Great Resource!!!!

So it seems like most people are using online resources for their research. Just wanted to let everyone know that I found a book entitled Speeches in the Main Stacks with the printed versions of many of Twain's speeches, including the one that we are studying. You may find it to be a very useful resource.


Cheers,
Nick

The Slight Cockiness of Mark Twain

In class, we were discussing whether or not Mark Twain’s speech could be taken as humorous. What I thought was actually humorous about the speech wasn’t simply what was in the speech, but rather that Mark Twain reminisces about the past event twenty-eight years later with a slight cocky attitude. When Mark Twain stated, “[I]f I had those beloved and revered old literary immortals back here now on the platform at Carnegie Hall I would take that same old speech, deliver it, word for word, and melt them till they’d run all over that stage,” it doesn’t seem as if he was concerned with himself or the speech (489). Instead, the tone seemed more revengeful considering the fact that the three “old literary immortals” were then dead, and he decided to rant about that the past when Mrs. H brought it up. According to Wikipedia, Oliver Wendell Holmes died on October 7, 1894, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow died in March 24, 1882, and Ralph Waldo Emerson died on April 27, 1882. I thought what was actually more humorous was that Mark Twain mocked them postmortemly, while describing these men as “immortal” when in fact, they had been dead for at least a decade.

Furthermore, it seems as if Mark Twain never intended to repeat his speech. When he described his speech as not having “a single defect in it from the first world to the last. It is as good as good can be,” his cocky attitude suggested that he was enjoying seeing the reactions to his first speech (489). It seems as if he would give his speech a second time just to see the audiences’ horrified reaction but not for the purpose of perfecting the presentation.

While I was browsing the Internet, I read something about Mark Twain as being a pessimist and having a cocky attitude.

"As Twain's life and career progressed he became increasingly pessimistic, losing much of the humorous, cocky tone of his earlier years. More and more of his work expressed the gloomy view that all human motives are ultimately selfish. Even so Twain is best remembered as a humorist who used his sharp wit and comic exaggeration to attack the false pride and self-importance he saw in humanity." ("Mark Twain: American Author and Humorist" from http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/95nov/twain.html)

I'm not sure whether this source is necessarily reliable, but it does provide a starting point in looking into Mark Twain's character. If he did tend to write with a cocky tone, then it could provide a different view on his autobiography.

Poems & Style

My research focused on two areas: what poems did the quotes from the story originate, and how similar was Mark Twain's style in his other speeches.

Every single quote spoken by Emerson, Longfellow, and Holmes did indeed come from a poem they had written. Emerson's poems include "Mithridates," "Brahma," "Song of Nature," and "Monadnoc." Poems written by Holmes were "The Chambered Nautilus" and "Mare Rubrum." Finally, quotes from Longfellow were taken from "The Four Winds," "Hiawatha's Wedding-Feast," "The Village Blacksmith," and "A Psalm of Life."

Just knowing where they came from, however, does not help in any way. First of all, many of the quotes are taken from the middle of a stanza and the middle of a sentence in the speaker's poem, and thus none are truly in context. So, when hearing Twain's speech, it would be quite funny to suddenly hear a line from a poem that is completely taken out of context and put into a derogatory sense. For example, Emerson's quote "Is yonder squalid peasant all / That his proud nursery could breed?" is taken from the middle of a sentence ( http://www.fullbooks.com/Poemsx21662.html).

I took a closer look at each of the quotes in the miner's story and matched them up with their original source - and found some interesting differences. Longfellow's first line, where he remarks "Honor be to Mudjekewwis! / You shall hear how Pau-Puk-Keewis-" is actually taken from two different poems - "The Four Winds" and "Hiawatha's Wedding-Feast." Even when this quote is first read, it is quite random. But, taken from two completely different poems, this quote adds to the humor of the story because of its complete randomness.

However, the best difference is when Twain actually edits the original lines of the poems and creates a pun. Part of Emerson's line from the story, "I pass and deal again," is edited from its original. In "Brahma," the original text reads "...pass, and turn again" (http://www.let.rug.nl/~usa/LIT/emerson.htm). Twain edited the original text to pun on the card game going on at this point in the story. In fact, he does it again in Emerson's next line: "I tire of globes and aces!" The original text, from "Song of Nature," reads "I tire of globes and races." So, again, Twain edits the original text to create a pun on the card game. Thus, with just two simple edits, Twain is able to produce a humorous pun.

