House apologizes for slavery

A recent Washington Post article describes the House's recent decision to apologize for the U.S. government's involvement in slavery.

The House yesterday apologized to black Americans, more than 140 years after slavery was abolished, for the "fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality and inhumanity of slavery and Jim Crow" segregation.

Question: why is this controversial?

The Conjure Woman

I'm enjoying this book a lot more than I though I would, mostly due to the fact that it isn't the kind of book I thought it was going to be. I had envisioned it as a melancholy book about the evils of slavery, which is a theme I didn't really have much interest in revisiting for the millionth time in my educational career. I was pleasantly surprise to find out that it isn't that at all, and that it was actually pretty lively. I'm originally from the South, and the book really rings true with a lot of aspects of the culture I lived in as a kid.

Storytelling is a big part of Southern culture, and although my grandfather (who I called Poppy Chuck) clearly wasn't a post-emancipation black southerner, I could almost hear him telling these exact same stories. In particular, it reminds me of all the stories I heard about the Bell Witch, a famous local alleged witch in Christian County Kentucky, where I'm from. You can read about the Bell Witch at www.bellwitchfansite.com. Some of my favorite stories that Poppy Chuck told me were about the Bell Witch and his supposed run-ins with her as a boy.

The most striking similarity I see between Uncle Julius' storytelling and my grandfather's is the style. I don't really have the words to describe what is so distinctive about Southern storytelling, but it kind of makes me feel like I'm a little kid again to be reading Conjure Woman.

Being from the South also helps me a lot with the dialiect. It's causing me no difficulty whatsoever. A lot of times when I drink, I slip back into my Southern accent (my friends make fun of me for it), and I can turn it on and off at will, so all I have to do to read The Conjure Woman is turn on in my mind and get to reading. Mine isn't quite as pronounced as what's in the book, but it's close enough to bridge the gap. I actually had a lot more trouble reading Coverdale's story than I have with Uncle Julius'.

The problems of research

I’ve run into a few issues while researching, both for the annotated bibliography and as I attempt to find additional sources of information. First is finding criticism relevant to what I’m discussing. Much of what has been written critiquing The Blithedale Romance is not concerned with the specific aspects of the novel that I’m interested in (how the novel provides commentary on issues related to utopian socialism), or they are buried within a larger criticism which is mostly irrelevant. Obviously this made the research process very laborious, and I’m not entirely satisfied with the sources I’ve found. It’s possible that there are sources out there which discuss the issues I’m concerned with in greater depth, but finding them via a search engine is a non-trivial task considering how much has to be sorted through.

Also, I’m not entirely sure how I should go about addressing discrepancies in the criticisms I’ve come across. I’m going to need to use the criticisms of The Blithedale Romance to help establish a connection between the text and the ideological movements associated with utopian socialism. It’s not clear to me at this point how I should deal with the different perceptions of novel themes. It seems somewhat disingenuous to simply look for sources which support the argument I’m inclined to make, but on the other hand it seems like it’ll be much harder to advance the thesis while acknowledging the variation in opinions. Obviously to a certain extent it makes the argument stronger to acknowledge differences in opinion and to argue against those contradicting your argument while at the same time advancing your own thesis. The issue, I think, is that some of the disagreement comes down to a basic subjective difference between the authors. One could make a compelling base for both views, and it’s hard to resolve the difference without admitting some of the differences are, to a certain degree, arbitrary. I’m sure I’ll come up with some solution in presenting the different views while putting forth my argument, but at this point in time it’s not entirely clear to me how to go about it best.

Hawthorne and Margaret Fuller

Like Wendy me research has to do a lot with Margaret Fuller and her affects on the book. I initially started with the idea of Women's Rights and how it affected Hawthorne but came to the conclusion it was too broad, so I refined it and focused my research on Margaret Fuller.

Hawthorne had a very interesting relationship with Margaret Fuller. One can conclude Hawthorne's relationship with Margaret Fuller was the most intimate relationship he had with any women. Hawthorne was happily married to Sophia Peabody but he was never able to connect with her like he did with Fuller.

Initially, Hawthorne disliked Fuller and thought she was too bold. She also called her "naughty Sophia" and wanted to refine her and make her more "pure" (111). His initial dislike turned into somewhat a friendship during his experiences at Brook Farm, a place where Fuller frequently visited. During their experience at Brook Farm they came to establish a respect for each other. They started critiquing and at times praising each others works. They also confided in each other very frequently. As evident in Hawthorne's letters, he had many one on one conversations with Fuller. After one conversation Hawthorne writes a letter, which included an almost endless of topics they discussed (114). His willingness and excitement to freely talk about almost everything signals their close and intimate relationship. They frequently exchanged letters and engaged in close conversation on a variety of matters, even private matters: "there is nobody to whom I would more willingly speak my mind, because I can be certain of being throughly understood" (115). It is evident that Hawthorne and Fuller have a very deep connection; Fuller became his most trusted confidant.

It is interesting how their relationship developed and grew. Their relationship parallels Coverdale and Zenobias greatly. The character Zenobia is also inspired by Fuller. Fuller was an inspiration to Hawthorne on many occasions. I still have a lot more research to do their on Fuller and her relationship and influence on Hawthorne.

Hawthorne & Reform

Researching reform movements in the early 19th century and what Hawthorne thought of them was a lot harder than I thought. I only found one website - the rest of my sources were books or JSTOR.

From this research, I decided to switch my topic of researching philanthropy to researching reform movements, because philanthropy is too broad. While researching, I found that the most common reform movements of the time were abolitionism, temperance, utopian ideals, women's rights, and prison reform. Most of these found a place in The Blithedale Romance. In fact, most characters represent a reform movement: Zenobia and women's rights, Coverdale and utopian ideals, Hollingsworth and prison reform, and Priscilla and slavery. I will probably concentrate more on Hollingsworth because I wrote my reading paper on him, and I concentrated my research around prison reform.

I found out that most of these reform movements did not suceed. Prison reform was not strict enough to actually prevent crime. As we know, the women's rights movement started in the mid-19th century but women did not actually get the right to vote until the early 1900's. Other movements had different ideas on how to actually reform, so there was a lot of in-fighting. Thus, reform was not very actually very philanthropic during Hawthorne's time, and thus it is no wonder that he was not supportive of the different reform movements. Most of the characters "fail" in a sense. Zenobia commits suicide, Coverdale does nothing with his life, and Hollingsworth never achieves his dream. So, I think Hawthorne is trying to show how their specific reform movements also are going to fail.

One of my most interesting finds was an article from JSTOR, which specifically talked about Hawthorne and his thoughts on reform. Many reformers, Hawthorne claimed, had unrealistic or stupid goals that would really not help anybody. Hawthorne even tried to have an open mind with reform movements by going to Brook Farm, but even that failed and caused Hawthorne to become more disoriented with the movements of his time. Hawthorne concluded "that man's efforts to improve society will continue to accomplish nothing until the heart is purified" (704-705). So, Hawthorne was against the reformers themselves - and thus he portrays the characters in Blithedale as failures.

Turner, Arlin. "Hawthorne and Reform." The New England Quarterly 15 (1942): 700-714. JSTOR. Berkeley. 24 July 2008.

