POE AND HAWTHORNE

When the first settlers left Europe, they were in search of a new world. To find a world that would enable them to start their lives over. They stumbled upon a land, which was later called America, and set out to make it a sort of new “Eden.” This must have been where the idea of American innocence came from. This is the idea that Americans are believed to do no wrong, the belief that they are untainted by the sins of others and that Americans posses countless knowledge that guarantees success where others may fail. Of which is the almost total opposite of the idea of natural depravity. Natural depravity refers to human nature. As in human are naturally corrupt and sinful due to Adam and Eve. The idea of American innocence is not the theme in Nathanial Hawthorne’s “The Birthmark.” A few gothic elements in this story are a lady in distress and an air of suspense. This is the story of a hideous birthmark on the cheek of a beautiful wife (Georgiana). Although beautiful the husband (Aylmer) shutters at the glance the unattractive birthmark and he generates a plan to remove it. The husband conducted an experiment on his beloved wife to remove the birthmark. The birthmark did go away, but the wife died. And turns out this husband had many failed experiments. This goes against the idea of American innocence. The fact that he even allowed worldly imperfections to hunt him so is one strike against it, and the other is that his experiment failed. In light of natural depravity this story gives light to the fact that human are not perfect beings. Another gothic story written by Edgar Allen Poe named, “The Black Cat” entertains the conflict between the idea of American innocence and the idea of natural depravity. A few gothic themes in this story are superstition and unexplainable events. This story entails the life of an animal lover that kills his favorite pet out of anger. He also kills his wife, because of the pet he once adored. The idea of American innocence is totally swept away by these actions. But the idea of the nature of natural depravity thrives. Nothing but a life in Christ can change a humans natural ways. By nature humans are horrible creatures, and it is only by God’s grace that we succeed. Plus, no amount of knowledge or experiment can change this. This is the conflict between American innocence and natural depravity that humans under any distinction are not perfect and are born under sin.

Blog Assignment: Poe and Hawthorne

Choose one Poe story and one Hawthorne story and discuss how the gothic elements in each story help to elucidate the conflict in American Literature between the idea of natural depravity and the idea of American innocence. This blog will be due on March 5. Blogs posted after March 5 will not be accepted.

Posted by: Mary McCay

James Fenimore Cooper is an American MAN. He embodies a superior white man untouched by civilization and self-dependent. He describes the Indians race as an inferior race and calls on them as dumb non sophisticated “idiots”. In the Deerslayer he practically dumbs their nature down to show how superior he and white men in general are to the “Red Man”. The one good thing about The Indians is the Red Gifts which is honesty, nobility, and boldness. Cooper prides himself on being part of nature and nature being part of God and we can see God as Beauty in nature. He understands humans as being one with God and nature that is why he uses a lot of imagery of the forests, lakes, canoes, and earthly things.

The saddest thing is to see how he depicts the “Injun’s”. He places them just above Irish peasants and in America those days the Irish were thought of as vermin. So, one notch above absolute filth. He talks about them as a primitive society and as needing the white man. But as we look at the stories we can draw closer and see that “the white man” and the “red man” have many similarities.

Mr. Grumpy Pants

Benjamin Franklin and Washington Irving were two great narrators. While they both explicitly tell a thrilling tale they do it different ways. Such as Franklin writes in a vain format which makes him come off as extremely fiction whereas Irving writes to tell his story. Franklin may come off as vain more because he is writing his own autobiography so why not give your ego a boost. But besides that he in general is extremely coincided as well as arrogant. He looks for personal success and fortune. I believe that to be the innovator he was, one needs to be able to toot his own horn so to speak. If he didn’t the things he discovered and the fame he developed as well as the stature he acquired would have all been lost.

Irving on the other hand writes for pure entertainment. He uses poetic verse and flashy language to capture the audience and in Franklin’s case, put them off. He uses stories luike “Rip Van Winkle” and “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” to inquire into people’s love of narrative. These characters are contradictory to Benjamin’s belief in self success and drive. The characters Ichabod Crane and Rip Van Winkle are much laid back and day to day people. Rip is seen as lazy and Ichabod as an investigatory scarecrow.
These narrators do get their point across but in different ways. Irving as a graphic storyteller, and Franklin as a self centered, self dependent man.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x19h6GkrdMM

Cooper on the Indian

In Cooper’s description of the Indians he immediately casts them as being far inferior to the white man. In fact the only race that Cooper puts under the Indian is the Irish peasant, which would be seen as vermin to Cooper’s aristocratic audience. Perhaps the most kind thing Cooper says about the Indians is that they seem to be somewhat willing to be absorbed into the superior white society. Cooper’s report on Indians paints them as a primitive, uncivilized race that would need the guiding hand of the whites to survive. He is no kinder in his description of Indians in The Deerslayer. Painting the Indians as fairly dim and deceitful adversaries who are far inferior to Natty Bumpo. Although, Cooper was not exactly kind in describing Indians, I feel that he is also fascinated by them, as they represent a wild untamed America that was slowly being destroyed by the white man.

"Red Gifts" versus "White Gifts"

As we discussed in class, James Fenimore Cooper seems torn in his perceptions and ideals of America. On one hand he possesses a very real nostalgia for the self-reliant, independent frontiersman of yesteryear, while he also maintains respect for the civilizing influences of white man's law. The ideal frontiersman, one who is truly in communion with nature as Cooper envisions, might easily be found in the Indian: he lives very close to the land, obeying whatever moral precepts seem best to him. Cooper mentions the "red gifts" of honesty, nobility, and boldness, but he always restrains himself from going very far in praising them. His essay on Indians in America depicts them more realistically than the Deerslayer's narrative, but if he praises them too much then his whole argument for the white man taking over the wilderness would fall apart. Thus he must keep asserting the white man's superiority. He embodies the best of these in the Deerslayer, a young, virtuous, honorable, Christian man. He is pure and untouched by civilization, completely capable of caring for himself and others. He has strong ideas about what constitutes a "fair fight," yet could win any fight in a heartbeat. What comes up most often is the idea of Deerslayer being really Christian, and perhaps this is a reflection on Cooper's reverence for nature as a communion with God. I found it very interesting that Cooper had to make the Indians in Deerslayer practically morons in order to emphasize how "superior" the white man was. Notice how in the engraving below, the Indians can't hit Deerslayer even when he is tied to a tree. Ridiculous.

