Life in the Iron-Mills.
Wow.
I love this story; it's filled with passion. I started reading this and I knew I would like it, even though it is dark and morbid for 95% of the story. I love the way Davis wrote this. She spoke to the reader like she could read their thoughts. The way she inquired of her readers was chilling, in a way, and I kept wanting to deny any judgement she assumed upon her audience. The way she wrote this made me appalled to think someone might even try to judge these mill workers for being dirty and stuck in a rut. That's what life was like back then; if you weren't somebody you were nobody.
After reading the first page or so, it struck me who I could compare Davis to. In a way, her dark and depressing story just screams Hawthorne.
I also found myself thinking of the novel North and South by Elizabeth Gaskell. I just recently started reading this book and haven't gotten very far, but the same friend who insisted I read the book also insisted I watch the movie with her. Therefore, I have a bit of North and South discourse in the back of my mind. While reading Life in the Iron-Mills, I kept imagining the fluffy pollution of the cotton mills (the very atmosphere is filled with particles of cotton that could easily be breathed in). It was easy to imagine what the iron mills would look like. Also, in North and South one of the main characters, Mr. Thornton, is a mill owner. He's the classic Jane Austen hero--tall, dark, and handsome--but he appears to care none at all for his workers. When he catches a worker smoking his pipe in the cotton mill, he beats him bloody and proceeds to fire him from his job. Throughout the story, Mr. Thornton is found discussing business with his fellow mill owners. The very same thing happens in Life in the Iron-Mills. I felt like I was watching another episode of North and South the entire time I read this story.
Another aspect about Davis' piece is that she heavily used Biblical allusions all throughout the story. Just a handful of these include p. 2600- "busy making straight paths"; p. 2602- "Man cannot live by work alone.."; p. 2608- "...a great gulf never to be passed"; p. 2610- "What shall we do to be saved?"; p. 2611- paragraphs 2 and 4; and p. 2616- "...mote in brother's eye..."
Davis uses these scriptures well. She must know her Bible, much like her character Mitchell.
Well, having said all of this, I just thoroughly loved reading this piece. I couldn't figure out what it was that Deb was horrified that Hugh would do until we got to the scene where he kills himself with the blade that he had been sharpening on the jail bars. But I think what I liked most about this piece was that at the end, Davis wrote with a hopeful light rather than sticking with morbid tones all throughout. I really think it was the perfect piece of literature to end the semester with.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Elizabeth Drew Stoddard is the Bee's Knees
When I sat down to write this blog, I couldn't quite decide who to compare Stoddard to. But then I flipped through my notes on Stoddard's "Lemorne vs. Huell" and found my sidenote on how she uses wit throughout her story, particularly while talking to Uxbridge. I'm a big fan of the witty banter, so I really loved reading Elizabeth Drew Stoddard. Every time she gave Uxbridge a good tete a tete I just about laughed my face off.
Emily Dickinson uses wit very frequently in her poetry. I love how far we've come from Puritan sermons; I really think Emily portrays just where we're at during this time period. She's brazen and individualistic, not afraid to write about things that other people wouldn't normally write about.
So having said that, what I really love about Elizabeth Drew Stoddard's "Lemorne vs. Huell" is that it is the complete opposite of what you think it is going to be. As we read this story about 24 year old Miss Huell, all signs point to another Jane Austen ending, where the girl marries for love in the end and everything ends up more or less a happy ending. But THEN...
Page 2538 of the 2nd Norton Anthology text.
"That night I dreamed of the scene in the hotel at Newport. I heard Aunt Eliza saying, "If I gain, Margaret will be rich." And I heard also the clock strike two. As it struck I said, "My husband is a scoundrel," and woke with a start."
Okay...that's totally NOT what I expected.
(we knew it was there, we just thought she'd be all girly and clueless for the rest of her life)
Emily Dickinson uses wit very frequently in her poetry. I love how far we've come from Puritan sermons; I really think Emily portrays just where we're at during this time period. She's brazen and individualistic, not afraid to write about things that other people wouldn't normally write about.
So having said that, what I really love about Elizabeth Drew Stoddard's "Lemorne vs. Huell" is that it is the complete opposite of what you think it is going to be. As we read this story about 24 year old Miss Huell, all signs point to another Jane Austen ending, where the girl marries for love in the end and everything ends up more or less a happy ending. But THEN...
Page 2538 of the 2nd Norton Anthology text.
