Category: Uncategorized

Loading Likes... I have read only a few Dickinson poems before, and have always loved her word choice and unique style but also have been generally baffled by her poems. Her unique use of punctuation, grammatical structure, and line breaks are essential to her poems, yet I have never been able to pinpoint how or why her unique choices contribute to her voice and writing- that is, until I read the two different versions of poem #320. The anthology included her original poem and then an edited version where many of her capitalization, punctuation and word choices were changed or erased to be published in a book about her poetry. When reading this edited version, I realized how much her odd choices construct a particular cadence to her poems that make them so distinctly hers and add to their meaning. For example, while her use of dashes seems excessive at times, the line in poem 260 “Are you – Nobody – too?” would have an entirely different meaning than “Are you nobody too?” or any other version aside from the one she wrote in her specific style. After reading the edited version, I re-read the original poem 320 and noticed an overwhelming sense that of her voice in her writing. Her use of these unconventional choices gives a rhythm and style to her writing that almost feels like she is talking to me through the page, like I can hear her speaking the lines in her particular voice.

Loading Likes...

In reading Sarah Orne Jewett’s “A White Heron,” I found myself wondering if the titular bird does not symbolize the innocence – I’d even go so far as to suggest the virginity – of young Sylvia. When she first encounters the young man in the woods, she is alarmed to hear “a boy’s whistle, determined, and somewhat aggressive.” She immediately identifies him as assertive and forward – Sylvia seems afraid of him, as though she herself is the prey he hunts. The man evidently evokes some shamefulness or fear in the girl, as Sylvia “did not dare to look boldly at the tall young man.” From the get-go, Sylvia seems somehow ashamed to have even “invited” this young man’s attention: “Would not her grandmother consider her much to blame?” The tone surrounding the first meeting is one of apprehension, timidness, and shame — which seems attributable to what Sylvia perceives as her grandmother’s expectations of her. One might quite easily translate these emotions into those surrounding a young girl’s early discoveries of or introductions to sexuality. 

Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but the young man’s immediate demand for milk upon his arrival at the farmhouse seems specific and intentional: could the milk further imply his “hunt” for a “fertile” young woman?

The guest’s “eager interest” in Sylvia and her potential knowledge of (in his words) the “tall white bird with soft feathers and long thin legs” might carry similar connotations. This description of the bird is human-like, feminine, and even mildly sexual. Sylvia’s “heart” gives a “wild beat” in response – she is excited, in some way, by the mention of this rare bird. In her description of her encounter with the creature, one detects a sense of danger or sensuality: “the sunshine always seemed strangely yellow and hot;” “her grandmother had warned her that she might sink in the soft black mud;” Sylvia “dreamed about” the salt marshes beyond this space, but she “had never seen” them. Sylvia knows the bird is there – she’s seen it, heard it – but the mystery and intrigue remains; there is much she has not yet explored. 

Soon Sylvia is captivated by the young man, whom she describes as “charming and delightful; the woman’s heart, asleep in the child, was vaguely thrilled by a dream of love.” In the woods, the young man leads the way, and Sylvia follows him. This maintains a dynamic of ‘experienced’ versus ‘inexperienced.’  

In her knowledge of the bird, Sylvia has power – she has something the guest wants. The issue at hand is whether or not she should give the stranger access to the bird. However, once she has climbed the tree and spotted the white heron, Sylvia wishes to keep the “secret” of “the wild, light, slender bird,” for to do so would be to “give its life away.” While Sylvia is tempted by the young man’s promises of money, as well as her desire to please him in light of her newfound affection for him, she finds herself bound to her morals and her obligation to nature — her obligation to innocence, perhaps. Jewett’s introduction remarks that her stories negotiate between a young woman’s “conception of herself in nature and to the world of men.” Of course, Sylvia is very young. But does the story suggest a woman to be effectively impure or sinful upon giving up her “secret” to a man? Are men inherently corrupting?

Loading Likes...