I read some of Twain's other speeches, most found on: http://www.farid-hajji.net/books/en/Twain_Mark/mts-index.html. In most speeches, Twain usually had a touch of sarcasm or a sentence of humor. Some were filled with them, while others had a much more serious tone. However, just like the Whittier dinner speech, Twain is casual and seems to feel at one with his audience. But, the Whittier speech is unique in the sense that Twain pulls quotes from poems and mixes them in with the real story. On the website earlier mentioned, this exact copy of the story, plus Twain's response to Mrs. H, is the very first speech. So, if seems as if Twain was simply experimenting with this style, and from then on did not try it again.

Some insight on Willie Winter

I researched the question: is Willie Winter real, and if so, who is he? After doing some quick searches on Google I came across marktwainproject.com, a very useful site. Under the tab “letters” I found some interesting information on a fellow named William Winter (which is obviously connected to Willie Winter). Another quick Wikipedia search on William Winter revealed that he was in fact a dramatic critic and author. He was a literary critic for such papers as Saturday Press, Albion, and most importantly (to my cause) Tribune.

Going back to Twain’s speech, we find that when he first introduces Winter he states: “Willie Winter for these past thousand years dramatic editor of the New York Tribune, and still occupying that high post in his old age) was there.” I’m sure we can safely assume that Willie Winter is in fact the author William Winter.

Mixed Accounts on MT's Speech & Social Effects on His Life

Before I did any research, I actually read everyone's posts and comments in the blog. I noticed that most areas of research were covered, so hopefully this post is a tidbit useful. For the first question in particular, I figured it should be modified to be more feasible.

Q: What did the public think (as communicated through the press) of the Mark Twain speech after it was delivered?

A: Unlike what Mark Twain described in his autobiography and what William D. Howells wrote about the experience in his book My Mark Twain: Reminiscences and Criticisms, the Boston Daily Globe reported quite the contrary—that it “produced the most violent bursts of hilarity.” Here is a direct quotation to be exact:

This eccentric story was told in Mr. Clemens's characteristic drawling, stammering way, and produced the most violent bursts of hilarity. Mr. Emerson seemed a little puzzled about it, but Mr. Longfellow laughed and shook, and Mr. Whittier seemed to enjoy it keenly.

I honestly think the general public at the time was careless about it. To be exact we would have to find a first-hand account or reflection about the speech written by a detached audience, namely someone who did not participate in the dinner—but that is probably impossible to find.

An interesting read I found was William Howells' account of Mark Twain's speech. Howells said that the three "victims"--Longfellow, Holmes, and Emerson--told him what they wrote back in response to Mark Twain's apology letter. Longfellow said, "Ahh he is a wag!" Holmes said he was not offended at all by the speech. Emerson was confused why Mark Twain was even bothered by it. Maybe they were trying to be nice? But check this out: Howells wrote that "Holmes told me, with deep emotion, such as a brother humorist might well feel, that he had not lost an instant in replying to Clemens's letter, and assuring him that there had not been the least offense, and entreating him never to think of the matter again." I don't know, what do you guys think?

Sources: The Boston Daily Globe Reports on the Whittier Dinner. 18 Dec. 1877. 29 June 2008 <http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/onstage/whitnews.html>.

Howells, William D. My Mark Twain: Reminiscences and Criticisms. Howells on MT as Performer. 29 June 2008 <http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/onstage/howlrev.html#b>.

___________________________

Q: What were the social effects on Twain’s life?

A: Based on my research, it seemed like any effect at all caused by this unfortunate incident on Twain’s life was self-inflicted. It could have been shame, rage, confusion, or any other combination of emotions, but documented dates in Twain’s life indicated that the fiasco did not prevent him from attending a banquet in Tennessee in November 15, 1879; conducting a large Republican meeting in October 19, 1879; being a guest of honor in the Lotos Club’s new house in November 12, 1893; just to name a few. I included a brief time line for reference below.

• October 19, 1879 – MT conducts a large Republican meeting
• October 19, 1879 – Patriotic letter from MT, read at a dinner for the Gate City Guard of Atlanta, GA in Hartford, Connecticut
• November 15, 1879 – Banquet of the army of the Tennessee
• November 12, 1893 – MT was guest of honor in the Lotos Club’s new house
• July 23, 1895 – MT begins touring the world to lecture on morals
• November 27, 1897 – MT gives his Vienna speech in German

Source: Mark Twain in The New York Times. 29 June 2008 <http://www.twainquotes.com/nytindex.html>.