"That night I dreamed of the scene in the hotel at Newport. I heard Aunt Eliza saying, "If I gain, Margaret will be rich." And I heard also the clock strike two. As it struck I said, "My husband is a scoundrel," and woke with a start."
Okay...that's totally NOT what I expected.
(we knew it was there, we just thought she'd be all girly and clueless for the rest of her life)
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Hawthorne's a weirdy.
Nathaniel Hawthorne is just one of those guys. You really don't know what to do with him; he's awkward and hard to read sometimes, filled with passion but a different duck nonetheless. At least the Birthmark was easy to read--I'm just thanking my lucky stars on that one.
The Birthmark is definitely an interesting piece. It's dark, but it still sheds hope for Georgiana throughout the story. You think she's gonna make it and they'll live happily ever after, but actually she dies and it's all his fault.
Hawthorne tries to portray science side by side with evil, or better yet bad consequences. I feel like he reminds me of the old Puritan authors whose only works were like sermons or judgement poetry, not because he preaches per se but because he condemns things practically. This guy really thought scientific anything was for the birds, and he let people know all about it. I have more to say about all that, but I'm saving it for this research paper that I have the pure joy of writing. ;)
Moral of the story is, kids, you've gotta be pretty low to think your own wife is repulsive just because of a birthmark that she definitely had when you married her. Someone needs an attitude check if he finds the woman he loves to suddenly be disgusting to him--talk about potential heart shattering feelings. I know it's about more than that, but seriously. What is this guy thinking? Better yet, what is Hawthorne trying to portray through Aylmer here? This is a man who loves nothing more than his science. If he had to choose between the lovliest lady in all the land or science, he would pick science and, OH LOOK, HE DID!
I mean, this story is filled to the brim with passion. I read that this was written shortly after he had become a newlywed himself. Now what does that tell me...I see a lot of romance in this story, but it's all of a grotesque kind. Maybe he had some secret disgust in regards to his own bride that he needed to vent about. That would be sad. I'll leave you with that, since it's pretty interesting and all.
The Birthmark is definitely an interesting piece. It's dark, but it still sheds hope for Georgiana throughout the story. You think she's gonna make it and they'll live happily ever after, but actually she dies and it's all his fault.
Hawthorne tries to portray science side by side with evil, or better yet bad consequences. I feel like he reminds me of the old Puritan authors whose only works were like sermons or judgement poetry, not because he preaches per se but because he condemns things practically. This guy really thought scientific anything was for the birds, and he let people know all about it. I have more to say about all that, but I'm saving it for this research paper that I have the pure joy of writing. ;)
Moral of the story is, kids, you've gotta be pretty low to think your own wife is repulsive just because of a birthmark that she definitely had when you married her. Someone needs an attitude check if he finds the woman he loves to suddenly be disgusting to him--talk about potential heart shattering feelings. I know it's about more than that, but seriously. What is this guy thinking? Better yet, what is Hawthorne trying to portray through Aylmer here? This is a man who loves nothing more than his science. If he had to choose between the lovliest lady in all the land or science, he would pick science and, OH LOOK, HE DID!
I mean, this story is filled to the brim with passion. I read that this was written shortly after he had become a newlywed himself. Now what does that tell me...I see a lot of romance in this story, but it's all of a grotesque kind. Maybe he had some secret disgust in regards to his own bride that he needed to vent about. That would be sad. I'll leave you with that, since it's pretty interesting and all.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
The Finished (because it wasn't before) Blog about Harriet Jacobs.
For this blog, let us go back to that one time in lecture when we discussed William Apess, a Native American author and public speaker of sorts. Apess was naturally fiery about his cause. This cause was directly involved with the unfair treatment of Natives by Caucasians. In his writings, Apess declares his opinions with fervor and speaks out for his people. This writing is most definitely something like a speech, seeing as how he uses rhetoric to send forth his message to his audiences. "My brothers...my brothers..."
Apess' venue of protestation was effective, but Harriet Jacobs decided to take a different route; she simply told her story. Harriet lived in the 1800's--right around the Civil War. She had a voice during this time period, which was good considering this war was all about Southern rights, and that included, well, HER. This was a time when southerners were antsy about the possible election of a president who may or may not take away their precious slavery (by the way, that would be Abraham Lincoln). With new states entering into the Union and such, slavery was already a heavily debated issue. To keep, or not to keep? That IS the question. Lincoln wanted to keep things at a neutral place, allowing the pre-existing states to keep their slavery, but creating all new states as "free soil" (a term used in the time period to describe a state where a slave could become free). But slavery was pretty much the death sentence debate of the 19th century, and so people talked. That brings us back to Jacobs.