Upon realizing that George has been killed, Editha rushes to see Mrs. Gearson, his mother as she promised she would. However, she finds no sympathy for the death of the lover who she sent off to war, claiming she could only love a man who loved her country, America. Mrs. Gearson declares, “No, you didn’t expect him to get killed,” Mrs. Gearson repeated in a voice which was startlingly like George’s again. “You just expected him to kill someone else, some of those foreigners, that weren’t there because they had any say about it, but because they had to be there, poor wretches–conscripts, or whatever they call ‘em. You thought it would be all right for my George, your George, to kill the sons of those miserable mothers and the husbands of those girls that you would never see the face of” (Adams 362).

Many interesting points are raised in this speech that contradict the readings prior over-enunciated patriotic tone, that went so far as to claim Editha could only love a soldier of her country, a hero. Mrs. Gearson accuses Editha of attempting to force George to become a murder to men who would be just as complacent or resistant even to the war as he. She claims that Editha’s pressures would have led to the downfall of George’s character, and that she is glad that he died, for at least being murdered he was not forced to murder. In addition to critiquing the intense war-mongering in the United States prior to the Spanish-American War, this speech also attributes much of said war-mongering to women. The story “Editha” contains no blood thirsty men, but rather Editha pushing her partner to go to war so she can have the pride of him being a hero when he returns. The story critiques the role of women, who would not personally be sent to a war-front, for their roles in persuading and pressuring men into the turmoils of war. I would be curious to know if there was an actual discrepancy between the level of support for the war between men and women at this time. Was there a valid reason to attribute the blame for the deaths of men to women, or did the writer simply dislike women? Was this an isolated incident to this family or was it a wide-spread phenomenon to blame women for the deaths of men that they encouraged to go to war.

I find this particularly interesting because it shifts the blame from the government that declared the war to the women, who at this point in time had little to no say on how a war progressed. The story almost seems to treat Editha as a scape-goat. And while I disagree with Editha’s actions, I believe this representation that women receive in 19th century America is interesting enough to examine further.

Loading Likes... one of the things I’ve found most interesting while reading Incidents is the way Jacobs describes characters as both kind and cruel within the same breath. Often times she’ll describe the apparent “kindness” of slaveowners, while still describing them as slaveowners. This really contributes to the irony in the book.There were a few times I found myself scoffing out loud at something I read. Another example would be her description of the jailor as a good man who lets her and family see her brother, however while he is helping them, he only does so much, letting them see him for a very short period of time and doing nothing to actually help.

It becomes very easy to draw connections between Jacobs’s argument here and Douglass’s argument in his own narrative. I think the common notion that slavery was damaging to the moral character of everyone involved. (particularly white people) is really interesting and likely a good argument if one were appealing to a white reader who didn’t want to be corrupted by slavery or perhaps didn’t see the truth of the evils being committed. I know I’ve mentioned this argument before in my blog posts but it always stands out to me for some reason. I think because its a point that is relatable to readers, most everyone has witnessed someone become power hungry in some way. But at the same time it’s almost depressing that an argument like that every had to be made. The fact that the argument must be framed as trying to save potential slaveowners from the damage of slavery instead of for rescuing the people who are actually suffering is incredibly sad.

Loading Likes...

While reading “The Loophole of Retreat” chapter in Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, I found myself interested in the scene in which Jacobs compares her experience to that of other slaves, saying that:

It seemed horrible to sit or lie in a cramped position day after day, without one gleam of light. Yet I would have chosen this, rather than my lot as a slave, though white people considered it an easy one; and it was so compared with the fate of others. I was never cruelly overworked; I was never lacerated with the whip from head to foot; I was never so beaten and bruised that I could not turn from one side to the other; I never had my heel-strings cut to prevent my running away; I was never chained to a log and forced to drag it about, while I toiled in the fields from morning till night; I was never branded with hot iron, or torn by bloodhounds. On the contrary, I had always been kindly treated, and tenderly cared for, until I came into the hands of Dr. Flint. I had never wished for freedom till then. But though my life in slavery was comparatively devoid of hardships, God pity the woman who is compelled to lead such a life! (Jacobs 137-138)

