Find the Difference in These Two Passages...

The stronger of the two connections would have to be what each, the book and the passage, are describing. While the book is describing China in the late 1900s and the “re-education” of young men and women, the passage describes and lugubrious valley, which is getting older and less interesting for the character. Balzac speaks more on how the past is better for the future, meaning the way of life worked so well in the past, that that same path should work for future generations. Little items, like an instrument, were common to the average American, but a mystery to most in the villagers in China. “The headman held the violin upright and peered into the black interior of the body, like an officious customs officer searching for drugs” (Sijie 3). On the other hand, the passage for Pere Goriot is more of a man’s acknowledgement that the valley, which was probably treasured, has lost the dazzle. Because of the way this passage is worded, one can go so far as to infer that the characters in both the passages of text are choosing to see life in a different light.

In Balzac and the Little Chinese Seamstress, the plot seems to be escaping the re-education process, but maybe the plot was daring to think differently; taking the plunge in doing something against the rules, not for sport, but because one’s heart desires the taste of something new. Four-Eyes said it perfectly with the question, “What is it with you two, always going for stuff that’s forbidden? (Sijie 77)” The tone in the passage from Pere Goriot gives off that same vibe. The character describing the valley as “that valley where suffering is always real” or “A Parisian losing his way here would see nothing but lodging houses and institutions,” he makes it seem like he just wants something fresh, so, in putting down what he or she already has, he or she hopes to gain a beautiful, new future.