Harriet Jacobs' narrative, Incidents int eh Life of a Slave Girl, was her story. What you read in your anthology is what her life was like. Like any other slave who wrote such literature, her writing was questioned (we wouldn't want another Equiano on our hands, now would we?). But I think it's safe to say that this narrative is all her own and it is a true account.
So instead of trying to call out to an audience to make them ponder the present issue, she gives her testimony. Reading such a testimony is bound to pluck away at some heartstrings, and indeed it did. I really feel like Jacobs was almost like a smaller, woman version of Frederick Douglass. In fact, some of her work was mentioned and quoted in my history class the other day. (I got all excited!!) Jacobs' Incidents is written in a way where you can just read and you get it and it's good. As I started reading it, I got sucked in and didn't really pay any attention to anything else. I'm sure we can all connect with her in the way she longed for something and yet was denied it. We're all familiar with the star-crossed lovers ordeal, but this narrative takes it to the next level of cruelty when we read about Mr. Flint's harassment. It's just sad that the next level even happened. Though she clearly dislikes dregging up her painful memories, she tells us about her "unhappy times" for the sake of the message. "And now, reader, I come to a period in my unhappy life, which I would gladly forget if I could. The remembrance fills me with sorrow and shame. It pains me to tell you of it; but I have promised to tell you the truth, and I will do it honestly, let it cost me what it may" (p. 1816).
This automatically makes the reader proceed with caution, knowing that he or she is about to read horrible things. It sets a sad tone and makes the reader consider how Jacobs suffered much more than any rhetorical question would. What it all comes down to is this: when you know that someone has been through it all, you're more willing to understand them, hear their voice and think on their thoughts. Testimonies are powerful.
Apess' venue of protestation was effective, but Harriet Jacobs decided to take a different route; she simply told her story. Harriet lived in the 1800's--right around the Civil War. She had a voice during this time period, which was good considering this war was all about Southern rights, and that included, well, HER. This was a time when southerners were antsy about the possible election of a president who may or may not take away their precious slavery (by the way, that would be Abraham Lincoln). With new states entering into the Union and such, slavery was already a heavily debated issue. To keep, or not to keep? That IS the question. Lincoln wanted to keep things at a neutral place, allowing the pre-existing states to keep their slavery, but creating all new states as "free soil" (a term used in the time period to describe a state where a slave could become free). But slavery was pretty much the death sentence debate of the 19th century, and so people talked. That brings us back to Jacobs.
Harriet Jacobs' narrative, Incidents int eh Life of a Slave Girl, was her story. What you read in your anthology is what her life was like. Like any other slave who wrote such literature, her writing was questioned (we wouldn't want another Equiano on our hands, now would we?). But I think it's safe to say that this narrative is all her own and it is a true account.
So instead of trying to call out to an audience to make them ponder the present issue, she gives her testimony. Reading such a testimony is bound to pluck away at some heartstrings, and indeed it did. I really feel like Jacobs was almost like a smaller, woman version of Frederick Douglass. In fact, some of her work was mentioned and quoted in my history class the other day. (I got all excited!!) Jacobs' Incidents is written in a way where you can just read and you get it and it's good. As I started reading it, I got sucked in and didn't really pay any attention to anything else. I'm sure we can all connect with her in the way she longed for something and yet was denied it. We're all familiar with the star-crossed lovers ordeal, but this narrative takes it to the next level of cruelty when we read about Mr. Flint's harassment. It's just sad that the next level even happened. Though she clearly dislikes dregging up her painful memories, she tells us about her "unhappy times" for the sake of the message. "And now, reader, I come to a period in my unhappy life, which I would gladly forget if I could. The remembrance fills me with sorrow and shame. It pains me to tell you of it; but I have promised to tell you the truth, and I will do it honestly, let it cost me what it may" (p. 1816).
This automatically makes the reader proceed with caution, knowing that he or she is about to read horrible things. It sets a sad tone and makes the reader consider how Jacobs suffered much more than any rhetorical question would. What it all comes down to is this: when you know that someone has been through it all, you're more willing to understand them, hear their voice and think on their thoughts. Testimonies are powerful.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Phillis Wheatley vs. Philip Freneau
Phillis Wheatley's work consisted mostly of inspiring poems and letters that cried out for freedom and independence. This is much the same as the some of the work of Philip Freneau, who was something of a "literary hit man" for men like Thomas Jefferson.While Freneau wrote for independence of the white man, Wheatley wrote for the black. Her poems were a strong voice during the late 1700's--a time when America was crying out for freedom from Britain, or at the very least representation in the mother country.