A searching on Margaret Fuller's Death

This week, I went to San Francisco Public Lirary's main branch. Through using library catalog and some help from librarians, I borrowed a few books home. With an interest of investigating the relationship between Margaret Fuller and Zenobia's death, I read on the chapters of the books where they present Margaret's story.

First, a book called In Search Margaret Fuller by Abby Slater, she points out that Margaret Fuller did not see her death was unwelcome. In a letter which Margaret wrote a few days before the shipwreck, "I have a vague expectation of some crisis--I know not what...My life proceeds as regularly as the fate of a Greek tradegy, and I can but accept the pages as they turn..."(3). Although her letter is not a foretold of the shipwreck, she seemed to be ready to somekind of doom. It's always not easy to be the first one to doa thing. As she's the very first feminist writer in the 19th century, I think the bad feeling she had was the criticizm she would encounter after arriving back to United States. after her year living in Europe, it's reasonable that Margaret felt doom when she was rerouting back to her starting place.

The book also tells a story of Margaret Fuller during childhood which says Margaret had brooded to suicide. I believe this may have some affect on her perspective of life.

By the way, The Conjure Woman and Other Conjure Tales is indeed HARD to read T_T
Good luck everyone

Slater, Abby. In Search of Margaret Fuller. New York: Dekacorte Press, 1978.

The What Grapevine?!

I haven't quite finished reading The Conjure Woman yet, but from what I've read so far, it's seems to be a very entertaining book. Not only are the stories told by Julius imaginative, but as I turn every page, I can't help but wonder whether these stories being told could be true. I mean at the end of every story, John provides a logical explanation for the stories Julius tells. For example, in "The Goophered Grapevine," it seems as though Julius was only trying to dissuade John from buying the lot, because he was currently making a living off the few grapes that grew there. Also, in "Po' Sandy" he seems to have interest in keeping the old schoolhouse form being torn down for Annie's new kitchen. He even mentions that the late owner's wife wanted to build a kitchen there and was later haunted by spirits. In the end, Julius seems to get his way, or at gain something from telling his stories. Even though John is skeptical of the stories from the beginning, he listens. His wife, Annie on the other hand is very attentive and almost believes Julius' stories.

Something I noticed about all stories, which is also addressed in out SA questions is how the characters always seem to turn into something else. Henry in "Goophered Grapevine" becomes part of the grapevines and Sandy turns into a tree. The slaves in these stories seem to be very oriented to nature. I would like to suggest that Chesnutt is inferring that the slaves in the stories have a deep connection with the land that they live on. Their "Mars" may own the land, but they have no personal connection to the land except that they gain profit off it.

Something that caught my attention is Julius' last name. His last name is McAdoo and so is the name of the man who used to own the grapevine land. Is he a descendant of the late owner. John notes that Julius is a little light skinned, which may mean that his father was Mars Dugal. This may be another reason as to why he didn't want John to buy the land. However, I may be wrong since I haven't read all the reading for Conjure Woman yet. We'll see what happens.

*Chesnutt, Charles W. The Conjure Woman and Other Related Tales. Duke University Press. (1993).

The Conjure Woman

After searching for various sources about Charles W. Chesnutt, I was better able to understand his entrance into the literary world, one that was filled with obstacles. As a Mulatto, which is the mixed race of black and white, Chesnutt faced challenges as his racial identity could have very likely hindered his ability to become a successful writer. In fact, one the primary reasons that Chesnutt wrote was to challenge the racial division. Knowing that even after the war there still remained prejudice against the blacks, Chesnutt sought to have the voices of African-American writers heard without hurting either the whites or the blacks.

In fact, his first published book, The Conjure Woman, seemed to represent the struggle that Chesnutt, himself faced in his short-lived career as a writer. In addition, other writers who focused on the plantation also faced similar obstacles, although Chesnutt was a bit less fortunate as most of the works did not sell well. Chesnutt’s unique style involves the multifaceted interpretations to his works. On one hand, the book could be considered as a form of entertainment, particularly for those who fail to see beyond the surface of the folktales. On the other hand, those who are more perceptive and flexible, can see beyond the exaggerations and realize that each story contains a moral. The public attitude then could be easily compared to John’s and Annie’s reactions, since they too represent the extremes. An adamant attitude like John's leads to the inability to accept the tales, whereas a more understanding perception like Annie's leads to knowledge of not only the morals but also the history of slavery.

"Salem, Transcendentalism, and Hawthorne""

So I found the book Salem, Transcendentalism, and Hawthorne by Alfred Rosa in the library, which is quite the find since my research topic is dealing with Transcendentalism's role in Blithedale. I found out a lot of information about the contact that Hawthorne had with prominent people in the movement. For one thing, he lived in Salem, Massachusetts which rivaled Boston as a center for Transcendentalist thought. In fact, Hawthorne was in charge of booking speakers at the Salem Lyceum and was frequently requesting Thoreau and Emerson to lecture there. But Hawthorne wasn't necessarily a follower of the movement. He definitely respected the Transcendentalists (many of his friends were Transcendentalists, including his wife's sister), but he did not agree with their stance on prison reform and saw himself somewhere between the extremes of Transcendentalist and popular writer. Prison reform definitely shows up in Blithedale in Hollingsworth's character. Rosa quotes the words of John Erskine from 1918 (very, very old school), "He was really the detached observer, that other Transcendentalists thought they were(14)." I thought this quote was very interesting considering all of our talk about Coverdale as a passive observer. All in all, this is a very handy book that I still have to discover more.

Peace, Love, and Happiness-

Nick G

Sources, Temporal Proximity, and Credibility

As I'm sure all of you did, I ran into several problems while conducting research for my paper. Out of all of the problems, books being checked out of the library, JSTOR not having what I wanted, or simply not being able to find relevant information, the most interesting problem I had was that I kept finding inconsistencies in my sources. One source would say one thing, and another source would put forward something completely contrary. It was frustrating!

While that problem isn't unexpected it is still a difficult problem to solve. Who do you believe? Sure you could simply discard the source that doesn't support your argument, but that doesn't really solve the problem. After thinking about it for awhile I reached a dead end with this question:

All other things being equal should a source that is authored shortly after an event be considered more credible than one that is authored after a much longer period?

In the case of The Blithedale Romance can a critique of Hawthorne's intentions written a hundred years later be considered as credible as one written during Hawthorne's lifetime? If the two directly contradict each other which one should take precedence? It's a tough question to rectify.

Did anyone run into this problem? If you did how did you solve it?

That annotated bibliography took me forever!

This is a reflection on the annotated bibliography we turned in last Thursday.

I don't know about you guys, but it took me a really long time before I could put anything down on paper as I was writing my annotated bibliography. After hours of reading a variety of sources, I realized that it was so hard to write because I didn't have any specific goals; the revised research question I had formed was still too broad: How did the law shape the lives of American women in the 19th century. So I referred back to the research proposal I got back from Natalia. One of the comments she gave was to refer back to Sweet Cicely to identify specific laws mentioned in the book. I took a step back and tried to come up with several laws that I could do research on to produce a substantial 8-10 page research paper. After all those hours of writer's block, I wrote the following on top of my draft: How did laws regarding ownership of property, possession of alcohol, and domestic abuse affect American women in the 19th century? After I wrote that question down, my annotated bibliography started to take shape.