I found the allusion to white people’s shock as the first striking aspect of this passage, as Jacobs frames the perpetual disconnect between white people and the suffering of slaves. The notion that her experience in slavery, marked by sexual abuse, mental torment, and extreme restrictions on her way of life could be considered “an easy one” echoes the detachment and judgement passed by non-slaves on the relative experience of those enslaved. While Jacobs then distinguishes between her limited experience with physical abuses of slavery and her own mental duress, the power in her analysis lies in the fact that both prove insufferable and inhumane. Although she concedes that she had been treated relatively well while she was young, the relativity proves that as nice as she might have been treated, she was still considered property. Such a comparison underlines the truth in the essential inhumanity and indisputable horrors of slavery, whether it takes shape in outright physical abuse or sexual and mental abuse.

I find that this scene potentially echoes our class discussion regarding Jacobs’ censorship of her own experiences; conceding that she never faced the horrors of plantation slavery abuses, such as those referenced in Douglass’s work, but still validating her own suffering. In justifying her running away and living in darkness rather than under the same roof as the abuses of Dr. Flint, Jacobs seems to be convincing the readership of the horrors of her experience without explicitly mentioning the physical abuse in her domestic setting as she doesn’t measure it to the physical abuse of other slaves.

I interpreted this scene as a claim that gauging who is more oppressed of one slave to the other distracts from the ultimate and important truth that slavery as a whole defines oppression and must be eliminated in all forms, whether physical, emotional, or mental abuses.

Loading Likes...

In class we spoke about how Uncle Tom’s Cabin was distinct from other texts we had encountered this semester in that it was written for the present day instead of attempting to be a lasting piece of literature read years after being written. Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, in several places, distinctly considers its 19th century reader. For instance, when Jacobs describes being protected by the wife of a senator in New England, she specifically refers to the senator in the 19th century best seller Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Furthermore, Jacobs refers to a 19th century pro-slavery political figure John Mitchell. These moments which are particularly relevant to the 19th century reader are important in showing to the intended audience how here autobiography is relevant. However, as opposed to the conclusion of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, Jacobs does not end her autobiography by directly calling the readers to action against slavery. She instead thanks those she has been surrounded by, such as her grandmother and Mrs. Burns, who have shown her love amidst her adversity. While Jacobs does not as directly call her readers to political action or refer to the increasing tension in the United States, the references she makes throughout the text make her biography more pertinent for the 19th century reader.

Loading Likes...

What I found interesting about the short story “Editha” by William Dean Howells is the vagueness of the war that he describes. Since George mentions his father fighting in the Civil War, I initially assumed it must have been about the First World War. But the publication date, in 1905, means this story predates World War I by almost ten years. Therefore the war must be fictional; but Howells does not describe the circumstances of the war. Editha describes it only by making sweeping generalizations, such as when she says it is “for the liberation of people who have been struggling for years against the cruelest oppression” (354). Editha doesn’t describe who these people are, or what kind of oppression they are facing. She also doesn’t explain why it is necessary for America to go to war to fight for these people.

Instead of focusing on the details of the war, Howells focuses on emotions. Howells describes how once Editha had written a letter imploring George to enlist “she rested serene in the consciousness of having done what was laid upon her by her love itself to do” (356). The use of the word “serene” contrasts very strongly with the reality of war, which is bloody and violent. When speaking of George, Howells describes how after he enlisted “he was very gay, and he put his arm around her [Editha] with a boisterous laugh” (357). Again, these emotions are at odds with the reality of war. By enlisting, George has volunteered to leave his family and potentially risk death, yet he is described as being “gay” and “boisterious”. With these descriptions, Howells shows the irrational nature of the decision to go to war. In addition, by refusing to define the specifics of the war in the story, Howells is making his critique applicable to all wars. Someone reading this story could recognize the circumstances of World War I or the Vietnam War or the invasion of Iraq. In this way, the story is not just a critique of a single war, but a critique of the very idea of war itself. It becomes a warning about the danger of getting lost in patriotic feelings and forgetting the devastating consequences of war. 