Was Mark Twain a Liar?

In my research to discover whether Twain’s speech was offensive or funny, I looked for information about Twain’s Autobiography to discover whether it was ever published and whether it contained the chapter about the Whittier address. While searching for his Autobiography in the library, I stumbled upon a book containing Twain’s letters at the time. Online, I found an 1877 newspaper article that tells a very different story than Twain told in 1906.

Mark Twain published the first excerpts of his Autobiography in the North American Review, while intending its full publication for after his death. Mark Twain’s Autobiography was published in 1924, edited by Albert Bigelow Paine and copyrighted by his daughter, Clara Gabrilowitsch, fourteen years after his death in 1910. This first edition does not contain the North American Review’s passage about Twain’s speech at the Whittier dinner. Apparently, Paine “utilized all but one-fifth” (a review of a later version of Twain's Autobiography) of the selections sent to the North American Review and one of the passages included in this “one-fifth” happens to be about his speech at the Whittier dinner.

(A random, somewhat interesting, thoroughly meaningless coincidence: In the Paine version of Twain’s Autobiography, the passage dated January 10, 1906 begins “I have to make several speeches…” (278). This is immediately followed by the passage dated January 12, 1906, which begins “My seventieth birthday…” (291). The missing Whittier passage was written January 11, 1906 and (as you know) involves a speech Twain made on Whittier’s seventieth birthday.)

Since the 1924 version of Twain’s Autobiography, other versions have been published, including one solely dedicated to the chapters from the North American Review, in 1990. This book does contain Twain’s Whittier address and commentary, identical to the version published in the North American Review.

Twain’s Autobiography does not appear to contain any other mentions of his address to Whittier in 1877; however, Mark Twain’s letters at the time, now published as Mark Twain's Letters and edited by Albert Bigelow Paine, indicate the effect the speech had on him.

Twain writes in a letter to Mr. Howells, “My sense of disgrace does not abate. It grows … I feel that my misfortune has injured me all over the country; therefore it will be best that I retire from before the public at present … It seems as if I must have been insane when I wrote that speech.”

Howells reassures Twain, telling him, “You are not going to be floored by it; there is more justice than that, even in this world” (Paine 316).

Twain then proceeded to write to Holmes, Emerson, and Longfellow with his apologies. Holmes replied, “It never occurred to me for a moment to take offense, or feel wounded by your playful use of my name,” while Longfellow said, “I do not believe anybody was much hurt. Certainly I was not, and Holmes tells me he was not. So I think you may dismiss the matter from your mind without further remorse” (Paine 318). Emerson was unable to understand the speech due to his mental illness. I found it interesting that Twain failed to mention these courteous responses he received when writing about the event for the North American Review 28 years later.

Twain’s account also contradicts what newspapers at the time had to say of the event. The Boston Daily Globe reported, “This eccentric story was told in Mr. Clemens's characteristic drawling, stammering way, and produced the most violent bursts of hilarity. Mr. Emerson seemed a little puzzled about it, but Mr. Longfellow laughed and shook, and Mr. Whittier seemed to enjoy it keenly” (Boston Daily Globe). Clearly, the entire crowd was not silent throughout his speech as Twain suggested. It appears they enjoyed Twain’s speech as any other work of his.

From this evidence, I think Twain’s speech was more funny than offensive. Twain appeared to have lied in his North American Review account or he overreacted to his speech’s reception after the event.

Some History on the Autobiography

So I did a little bit of research on the publication history of the Autobiography and I found a few things that I didn't know before (and some things that we did know already):

• The prefatory note that's seen in the NAR version is also seen in the print version.
• Not meant to be published until after the author's death because of the entries about people still living.
• Some sections were decided to be allowed publish in the NAR after Twain returned from "Pier No. 70".
• Twain purposefully wrote out of order.
• Wanted the autobiography to "deal mostly in the common experience".
• He told Howells that he wanted to continue writing the memoirs until his death and would create volumes upon volumes of the Autobiography.
• Was published in two volumes in 1924, 14 years after his death.
• edited by Albert Paine
• Published in one volume in 1959 by Charles Neider
• Neider edited it to "make sense of it", putting passages in chronological order- omitting "awkward passages".

