Treated Like Animals: Frederick Douglass

            There is no reasoning on earth that could justify the amount of suffering that Frederick Douglass went through as a child and a young man. One of the most shocking images to me was that of the children running around with nearly no clothes on in the middle of winter! How can you let small children live with so much pain by freezing them for the simple lack of a blanket and some decent clothes? Douglass refers to the fact that most children were provisioned two shirts a year and pants were considered a luxury they did not need. The slave owners treated these children like filthy miscreants that were no better than the lowest animal! Douglass described many a child stealing scraps from the pigs in order to get something to eat so that they simply would not starve to death. The anguish that these people were subject to from sheer hunger disgusts me, especially when there was quite clearly a surplus of food at the plantation owner’s house.

            The act of whipping that pervades the story makes my stomach churn as well. The overseers and slave owners seem to whip the slaves merely because they have the ability to do so. Captain Anthony whips Aunt Hester for visiting a friend at night and he relishes the whipping by whipping her harder based on how loud she screams. The cold-bloodedness of this scene broke my heart and I felt as if I was standing with Frederick Douglass as a child when he witnessed all of this. In the city, Douglass describes the deplorable situation of his neighbors, Mary and Henrietta. Mrs. Hamilton whipped them in the head and on the shoulders nearly every minute and referred to Mary as a “black gip.” I’m blown away at how these women ever survived after the loss of so much blood and I wanted to slap Mrs. Hamilton after this description. When Douglass finally rises up against Mr. Covey towards the end of the chapters, I almost jumped out of my chair and yelled at the prospect of his success. No longer would he stand to be whipped like a common animal and treated with less respect than dirt on the road.

            Frederick Douglass’s narrative showed the inhumane practices of slavery that were acceptable in the 1830s. My emotions were like a roller coaster throughout all of the chapters that we read. I felt disgust towards the slave owners, despair for Douglass and the other slaves, anger at the whippings of innocent people, and triumph for Douglass as he finally harnesses some way to stop the cycle of violence for himself. The power that learning to read and write had on Douglass is clear throughout his piece and it seems to have given him the courage to move forward and pursue his freedom from slavery. His narrative is well written and deeply moving. I am sure that I will not be able to get rid of the images of starving, half-naked children for quite a while.

Understanding 'Good' in "Young Goodman Brown"

            I cannot say that I have ever been particularly thrilled by Nathaniel Hawthorne’s works. Reading “The Scarlet Letter” in high school was absolute torture; I could not understand why the novel was so drawn out when the point was so simple. And the idea that a woman and child could be so ostracized because of one simple mistake was kind of appalling to me. This being said, I fully expected “Young Goodman Brown” to be absolutely boring and overdone. I was pleasantly surprised. After reading essays from Thoreau and Emerson, as well as an autobiography from Apess, I have to say that reading a cohesive piece of fiction was quite the break!

            Although the story still possessed Hawthorne’s writing style and an intense moral argument, the story was concise (partly because it was a short story and not a novel) and it left me pondering the final intent. Goodman Brown knows he is following the wrong path with the traveler in the woods, and yet he finds a reason to keep going. At one point, he even seems convinced that it may not be the wrong path at all when the traveler tells him, “Wickedness or not… I have a very general acquaintance here in New-England,” recognizing that many other ‘good’ people have gone down this path. Even when Goodman Brown makes the decision to stand fast against the devil, his resolve is broken when he believes Faith to be gone.

            Finally, at the devil’s gathering, Goodman Brown decides not to follow, but rather to “look up to heaven, and resist the Wicked One.” His final decision gives him peace and solitude at the time but when he returns to his village the next day, he is deeply suspicious of the people he knows. He feels this sentiment until the day he dies and even in death it seems there is no hope for Goodman Brown.

            I thought this ending was rather provocative and intriguing. While Goodman Brown’s eyes are opened to the sin that is all around him, he seems unable to live his life with any kind of good cheer and cannot truly appreciate his life at all. He sees the world only as a dark and dreary place where blasphemy lives on the doorstep of each citizen he knows, including his own family members. It seems to me that Hawthorne is pointing out the necessity for understanding that there will always be sin in the world, but to take that information as a guide and learn to live with hope for your life. If you live in constant gloom, people will only remember you for that gloom and your life will be constantly unhappy. You must learn to accept the fact that not all things are good so that you can truly be aware in your life of all the beauty that surrounds you.