Franklin's autobio

Benjamin Franklin’s Autobiography differs from the authors we have read so far in class. Franklin’s style, content, and tone sharply contrast with the early religious writings of the Puritan colonists. When reading Franklin’s Autobiography the most noticeable difference from authors such as Jonathan Edwards or Cotton Mather is that Franklin writes little about God or his own faith. In chapter one of his Autobiography Franklin talks about how his reading of Shaftesbury and Collins made him question religion early on in his life. Franklin is also very explicit in talking about his various affairs and youthful transgressions. Even though Franklin is not a religious person he still stresses the importance of morality and honesty when living ones life. In Franklin’s Autobiography he lists thirteen virtues that he felt embodied a good and moral life.

Franklin’s Autobiography also differs from other authors of the time in that his tone is very light and humorous at times. Franklin is self-depreciating in a comical way throughout the book, describing himself as a rambling old man or as a vain and over confident youth. By making fun of himself, Franklin instantly becomes more likeable and accessible to the audience. Of all the readings we have done for class Benjamin Franklin’s Autobiography is the more modern in its language and style than the early Puritan authors. In Franklin’s writing we can see the shift away from the religious zeal that was in the colonies and more modern ideas about liberty, government, and science emerging.

Personae in Irving and Franklin

The personas of the narrators in Franklin and Irving’s writings greatly differ. In Franklin’s Autobiography he is vain and self-indulgent while at the same time being self-deprecating, this is entertaining to the audience but it also causes the audience to lose trust in the authenticity of the story. Irving, on the other hand, narrates his stories with illustrative descriptions and poetic language to entertain his audience. Even though the events of Irving’s stories are fantastic and otherworldly the narrator gives the impression to the audience that the events happened exactly as told. Irving’s narrator never gives the audience the impression that he is embellishing the story in any way. Franklin cannot maintain this trust with the audience, he often refers to his own vanity and this gives the impression that he has changed some of the stories to make them more interesting. Another interesting comparison is between Franklin and Crane and how they contrast with Rip Van Winkle. Although Irving depicts Crane as an unlikeable character he and Franklin are still very similar. Both are well-educated, professional, metropolitan men, who represent the new modern American. Rip Van Winkle, on the other hand, represents the free, wild, untamed America that was already disappearing when these stories were published. Irving uses Rip Van Winkle to mourn the death of the wild and truly free America.

Mardi Gras and Puritan ideals

The tradition of practicing Mardi Gras is popular in region’s with heavy French and Spanish influence, such as New Orleans and much of South America. The name literally translates to Fat Tuesday and is celebrated as a last day of indulgence before the deprivation of pleasures that coincide with observing the forty days of Lent. Setting aside a day to completely indulge in whatever sinful or gluttonous activity one wants is directly in conflict with the teachings of Puritanism. Even the spirit and look of Mardi Gras is in discord with Puritan values. Puritans are very reserved in their demeanor and very plain in the way they dress. Mardi Gras on the other hand is full of loud music, bright flashing colors, and extravagant (often revealing) clothing. With the sermons of people like Edwards and Mather, the Puritans saw themselves as people ruled by an angry and wrathful God, who would cast them into hell for the slightest transgression. A people who saw themselves as dangling over the fires of hell, like the Puritans would never set aside an entire day much less an entire week to drinking and partying.

Cooper the Trooper

Cooper's stories were related to his real life. He could see that the wilderness was decreasing and created tension between himself and the public through his opinions in his books. His idea was that the American Indian was doomed to fade away wherever he came into contact with European settlers. Cooper knew that it was inevitable for indians and settlers could not live together and America was bound to be industrialized eventually eliminating the wilderness. With this background, Cooper described gifts in his story, "The Deerslayer." The Indians in the story and the white people both represented different societies and offered separate, but equal gifts. Both have different desires. The Indian's gifts are nomadic, while the White Man's gifts are urban. For example, the white men have guns while the Indians use the forest as weapons and create bows and arrows. Both gifts could not exist dually, and Cooper observed the Indian's gifts dying out from being overpowered by the white man's gifts. It shows the difference between the societies when Deerslayer wants to take the canoe back to its original owner, but the Indian wants to keep it because he stole it and successfully almost got away with it. However, the gun put an end to his life. Deerslayer shot the Indian, which was symbolic to the end of the wilderness. The White man was urbanizing it and washing out the Indian's gift of the appreciation of nature. Cooper foreshadowed what came to be true, the end of the wilderness, which can also go on to say that God was gone too and replaced by metal. Cooper was a trooper and with his novels shared his opinions about society. His thoughts were true, maybe that is why he is still widely read today.

Civilized vs. Naturalistic Romanticism

In Cooper's The Deerslayer, there is a distinction between "white gifts" and "red gifts"; these distinctions are based on the stereotypes of White people and Native Americans. In many of Coopers works, he sets the racial and social stratification between people. These "white gifts" are, civility, fair fighting, justice and morality. The "red gifts" are the opposite, incivility, unfair fighting, and immorality. For Deerslayer, who is in fact white but considered a Native American, Cooper says that he has some "white-gifts" that out weigh the "red ones". In Cooper's novel, Deerslayer takes the role of a Native American in an idealistic early America. Cooper sets the stage of an Edenistic wild America. When Deerslayer is confronted by a Native American who does not posses any "white gifts" he kills him. This action illustrates Cooper's confront of the white settlers, or civilizers, destruction of the order of the natural world. Cooper is confronted within himself of the idea of necessity of "white gifts" and the necessity of the natural American wild. The contradiction between Coopers two ideas leads him to a stratification within himself.

Cooper: The Fair and the Fickle

James Fenimore Cooper’s treatment of white and red gifts undoubtedly holds a bias that closely reflects the “white man’s burden.” The white man’s burden consists of whites teaching lesser races the benefits of civilization and morality over savagery. For example, in Cooper’s “Notion of the Americans,” the Indians are a lazy, “stunted, dirty, and degraded race.” For this reason, whites set up reservations and give the Indians an education. They also pay for land that “[the Indians] did not want, nor could they use.” The Indians are overall a lazy bunch, while the whites are fair and just; they not only pay fairly for the land but also give more than they need to (i.e. and education and technological civilization). The perfect example of this is found in the story of the peacock feather. And while some Indians are sometimes given the gifts of honesty and gratefulness, Cooper mentions, “he is well known to be as eminently grateful as he is vindictive.” Indians are fickle characters known for their trickery and deceit; they are not to be trusted.