In my research so far, I was not able to find any specific laws regarding those three aspects of woman life in the 19th century. I started to panic that maybe I would need an entirely new research proposal! But what I did find were testimonials and personal accounts of prominent women figure in the 19th century, such as Elizabeth Stanton, that covered these issues. I was relieved that I did not waste all these hours reading sources to write my bibliography. Hopefully I will be able to find more useful sources in the following weeks.

Hawthorne's Self-Criticism

My research deals with how Hawthorne relates to his narrator, Coverdale, in The Blithedale Romance. In my research, I have looked at many sources on Hawthorne’s life and experiences (particularly at Brook Farm) as well as sources on how Coverdale is portrayed in the novel.

I have found several interesting personality links between Hawthorne and Coverdale. First-hand accounts of Hawthorne describe him as shy, quiet, self-absorbed, antisocial, and isolated. This is exactly as Coverdale is portrayed in The Blithedale Romance, suggesting Hawthorne either purposely or accidentally based Coverdale on himself, which would help explain why he chose Coverdale as his first-person narrator.

In addition, Edward Wagenknecht, author of Nathaniel Hawthorne: Man and Writer, points out that Hawthorne once said, “I have not lived, but only dreamed of living” (77). Hawthorne’s statement mirrors Coverdale’s lack of action throughout the novel; Coverdale constantly alludes to his feeling “that it appears all like a dream that we were ever there” (Hawthorne 165).

However, Wagenknecht provides an explanation for the resemblance between Hawthorne’s personality and Coverdale's that does not suggest Hawthorne based Coverdale on himself. He implies that Hawthorne often created lonely characters like Coverdale to warn against seclusion from society, despite his own isolation. Thus, Coverdale may not represent Hawthorne; he may merely represent the kind of loneliness of which Hawthorne disapproves. Also, it seems Coverdale and Hawthorne do not possess identical personalities, for Hawthorne was not as egotistical as Coverdale and did not pry into others’ lives like Coverdale.

Frederick Crews, in his book The Sins of the Fathers: Hawthorne's Psychological Themes, asserts The Blithedale Romance is a self-cleansing tool for Hawthorne with which he can wash himself of his past. Crews says, “Half understanding and wholly disapproving of the nature of Coverdale’s artistic purposes, Hawthorne was able to rise … to … self-criticism” (212). Thus, Crews holds a similar opinion as Wagenknecht, who believes Hawthorne uses Coverdale to warn against seclusion and obsession with others’ lives, but Crews takes this one step further by suggesting Hawthorne also reprimands himself for being like Coverdale.

Many of the sources I found suggested Hawthorne’s focus was Coverdale and that Blithedale and its inhabitants were merely Coverdale’s focus. They point out how much of the novel is devoted to Coverdale’s thoughts and self-aware narration. I agree with their opinions to a certain extent, but I think Hawthorne is more linked to Coverdale than these critics propose. Because Hawthorne and Coverdale have similar personalities and shared experiences, it seems Coverdale is just a more extreme version of Hawthorne. Hawthorne is almost directly writing in the first-person, perhaps unintentionally, for Coverdale is the kind of person Hawthorne worries he is like.

I am still developing my opinion on the relation between narrator and author, but I see a strong connection, a connection that maybe Hawthorne himself was not entirely aware of.

The Conjure Woman -- very entertaining and enjoyable.

I bought The Conjure Woman from Amazon 1.5 months ago, because I wanted to get ahead and start reading some of the texts for this class. But when I opened the book and started reading for a bit, I felt dizzy -- yes, the language made me feel dizzy. I had trouble understanding the text. So, I stopped reading... and just waited till I need to read.

At first, I found it hard to make out some of the words, and I felt frustrated. But soon I realized that though I could not find the Standard English words for some, I had no problem understanding the text, because I could guess what the word would possibly mean in that context. I have to admit that reading The Conjure Woman is very time-consuming, because I have to read out loud the text in order to understand it. But after I finished this book, I found it very entertaining, not only because of the tales, but also because of the characters in this book.

Uncle Julius is clever. Every time he gives "advice" to his employer, he begins with a tale, and he always ends up getting some benefits from telling the tales. In Julius' tales, the slaves were constantly turned into something other than human-beings, and most of them had undergone some injuries as a result of that. To me, it's like Julius is actually saying how much the slaves had suffered under the mistreatmeant by their masters, as if they were not treated as human-beings. Nevertheless, in those tales, the slaves always beat their masters, so Julius' tales are like a warning to John and Annie.

Although the narrator, John, and his wife, Annie, always comment on those tales as "absurd, ridiculous, nonesense," etc, they nonetheless believe those tales, and seldom question Uncle Julius' real purpose of the telling. Both John and Annie seem to trust Uncle Julius too much, or, I would say they simply assume that Uncle Julius would not deceive them, because Uncle Julius is an ex-slave and he is supposed to be loyal and honest to white people. And with this assumption and their white superiority, John and Annie fail to see Julius' true purpose.

I wonder what the reception of this book was; since in the tales the blacks constantly beat the whites, and most of the audiences (if not all) were white, I wonder how they reacted to this book?

The Conjure Woman

The book is not as bad as I thought it would be. I guess everyone's thinking the same thing. I think it's because most of the book is plot driven. It's the same reason why people like to read Harry Potter. We are not inundated with details about how the harpoon looked or how Zenobia looked through Coverdale's sick eyes. The sentences that Julius uses are also easy. It's not these long sentences where Coverdale talks about ten different things with all these commas connecting them.

However, now that I think about it, the reading paper for The Conjure Woman would not have been very interesting. I would understand the plot and everything in it, but it would not have been very interesting to analyze. I would have about 10 to 15 pages within the chapter to analyze the story. The only thing that's holding the book together is the presence of the conjure woman and slavery. There's no evolution of the characters or building tensions from one chapter or another. It's just some old slave telling folk tales and conning the white people.

SA #3: Conjure Woman reading questions

1. List the material benefits that Julius accrues by the end of The Conjure Woman.

2. Based on your understanding of the text, define or write in standard English the following words:

goophered (e.g. p. 35 )
bimeby (e.g. p. 47)
juneseyin’ (e.g. p. 58 )
patteroles (e.g. p. 64)

3. In “The Conjurer’s Revenge,” Julius says,

I doan lak ter dribe a mule. I’s alluz afeared I mought be imposin’ on some human creetur; eve’y time I cuts a mule wid a hick’ry, ‘pears ter me mos’ lackly I’s cuttin’ some er my own relations, er somebody e’se w’at can’t he’p deyse’ves. (71)

a. What is the reason Julius gives for this feeling in his story?

b. Give another example from the novel of a person undergoing injury as a result of being mistaken for something other than a person.

c. In your opinion, is conjure represented as a source of misfortune in the novel?

A (not so) surprising find.

Yesterday in class, I pointed out some ways in which Blithedale brings up Kantian transcendental idealist ideas. Natalia said that German romanticism, a historical period in German philosophy dominated by Kantian transcendental idealism, was not directly related to American Transcendentalism. I'm not convinced. There are too many parallels and references in Blithdale for me to accept that there isn't a strong indirect connection between the two, and my research confirms my thinking. (This is the topic of my research paper).