I thought it was very interesting that the editors had such a strong role in the book version. They were able to pick and choose passages to include in the book. This takes away from Twain's original goal of having an autobiography that has never been seen before- one that had no order or system.

Helpful resources:

http://online-literature.com/twain/my-autobiography/0/
http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/twainbio.html

The Dinner Guests

My research is focused on confirming the existence of Willie Winter and finding the names of the other dinner guests. Using a quick Wikipedia search for Willie Winter and the New York Tribune (Twain mentioned it in the typescript), I was able to confirm that William Winter did indeed exist and he did work for the New York Tribune. However, it was pretty difficult to know whether Winter was actually there or who the other dinner guests were.

Luckily, I ran into this incredible article by Henry Nash Smith in the Harvard Library Bulletin (Spring, 1955). The article was focused on "contradictory evidence bearing on the occasion [Whittier's party] in order to discover how much distortion it suffered in Mark Twain's and Howell's recollection." Basically, the article tried to answers the same questions that we raised in class on Thursday.

The most important piece of evidence that I was got from the article is scanned and reprinted above. It's an autographed seating plan of the dinner. After looking it over several times, I am pretty confident that William Winter wasn't at the dinner. And it also answered my questions as to the other party guests.

Smith also validated the absence of Winter at this dinner. He wrote the following in one of his footnote:

The degree of confusion in Mark Twain's reminiscences of the dinner is evident in the fact that he describes at length an address of William Winter, mainly in verse, which was actually made two years later at the Holmes breakfast ... Both ceremonies took place in the Brunswick Hotel.

In other news...

Apropos of our discussion of Twain's funny/inappropriate speech at the Whittier dinner, some of you may have heard about the poet Derek Walcott's funny/inappropriate reading in May at the Calabash Literary Festival. He read a poem titled "The Mongoose" that attacked the novelist V.S. Naipaul. As an article in the Guardian puts it:

So far the incident, reported in the New Statesman, has elicited a mixed response. The Jamaican daily newspaper the Gleaner seemed to come out in support of the poet, with a story headlined: 'Walcott broadsides Naipaul.' One of the Calabash Festival organisers, the Jamaican poet Kwame Dawes, told The Observer that people in the Caribbean were likely to side with Walcott, given Naipaul's long-running antipathy to the region of his birth: 'It's not so much a case of "Naipaul had it coming", as "Naipaul constantly has it coming", because he's such an easy target.' But the writers and critics who attended the festival were less sure. 'Some people felt that it was demeaning for someone of Walcott's stature to write such a vitriolic and nasty poem,' Kay told The Observer.

Mark Twain's Letters

Researching the Twain incident, I thought it would be interesting to research other letters written around or before the Whitter Dinner, which was on December 18, 1877. I found some really interesting letters after the incident. After the incident he exchanged a few letters with William Howells, expressing his sheer disappointment and asking for his advice

In addition to the letters sent to William Howells, one I found particularly interesting was a letter sent to Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and Oliver W. Holmes. In the letter he expressed his apologies:

I will end, now. I had to write you, for the easement of it, even though the doing it might maybe be a further offense. But I do not ask you to forgive what I did that night, for it is not forgivable; I simply had it at heart to ask you to believe that I am only heedlessly a savage, not premeditatedly; & that I am under as severe punishment as even you could adjudge to me if you were required to appoint my penalty. I do not ask you to say one word in answer to this; it is not needful, & would of course be distasteful & difficult.

SLC to Ralph Waldo Emerson; duplicate letters ...; 27 Dec 1877, Hartford, Conn. (UCCL 01184). 2007. <http://www.marktwainproject.org/xtf/view?docId=letters/UCCL01184.xml;style=letter;brand=mtp>

Reading the letter it seems as if he is truly disappointed in his speech and apologetic for his speech. He clearly reveres the literary greats he insulted and is bothered by the incident. Following the letter of apology he writes another letter to Howells. In the letter he tells Howells how it would be an intrusion to write to Whittier about the incident.

Though it seems Twain did exaggerate the event, it is clear that it still bothered Twain a tremendous amount as evident by his letters.

