Master narratives not only tell us what we should believe; they tell us what to ignore. A master narrative will obfuscate the historical context in which an event occurs, as well as the complex of global relations which shape the immediate site where something happens.

For example, in your first readings Takaki explains that the Irish people suffered terribly under British imperialism. Even before the potato famine, they had been hungry for a long time. The island nation had rich soil and the people produced a wide variety of food, but those who produced this food starved as the produce was shipped off to England to feed others. The master narrative thus obfuscates the role of British imperialism in the emigration of Irish during the 19th century and instead blames the potato famine. Takaki looks at the potato famine historically through the perspectives of the people whose voices are silenced in and by the master narrative. His powerful historical accounting amends history and for example illuminates what might have been seen through the eyes of Irish women in the 19th century.

For this question, consider the following in your answer:

What is revealed when we look at the history of the potato famine historically and through the experiences of many different groups of people?

What is a comparative multicultural approach?

Why is it important to take a comparative multicultural approach to history?

What examples, apart from that of the Irish, stand out in this Week’s Takaki readings and the documentary The Shadow of Hate.

Post an initial response Thursday, by midnight, PST, and two responses to other students’ postings by Sunday, by midnight.

Requirements: 1 paragraph

We can handle this paper for you

We Guarantee ZERO Plagiarism ZERO AI

Done by Professional writers from scratch