I know a lot about transcendental idealism, but not so much about American Transcendentalism. So, in order to find out where I needed to look, I googled it and was directed to a number of websites which posted bibliographies. The one I decided I trusted the most listed a few sources that looked like an overview of the movement as a whole, so I picked a couple more-or-less at random from among their list.

I was shocked and pleased to find that one of the books I checked out on American Transcendetalism is actually a inquiry into the philosophic roots of the movement, and it spends a full chapter discussing the relation between transcendental idealism and American Transcendentalism. In particular it discusses the way in which the Kantian ideas which define the philosophic movement shaped the much-hailed Emerson's work. The book also contains a section about the influence of German romanticism on the American movement.

I say that this find was (not so) surprising because I was surprised to see something so relevant to my topic basically fall in my lap, but not at all surprised that this subject has been covered elsewhere, as it seems like an obvious source of research given the similarities between the two movements (they both even have "transcendental" in the name).

Travel photos

This summer, like Si, I'm stuck in Berkeley doing some weird class on American lit. But last summer I went to a conference in York, England. So obviously when I saw this plaque on the side of York Minster it put me in nerdly raptures:



That's the historical Miles Coverdale, not to be confused with Miles Coverdale, Self-Absorbed Whiner and Narrator of The Blithedale Romance.

Here's a photo of the cathedral, for context.

On the (anti)feminist implications of the “strong woman”

I want to make some comments on the phrase "strong woman," because I see it frequently, and not just in the context of this class. This post isn't intended as a reprimand to anybody, but rather a suggestion that we work toward more specific and more considered terminology.

The phrase "strong woman" is usually invoked as if it were some kind of feminist term. As far as I’m concerned, however, any claim that the phrase has feminist or pro-woman implications is bogus. In fact, I contend that the phrase reinforces sexist norms. Here are my reasons.

1. Invocation of a stereotype

I usually see the phrase “strong woman” being used as if a “strong woman” were some kind of rarity. For instance, in discussions of Zenobia and Priscilla, Zenobia, the “strong woman,” is held up as the exception to the rule, even though there are only two important female characters in The Blithedale Romance. Somehow the “weak” Priscilla is the default. There is a stereotype that holds that women are generally “weak.” But according to the UN, women make up about 46% of the world's official labor force, but on average also do twice as much unpaid work as men (usually domestic labor). (source) Isn’t it time we stopped being shocked when women are strong?

Of course the stereotype still persists, but talking about “a strong woman” as if she were some kind of wild one-off exception does nothing to undermine that stereotype; it only makes strong woman after strong woman the exception that proves the rule.

2. The masculinist ideology of strength

Let's take another look at the logic behind the phrase "strong woman." It buys into a stereotype that says that women tend to be weak and men tend to be strong. So in fact, if we celebrate a few women as “strong women,” all we are doing is celebrating them insofar as they are exceptions to normative womanhood, i.e. insofar as they are (supposedly) like men. By that logic, a woman can only be admirable by aspiring to be like a man, reinforcing an ideology of male superiority.

What's more, except when applied to physical strength (and perhaps even then), "strong" is a hopelessly vague adjective. If one has a "strong mind," does that mean that one is intelligent, or merely stubborn? The phrase "strong woman," because it banks on a sexist stereotype, invites a slippage between the many legitimately admirable meanings of strength (the vague category of "strengths" one might have, which might otherwise be phrased as "good attributes") and the form of physical strength that is stereotypically associated with aggressive masculinity, i.e. the kind of strength least typically associated with femininity. In this context, the kind of strength being celebrated is a stereotypically masculine one -- not endurance or intelligence or versatility, but force.

But what’s so good about being forceful in the first place? Sure, it lets you get your way, but is it morally admirable to steamroller over others? Should we really value people on the basis of their strength, rather than on the basis of their humanity? To valorize force is to invest in a might-makes-right economy of aggression in which the last resort is physical. Women as well as men who don’t meet the masculine ideal of forceful strength (or its concomitant, size) are damaged by this ideology. Wouldn’t it be more productive to reorient toward a society not based on force?

To valorize women for being “strong” is to buy into a gender stereotype (that it is unusual for women to be strong) and then, on the basis that stereotype, to mark as admirable a particular version of strength (force), more for its association with masculinity than for any legitimate social value. If this is actually pro-woman, then I’m Harold Bloom.

* * * * *

(I note with interest that it is actually pretty difficult to find a still of Buffy the Vampire Slayer in which the actress playing Buffy actually looks threatening, rather than sexy, head-tilty, and vulnerable. Even when she is posing with a wooden stake.)

Zenobia's Femininity

After reading through the blog I wanted to change my research focus since it seemed like many of us had the same central focus, women and their impact on the novel. I then started conducting my research and reading and have decided to stick with the same topic for now. I feel it is a very vital topic to understand to have a good understanding of the novel, so it makes sense that a lot us are writing about it. I hope to refine the topic once I have more research so we do not end up with a bunch of papers that sound a like.

So back to my research. After reading through some research what interested me a lot was Zenobia. Zenobia is a very complex character that embodies sexuality, creative energy and traditional femininity in her strong-mindedness, pride, and competitive nature against men. Many critics have compared her to the 19th century women's rights activist Margaret Fuller.

Though she it touted as a strong minded reformer she is also flawed. It does not take long for Coverdale to realize that her culture, mind and passion are superficial: "I malevolently beheld the true character of the woman, passionate, luxurious, lacking simplicity, not deeply refined, incapable of pure and perfect taste" (165). Like Coverdale her commitment to Blithedale is half hearted; she is at Blithedale only in the interest of Hollingsworth. She then later in the novel fails: "Everything had
failed her; --- prosperity in the world's sense, for her opulence was gone, --- the heart's prosperity, in love. And there was a secret burthen on her, the nature of which is best known to you. Young as she was, she had tried life fully, had no more to hope, and something, perhaps, to fail" (239).She surrenders herself to both Westervelt and Hollingsworth.

Her surrendering herself to the two men comments on the way society views women in the 19th century. A women of Zenobia's character would be rare and would not be accepted in society. Hawthorne used Zenobia to show that a true feminist had to have a true passion and commitment to her cause which Zenobia did not; Zenobia was merely an actress. The women of time such as Fuller were dedicated and did not fall victim to men; one of Fuller's belief was to be careful of marriage and for women not to depend of men. Hawthorne's writing is essentially the social commentary of the time.

Common Characters Between Blithedale and Brook Farm

I had a difficult time settling on a topic for my research project until we went over the preface of The Blithedale Romance last week. In the preface Hawthorne claims that other than the setting there was no relation between the Brook Farm community, and Blithedale. I found that a little hard to believe and decided it would be worth researching if there were any similarities between the people involved at Brook Farm and the characters of the novel.

I think that more often than not fictional characters are based in some capacity on real people. So even though Hawthorn claims that there is no relationship between the characters and the real people I think that there are likely similarities, if not direct relationships between the two.

I feel that this research will be interesting from a historical perspective, and also from the stand point of the novel. If there turns out that certain characters in the novel were actually based on real life people, it will help me to understand the book in a whole new light. If however, there are no similarities, it would be almost equally as interesting to contrast the differences between the two groups.