Loading Likes...

In Douglass’ Narrative, in Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and with Harriet Jacobs’ Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, the issue of how families are affected under slavery is very prevalent. And for the latter two readings, where the issue is at the forefront, the female perspective is quite powerful. There is a universality to the mother-daughter relationship that is beyond race or geography – and time – which the authors employ to evoke at the very least sympathy, or ideally empathy, from their white audiences. 

Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl establishes and brings to light many new ideas on how slavery impacts the family (or maybe how we must perceive family in this historical context). In particular, in Chapter 11 (The New Tie to Life), Jacobs reflects on what her grandmother said of her parents’ death, that “‘Perhaps your mother and father are taken from the evil days to come”’ (53). Yet, Jacobs has just encountered these “evil days”, which prompts her questions, “But why, thought I, did my relatives cherish hopes for me? What was there to save me from the usual fate of slave girls? […] How could they hope that I should escape?” (53). These are hard questions to answer and probably do not mean to be answered. Rather, they reflect a deep internal conflict that involves Jacobs’ identity. Who is she to become when there are expectations held by her family, expectations held by herself, and expectations held by the institution of slavery (which is the harsher and more inescapable reality)? In the following chapters, many of the decisions she has to make emphasize this inner battle.

Furthermore, these questions are prompted by her recent pregnancy, where these questions seem to reflect her regret or shame in being responsible for bringing a child up under slavery. Similar to Cassy in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, she often thinks of how it would be easier if her children were to die, so they did not have to suffer under slavery. Yet, her children are what give her a new reason to live. A few chapters before, Jacobs states that “the condition of a slave confuses all principles of morality, and, in fact renders the practice of them impossible” (48), and I think is the only perspective that needs to be taken or to be reminded of. Nevertheless, the deep complexity that this situation presents forces the reader to reflect and think about family in a new way – generationally. And in connection to this, the hope that arises for the new generation, which is rooted in doing better than the previous generations. 

Loading Likes... Right from the get-go the narrative style of incidents is a lot closer to Douglass’s writing than Stowe’s. Obviously this is in part due to the autobiographical nature of the novels, but it is also due to the writing style. Jacobs is far less verbose than Stowe while still managing to describe each event and feeling in detail. There is also far less use of dialect in Jacobs and Douglass than Stowe. This helps craft a different narrative of slaves by portraying them already as more educated and realistic figures that the occasionally cartoonish characters in Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Again, obviously this comes from the fact that it is a memoir, but it is also a stylistic choice made by the author. A lot of the impact and emotion comes from the matter of fat descriptions of a lot of the experiences she had paired with simple thoughts from the author. Whereas Stowe had more big emotional scenes, Jacobs relies (very effectively) on a more simple style that is still very impactful.

Loading Likes...

The loss of motherhood- the forcible separation of mother and child through death or sale- is one of the most prevalent horrors in slave narratives. Uncle Tom’s Cabin started off with a fictionalized account of the common experience of a Black mother being forced to handle the imminent theft of her son, and Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl ends the second chapter with a visceral description of a young enslaved girl and her newborn baby both dying in childbirth in front of the former’s mother and their mutual mistress. 

The juxtaposition of the three is utterly damning. “Seven children called [the mistress] mother,” while the dying girl and her own mother both lose the title within seconds of one another. Being enslaved deprives them of the right to any sort of ownership, any sort of identity, beyond their status as slaves. Motherhood is always understood to be something which can be forced on them through assault, as is heavily implied in the case of the young girl, and just as easily taken away by forces outside of their control. It is one of the major components of slavery’s dehumanization. 

