartre, and Kierkegaard) which describes the state of uncertainty about the world and reality in general. The philosopher Kierkegaard describes it as a positive stage which doesn’t last long. It is probable but what’s after this stage is what seems to matter most.
In the story Sophie remained all the time in the angst stage. For example, she’d no longer play badminton with her friend Joanna or she’d risk flunking her school test for the sake of being honest in her thoughts and perspective. On the other hand, there were times when Sophie as natural as it is for a 15 year old had this longing to no longer have to deeply consider things. In a point in the story she wished her course in philosophy would soon end, and at another point she’d want to spend time with her friend Joanna. She came to understand more about the desires of others especially her mom and her close friend Joanna. She invited Jeremy only because Joanna liked him. However, those were rapid moments that soon changed into more desire and curiosity to continue her track towards knowing more about the world and what Alberto, her philosophy teacher, had to say. Joanna, on the other hand, was the only character other than Alberto to have gone into the experience, know about the cabin and saw the philosophy classes, but she was rather driven by fear and desire. She wouldn’t even sleep in the presence of the Gypsy mirror. She didn’t bother at all when Sophie would not include her in the classes. In the end, Joanna missed out the most important philosophical speech given by Alberto at the Garden Party because of her sexual desires towards Jeremy whom they both were both no longer present during the speech. It’s negative in the sense that she was no longer “at the top of the rabbit’s hair, staring directly at the magician.” The way I say it is that the limbic brain took care of her, and this is common in many lives. This is a genuine comparison between those in society who will fall for illusion and those who will seek farther and not held astray from their purpose. Further more, Joanna’s parents seemed to appear in the party as those who will try to stop others from appealing anything that contradicts their peace of mind, and more simply, they’d constrain themselves to what their society is structured by with less understanding or courage.
There quite many great lessons to draw from the themes, characters, and the story in itself. To reflect upon this story would take indeed ages, and so it’s not simply what it is about, but why?It’s about always remembering to think critically. To realize that sometimes things aren’t really the way we perceive. To understand to think. Perhaps one day I’ll get a clearer answer to many things, but for now, I have enjoyed reading this novel. It didn’t give me an answer, but it elevated my perception.
A humble perception, a philosophical thinker, are base qualities and values of a compassionate soul. It’s a start for a Revolution of Compassion.
By
Al-Gassim Sharafuddin
P.S.
One last thing, I was rather disappointed though that this novel didn't mention anything about the holographic theory of the universe or quantum theories and Bohm's perspective. Maybe because they were still back then categorized in the New Age culture.