So far the research looks promising, and I can't wait to get some good information to share in my next post

The Conjure Woman

After reading The Conjure Woman, I started to wonder if most African American folktales involved supernatural events. John and Annie, the white couple, reacted very differently to the ex-slave’s stories and it made me wonder how African-American folktales were actually received by the public after the Civil War. Was Charles Chesnutt’s collection of stories representative of how society perceived these folktales? Furthermore, since most African-American tales were mostly passed on orally, the tales would be subject to variations. However, in order for people to learn about these tales, they would have to hear about them in person or read about them. Consequently, for someone to read the tales, there must have been a point in which oral becomes written, and it would be interesting to understand this process, particularly since this would have been the point where the public would receive the tales.

In order to look into these questions, I would first look into the history of Charles Chesnutt. Since The Conjure Woman was not completely wholly by him but rather shaped by his editors, this could help with studying how the folktales transitioned from oral to written. Was it typical that white people were necessary for this transition, or was Charles Chesnutt simply an exception? I would also plan to look into other African American writers during the times of slavery and the Reconstruction period because that time frame would have corresponded with the novel. It would also provide some insight into how other people were involved in African American folktale, and whether there were similarities.

This is a citation to the my last post:

Templin, Charlotte. "Marietta Holley and Mark TwainL Cultural-Gender politics and literary repuation." American Studies. (1998): 39.1 75-91.

Sweet Cicely!!!

I'm actually really excited for the rest of the class to read Sweet Cicely, because I found the book rather entertaining. The characters Marietta Holley created are all colorful and each have their own story to tell. I feel that this and her simple way of portraying the lives and Samantha and her Josiah may have been a reason why she is often referred to as the female counterpart to Mark Twain (Templin, Charlotte). This leads me to my research proposal which is to investigate the relationship between Holley and other humorists during her time. I especially want to delve into whether there is a difference between male and female humorists. Is there a reason why Mark Twain is so well known and not Marietta Holley? The most obvious difference between the 2 writers in their gender, which is a central issue to Holley's novel Sweet Cicely. As much as I enjoyed reading The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain in middle school, I also enjoyed Sweet Cicely. Twain's use of satire for humor is also seen in Holley's writings. Most of my research is going to come from previous articles written by other people who have done similar research so if anyone has any suggestions, just blog it!

What's the Big Idea?!

So when coming up with a research topic I decided that doing my paper on Transcendentalism in Blithedale might be a good avenue since Brook Farm and Blithedale both had roots in the movement. However, with further thought I began to wonder on what level is the book a social commentary at all? What was Hawthorne's purpose for writing this novel? He says in the Preface that he is making no judgments on socialism at all. But as in the case with Coverdale, I find it hard to take to heart everything that Hawthorne says. So as of now my topic is Transcendentalism. Maybe it will change to socialism. Or maybe it will encompass some aspect of both or more. Who knows at this point where my reading will take me.

Reform & Hollingsworth

I want to investigate why Hawthorne decided to make Hollingsworth so egotistical and so intolerant to other ideas. It seems that Hawthorne was trying to speak out against the efforts of reform / philanthropy in the 19th century. So, I want to research philanthropy & prison reform in the 19th century and compare the efforts and actions with those of Hollingsworth, and use this information to figure out what Hawthorne was trying to say about reform.

I actually found another copy of The Blithedale Romance which had at its beginning a great introduction about the various historical contexts. There were many reform movements going on at the time - such as abolitionism, the temperance movement, the women's rights movement, and prison reform. Most of the reform movements had extremists who, like Hollingsworth, only cared about their reform and did not give any one else a second thought. For example, William Lloyd Garrison of the abolitionist movement was described as "a fanatic" and was opposed by many people (8).

Prison reform had two new systems. The first system “stressed the total isolation of prisoners,” while the second system “enforced isolation at night…but allowed prisoners to work together” (10). There was another method of transforming criminals into moral citizens, as Hollingsworth exemplified.

Reform in Hawthorne’s age, while beneficial, also led to unforeseen consequences that Hawthorne did not like. He was against the radical-ness of some of the reform movements, because they would often lead to trouble for the group that was not getting directly affected by the reform. For example, some argued that while the abolitionist movement helped the slaves, white men who worked hard jobs for extremely low pay were worse off because they were not guaranteed safety (8). So, not everyone would benefit.

It seems I’ve gotten a somewhat generalization so far – that Hawthorne was disillusioned against some of the reform movements of his time, and thus showed Hollingsworth as a selfish philanthropist in order to criticize the reform movements. I originally was going to focus on philanthropic movements, but now after reading, I think I am going to concentrate more on reform movements – but still try to focus on prison reform.

Hawthorne, Nathaniel. The Blithedale Romance. Bedford Cultural ed. Houndmilss: Macmillan P LTD., 1996. 1-506.

Is Coverdale Hawthorne?

Although I am not completely sure exactly what I want to research, my central question is how does Hawthorne’s narrator in The Blithedale Romance, Coverdale, compare to Hawthorne himself? I mainly want to find out why Hawthorne chose Coverdale to be his first-person narrator, what effect it has on the story, and whether Coverdale at Blithedale is Hawthorne at Brook Farm.

I have been reading Nathaniel Hawthorne’s journal lately, and have found some interesting entries that relate to my research.

First I looked up his journal entries from around the time he was working on The Blithedale Romance (early 1850s). He writes, “Wrote the last page (199th MS.) of ‘The Blithedale Romance’” on April 13, 1852. On May 1, he adds “Wrote Preface. Afterwards modified the conclusion, and lengthened it to 201 pages.” (Arvin, Newton, ed. The Heart of Hawthorne's Journals. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1929.)

These entries suggest two things. One, the preface (which explains that the novel does not reflect his opinion of Brook Farm) appears to be an afterthought. Two, perhaps he added the chapter “Miles Coverdale’s Confessions” three weeks after he considered the novel finished. The preface and the last chapter seem to be crucial to the novel’s meaning, at least to me, so it is puzzling to find that he added them after finishing the book. Maybe the novel is more attached to his Brook Farm experiences than previously thought; maybe Hawthorne added the last chapter to disconnect himself with Coverdale because he felt the character appeared too similar to him throughout the book. I will have to look more deeply into it.

I then found a passage from September 7, 1850, that reads almost identically to a passage near the end of The Blithedale Romance. I will not quote the entire journal entry, but it is a less refined version of what is found on page 211 in The Blithedale Romance, beginning with “In my haste, I stumbled over a heap of logs.” It is interesting to note that in his journal, Hawthorne uses first person to represent himself as stumbling over the logs, whereas in The Blithedale Romance, he uses first person to mean Coverdale stumbles over the logs. I will need to analyze the passage more and hypothesize why Hawthorne would deem it necessary to include in his novel.

Next I looked up journal entries from when Hawthorne was at Brook Farm (they turned out to be letters instead of journal entries). Apparently Hawthorne was sick when he first arrived at Brook Farm like Coverdale, and he absolutely hated all of the manual labor he had to do on the farm, leaving shortly after joining. Like Coverdale, he complains about how he does not have time to write because he is constantly exhausted from working. He seems very similar to Coverdale in these letters.