A pervasive myth (and one perpetuated by the Shelbys in Uncle Tom’s Cabin) is that the wives of slaveowners were somehow less complicit in slavery than their husbands. What is also key here is the lack of empathy exhibited by the mistress in this situation. There is no attempt at kindness, or comfort. Neither the mistress through her actions nor the writing of the text itself put in any effort to soften her callous approach to the horrors to which she’s bearing witness. She is as much to blame for the outcome as her absent husband. 

Loading Likes...

I found the character of Linda’s grandmother. Throughout the chapters that I have read so far, she exists as a sort of safe and calming presence. She exhibits many of the qualities that typical fiction grandmothers would have. She always is baking or cooking something for others or to sell and her house smells good. She exists as a place for her grandchildren to escape to and will always comfort them.

Something that is really admirable about her character is the fact that even though she is technically free after years and years of hard work, she refuses to go North if any of her children or grandchildren are still trapped in the system of slavery. This shows how much she values her family and will do anything in her power to either buy them back or simply remain a person of support. I find this especially relevant in Linda’s life because her grandmother also serves as her mother once Linda’s parents are no longer around. Her grandmother takes on this duty, as well as all the other duties she has to other family members and rarely falters.

Loading Likes...

The chapter titled “What Slaves are Taught to Think of the North” shows how slaveholders used misinformation as a powerful tactic to force their preferred version of reality onto those that they have enslaved. Linda explains that in her own experience, she had an interaction with her Mistress in which her Mistress created a false narrative that a freed woman was living in “starvation” in her new life and hoped for the opportunity to become enslaved again. Linda quickly confirmed that the story had been entirely false, but she reflects that she knows that most of the enslaved people believe these stories. 

This chapter reminded me of the moment in Frederick Douglass’ narrative where he explains the altered version of the experience of slavery that had been told to those in the North. The mutual passages of misinformation allow white people to alter black people’s version of reality and therefore perpetuate their ideal version that both assuages their guilt while still maintaining the systems of enslavement. 

Loading Likes...

There was one passage in chapter 8 where Jacob’s put forward a religious argument against slavery, and an argument to make Christianity accessible to current slaves. This is similar to the argument made by Stowe in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, but I thought Jacobs did a better job of incorporating an adequate amount of anger and recognition of the hypocrisy within Christianity surrounding the morality of slaveholders. 

This is the full quote I’m referring to: “They send the Bible to heathen abroad, and neglect the heathen at home. I am glad that missionaries go out to the dark corners of the earth; but I ask them not to overlook the dark corners at home. Talk to American slaveholders as you talk to savages in Africa. Tell them it was wrong to traffic in men. Tell them it is sinful to sell their own children, and atrocious to violate their own daughters. Tell them that all men are brethren, and that man has no right to shut out the light of knowledge from his brother. Tell them they are answerable to God for sealing up the Fountain of Life from souls that are thirsting for it.”

I appreciate that while she alludes to the Christian nation in Africa (that Stowe was also in favor of), she also recognizes that there are people in need in America, and that they should not be overlooked in the effort to improve the conditions of people in Africa. I also think she does a great job of representing the hypocrisy of the mission as a whole. Because in reality, preachers did not speak to slaveholders better than they did the people in Africa, and they didn’t say that there is anything immoral about slavery, despite the fact that it so clearly goes against the moral teachings of Christianity. Through calling out this hypocrisy, she adds a level of (well deserved) anger to her argument that Stowe was lacking. I think this highlights the importance of hearing this type of opinion on slavery from someone who has been through it themselves. While Stowe’s intentions were likely good and based in her own moral understanding, Jacobs’ argument is much more compelling because of the personal experience that backs her opinions. 

Loading Likes...

While Uncle Tom’s Cabin showed many slaveowners that treated their slaves well, Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl depicts all the ways a slaveowner can abuse and torture their slaves. In particular, it shows the sexual harassment of female slaves, something which was only alluded to in Uncle Tom’s Cabin. In this respect, Harriet Jacobs is much more forthright about the secrets of slavery, which she describes as being “concealed like those of the Inquisition” (35).