One of Wheatley's main focuses was slavery. It was her belief that American independence and American slavery could not co-exist; in fact, to have such a situation would be very hypocritical. This is what she is trying to show to a secretary of state in her "To the Right Honorable William, Earl of Dartmouth, His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for North America, &c." William Legge was not sympathetic to the cause of the American Revolution (Baym, 754). Wheatley reall butters him up in her poem, which probably helps to get him to accept what she is really trying to say here. You can find the heart of the poem in lines 20-31.
In Freneau's "To Sir Toby," we can find a different manner of protestation entirely. He provides a more violent presentation of slavery and names the poem in honor of a slave master. He doesn't cut to the chase in the beginning. "If there exists a hell--the case is clear--/ Sir Toby's slaves enjoy that portion here:/ Here are no blazing brimstone lakes--'tis true;/ But kidnled rum too often burns as blue;/ In which some fiend, whom nature must detest,/ Steeps Toby's brand, and marks poor Cudjoe's breat." Freneau goes on to speak of whipping, chains, imprisonment, and lots of creepy crawley things--surely not a pleasant poem.
Yet he gets a point across to us; that freedom is something slaves long for, yet must pass through inumerable toils to attain.
This is not the style Phillis Wheatley chooses to use, and I can't help but think she probably gained more fans that way. You know what they say: you can catch more flies with honey.
One of Wheatley's main focuses was slavery. It was her belief that American independence and American slavery could not co-exist; in fact, to have such a situation would be very hypocritical. This is what she is trying to show to a secretary of state in her "To the Right Honorable William, Earl of Dartmouth, His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for North America, &c." William Legge was not sympathetic to the cause of the American Revolution (Baym, 754). Wheatley reall butters him up in her poem, which probably helps to get him to accept what she is really trying to say here. You can find the heart of the poem in lines 20-31.
In Freneau's "To Sir Toby," we can find a different manner of protestation entirely. He provides a more violent presentation of slavery and names the poem in honor of a slave master. He doesn't cut to the chase in the beginning. "If there exists a hell--the case is clear--/ Sir Toby's slaves enjoy that portion here:/ Here are no blazing brimstone lakes--'tis true;/ But kidnled rum too often burns as blue;/ In which some fiend, whom nature must detest,/ Steeps Toby's brand, and marks poor Cudjoe's breat." Freneau goes on to speak of whipping, chains, imprisonment, and lots of creepy crawley things--surely not a pleasant poem.
Yet he gets a point across to us; that freedom is something slaves long for, yet must pass through inumerable toils to attain.
This is not the style Phillis Wheatley chooses to use, and I can't help but think she probably gained more fans that way. You know what they say: you can catch more flies with honey.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Olaudah Equiano
Olaudah Equiano was one of the most moving African writers before Frederick Douglas. In his piece, The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavas Vassa, the African, Written by Himself, he tells his story. In the beginning of his narrative, this is not necessarily a call to action. Unlike Tecumseh, Equiano is simply writing about his autobiography. Tecumseh was filled with rage in his writings and speeches, but Equiano takes measures to ensure that he doesn't offend his readers.
"I hope the reader will not think I have trespassed on his patience in introducing myself to him, with some account of the manners and customs of my country. The had been implanted in me with great care, and made an impression on my mind, which time could not erase, and which all the adversity and variety of fortune I have since experienced, served only to rivet and record; whether the love of one's country be real or imaginary, or a lesson of reason, or an instinct of nature, I still look back with pleasure on the first scenes of my life, though that pleasure has been for the most part mingled with sorrow."
Olaudah does not press his views on his readers, unlike Tecumseh. He simply states that he was born into a different culture, and it cannot be taken from him or forgotten easily. He does not apologize for it though, and that is one thing that he shares with Tecumseh. They are both proud of their cultures.
Equiano shows us what it was like to be a slave during this era. He opens a window that we haven't opened yet ourselves in this text book. We are now beginning to read about life in slavery and the struggle that comes with trying to be free. I enjoyed reading Olaudah Equiano's narrative; it felt like I was reading a story (which I was). It is nice to read something that isn't focused on Puritan ways or Native American folklore for once :)
"I hope the reader will not think I have trespassed on his patience in introducing myself to him, with some account of the manners and customs of my country. The had been implanted in me with great care, and made an impression on my mind, which time could not erase, and which all the adversity and variety of fortune I have since experienced, served only to rivet and record; whether the love of one's country be real or imaginary, or a lesson of reason, or an instinct of nature, I still look back with pleasure on the first scenes of my life, though that pleasure has been for the most part mingled with sorrow."