Howells & Twain

I am researching two questions – one concerning who exactly Howells is and also when Mark Twain gave his next speech. I found my answer to the first question with a quick google search, but the Mark Twain Project also provided some interesting insight into both his relationship with Howell and how he handled the fallout from the speech. Although it seems other people in the class have found that he didn’t face the universal rejection he describes in the typescript, his letter to Howells dated December 23, 1877 (link: http://www.marktwainproject.org/xtf/view?docId=letters/UCCL02520.xml;query=%20howells;searchAll=;sectionType1=;sectionType2=;sectionType3=;sectionType4=;sectionType5=;doc.view=text_note_comm;style=letter;brand=mtp#1)
is consistent with the shame he described in the autobiography:

My sense of disgrace does not abate. It grows. I see that it is going to add itself to my list of permannencies—a list of humiliations that extends back to when I was seven years old, & which keep on persecuting me regardless of my repentancies.

If he did exaggerate the reception in his autobiography, it appears he wasn’t aware of the fact that not everyone thought it was horrific or insulting. There was the possibility he didn’t describe the situation in the autobiography accurately so as to draw sympathy, or for entertainment value, but it seems unlikely in light of how described it in his personal correspondence. Interestingly, it appears (link: http://www.twainquotes.com/SpeechIndex.html) that a little over a month later he delivered a speech. For all of the personal embarrassment he faced, it’s remarkable he was willing to trust himself to deliver a speech so soon.

Liar, Human Being, and a Writer

According to previous colleagues who had done research on the dinner account, they all shared similar view on the over-exaggerated description of audience’s reaction on the banquet. When I was researching on Mark Twain’s social life, bibliographical history, literary and social criticism, I came across few interesting aspects about Mark Twain that I would like to share specifically.

• Mark Twain as a Liar

According to the Legend of Mark Twain by Russell Smith, the following few lines had caught me by interest.

Link: http://www.twainweb.net/filelist/legend.html

“During his reporter days in Nevada he was notorious for writing and publishing hoaxes. Kaplan described the hoaxes in his excellent book Mark Twain and His World. One of the hoaxes was about a petrified man who was supposedly discovered in the desert and another hoax described the massacre of a Nevada family by a berserk man. Entitled "The Empire City Massacre," the article described a man in Carson City killing his wife and six children.”

“Another hoax backfired on Twain in 1864 and he was forced to leave Nevada. He reported that money raised by Nevada women for wounded Union soldiers was being diverted to "aid a Miscegenation Society somewhere in the East.”

Other bibliographical sources that documented Mark Twain and his work did not suggest any details about him prone to create false articles, but this source somehow evokes ones to further questions Mark Twain as a writer.

• Mark Twain’s life history

Link: http://www.marktwainhouse.org/theman/bio.shtml

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/mtwain.htm

From Mark Twain’s bibliography, ones can see his transition as a writer as he became more aware and self-enlightened toward concurrent socio-political issues in his time. There were commentary about his writing became darker and cynical and most of his works were banned, unwelcomed, or harshly criticized by public. Yet, by looking back at Mark Twain’s works, auto-bibliography, notebooks, quotes, ones might find striking relevance of his personal critique toward the contemporary society.

• Youtube on Mark Twain by ucberkeleyevents:

Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5UrdIewFkc

This clip on youtube presented by UCBerkeleyevents records the symposium that is hosted by the Bancroft Library in 2006. Shelly Fisher Fishkin focuses a brief remarks and criticism on Mark Twain and his era. Speaker Fishkin commented on Mark Twain’s My First Lie and How I got out of it (1899) reveals a “Hierarchy of Lies that diffuse our lives” where “the top of hierarchy of lies in society, society pretension of nothing goes wrong, when there are stuff wrong.” This commentary really fits where Mark Twain is coming from, because he was born and grew up in the era of socio-economic, political unrest where the Anti-Semitism sentiment and the question of slavery were oblivious to the public. This commentary on the suggestion of Mark Twain is attempting to make audience realize moral failing and obscure silent desertion allow ones to ponder what is a lie and what is truth. Referring back to Russell Smith’s Legend of Mark Twain, it is unfortunate to make judgment on whether Twain did produce false articles or not, but this parallel of motif of lies perhaps symbolically suggests Twain is attempting to awake his readers to be aware of the society through his writing.