Deerslayer understands the fickle ways of the Indian in chapter seven of The Deerslayer. An Indian attempts to shoot him after they had agreed to go their own ways, as compared to earlier when Deerslayer had decided that he would not shoot the Indian while he had his back turned. After Deerslayer mortally shoots the Indian he still gives him water and does not scalp him. Deerslayer’s gifts are merciful but just, therefore showing his (and white’s) superiority over the Indian race’s fickleness.

Whites and Reds

We see in the Cooper readings that the relationship between whites and Indians is one that is a bit strained because of hierarchical and stereotypical standards. Cooper shows the reader that the difference between these twopeoples is that the whites tend to think they can outsmart the Indians in the sense that they are more civilized. This where the terms "white gifts" and "red gifts" comes in. White gifts are known to be part of the "proper", Christian form of existence. On the other hand, red gifts include things that are along the lines of savagery, nature and warfare. In "Deerslayer", "The Indians", and as we discussed in class, "The Last of the Mohicans", Cooper showed this hierarchical status of the whites to the Indians very well by creating and then developing a sense of superiority of the Indians to the whites. This racial degradation is something that has been a part of America's history in many ways. Cooper's works portray the world as it use to be, but he also gives it much hope for a less segregated future solely by addressing the hierarchical issue at hand. No matter the differences between the whites and the Indians, Cooper portrays both races as wanting to be heroes for their own people and both are willing to put their lives on the line to do so.

From Old Dutch Tales to An American Tale

The personae that Irving creates is a that of a story teller reminiscing on the past of early America. In this personae, he creates story telling characters that take on his voice of reminiscence. When compared to Benjamin Franklin, he is more of a fairy tale storyteller while Ben is more of a non-fiction American storyteller. Ben also takes on a personae to describe his hardship in reaching is goal as the first American success story; his is that of an idealistic freedom seeker of class and monetary status in the midst of a new born country. Irving's is lamenting the future of a new untamed country and remembering the old stable country. This theme outwardly plays out in the story of Rip Van Winkle. Irving's Sleepy Hollow reminisces on an age of fairy tale like male heros and the fairy tales that are an integrate part of the old country. When Irving and Franklin's work are compared, there is a distinct difference: Irving is lamenting the new and Franklin is lamenting the old.

new vs. old

It is easy to see that Cooper does not have too much respect for the Indians, but hey, at least they are better than the Irish, but in his letter, there are a few encouraging words for the lesser race. He describes the ones that work on the sea as highly reliable and good workers and describes Indians as a whole to not be known for thief unless those who live nearby who have been corrupted by white civilization.
This is weird contrast where he describes a race that he often refers to as uncivilized, being corrupted by civilized people. But years later, in the excerpt of Deerslayer, The Indians have become thieving and treacherous, while of course still being complete idiots. I believe that this was intentional in Cooper’s attempt to create the American Hero. For Cooper, the American Hero was the pioneer. It isn’t so much the thrill of living in the wild as it is leaving civilization to live in the wild. And with any great hero, there must be a villain and Cooper found it in the tribes that the obviously superior whites would encounter. I feel as if Cooper was truly playing into the spirit that would come to embody Manifest Destiny.

father and son

Our class seems to love to take shots at Benjamin Franklin. We have called him arrogant, egocentric, pompous, but I don’t think that is a fair assessment to make from an autobiography or that we should compare it to the works by Irving. Franklin may have had a bit of an ego to him, but it is unfair to say that from his autobiography. It is only human nature to portray oneself in the best possible light, I don’t think it anything special to Franklin. Even those who would do play down their accomplishments are most likely doing so to take the persona of a modest person (or else why would they have written an autobiography).
Irving takes a persona that lets him throw stones from the outside. He is attacking the superstitions help the puritans and other Americans and turning it into something fun and exciting. Irving’s personal dignity is not at stake in his writing, except perhaps the quality, unlike Franklin. Also this book was for his son, and from my view of most historical father-son relationships, the father will present himself in a larger than life type of manner, perhaps to feel superior, perhaps to inspire his son to greater heights. I don’t know, but here is a touching moment of Franklin with his son.

The traditional purpose of Lent is the preparation of the believer — through prayer, penitence, almsgiving and self-denial — for the annual commemoration during Holy Week of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus, which recalls the events linked to the Passion of Christ and culminates in Easter, the celebration of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The traditional purpose of Mardi Gras or Carnival started in Rome and evolved to invoking temporary madness (so to speak), elaborate dress, and for the college student...binge drinking.

None of which the Puritans approved of.

Mardi Gras is a time of indulgences and self pleasure. This idea of indulgences would probably stop a puritan in his/her tracks. Puritan lifestyle is Lent all year round for the average New Orleanian. But with all this self-denial how did they not see this coming? It’s human nature to rebel (ever heard of teenagers). The idea that a celebration to commemorate the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ would be complete heresy, punishable by death. But the great thing about Lent being right after is that we can repent all of our sins then, so PARTY ON!

Whites and Indians, Progress Much?

Reading James Fenimore Cooper's narrative on Indians sounds much like the views that other white men who came before and after him held on the Indians. There is a relationship there, but it is strained and one of convenience. Indians helped the Pilgrims survive, but cautiously and only because they benefitted from helping the new settlers. Even today we still have Indians living on reservations, and the relationship between the Native Americans and the US Government certainly has its faults.

As for Cooper's time, the Whites will be friends with the Indians as long as they teach them the ways of the land, help them gather food, and remain civil. Yet to the Whites the Indians are still inferior, it is almost as if the Whites see their arrival as a good thing, because now that they are here they may begin to "civilize" the savages. The same relationship exists on the side of the Indians as well. They benefit from the white men by being provided with guns, clothes, and other modern things brought from overseas. As soon as the whitemen overstep boundaries however, the Indians are quick to revert to their "savage" ways. It is a relationship of balance, a relationship that is repeated all the time and works as long as each company keeps to their respective ways and allows the other to do the same.

