As we read a book, fiction or non-fiction, or watch a movie or drama series, what do we see and understand? Is it only a story or is there something more important the author trying to convey? In Deogratias: A Tale of Rwanda, Jean-Philipe (JP) Stassen tells a story about a young boy, Deogratias, experiences before, during and after the genocide, the war happened due to the division between ethnics: Hutu and Tutsi. As the story progresses, it shows something significant in life that we can take as a lesson. While there is no denying that the event happened in Rwanda between the Tutsis and Hutus was very horrifying, JP Stassen’s deliberate illustration of Deogratias’ life and character in the book portrays the severe damage caused by the hatred
…show more content…
The “wall” between them is so thick that it caused discrimination and misrepresentation between the two ethnics. Discrimination between ethnics can cause unfair treatment, respect and judgment between people in the society. Apparently, the Hutus had the upper hand in the society and the Tutsis were viewed as “cockroaches” in their eyes (34, 57, 70, 72). This had caused the Tutsis to be viewed as mere peasants and deposited at the lowest hierarchy of the society. Even at school, the teacher was very biased, teaching the differences between Hutu and Tutsi. The teacher pompously described the Hutus as “proud and honest farmers…..who cleared the country for cultivation……they are the true Rwandans”. As for Tutsis, he unashamedly designated them as the people “who took advantage of the natural integrity of the poor Hutu peasants, and treacherously enslaved them” (18). This knowledge depicted that the whole land of Rwanda belong to the Hutu and Tutsi has no right to have a single land or property in Rwanda. The Hutus looked down on the Tutsis and didn’t gave them the credits they deserved. It was as if the Hutus are the heroes and the Tutsis are the villains. The Tutsi was badly misrepresented due to biased thoughts of ethnicities. This apprehends that the hatred between ethnics can cause biased or discriminate views of people in the …show more content…
The hatred between them was severely deep that it had led to cruelty, violence and war: the genocide. It started when the radio announced with “extreme sadness and a lot of anger” that the president—was a Hutu—had been murdered by the Tutsis whom they mentioned as “that foul race of cockroaches” (57). Blinded by hatred and anger, the Hutus rashly made the decision to start a war and “eradicated” the Tutsi, whom they blamed for killing the president. In this case, the Tutsi were not given any chances to defend themselves. There were no investigation or evidences that portrayed the Tutsis were guilty. This shows the denied of the human rights for a fair trial until proven guilty (Herman, 66). The Hutus set out on an abhorrent goal to hunt and kill the entire population Tutsi population. The menacingly determined expression on Julius’ face: a Hutu militia: when he asked his Hutu brothers, including Deo, to come with on their task, proves the fact of a heartless action to kill the Tutsis without any mercy or remorse (58, 70). Their action was not driven by justice intentions, instead it was blinded by their anger and hatred towards the other party. Therefore, this event proves that hatred and misunderstanding between races can lead to unnecessary violence and
The “wall” between them is so thick that it caused discrimination and misrepresentation between the two ethnics. Discrimination between ethnics can cause unfair treatment, respect and judgment between people in the society. Apparently, the Hutus had the upper hand in the society and the Tutsis were viewed as “cockroaches” in their eyes (34, 57, 70, 72). This had caused the Tutsis to be viewed as mere peasants and deposited at the lowest hierarchy of the society. Even at school, the teacher was very biased, teaching the differences between Hutu and Tutsi. The teacher pompously described the Hutus as “proud and honest farmers…..who cleared the country for cultivation……they are the true Rwandans”. As for Tutsis, he unashamedly designated them as the people “who took advantage of the natural integrity of the poor Hutu peasants, and treacherously enslaved them” (18). This knowledge depicted that the whole land of Rwanda belong to the Hutu and Tutsi has no right to have a single land or property in Rwanda. The Hutus looked down on the Tutsis and didn’t gave them the credits they deserved. It was as if the Hutus are the heroes and the Tutsis are the villains. The Tutsi was badly misrepresented due to biased thoughts of ethnicities. This apprehends that the hatred between ethnics can cause biased or discriminate views of people in the …show more content…
The hatred between them was severely deep that it had led to cruelty, violence and war: the genocide. It started when the radio announced with “extreme sadness and a lot of anger” that the president—was a Hutu—had been murdered by the Tutsis whom they mentioned as “that foul race of cockroaches” (57). Blinded by hatred and anger, the Hutus rashly made the decision to start a war and “eradicated” the Tutsi, whom they blamed for killing the president. In this case, the Tutsi were not given any chances to defend themselves. There were no investigation or evidences that portrayed the Tutsis were guilty. This shows the denied of the human rights for a fair trial until proven guilty (Herman, 66). The Hutus set out on an abhorrent goal to hunt and kill the entire population Tutsi population. The menacingly determined expression on Julius’ face: a Hutu militia: when he asked his Hutu brothers, including Deo, to come with on their task, proves the fact of a heartless action to kill the Tutsis without any mercy or remorse (58, 70). Their action was not driven by justice intentions, instead it was blinded by their anger and hatred towards the other party. Therefore, this event proves that hatred and misunderstanding between races can lead to unnecessary violence and