Olaudah does not press his views on his readers, unlike Tecumseh. He simply states that he was born into a different culture, and it cannot be taken from him or forgotten easily. He does not apologize for it though, and that is one thing that he shares with Tecumseh. They are both proud of their cultures.
Equiano shows us what it was like to be a slave during this era. He opens a window that we haven't opened yet ourselves in this text book. We are now beginning to read about life in slavery and the struggle that comes with trying to be free. I enjoyed reading Olaudah Equiano's narrative; it felt like I was reading a story (which I was). It is nice to read something that isn't focused on Puritan ways or Native American folklore for once :)
Friday, September 17, 2010
Edward Taylor and Michael Wigglesworth: Bringin' the word through their poetry
Michael Wigglesworth. The Day of Doom. Edward Taylor. Meditation 8.
Doom was easier for me to read. It may be 8 pages front and back of hellfire and brimstone, but it was still easier to read. I could understand it; I could follow the flow of the words. Meditation 8 was trickier to decipher. I cracked open my book this morning to read his work for class, and I was quite bamboozled by the first sentence. "I kenning through Astronomy Divine/ The World's bright Battlement, wherein I spy/ A Golden Path my Pencil cannot line,/ From that bright Throne unto my Threshold lie." (Taylor)
HUH?
I guess it is not a good idea to read Taylor first thing in the morning. Upon further explication and thorough re-reading, I can usually find the beauty, the meaning, the message in poetry. Edward Taylor is making me work for my understanding in this poem, though! Luckily Meditation 8 is annotated, but I can't help but wonder, is he just making up words? What on earth does "kenning" mean?
Dictionary.com says the word "ken" means to have knowledge of or to understand something.The annotation for the first phrase "translates it" as "discerning, by means of 'divine astronomy,' the tower of heaven." Well, okay. We'll go with that.
See, I can figure things out if I take the time to detassle the poem. I think I had a bad attitude about Taylor's pieces because he is so much more...Renaissance than Wigglesworth or any of the other colonial poets thus far. I was attempting to write this blog earlier but words just would not come to me. I was so frustrated by the way he writes that I vented into a different blog something along the lines of: "Taylor is all frilly Biblical references and Shakespearian linguistics." Yet to say I do not enjoy such poems would be a lie, and so I dug into his Meditation 8 a little more. Edward Taylor is not quite so frustrating and intimidating as I first thought him to be. And yes, I deep down know that I can appreciate his style of Biblical writing because we all need a little Taylor in the midst of Wigglesworths and Bradfords.
Doom was easier for me to read. It may be 8 pages front and back of hellfire and brimstone, but it was still easier to read. I could understand it; I could follow the flow of the words. Meditation 8 was trickier to decipher. I cracked open my book this morning to read his work for class, and I was quite bamboozled by the first sentence. "I kenning through Astronomy Divine/ The World's bright Battlement, wherein I spy/ A Golden Path my Pencil cannot line,/ From that bright Throne unto my Threshold lie." (Taylor)
HUH?
I guess it is not a good idea to read Taylor first thing in the morning. Upon further explication and thorough re-reading, I can usually find the beauty, the meaning, the message in poetry. Edward Taylor is making me work for my understanding in this poem, though! Luckily Meditation 8 is annotated, but I can't help but wonder, is he just making up words? What on earth does "kenning" mean?
Dictionary.com says the word "ken" means to have knowledge of or to understand something.The annotation for the first phrase "translates it" as "discerning, by means of 'divine astronomy,' the tower of heaven." Well, okay. We'll go with that.
See, I can figure things out if I take the time to detassle the poem. I think I had a bad attitude about Taylor's pieces because he is so much more...Renaissance than Wigglesworth or any of the other colonial poets thus far. I was attempting to write this blog earlier but words just would not come to me. I was so frustrated by the way he writes that I vented into a different blog something along the lines of: "Taylor is all frilly Biblical references and Shakespearian linguistics." Yet to say I do not enjoy such poems would be a lie, and so I dug into his Meditation 8 a little more. Edward Taylor is not quite so frustrating and intimidating as I first thought him to be. And yes, I deep down know that I can appreciate his style of Biblical writing because we all need a little Taylor in the midst of Wigglesworths and Bradfords.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)