Lord and Land

Dear John and Thomas

Religion today is as confusing as religion back then. But questioning religion and religious authority is and will always be hard to understand. According to your letter Thomas you believe that the facet through which we collected a “beautiful assembly of gentlemen” was under Christianity and English/American Liberty. Things have far changed from those days. From my perspective religion today has undergone a huge change. Not a change in values or tradition but of how Religion is perceived. Religion is not an internal faith as it was back in Virginia and Massachusetts. Christianity is still the largest religion but no religion/Agnostic is a close second. Its not that Christianity is going down it’s the education of the people about Christianity is dwindling. As I am a college student at a Jesuit University I can confidently say that most people are Christian, but don’t practice it. Jesus has become the opposite of a fair weather friend. When in absolute desperation we call on him, but other than that he has no room in our day-to-day life. It has become more prevalent in older aged folk to start concentrating on religion due to the scare of Death, but besides that it doesn’t give a second thought.

Where religion and government is concerned we have made laws separating Religion and State affairs. They are no longer linked due to the trouble started about what is moral in God’s eyes and what is not. We can’t just live by the Ten Commandments and be ok. As you well know self-government is synonymous for a democratic state. But we have different definitions of self-government. John you are astonished at “How could mankind submit to be governed as they have been”, you call it a “inscrutable Mystery”. And I agree, but if we were self governed we would constantly be at war with one another and the world would be packed with dictators. Religion is allowed to have one ruler, one God, government is cannot.

If we can just “reduce our volume to the simple evangelists” like John says, and “express unintelligibly for other what they had not for themselves”, we may have a chance to recapture the beauty you both have experienced that is Jesus in modern day life.

White Gifts, Red Gifts, Relationships, and Misunderstandings

Cooper's writings on Indians and the chapter 7 from Deerslayer present fascinating incites about the relationships between white men and Indians. Through both works, Cooper also expresses the separate cultures themselves by the gifts that they give to one another: White gifts and Red Gifts. In Cooper's Notions of the Americans: The Indians, a gift of "peacock feathers" is presented to the Indian Peterlasharroo. The gift is regarded nicely from Peterlasharroo. I find that this gift of feathers presents the white man's interpretation of the Indian. This gift, which is not much more than pretty feathers to white men is considered a "brilliant" to red men. It may be my own speculation (and i understand that the gift was valuable to the Indians), but I smell exploitation, which was a very abundant aspect of the white and red man relationship.

In The Deerslayer, we are shown that the gifts of white men also come in the form of forgiveness, humility, fairness, and respect. Deerslayer attempts to settle his dispute with the Indian with common kindness (you go your way, I will go mine). Unfortunately, this gift of respect is not returned by the Indian who gives the gift of trickery, deceit, and a tomahawk. The Indian is the weaker man here (and in most relationships with the white man), his use of cunning is perhaps both his most powerful and damnable gift (although he fails in his trickery). It would appear that neither side has a strong grasp of each others gifts. The Indian recognizes the white man's gift of "go your own way" as simply an opportunity, while Deerslayer feels morally bound to respect and his word. However, the white man will surely come to recognize the success of guerrilla warfare.

Relations between Whites and Indians, Cooper

By far the most telling and interesting part of Cooper’s account is the even tone throughout the pieces, even a naivety with which he speaks of the relation between colonial bigotry and colonial sense of charity. Schools built and trade established was punctuated by “The Indians have never been slain; except in battle, unless by lawless individuals; never hunted by blood-hounds, or in any manner aggrieved, except in the general, and perhaps, in some degree, justifiable invasion of a territory that they did not want, nor could not use.” However fictitious Deerslayer may be, the conversation between the protagonist and the “Injin” indicates a nice common ground between the two cultures, hinting at a progressively tolerant, if tentative and hostile, attitude. Granted, Cooper writes the class mentioned “American Hero,” and in doing so exemplifies the honor of Deerslayer, but that Cooper recognized this to be a positive step says a lot of colonial/native relations. Cooper writes in his Notions of the Americans: The Indians,
“As a rule, the red man disappears before the superior moral and physical influence of the white, just as I believe the black man will eventually do the same thing…In nine cases in ten, the tribes have gradually remove west; and there is now a confused assemblage of nations and languages collected on the immense hunting grounds of the Prairies.”
While tense, the progression has to be mentioned, and taken as a sign of the change in culture. Cooper does write with a hint of the civil revolutions to come which reveals a lot of what growing sentiment there was between both cultures.

James Fenimore Cooper...Mardi Gras....two for one special....read it!

In the days and weeks following Mardi Gras and Fat Tuesday, the American is allowed time to reflect on what has taken place. Viewing the revelry from a historical standpoint, I once again asked myself, truly, "what happened?".

In the broadest sense, The United States was founded by a group of British religious fanatics whose descendants became addicted to money(and the killing of Indians who interfered with the acquisition of it).

At first Americans were afraid of the wilderness. Then it was gone. So they loved it. They were also afraid of the Indians. Then they were gone. So they loved them too. James Fenimore Cooper's work, as well as many writers of the early 1800's emphasized the "noble savage"- of course once that "savage" was already dead and couldn't slit his throat. We have a history of revering things after they cease to be a threat to the status quot. After all, what is the Native American ethic if not Anti-American? For instance: conservation of resources, sharing (socialism), stewardship of the land, not being white (and christian). On a bit more touchy subject, what about the messages of Martin Luther King? Have his dreams been fully realized by the status quot? Surely even the most conservative Senator or Congressman in the country will honor his memory on Martin Luther King day (so long as a camera is pointed at him). The fact is some of these very same people were trying to defame, and/or kill him, when he was still spreading his doctrine! How does this relate to Mardi Gras?

Lets see. First we have to sum up what Mardi Gras IS. At this point in time Mardi Gras in the national imagination is little more than an alcohol fueled frat-fest where the everyday Puritan, capitalistic, lifestyle can be put on hold to throw back more-than-a-few with the guys. Not to mention; trash the streets of this undoubtedly poorer city than the tourists came from, gawk at local blacks, and snap pictures of the destroyed 9th ward as if it were an African American Theme park. This is not to say that there are not exquisite cultural things happening in New Orleans (such as the existence of a living, breathing, music form); but only to say that the first time Mardi Gras visitor will likely be unaware of it.