Speaker Fishkin further comments on Twain’s criticism toward patriotism that is in relevance toward our contemporary political culture. It is interesting that Twain’s writing does not only resonate to the era that he was in, but also responds to the current society.

Twain’s Notebook:

Patriotism “is a word that always commemorates a rubbery. There isn’t a foot of land in the world which does not represent the ousting and reousting of a long line of successive owners (who each in turn as a patriots) with proud swelling hearts defended against a next gang of rubbers, who came to steal it and did as the swelling hearted patriots in their turn.

2001 NAR review on Twain’s piece

“The modern patriotism, the true patriotism, the only rational patriotism is loyalty to the nation all the time, loyalty to the government when it deserves it.”

The motif of racism, political, social inquiries still relate to contemporary issues that ones are dealing with. Twain’s work really appeals to audience in the aspect of their interests and humanity successfully. Perhaps as he learns more about society’s shortcoming and the repetition of human mistakes, he contributes his mortified and despaired emotion in his writing that results in bitter and outrageous cynicism. He is an interesting writer, and he is an interesting human being.

Random Thoughts

After the first frustrating hour spending on the search engines, I stopped and went out with my friends for dinner. It was only an excuse for me to escape from the research for a moment, and when I came back, the work was still there waiting for me. Well, I have to admit that I’ve never done this kind of research before, and I felt horrible until finally the first useful website emerged from the crowd. It was a shot energy that injected to my brain and regained me some interest to look for the truth. The research went well at the end, and I found something interesting and want to share.

Regarding to the exaggeration Twain uses. I’m wondering why Twain did use it so often. From an essay on Vern Crisler’s personal blog concludes: “Major techniques for both "satire" and "humor" are incongruity, exaggeration, invective, reductio ad absurdum, paradox, caricature, understatement, anticlimax, etc. Twain's "humor" exhausts the techniques available, but three prominent humorous techniques emerge as his favorite and most compelling--namely, exaggeration, understatement, and anticlimax.” http://vernerable.tripod.com/comedy.html
I did a search on all the humor techniques he mentions. Though, it’s hard to distinguish some of the techniques for me, like “anticlimax” and “bathos”. I’ve never been taught that English can be so complicated because most of my readings in High School are plain English with no surprise, and we were told to use the simplest way to express. That was the way I thought English was. Well, this really got my attention and updated my point of view on English.

Other Accounts of Whittier Dinner

I am researching on the question "What other accounts exist of the dinner?" and I found several contradictions to Mark Twain’s version of this incident. Twain said on page 487 in NAR version of his autobiography that while he was delivering his speech, he was "hoping somebody would laugh, or at least smile, but nobody did."

However, according to one of Twain’s good friends Howells’ reminiscence of this incident, Howells recalls that at the end of Twain’s speech, "There fell a silence, which deepened from moment to moment, and was broken only by the hysterical and blood-curdling laughter of a single guest."
http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/onstage/howlrev.html#b

Yes, there was an awkward silence after Twain’s speech, but it was soon broken by the "hysterical" laughter of one guest. What Howells described was nothing like what Twain had said, that “nobody laughed and everyone seemed turned to stone with horror" – well, at least one person found his speech funny and laughed.

So we can tell from here that Twain did exaggerate the dramatic effect of his speech. Perhaps he was not able to accept that fact that he had told a bad joke. Since he did not receive his expected returns, he exaggerated a whole lot on this incident to convey that it was in fact the problem of this crowd, not himself.

Another thing I was researching was about what the newspapers said about Twain’s speech. Thanks to Adam’s website, I found The Boston Daily Globe’s report on this incident. Its title is pretty self-explanatory -- "Mark Twain’s Funny Speech," with a commentary that says "This eccentric story was told produced the most violent bursts of hilarity. Mr. Emerson seemed a little puzzled about it, but Mr. Longfellow laughed and shook, and Mr. Whittier seemed to enjoy it keenly." We can see that some of the audience seemed to enjoy Twain's speech, and the newspaper's report was not negative at all; and most importantly, it comments on Twain’s speech as funny.
http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/onstage/whitnews.html


Other than The Boston Daily Globe, I also found one article on The New York Times that’s about this incident. It was published on Dec 20, 1877 – three days after this dinner. But this article merely reported Twain’s speech without too much commentary.