Jacobs starts by acknowledging preconceived notions of slavery, stating that Northern men are “proud, to give their daughters in marriage to slaveholders. The poor girls have romantic notions of a sunny cline… to what disappointments are they destined” (35). This shows how slaveowners are not only being cruel and violent to their slaves, but they are also deceiving their wives. The reaction of the “poor girls” mirrors the reaction Jacobs intends to elicit from her Northern readers, who were most likely unaware of this aspect of slavery. Jacobs goes on to describe how in the South, “women often marry a man knowing that he is the father of many little slaves… they regard such children as property, as marketable as the pigs on the plantation” (35). This simile, comparing the children of the slaveowner to “pigs”, shows the complete dehumanization of slavery. The slaveowner’s children that are born to his white wife are treated well, whereas his children born to his slaves are considered “pigs”. In addition, throughout the novel Jacobs shows the harassment of her slaveowner, Mr. Flint, and her own attempts to evade him. This context shows that not only were these children born from extramarital affairs, they probably were nonconsensual as well, coerced by the power a slaveowner holds over a slave. 

Jacobs then describes how “this bad institution deadens the moral sense… to a fearful extent” (36). This suggests that the nature of the slave institution has convinced southern men and women that the aforementioned behaviors are normal and acceptable. In fact, one can see a contrast between the southern women, who “do not trouble themselves about it”, and the northern women, who are disappointed that their husband “pays no regard to his marriage vows” (35). This contrast shows how being raised in a culture that accepts slavery can lead one to accept immoral actions. 

Loading Likes...

In Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the characters Mrs. Shelby and St. Claire are considered to be good people to their enslaved servants. They do not whip or abuse them. They treat them kindly and always ensure that they have food to eat and a bed to sleep in. This begs the question of whether or not there is such a thing as just and kind enslavement. Shelby and St. Claire represent a type of slavery that may not be as physically or verbally abusive to their servants, but still greatly dehumanizes them in an emotional context. Neither character treats their enslaved workers as equals, but instead, considers them to be a type of beloved pet that they can dote on and control as a master.

Mrs. Shelby demonstrates this dehumanizing relationship with her enslaved servant Eliza. Mrs. Shelby sees Eliza as a young woman whom she must instill Christian notions of family and guide towards spiritual salvation. The very first statement that Stowe writes on Eliza and Mrs. Shelby’s relationship reiterates these sentiments by stating “Eliza had been brought up by her mistress, from girlhood, as a petted and indulged favorite” (Stowe, 17). Stowe’s utilization of the words “petted” and “indulged” relate closer to a well-liked pet than a true mentorship or daughter-like relationship. You do not indulge or show great liking to an equal. Although Mrs. Shelby is kind to Eliza, the social hierarchy of enslavement is still prevalent in the Shelby household. This relationship does not harm the enslaved people physically or verbally but it does give Mrs. Shelby a sense of superiority over the enslaved servants. This, consequently, teaches the enslaved workers that they are biologically inferior to white people as their devoted “pets”. 

Likewise, St. Claire has a similar relationship with his enslaved servants as Mrs. Shelby does with hers. St. Claire is known to indulge his enslaved workers to the point of greediness and laziness (according to Marie St. Claire). One would believe that for an enslaver to treat his enslaved people with kindness, he must also treat them as people. In this case, as with Mrs. Shelby’s case, St. Claire regards his enslaved workers as beloved pets to dote on and not as people. After Marie St. Claire criticizes Mr. St. Claire for his indulgences, he responds “What’s the harm of the poor dog’s wanting to be like his master”. St. Claire outwardly compares his enslaved servant, Adolph, to a dog. St. Claire may indulge and act kindly towards his servants, but he certainly does not see them as people. This dehumanization may not be as outwardly barbaric to those who are enslaved, but it still supports a money-making institution that profits from selling humans by ensuring that black people know they are below white people.