So, I ask, has Mardi Gras (New Orleans) become a place for the northern white to view the now "docile" black? Has New Orleans hinged it's tourism on something which formerly, we (popular culture) had no control of? What about Jazz no longer being a threat the white culture makes it ever more sellable? Perhaps, you might say, this phenomenon is nothing more than a showing of reverence for the past (in the style of Rip Van Winkle and the dubious Dutch ancestry of the United States which it highlights). It is true that Mardi Gras represents something aside from the Puritan work ethic that still permeates the country. It is also true that because of this assumption, Mardi Gras has mutated over the years provide an ever present alternative to white (white collar, christian, whatever you want to call it) America. After all, Mardi Gras is French, right?

Franklin and Irving want to know, Which American Are You?

Considering what Franklin and Irving imply through their personae’s in their writings, one sees that a combination of the two authors personas is the quintessential modern American. At least the idea of what an American is to foreigners. Consider; the American dream is a self made man. He preserves and uses many of Franklin’s 13 virtues to create for himself the life he envisions to lead. For the ability to do this in America, to create oneself, outsiders are jealous.

Yet this brings us to the other side of the stigma of the idyllic American, the one Irving portrays. That Americans are lazy, greedy, and worthless. Irving’s characters are the opposite of what Franklin portrays himself to be. Ichabod Crane and Rip Van Winkle each embody what reflects most poorly on Americans; laziness, carelessness, despondence and the whole gamut of negative qualities foreigners are all too happy to point out in Americans.

While it is true that Irving is more fantastical in his approach to creating his protagonists (well Franklin is nothing but staunch and frank in his writing), it cannot shift focus from what the basis of his stories are; despondence towards oneself and society. Why do you think we have millions of obese people walking around in America today? On the other hand (Franklin) we also have those who are living the life they planned, Lexus SUV, golden retriever, and two kids in private school.

FRANKLIN AND IRVING

The persona that Benjamin Franklin creates in his autobiography is one of almost sincere arrogance. He gives of a type of pride and confidence about himself that others may admire, while others may find it annoying. Franklin is an individual and believes in individual success, in which he set up principals and ideals for himself. Through his believes he writes to his son explaining how he became successful, and even lays out some guidelines that may help his son become successful. This guideline is called the thirteen virtues, which are temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanness, tranquility, chastity and humility. Franklin was set on attempting to be the “perfect man.”As oppose to the persona that Washington Irving gives off for the characters in “Rip Van Winkle” and The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. These characters are much less prideful than Franklin. In “Rip Van Winkle,” Rip is a very nonchalant guy. He seems to live life by the day instead of having a plan for himself or his family, which is the total opposite of Franklin. Unlike Franklin, Rip seemed to be lazy in certain aspects of his life. Franklin’s character was formed by difficult task and willpower. Although Rip was a seemed to be unconcerned at times, he did serve as a purpose for Irving. This purpose may have been to let us know that we are nothing without the past. When Rip came back from his mysterious disappearance, he still could recollect aspects of the past. For that reason he was seen as a sort of historian to the new village. So in a sense Franklin and Irving’s characters may not be all that different, they all have a sort of mystery about them and serve as ally for the past.

WHITE GIFTS AND RED GIFTS!!!?? WHAT!!

This week’s reading brought us to discuss the difference between white gifts and red gifts. When asked the difference, I did not have a clue what it was and at first glance I did not understand the question. But as we discussed the topic in class, I think I figured it out. White gifts are gifts of personality that whites think they have and red gifts are gifts of personality that whites think the Indians have. The definition of white gifts and red gifts are of pure opinion derived by the whites, therefore the white gifts are seen as the best ones. White gifts are of much more value and prestige than red gifts are. Traits that are of fairness, honor, integrity, trustworthiness, and mercy are all white gifts. These gifts are the complete opposite of red gifts. Red gifts are traits such as sneakiness, dishonesty, cruelty, and a thieving mindset. The red gifts or of no value and are looked down upon by the white man. The white gifts are all qualities that each person would love to possess, but not everyone does according to the white man. It seems that only whites are able to possess and even give these gifts. This is what seems to be the intention of Deerslayer, of whom is the character in The Deerslayer written by James Fenimore Cooper. Chapter five of this book helps to bring to light white gifts and red gifts.
.

Franklin and Irving Do It Their Way

Ben Franklin's persona in his autobiography is that of a confident, well educated, and systematic man. When compared to Washington Irving's fictional character Ichabod Crane from The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, we begin to find similarities between these men. They are both intellectuals (Crane is a school teacher) and lady killers as well. Franklin creates a system for success which helps him to become a self-made, wealthy, and important individual, but Crane aims to use his intellect to win over a young girl for her father's wealth. Thus, both of these men act for their own personal gain of wealth and power. A major difference between these men is the rational "from the ground on up" ethic of Franklin and the "one big plan" of the fictional Crane."

In Irving's Rip Van Winkle, we find a much more giving character that is much less interested in the highlights of society than our other two characters. Van Winkle is somewhat of an adult version of Huck Finn. He only wants to be left alone to do what he pleases. Winkle also enjoys helping others with their work, but does not enjoy doing any work for himself. Here, Winkle further differs from Franklin and Crane who act only for themselves.

Interestingly, none of these men seem to have too much favor for early Puritan ideals. The concept of Predestination does not appear to bother these men at all: each acts exactly the way that they want, despite their obstacles (Franklin's lower class condition, Craine's stick-like appearance next to Brom Bones, and Winkle's rough wife). Early trend setters perhaps?

These characters also provide similar and different views of their world. Franklin's world is very intent on rules, which we can recognize from his father assigning him to the printing business like his brothers and then having to present his writings under a separate identity. This is of course a much more real world in Franklin than in Irving's fantasies. Although Rip Van Winkle tells a tale of fiction, it also displays a worldly change in America from before the Revolutionary War to after.