Simplicity, Simplicity, Simplicity!: Henry David Thoreau

           Thoreau seems thoroughly carefree and willing to let the world pass by, observing with interest but not with any true investment in it himself. Within the first few paragraphs, he says “[he] never got his fingers burned by actual possession.” To Thoreau, the worldly, materialistic ideals of ownership and property weigh us down and stop us from experiencing the world with true fervor. He argues that we should make ourselves new each day and be open to the effects of natural marvels. The idea that stuck with me the most throughout this piece was Thoreau’s assertion that “hardly a man takes a half hour’s nap after dinner, but when he wakes he holds up his head and asks, ‘What’s the news?’” as though he is greatly affected by the events that have ensued. Sometimes I feel this way about our society. Always someone is prying apart events that happen in people’s lives for the entertainment of other citizens.

            Although Thoreau has some valid assertions, I greatly prefer Emerson’s style and eloquence in his prose to Thoreau’s distracted thoughts. Emerson clearly argues his points and explains why he believes the way he does. Instead, Thoreau uses analogies that go on for paragraphs, slowly leading around to the same point he could have made in a few lines. I found Emerson much easier to follow even though his points tended to be longer in themselves. The lack of showy examples made the ideas easier to clarify and take a stand on.

            While Thoreau has legitimate concerns with mankind getting too caught up in the hustle and bustle, ready for gossip at every turn in the road, I think he goes too far with it, believing that it is ideal to hardly invest in anything at all and simply reside in nature with no real responsibilities upon your shoulders. It is not good to let society pass on without ever really knowing what has happened within it; everyone would simply repeat the mistakes that could have been easily avoided if they had read about it before hand. Not only is this a bit lazy, it’s completely unrealistic to just drop everything and live without reference to the rest of humanity. If I were to give up even one of my commitments during school, I would be judged for either taking on too much to begin with or chastised for not working harder to make it happen. Simplicity is a great thing, but to characterize all of your life into two or three categories as Thoreau suggests is nearly impossible and would cause my mind to explode with lack of organization! While Thoreau’s ideas may have been possible for him in the 1840’s, I can hardly imagine anyone fully capable of living by these standards today. However, maybe I am just too practical.

Trust Thyself: Emerson's "Self-Reliance"

            Emerson’s “Self-Reliance” is probably my favorite piece that we have read so far this semester. The prose is insightful and each word seems to be selected by careful thought. I was impressed by his vocabulary and the ability he had to capture his thoughts so eloquently. I could connect with his writing as he gave his points and I thought he was engaging in proving them. I enjoyed identifying the aspects of romanticism and transcendentalism in “Self-Reliance” as well.

            In reading “Self-Reliance,” I thought one of the most striking features was the intense difference between the viewpoint of the Enlightenment and the radical statements that Emerson uses to support his opinions. Emerson seemed to emphasize a much more personal and spiritual view of the world; often he referred to ideas in terms of nature in order to explain his feelings toward them. Emerson thinks of man as a natural being, and so, nature best captures for him the ideals that men should strive for in their lives. Several times I caught myself underlining things that directly opposed the idea of understanding the world through reasoning and logic. A few lines in particular were striking to me: “All men plume themselves on the improvement of society, and no man improves. Society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other.” In contrast with Franklin’s ideology of pragmatism and improving society as the main reason for life, Emerson’s view is stunning. Emerson postulates that no man is ever able to improve while he is focused on the betterment of society. While I think this is a bit drastic, there is some truth to the idea. If you are never able to look inward to analyze yourself, who are you to help other people? Can you support the decisions you make enough to say that you are knowledgeable in improving the lifestyle of others? You have to be confident in your own life in order to make a difference in society and the lives of others, “insist on yourself.” Emerson’s views on prayer were equally intriguing. Anyone who will openly state that “men’s prayers are a disease of the will” deserves to be listened to, in my opinion. He states that prayers in words are simply a crutch for humanity to be lazy and idly sit by without doing anything. To Emerson, taking action and pushing to help yourself is the true form of prayer because it gives you the highest amount of happiness.

            I found Emerson’s writing to be incredibly motivating. While I do think that some of his statements are a bit on the radical side, he does an admirable job supporting them. By the end of his essay, his argument is justified and persuasive in showing the audience his point of view. The last lines evoke a desire for fulfillment through self-acceptance and self-knowledge.