I have only scratched the surface of similarities between Hawthorne and Coverdale; I hope to delve deeper into his journal, his letters, and biographies about him to discover how he relates to his character Coverdale, as well as more closely look at what I have already found.

Coincident? I think not.

In the preface of The Blithedale Romance, Hawthorne kept telling us that the book should be seen separately from the actual Brook Farm. However, it's not very hard to say that Hawthorne did indeed based his book on his experience at Brook Farm.

Doing a quick wikipedia search on The Blithedale Romance, I found that the circumstances of Zenobia's death was based on the actual drowning-suicide of Miss Hunt. Apparently, Hawthorne wrote extensively about this in his journal. However, I don't have his journal on hands nor do I know which part of his journal contain this Miss Hunt. I guess that could be a research material that I will be needing.

I was flipping through Horatio Bridge's Personal Recollections of Nathaniel Hawthorne today when I found this passage

I remember also his glee in telling of his strictly enforcing the rules for early rising by blowing the horn - long and loud - at five o'clock in the morning, much to the discomfort of the drowsy members of the family.

As we might remember in The Blithedale Romance, Coverdale described how Silas Foster had the habit of sounding the horn at day-break. On page 39, Coverdale described it as "harsh, uproarious, inexorably drawn out, and as sleep-dispelling as if this hard-hearted old yeoman had got hold of the trump of doom." This is pretty far from the "glee" that Hawthorne had for sounding the horn as was described by Bridge.


From Hawthorne's letter to Sophia Peabody dated April 13, 1841, he wrote

Here is thy poor husband in a polar Paradise! I know not how to interpret this aspect of Nature - whether it be of good or evil omen to our enterprise. But I reflect that the Plymouth pilgrims arrived in the midst of storm and stept ashore upon mountain snow-dritss; and nevertheless they prospered, and became a great people - and doubtless it will be the same with us. I laud my stars, however, that thou wilt not have thy first impressions of our future home from such a day as this.

Hawthorne is basically telling Sophia to not be so depressed by having to go through a snow storm on their trek to Brook Farm. Coincidently, Coverdale described the very same snow storm in his trek to Blithedale. I just don't think that it's a very good idea to believe Hawthorne when he said that the book is separate from the actual Brook Farm.

Socialism and Utopia in The Blithedale Romance

My research proposal is concerned with the way in which 19th century concerns with socialism and utopianism impacted The Blithedale Romance. Hawthorne appears to criticize both of these ideas in the book through the creation of an array of characters who, although superficially committed to the cause of their community, fall short in successfully establishing Blithedale due to their own personal interests. I hope that gaining some insight into the historical context surrounding the novel will help to explain why he depicted the community as he did. I'm taking a couple directions with the topic at this point, as I'm not entirely sure what will be relevant to the paper.

I'm using Brook Farm as an obvious starting point for research. Importantly there's the connection with Hawthorne himself, which should allow for more insight into the philosophical underpinnings of the book than would be accomplished by pursuing general research into 19th century socialism/utopianism. This has led me to some of the ideas associated with Brook Farm- Transcendentalism and Fourierism. At this point I intend to draw the connection between those ideas, Hawthorne himself, and by proxy the situation he described at Blithedale. Biographical readings about Hawthorne, historical accounts of Brook Farm, and descriptions of the philosophies associated with the Brook Farm experiment may all be useful.

Besides using historical sources which describe and its associated ideologies, I’m also exploring literary criticism to see how others saw the association between The Blithedale Romance and socialism/utopianism. It’s not always clear how to place a novel within a specific school of thought, so I think by looking for experts on the matter I can more easily see how specific ideas within 19th century socialism or utopianism may have influenced the novel.

At this point my research is rather broad in scope, as I’m not exactly sure what I’ll be arguing. I assume it’ll become clearer in the days ahead, as I still have a lot of material to absorb before I can clearly formulate a thesis (and therefore have a good idea of what type of material I should be looking at).

Reading The Blithedale Romance+More...

In The Blithedale Romance, Zenobia and Priscilla are two totally different images of woman. Zenobia, who is a fascinating strong woman, is more likely to be an image of modern women, and Priscilla, who is very submissive and says she never has any free-will, is an image of ordinary women in the past. To me, Zenobia is an interesting character. Not only because of how special the reference name Hawthorne uses, the existence of Zenobia is like a woman living in the past time with a modern mind. The challenges and pressure under Zenobia is hard to difficult to express, or write it out. Unlike to Hollingsworth, Miles Coverdale is a mild character who understands and cares other’s feeling. Through the language Hawthorne uses, I’m surprised and can definitely feel the kind of romance which is different from other books.

I was thinking of a specific research topic, but still, it’s kind of hard to narrow it down. Every time I find some new information to support a topic/thesis, there are new ideas get in, and then, I have to find get rid of the extra ideas, or giving up the source and find a new one. Beside, we have readings too. Gosh…everybody’s going somewhere on their vacation…I don’t have enough time to go out!!! T_T depressing!!!

My Research Proposal

To be honest, I do not like the way Nathaniel Hawthorne killed Zenobia in The Blithedale Romance. I wish she could survive, or, at least she could die in another way instead of committing suicide.

Zenobia represents a kind of aggressive woman figure (and an advocate of women's rights) who is rarely seen in the nineteenth century; committing suicide means that she gives up her goals and surrenders to the unjust society. I always wonder why Hawthorne would kill Zenobia.

Some critics have suggested that Margaret Fuller, who was one of the leading feminists in the nineteenth century, had a great influence in the character of Zenobia. According to the notes on the back of the novel, Fuller was "a frequent visitor at Brook Farm, and an acquaintance of the Hawthornes" (Hawthorne 252). I want to examine Fuller and Hawthorne's acquaintance through Brook Farm, as well as the history of feminism in the nineteenth century (especially around 1840 - 1852), to see how their acquaintance, nineteenth century feminism, and Hawthorne's views on feminism impacted the novel.

So my research question for The Blithdale Romance is the following:

How did nineteenth century feminism and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s views on women’s rights impact The Blithedale Romance?

Through this research, we can better understand the characters of Zenobia and Priscilla, especially Zenobia -- is she really representing Margaret Fuller? Why is she killed? Was Nathaniel Hawthorne against the idea of feminism? What message does Hawthorne want to bring out?

I will look up Hawthorne's biographies to see his potision on women's rights and/or feminism. I also want to compare Hawthrone's view on women's rights to that of Coverdale's, to see if they are different or the same. If they are different, then what kind of person is Coverdale representing? What specific idea does Hawthorne want to point out through Coverdale?

I will also research some prominent feminists in the nineteenth century, especially those who had acquaintance with Hawthorne. i.e. Margaret Fuller, Elizabeth Peabody (Hawthorne's sister-in-law).

I have borrowed 4 books, Nathaniel Hawthorne: A Biography; Nathaniel Hawthorne and His Wife, a Biography;Elizabeth Palmer Peabody: A Reformer on Her Own Terms; Letters of Elizabeth Palmer Peabody. I was not able to find Margaret Fuller's Woman in the Nineteen Century, which I think is an important book to my research. I will go to the library again on Monday to see if I can find that book... also other relevant books.

And for the following days...... READ READ READ!!!!! ...........

ohhhhhhhhhh

Don't forget to start The Conjure Woman next week!!!