The Carnival Body Vs The Puritan Body

The Mardi Gras celebration is a time for people to release themselves, to release their carnival bodies. The carnival body is the free and natural human at its dirtiest. It is the acceptance of the human body: the genitals, mouth, anus, etc. The carnival body finds humor in sexuality, defecation, and crude behaviour. Of course, this idea derives from the early celebrations of carnival (the festive season) celebrated in different cultures (popularly in the Italian theatre form Commedia dell'arte). This is the body that wears plastic breasts and loves to catch fake dog poo.

The Puritans, however, do their best to conceal the carnival body. Puritans believe that these acts of the carnival (sex, feces, and foolery) are acts of the devil. The Puritan body is clean, disciplined, and covered. It would be difficult to find an early Puritan running about his colony declaring that he got "Plymouth faced at shit rock."
"Puritanism: the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy." - H. L. Mencken (can be found on http://www.jmac.net/images/NOLA/ a very carnival website).

Needless to say, the Puritan and Carnival body do not seem to mesh. The Puritans would believe that the city of New Orleans is headed straight to hell (if we weren't there already). We can see this disapproval today by the "save your soul" sign holders who yell at you on Bourbon street. As we witnessed during Arthur Miller's "The Crucible," dancing was considered a sin of disobedience. God help the early Second Line parades in 17th century Massachusetts.

The Savage and the Sage

When discussing white gifts as opposed to red gifts, one must keep in mind that this notion of gifts stems from a purely white perspective, and as such is a completely biased opinion. That being said, the white gifts are clearly the more honorable and praiseworthy attributes (obviously, since the author is white). White gifts are qualities such as integrity, mercy, sincerity, a trusting nature, graciousness, magnanimosity, and truthfulness. Red gifts are the diametric opposite, and are listed as follows: deceit, cunning, a simplistic mind, ruthlessness, a thieving nature, cruelty, and dishonesty. Basically, a red gift holds no merit, for it is in the "red man's" nature to act utterly unscrupulously, regardless of the situation. He cannot help who he is, and that is little more than a beast. Both of these gifts are highlighted in Chapter VII of The Deerslayer by James Fenimore Cooper. In this excerpt from the novel, Deerslayer is portrayed as a noble white man who gives the inferior Indian a chance to redeem himself, but of course the Indian fails to follow through. This is shown through many cases, one of which occurs when Deerslayer does not attack the Indian because the Indian is unaware of his presence. Even though the Indian first shot at Deerslayer without revealing his location, Deerslayer is averse to sinking to the Indian’s level, since that would be dishonorable. Instead, Deerslayer approaches the Indian with peaceful intentions, which on the surface the Indian appears to accept. The idea that it was simply a ruse never crosses Deerslayer’s mind, and it is only through sheer luck that he looks up and notices that the Indian is about to shoot him. So, Deerslayer is forced to kill the Indian, even though he does not want to. Despite the fact that he gave the Indian many a fair chance and treated him with dignity and respect, the Indian resorted to devious methods, and the courteous manner in which Deerslayer handled the Indian was unbefitting of his status. It is inherent in his nature to be nothing more than a common savage. Overall, red gifts are corrupt and morally inferior to the generous and intellectually superior gifts of a white man.

"consumed in compotations"- Increase Mather

The Puritans were anti-happy; basically anything that pleased the spirit other then prayer and hard work was frowned up. Even the standard celebrations during Christmas were curtailed because they were thought to be excessive and did not keep with the Puritan ideal of conservatism. Everything about Mardi Gras conflicts with Puritanism: Stuffing our faces with king cake and guzzling any liquid within our reach even partially fermented would have horrified the Puritans. The Puritans left England because they wanted no part of the remnants of Catholicism and hence paganism that were still present in the Anglican church. Mardi Gras has its roots in the pagan Roman festival of Lupercalia and because it falls right before Lent, it is also thought to have roots in Catholicism. Mardi Gras is a time of throwing away our inhibitions and reverting back to our pagan roots. Mardi Gras is also the time we are given to get all of that merrymaking out of our system before Lent. We all act a little heathenish, and certainly overindulgent during the Mardi Gras season and think ourselves justified in being so as the Lenten season is always just around the corner.

Increase Mather on Christmas...he would have had a heart attack on Bourbon St.
"The generality of Christmas-keepers observe that festival after such a manner as is highly dishonourable to the name of Christ. How few are there comparatively that spend those holidays (as they are called) after an holy manner. But they are consumed in Compotations, in Interludes, in playing at Cards, in Revellings, in excess of Wine, in mad Mirth ...".

Christian and Pagan Traditions Combine for a Good Time, or Mardi Gras

For anyone who has studied the progression of religion in Europe through the ages, it is known that The Father, Son and Holy Spirit were not always the alpha and omega. Ancient Europe, where pagan Romans thrived as a powerful empire for centuries, threw a festival mid winter known as Lupercalia, which honored the Roman god of fertility and agriculture, Lupercus. This festival celebrated feasting, drinking and other "pleasures of the flesh." In fact the word nearly synonymous with Mardi Gras, Carnival, literally means "farewell to the flesh."

When Christianity (mainly Catholicism) began to become the new religion in Europe, church leaders needed a way to ease the pagans into converting to Christianity. The problem was they had these deep seated traditions in sinful festivals, so the church leaders devised a way to ease the transition for pagans. They allowed them to keep their festivities but infused the season of merriment with religious relevance. So now January 6 (the Epiphany) became the day the festivities begin and Fat Tuesday (Mardi Gras) is the day when a person should be purged of all of their sinfulness for a while and be ready to enter the Lenten season. Eventually the Christians and Pagans merged their holidays and what is now known as the Carnival Season which culminates in Mardi Gras and kicks off lent is a vaguely religious holiday celebrated worldwide, although there is no denying Pagan roots.

When European settlers began to move to the New World, they brought their festivities with them. Over time New Orleans has added its own flavor to Mardi Gras, and Carnival season in New Orleans is now famous for its many unique traditions world wide.

Long time fan first time poster...

