“I grew up not being accepted by society for a long time due to having an accent, I wasn’t aware of the standards society sets for people with different backgrounds, Sherman Alexie and Nancy Mairs made me realize that there are indeed certain standards and norms society expect of you. I believe Sherman Alexie’s and Nancy Mairs essays are comparable because they both talk about what in their cases was acceptable by society and how they refused to be like everybody else. In Alexie’s and Mairs essays, I understand that they both have the same message I believe they both try to encourage and motivate people to break out of that stereotype and to make them understand it is ok to be different. Both talk about how they were expected to be and how they wouldn’t let anyone “non-Indians” as Sherman Alexie wrote or anything the disease multiple sclerosis in Nancy Mairs case defeat them. …show more content…
They also both agree that if you were different from the “rest” you were often not accepted or you would have it harder than the average “normal” person. Nancy Mairs writes “In our society, anyone who deviates from the norm had better find some way to compensate.” (Nancy Mairs 18) In a very similar way Sherman Alexie writes “As Indian children, we were expected to fail in the non-Indian world. Those who failed were ceremonially accepted by other Indians and appropriately pitied by non-Indians.” (Sherman Alexie 6) They both conclude that if you do not fall in to that average and acceptable standard society sets, people will be resentful of who you are and what you