Potter Abstract

In this post, I'm pasting (below) the abstract I submitted to the MLA panel chair, Jacqueline Horne. I wrote this abstract long before I wrote the paper, but you can see from the abstract that I already had a pretty good idea of where the paper was going to go.

For one thing, as you can see from the abstract's epigraphs, I had a few specific passages in mind that I was planning to analyze. These passages struck me as important, and indicative of the kind of difference I was seeing between Harry Potter and earlier "medievalist" fantasy literature. These later made their way into the paper.

The abstract also flags the kinds of research I was planning to do.

The words "media and history" in the title, as well as terms like "information age," suggest that this paper is informed by the work of media theorists like Marshall McLuhan, Walter Ong, and Jean Baudrillard (this last a much more recent theorist). Media theory examines how different communications media alter the way we think, act, and communicate. Harold Innis, one of McLuhan's great influences, proposed that any given media environment corresponds with a "bias" in the senses. Living in an oral culture, for example, would correspond with an aural bias; if the main way that you receive information is through the sense of hearing, then your sense of hearing will be well developed, and you'll pay a lot of attention to it.

The abstract also mentions other texts against which I plan to compare Harry Potter: works by C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Diana Wynne Jones. (In the paper I also consider Susan Cooper.)

And finally, by bringing up Harold Bloom, the abstract shows that I'm taking on the problem raised by Bloom's articles, namely that Rowling's writing is not "literate." (I could have flagged it more clearly and deliberately, however.)

So the abstract announces a problem (Harold Bloom's "literacy" problem), a specific literary field against which I was going to compare the Harry Potter series (post-WWII Oxford fantasy), and a theoretical paradigm that I was going to use to investigate these novels (media theory).

Nonetheless, you can see from the first sentence of the abstract that I wasn't quite sure what I was going to write. The paper "undertakes to consider" a "relationship" -- pretty vague stuff! That's because I didn't figure out what I thought about that relationship until I was deep into writing the paper.

Here's the abstract:

* * * * *

From Stone Tablet to Pensieve: Media and History in Children’s Fantasy

“It means,” said Aslan, “that though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time.”

--C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe

Easily the most boring class was History of Magic, which was the only one taught by a ghost. Professor Binns had been very old indeed when he had fallen asleep in front of the staff room fire and got up next morning to teach, leaving his body behind him. Binns droned on and on while they scribbled down names and dates, and got Emeric the Evil and Uric the Oddball all mixed up.

--J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone

My paper undertakes to consider the relationship between children’s fantasy, history, and media. As I will show, Harry Potter marks a departure from its fantasy forebears (what Maria Cecire calls the Oxford School of children’s literature) in its positioning vis-à-vis postindustrial information culture. For while the Oxford School constructs fantasy worlds in which the lore (OE lar, learning) of the humanities scholar—history, textual scholarship, hermeneutics—takes on life-or-death, will-the-world-survive importance, Rowling’s fantasy world—like our contemporary one—depends on information, information delivered just in time, transmissible by ordinary speech, and platform-independent. Text rarely figures prominently in the world of Harry Potter, and never as a source of knowledge, wisdom, or pleasure (except in the case of Hermione Granger, whose pleasure in reading — always nonfiction — is cast as humorous). Instead of fetishized inscriptions or codices, or even whole courses in the lore-logic of the fantasy world (for instance, the sequence of books sent to educate Polly in Diana Wynne Jones’s Fire and Hemlock), Rowling creates a world of hypermimetic media: photographs and portraits that go ordinary images one better by moving, for instance, or the Pensieve, a recorder of memory that one actually enters and experiences. This is a world without a paper trail, instantly changeable and ahistorical. In fact, the curriculum of Hogwarts Academy reflects this ahistoricity: in the world of magical media, one learns skill sets rather than arts and sciences, and history itself is so archaic as to be dead—as is its professor, the ghost of someone who is “very old indeed.”

Yet if the Harry Potter series exists within a postindustrial informational episteme in which history is continually effaced, it also wears the medievalized skin of so many of its Oxford School antecedents — what Harold Bloom derisively calls “the magical mirror of Tolkien.” Rowling’s medievalism is largely style, but it is a defining style. In Harry Potter, medievalized stylings signify an archaic mode of playful inefficiency (imagine actually writing with quill pens) that is not opposed to, but rather inseparable from the hypermimetic magical media that characterize Harry’s world. In this sense, Harry Potter confirms the influence of the Oxford School in the breach. For the Oxford School of children’s fantasy invests in a vision of premodern humanistic knowledge, as viewed through a Victorian lens, offering the modern, print-acculturated protagonist (and the reader) access to that premodern episteme—which is why it is so often important that the fantasy protagonist be a reader. Harry Potter decidedly does not access a medieval episteme, but rather negotiates an uneasy alliance between the premodern and the postmodern, the technologically backward quill pen and the magically hypermimetic Pensieve, introducing an element of inefficient play into information culture. If Rowling fails to continue the tradition of the Oxford School, her work is perhaps its logical consequence in the information age.

* * * * *

Previously:
Thinking about research projects (July 13)

Research Proposal

For my research, I am asking the following question: How did the law shape the lives of women in American in the 19^th century? Understanding what role the law played during this period will not only help the reader empathize with the female characters in Sweet Cicely, but it also allows him or her to judge the degree of accuracy of the details, which gives further insight into Marietta Holley’s writing style.

In order to answer this question fully, I will research the following information:

1. What laws were established at this time? What was legal and illegal? Specifically, what laws were aimed towards women?
2. What important events, movements, etc. (i.e. fight for women’s suffrage) happened at this time? Were they successful, or did they fail? Why?
3. Was there anybody notable in the law at this time? Is the person male or female? What did they stand up for? How significant was his or her influence, if any, on society?

I plan to research this question by finding books at the library, articles from credible websites online, and possibly newspaper articles/journals if I can find anything relevant and useful.

SA#2: Blithedale reading questions

Answer each of the following questions with a short paragraph.

1. In the preface, Hawthorne writes that “his present concern with the Socialist Community is merely to establish a theatre, a little removed from the highway of ordinary travel, where the creatures of his brain may play their phantasmagorical antics” (1). We noted in class that the phantasmagoria was a nineteenth-century pre-cinematic light show in which an oil lamp was used to project images of ghosts and goblins. So Hawthorne’s statement compares the products of authorial imagination to ghostly images, and the author to a kind of show-man.

In light of this, what do you make of Coverdale’s many comments about ghostly appearances?

For example:

While this passed, and while she spoke to my companions, I was taking note of Zenobia’s aspect; and it impressed itself on me so distinctly, that I can now summon her up like a ghost, a litle wanner than the life, but otherwise identical with it.(15)

Or:

The steam arose from his soaked garments, so that the stout yeoman looked vaporous and spectre-like. (18)

2. In the first chapter, Coverdale mentions the Veiled Lady as “a phenomenon in the mesmeric line; one of the earliest that had indicated the birth of a new science, or the revival of an old humbug” (5). This seems to set up a binary opposition between “science” and “humbug.” Ultimately, in what category does Coverdale seem to place the Veiled Lady—science or humbug, or something else?