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9E0DEFD9173EE73BBC4851DFB467838C669FDE&oref=slogin

I think I will keep researching on this question and see what else I can get…

Mark Twain publications

Our good old friend Wikipedia has a full bibliography of Mark Twain's publications, which shows that during the 29 years between his original speech and the letter from Mrs. Hudson, he published 33 books, stories, and essays--that's over one a year. It seems to me that he may have exaggerated both his torment and ostracism over the incident for dramatic effect. That's a lot of stuff to publish; clearly he wasn't upset enough that it prevented him from continuing to pour out the same kind of humorous material as in the miner story for very long. (He alluded in his response to Mrs. Hudson that it had been a constant source of torment for him the entire time.)

I do see the possibility of a very short lapse in publication, whether due to personal mortification or his inability to find a publisher willing to deal with him immediately after the incident. His speech was given very late in the year (December 18), so likely his two publications in 1877 came before. He only had one publication in 1878. I would be interested to know if that was a deal that was already in motion prior to the incident, or if publishers were still willing to enter into new agreements with him immediately after his allegedly offensive story. He didn't publish in 1879 at all, so if the 1877 publication was already in motion prior to December 18, it seems likely that the incident did in fact cause problems for his work.

Things to Think About...

I came across the idea of "Transcendentalism" earlier today and googled it to find out more about it. For basic knowledge on the topic, I clicked on the Wikipedia link :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentalism

To my surprise, I came across two familiar names which have both been mentioned in class: Emerson and Hawthorne. There is even a section in the article that mentions Hawthorne's novel The Blithedale Romance as responding to the Transcendentalist Movement. I would like to think that perhaps Twain, Emerson, Hawthorne, and many other 19th century authors perhaps have a some sort of similar connection toTranscendentalism. It would interesting to think about this philosophy when reading their work. Just a thought....

Mark Twain really likes to exaggerate.

After researching the Whittier Dinner Speech for only a short time I’ve already found a couple references suggesting that Twain’s description of that night was at best an exaggeration and at worst an outright lie. Apparently the speech did not cause the night to come to an abrupt and uncomfortable end, and according to The Boston Daily Globe the speech even “produced the most violent bursts of hilarity.” It’s true that it didn’t go over as well as he had expected, but it didn’t flop to the extent that he described.

So why did Twain go as far as he did to paint the situation as this horrible calamity? My guess is that in his mind the experience was far worse then it was in reality. Everyone has those moments where you do something completely embarrassing and it sticks with you long after everyone else has long forgotten about it. This was probably one of those moments for Twain, and he wanted to convey his feelings rather then give a factual account.

Class research questions

Below is the list of research questions that were posed in class today:

* Did Twain ever give the speech a second time?

* What other accounts exist of this dinner?

* Who is Bishop? Does he even exist? What happened to him?

* What were the effects on Twain’s social life? Did he start being excluded from parties?

* Who was actually at the dinner? Longfellow?

* What poems does Twain quote? What were the original contexts of those lines? (Why did Twain choose those lines?)

* What did the newspapers really say about Twain’s speech?

* What else did Twain do during those 28 years? Did he do anything in response to this experience?

* After this speech, when was the next time he spoke in public? What were the circumstances? Was it intended to be a humorous speech? What style did he use?

* Is the letter from Laura Hudson real?

* Is Willie Winter real?

* How does this speech fit in with the rest of Twain’s work? Is it similar?

* What is the publication history of the Autobiography? Does it match up with what’s printed in NAR?

* Are the Chamberlaines real?

* Who is Howells?

Welcome

Welcome to the course blog for English N1B/03, "Funny and/or Offensive: Reading the American Archive." The objects of this blog are as follows:

-To keep everybody posted on what people are researching

-To exchange ideas that you may not have had a chance to bring up in class

-To keep you in the habit of articulating your thoughts in writing for others to read.


When posting or commenting on this blog, please remember a few things.

First, this blog can be seen (and Googled) by anyone, and you may not want "anyone" (i.e. future employers) to read what you wrote for your summer English class. Respect people's internet anonymity, including your own, by not mentioning surnames, or by using (appropriate) pseudonyms.

Second, reading on a screen is hard on the eyes, so use plenty of white space. The return key is your friend. This may mean writing shorter paragraphs than you would in a paper, or adding white space at a logical place in the middle of a paragraph.

Finally, remember to treat everyone with professional courtesy.