So I couldn't help but notice a few similarities between The Legend of Sleepy Hollow and the novel, The Great Gatsby, which was brought up in class. While we see that the "blooming Katrina" is the apple of Ichabod's eye, it is not because of any romantic feeling between them, but rather because of Ichabod's desire to advance in the perenially stagnant social classes of the 1800's. We see the same phenomenon take place in The Great Gatsby, wherein the stricken protagonist so desperately desires whats her faces material goods he mistakes it for love. Not only do we see the roots of the American Dream planted as far back as 1800's, we see too represented it's hypocrisy, and it's flaws. Further, on the left, we see Mel Gibson from the movie The Patriot, which is an awesome movie. He is pretty much the ideal "American Hero" ; individualistic, strong, handsome, hard working, anti-semitic....and the list goes on. In "Rip Van Winkle", by the supposed author Diedrich Knickerbocker, we see the foundations being laid for what it is to be an American in literature. On the same note, in The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, Washington Irving makes a statement more on what an American isn't than what an American is. He highlights problems which surfaced following Mel Gibson's rash and abrupt disposal of the colonizing British. Paramount among these, is a lack of self reliance; which Mel has obviously fulfilled. Though Man reached his pinnacle in 2000 with Mel Gibson's "The Patriot", a study of these early texts may reveal to us once again what it is to be an American man.

T Jefferson, B Franklin and Religion

In one of the first letters between himself and Thomas Jefferson, John Adams writes of religion as one of the unifying factors during the American Revolution, signing of the Declaration of Independence, and throughout colonial America. While religious affiliations have steadily declined for the past two or three decades (reuters.com), faith has tied whole sections of a country together, raising armies for political figures, and is completely ingrained in the political system. Whether or not “the general principles of Christianity, in which all those Sects were United” are nearly as prominent as in 18th and 19th century colonial America insights both a gut negative reaction and a much slower, positive one. As mentioned above, faith has become criticized by the free voices the U.S. has within it, with the Enlightenment, and communications to outside philosophers are giving an awakening to imagination of a world outside of religion. God is obviously creeping away as people believe in a very possible, very human society. So no, religion splits far more often than it unites. But the strength of numbers in Christians shows extreme potential for a religious following to mass and shift, change and dictate much of what the U.S. can do, giving evidence to think of Jewish, Muslim, and Christian sects as completely unified entities unto themselves, so yes. Whether the flag or the cross takes precedent is another question.

Benjamin Franklin

The common consensus of the class is that Benjamin Franklin’s pride and confidence make for a completely different author than those read so far. Further, this suggests his sense of self, of the individual within its own set of principles and ideals, is the focal point of Franklin and a huge step from the communal concepts written of by the previous authors. Whereas Cotton Mather wrote a manual for recognizing evil in the hopes of bettering a person in relation to God, Franklin’s autobiography operates as a manual in the betterment of a person for the person. Isolating an individual from its community and giving it sovereignty, the idea of a pure pursuit of perfection for the self is oddly outside Puritan writing which always connects a man to something else: God or community. Benjamin Franklin relies on community for its civility, giving a reference for a person’s progress. This in itself is a kind of communal thought, but as a set of commandments gives way to a set of principles, the emphasis on one’s own place within said community becomes apparent and a complete departure from an author like Mather’s placement of the individual in a group’s goals.

James Fenimore Cooper Blog Question

There are two readings for Cooper. One is his essay on Indians and the other is Chapter VII on Deerslayer. Read them both and post a comment on the difference between white gifts and red ones--Deerslayer's gifts and Indian gifts. Think of what Cooper means by gifts.

Irving & Franklin

Benjamin Franklin's somewhat arrogant persona in his autobiography is filled with his obsession of the "perfect man". He has this way of explaining that everything he did made him successful, and he now wants it to go the same way for his own son. Just as your parents always want you to have a better life than they did, Franklin is paving the road for his son ahead of time with his 13 virtues. Franklin says that if you utilize the 13 virtues of temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanliness, tranquility, chastity and humility. Just as successful men and women write books about their accomplishments and how they grew as a person because of their lessons learned in life, Benjamin Franklin makes these same connections.

Washington Irving's depiction of the towns in "Rip Van Winkle" and "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow" are described much more conservatively compared to the overall tone of Ben Franklin's Autobiography. Irving's way of explaining the mystery of the "other-worldly" towns keeps everything separated from the practicality of Franklin's primary focus. Irving uses humor in his political explanations with the narrator, Diedrich Knickerbocker, as a way to explain the historical perspective as well as political stance of the time period.

Morally superior to the Irish, at least

The excerpt from James Fenimore Cooper’s “Notions of the Americans: The Indians” gives us the general view of the Native Americans during the early 19^th Century. Cooper writes about the natives (often referring to them derogatorily as “Savages”) as being almost the lowest of the low, (before the Irish peasants) in terms of, “…civilization, comforts, and character…”. Cooper makes it quite clear that he firmly believes the Americans to be in the right of the situation, stressing that the U.S. has never done any harm to the Natives and that the U.S., for the most part has endeavored to protect and provide for the Natives. Their relationship is somewhat akin to that between a recalcitrant teenager and an overbearing mother; the Natives resent the interference of the whites, but they cannot throw them over. Cooper finds the Natives to be completely lacking in morals and justifies the white invasion by stating that the Natives did not really want the land and also did not know how to use it effectively. He even outlines a plan that will “…secure the rights of the Indians more effectually…” by exterminating the Native American culture and replacing it with the values and “morality” of the whites.

Cooper Post

Please read the selection, Cooper on Indians and Chapter VII of THE DEERSLAYER. Write a blog of 200-250 words on the relationship between whites and Indians in Cooper. Pictures or links are always welcome

Puritanism on Mardi Gras

Mardi Gras is a traditional Catholic celebration before Ash Wednesday. It signifies the beginning of Lent and it is one last celebration before the period Lent begins. During Lent, one is supposed to give up something until the Easter Holiday. This celebration, when compared to Puritanism is a stark opposite to what Puritans viewed the days before Lent. For Puritans, the days before Lent were supposed to be for prayer and reflection; Mardi Gras is the opposite. Now days, Mardi Gras has turned more away from the traditional and has been lost in translation with the growing popularity of flashing one's boobs to get plastic beads. While, indeed Mardi Gras is supposed to be a time of celebration, it is still a religious holiday as well. In many countries, especially in Venice, people wear masks and disguises so that one could partake in bad behavior and not be recognized. In America, Mardi Gras was brought by the French settlers into the Louisiana territory. One group of people settled in the New World to create a community of religous purity and a couple hundred miles away, settlers brought the corruption of religion from mother country with them.