3. In chapter 9, Coverdale makes a distinction between the “philanthropic man” and the “philanthropist,” calling the latter a “steel engine of the Devil’s contrivance” (71). On what basis does he make that distinction? In light of the rest of paragraph, how is it that Coverdale can tell the difference between a philanthropic man and a philanthropist?

Hawthorne, Nathaniel. The Blithedale Romance. Introd. Annette Kolodny. New York: Viking Penguin, 1983.

Coverdale and Priscilla

I apologize for the late entry; I have been having trouble with my internet and I was working on it all weekend with no avail. So I decided to just do it on an on-campus computer.

Taking a different perspective from Matt and his thesis/previous post, I actually think Coverdale is in love with Priscilla.

From the start of the novel it starts with Coverdale being infatuated with just the mere name of Priscilla: "Priscilla! Priscilla! I repeated the name to myself, three or four times; and in that little space, this quaint and prim cognomen had so amalgamated itself with my idea of the girl, that it seemed as if no other name could have adhered to her for a moment" (29). Though this incident doesn't suggest a fully developed love for her, it does signal an apparent interest.

As the plot develops it seems that his love for her only grows. There are many incidences where Coverdale's actions signal his love for Priscilla. One incident in particular happens in Chapter 14, when Coverdale tries to show/persuade Priscilla that Zenobia and Hollingsworth have a romantic relationship and for Priscilla to stay away. It is rather clear that Priscilla has feelings for Hollingsworth and Coverdale is merely jealous and wants Priscilla's heart for himself.

And as for the relationship between Coverdale and Zenobia, might seem plausible but through the text it seems unlikely. When Coverdale is sick Zenobia comes in and claims that Coverdale does not admire her: “[…] I think, to precisely such glances as you are in the habit favoring me with. I seem to interest you very much; and yet-or else a woman’s instinct is for once deceived-I cannot reckon you as an admirer. What are you seeking to discover in me?” (47). Zenobia recognizes that Coverdale does not have feelings towards her. I think Zenobia is merely of interest to Coverdale. Coverdale is able to talk freely to Zenobia on a variety of subjects, such as women's rights, because he is not romantically attracted to her. Coverdale does think Zenobia is beautiful but not in the same admiring way he thinks Priscilla is beautiful. Coverdale and Zenobia's relationship seem strictly platonic.

Gaining a different perspective through writing

With this assignment, it's really stood out to me how much writing a paper changes your perspective on a piece of literature. When I first read The Blithedale Romance, I did it primarily as pleasure reading, and just enjoyed the story. Then, when I had to go back an write a draft, I was having to revisit the book from an entirely different perspective. In a way, the difference is akin to the difference in looking at a house from the outside, as opposed to the inside. From the inside, you can get an idea of what it feels like to be inside the house, but it's only from an outside perspective that you can really view it as a whole and understand how each part is connected to each other. Writing a paper has given me this change in perspective in the past, but it's only now that I've really taken notice of it.

In particular, taking an "outside" perspective enabled me to see just how well-crafted TBR is. I noticed that pretty much the entire book is contained in the first chapter--you get a strong emphasis on deception as a major theme, and unanswered questions which provide suspense to move the entire plot forward through the entire novel, your attention is secured on the main characters before they even enter the story, and you even get a bit of foreshadowing hinting that the ending will be tragic.

In viewing a book from the "inside," I don't even think it is possible to make analytical judgments about a book, since it requires making broad connections across an entire novel, a sort of timelessness outside the universe in the novel. The "inside" perspective gives you a linear, moment-to-moment, experience of the novel--it's in the now.

Plot Summary “Ain’t” So Bad

Looking at Melissa’s post about motivation, I thought it would be interesting to post something regarding essays instead of solely discussing my thesis about The Conjure Woman, which no one else read. When I first started my reading paper, I was excited that I had an idea that I thought would be fascinating to explore. Having noticed the difference between the John’s and Annie’s reactions to the stories presented by an ex-slave, I decided that I would try to link their reactions to how these slave folklore was received by the white folks. Although the initial planning got me excited about writing the paper, I found it rather difficult to get myself started, despite having started the planning rather early. This would have been the time when I needed the motivation to get me started. As words started appearing on the page, the more excited I became about writing about my hypothesis. I was rather careful to make sure that my ideas would be fully supported and would be clear for readers to understand. I even tried to avoid plot summary. However, I realized that I was still victim to plot summary. Though it seemed bad to have a paper full of plot summary, I am actually grateful that I had some plot summary in my draft to begin with because this just makes it easier during the revision. Knowing that I had lots of background to begin with, it is now easier to take a red pen and cross out extraneous information. It also provides the opportunity to review the plot and to reconsider how the particular evidence chosen applies to the hypothesis and how it would need better support. For all those people who feel bad because of excess plot summary in the draft, it’s easier to cross. It’s better than trying to add more information when it is probably better to focus on analysis in the revision.

Veiled Lady

So I had a lot of trouble with my thesis originally. I wanted to do something that dealt with identity because it was a very prominent theme throughout Blithedale. The Masquerade scene was seriously screaming at me while I read it. But what I came to realize after talking with Natalia was that this idea of identity is so broad that it's importance can get lost simply by listing all of these examples. I'm currently in the process of reworking my paper and I am focusing more on how Hawthorne uses the veil to play with identity in Priscilla's case. On taking a second look I noticed how completely enigmatic Priscilla is as the Veiled Lady. At the very beginning there is the question about her identity with Coverdale and Old Moodie. It's also ironic that Zenobia thinks she is revealing Priscilla's identity as the Veiled Lady when she gives her narrative, but she is ignorant of her family tie to her.

Thoughts on my thesis

I’ve been reformulating my argument for my reading paper. My initial thesis for my draft was that there was no substantial evidence that Coverdale was interested in Priscilla romantically (contrary to what he says about his admission of love being a clarifying pronouncement in the last section of the book). The only problem is that although I can find a number of situations where he does not express interest in Priscilla to use as evidence and thus support my thesis, the paper feels like an uninteresting presentation of the facts. There is no real global insight into the novel or Coverdale’s account specifically- the paper simply offers up evidence that his last statement was not accurate.

One possible argument that I’ve considered is to focus on what this says about Coverdale’s account. In this case, I can employ some of the line of argument I was using before. First, I establish what I did in my original draft, that Coverdale was not entirely honest in his last comment. I can then use this omission as evidence of the broader account being dishonest. Although it’s not unreasonable that an author may neglect to mention some of his personal feelings, the conspicuous lack of evidence of his feelings for Priscilla is certainly worth noting. It is suggestive of some sort of revisionism taking place, most likely intentionally. Why, unless he was consciously trying to mislead the reader, would he focus so intimately on the details of Zenobia while showing little obvious interest in Priscilla? Coverdale’s account portrays him as being almost unreasonably distant from the affairs of those around him, which may be a side effect of this deliberate attempt to suppress anything which may suggest he has feelings for Priscilla.

Another argument could be made for this saying something about the novel. Hawthorne may not have been trying to make Coverdale’s account completely coherent. The Priscilla comment at the end is surprising, but this may have been its purpose. This isn’t a completely satisfactory explanation, as it reduces what should be a meaningful event to an exploitative tool by Hawthorne to entertain. I’d like Coverdale’s comment at the end to mean something about the broader novel, and this certainly does not provide any deeper meaning.