For Puritans, Lent represented was a time for extra restraint in order to become more religious or to prove that they were "saved". For the early settlers in the Louisiana territory, the days before Lent represented a period of utter freedom to do as one pleased before a time of reflection.

Birth of a Nation

Benjamin Franklin and Washington Irving, despite being two radically different men in terms of writing style and in their manner of thinking, nevertheless were both writers who contributed significantly to early America’s literary history. At a time when America was attempting to refigure her place in the world, uprooting her roots from a crumbling society to bury them in the soil of a new-born nation, Franklin and Irving were indispensable in helping the country find her voice and, ultimately, in determining what it meant to be an American. Both men were gifted in their ability at creating a façade in their writings from which to elucidate their points; it is interesting to contrast the two differing personas. In his autobiography to his son, Franklin depicts himself as the acme of perfection, the epitome of what it means to be a man. Highly successful, he presents himself as the quintessence of a father figure who has achieved all of his life’s goals and wants nothing more than to elaborate on his achievements so that his descendants, too, can soar to the heights he has attained. His expository style of writing takes the form of a friendly manual in enumerating points which one should follow in order to better oneself. That is one of the major premises of Franklin’s writing: the self-improvement of man. At a time when the Puritan’s belief of pre-destination was the general consensus, Franklin introduced this revolutionary concept that has melded into one of our nation’s fundamental ideals. Franklin believed that anyone could rise from the position they were born in, and that one should always question pre-existing orders and take nothing at face value. This ability to question is also inherent in American society. Irving’s approach was wholly different from Franklin’s. Irving cloaked himself beneath the form of Diedrich Knickerbocker, a purveyor of the whimsical traditions and superstitions that pervaded the Dutch culture in early America. His style of writing did not intend to educate the reader in any particular manner; rather, it was simply a way of keeping the folklore of a dying people alive and a salute to how these people contributed to the nation’s first beginnings. Irving writes of the quaint, simple lifestyle of the Dutch, and how magic is a daily part of their lives. This magic is unlike that of the Puritans, who believed all magic stemmed from the evil of the Devil. That is what makes Irving so unique; most of his contemporaries believed magic to be malignant, with no redeeming qualities. He brought alive a magic that appealed to everyone in that it held no malice or conscious hatred, and he made people want to read about something that previously they had held an extreme aversion towards. These fantasy tales relate the dream-like nature of an America that no longer exists, of an America that would be lost forever if someone did not write down her legacies. If Franklin was the author of the first self-help book, then Irving was the first pop-culture writer.

We discussed Benjamin Franklin's persona in his autobiography as one of the "self-made" successful man, humbly dispensing advice to his son. His labeling of moral lapses as "errata" places the anchor of his values in a civic sphere, a place where how one is perceived in society is the ultimate standard of morality. His autobiography shifts the contemplative mode of expression of the Puritans from focusing on the relationship of man to God to the relationship of man and society. Furthermore, his systematic behavior and firm belief in the "perfectability" of man indicates a mindset of distinctly post-Puritan mold, and the beginnings of the American myth of self-reliance as one of the highest virtues.

Washington Irving's character of Diedrich Knickerbocker is similar to Franklin in his central focus on man instead of God. However, Knickerbocker is not so much concerned with his appearance in society, but rather the society from which he comes. His concern, bordering on obsession, with the past indicates a search for a new American identity. This is shown in the attitudes of Knickerbocker and the Dutch settlers of which he speaks towards the land: whereas Puritans saw the American wilderness as a desolate haunt of the devil, Knickerbocker sees it as a place that the past of the people inhabits. Ghosts of soldiers and Henrik Hudson inhabit the land as their eternal home. Here, the persona is shaped not so much by hard-work and self-determination, as in Franklin, but rather by history and the land.

.

In both of Washington Irving's stories, "Rip Van Winkle" and "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow," he created a precedent for the beginning of American fiction. He created the pop culture and wrote stories that people enjoyed. His stories drastically changed from the Puritans because witchcraft and ghost stories were poked fun at instead of being feared to be real. Americans wanted to rid themselves of the past and create a new future, but Irving dug up the past and viewed a need for cultured people. He created a fantasy like world that people could enjoy reading for fun, but also learn a bit of American History. His stories are still enjoyable today with its fantasy aspects. His description of Crane and Van Winkle is hysterical. When he describes tucking ducks into a bed of pie, fantastic. Irving definitely had a unique writing that created a breakthrough for literature. It was nice to finally read a piece of writing that was not serious and trying to scare its audience to death about God. It gave the mind a break from predetermination discussions and how to become the perfect human. Props to Irving.

The Legitimacy of Persona

The personae Benjamin Franklin and Washington Irving use in their works allow the authors to write without fear of dodgy repercussions. In the case of Franklin, he appears as a cosmopolitan, questioning individual seeking personal betterment. He is the perfect model for his son (he is moral and an intellectual), which keeps the reader from noticing Franklin’s actual personality of an egotistical chauvinist. Franklin’s persona pleases his audience’s sensibilities and, therefore, gives him credibility as a decent self-made man.

Likewise, the persona of Diedrich Knickerbocker that Washington Irving creates legitimizes the stories of “Rip Van Winkle” and “The Legend of Sleep Hollow.” Knickerbocker is a humanist interested in preserving the Dutch culture. He seems to be a simple man well liked by all; Knickerbocker is even known to have an honest reputation due to his “scrupulous accuracy.” However, this accuracy is also undercut due to his fantastical descriptions that often add humor and the supernatural events that occur in the two stories. Franklin’s persona is also undercut by his constant mentioning of vanity and humility, such as the vain act of writing an autobiography.

Both authors use a persona to create an authentic, human figure as compared to crediting God and the devil like the Puritans did in their works. The personae help mark the shift from other-worldly to “earth based practicality” in terms of legitimacy. However, Franklin’s persona is much closer related to Puritan ideology because he supposedly promotes virtues. Irving’s persona merely helps promote supernatural stories.