Category Archives: Literature

Character analysis of Emma and Mrs. Elton

Posted on by +

In Emma ((Page Numbers are for the Riverside Edition edited by Lionel Trilling)), Jane Austen presents characters who are uniquely human: each has their own rich personality and storied background. Through these characters, Austen is able to intimately explore the human condition, as she saw it, and highlight some of the issues of society and class in her world. To achieve this, Austen creates a world into which a reader can insert themselves through the gossip and unique perspective that the narrator and Emma provides; the reader’s perspective is not that of an all-seeing observer, but almost a character in its own right who may judge the characters as an equal participant and member of the community. From this perspective the reader is able to see characters as rich and complex individuals with whom the reader can acquaint themselves. In doing so, one can pass judgment on the characters not from the outside, but from the inside.

The characters of Mrs. Elton and Emma are extremely similar: they both are overly concerned with outward appearances, place too much value on social status, tend to treat others as their play things, and are quick to judge. They think very highly of themselves and hold themselves as pinnacles of their societies. The two women are so similar one could argue that if their positions were reversed, they would hold the same positions in the story. However, for all their negative similarities, it is the small differences that makes one superior to the other”"not only as a person, but as a friend.

Although Mrs. Elton tends to believe herself to a member of genteel society, her manners and mannerisms are a cheap limitation: she has a tendency to place herself on an equal footing with others who are social superior to herself. Although a biased source, quickly Emma judges her to be a vain and self-satisfied who attempted to be superior, but “with manners which had been formed in a bad school [and] drawn from one set of people” (213). Further evidencing the low origin of Mrs. Elton’s manners is how impressed she is by Mrs. Weston’s and Mr. Knightley’s manners: Emma takes their manners for granted and to her, it seems obvious that their manners would be impeccable because of the society of which they are members (218). Mrs. Elton also oversteps herself by referring to people by their given or Christian names without honorifics—even when they are of a superior social class like Mr. Knightley—while Emma would never even consider this even though the families are long-term friends and nearly equal (218).

Emma, unlike Mrs Elton, is aware that her family’s status in society is that of “the younger branch of a very ancient family” whose landed property is relatively small (108). Although she has a tendency to be snobbish and exclusive, she is able to put these feelings aside when pressured by her friends to do what is right. When the middle-class Coles were in a position to invite Emma to a dinner party, she almost gleefully prepared to rebuke them for being so presumptuous, but when the invitation actually came, she allowed the Westons to convince her to attend without argument (163). Even though she believes in the exclusivity of her class, she realizes that it is not practical to insulate herself from the other classes when she should be accepting of them. However, her egalitarian views do not extend beyond casual relations: she was very quick to refuse Mr. Elton’s advances on social status alone, and even though she was correct to do so, she did not see that the relationship she tried to create between Mr. Elton and Miss Smith was similar to Mr. Elton marrying herself. According to Emma, Mr. Elton only proposed to “aggrandize and enrich himself,” and although he “understood the graduations of rank below him [he was] blind to what rose above” (107). This evidences Emma’s flaw in oversimplifying the lives of others through her habit of lumping the middle-class into one rather than seeing it as stratified.

Mrs. Elton is very insecure about her background and tends to speak frequently of her brother-in-law’s estate comparing every aspect of it to Hartfield and claiming as its equal; however, as Emma points out, those with wealth are not impressed with people who are equally wealthy, so Mrs. Elton’s comparison serves more to show how little societal standing she has. She also judges others of similar backgrounds harshly: mentioning a family that lives near Maple Grove who are an annoyance “from the airs they give themselves” without realizing it is the same way others view her (244).

Emma is very blind to the thoughts and the feelings of the people around her to the point that she projects all of her own feelings onto people and then expresses shock when she is wrong. Events like her blindness regarding Mr Elton’s advances, her insistence that Miss Fairfax is in love with the happily married Mr. Dixon, or her belief that Miss Smith was superior to the Martins show just how little she understands the core personalities of the people around her. However, although she can be strong-headed, she does accept correction”"mostly by Mr. Knightley”"when she is wrong, so her weakness is less glaring than it could be.

Emma and Mrs. Elton play off each other well: they both have similar personalities and levels of intelligence, but where Emma is born rich and gentile, Mrs. Elton’s only claim to high society is a sizable dowry and a wealthy brother-in-law. Emma and Mrs. Elton are both flawed individuals, but Mrs. Elton has all of Emma’s flaws but few of her good qualities, and Mrs Elton’s one-dimensional nature is such that she seems incapable of growing as a person; however, Emma does learn from the lessons she receives, albeit slowly, and respects the opinions of others; therefore, although both individuals have their flaws, Emma would make a far better friend.

Interpretations of a slave in “The Heroic Slave” and “Benito Cereno”

Posted on by +

There are three major interpretations of the slave in literature: the good human being who is forced to live their live as a slave, the slave who’s mind, body and soul are broken because of slavery, and the slave who’s mind is twisted and becomes a monster because of the institution of slavery. These views of slavery are prevalent in abolitionist literature because they focus on the evils of slavery rather than the evils of the men who support slavery. In Fredrick Douglas’s “The Heroic Slave”, Douglas presents the reader with Madison Washington: a good man and a loving father and husband. In Herman Melville’s Benito Cereno one is presented with the figure of Babo: a demented and twisted individual who is willing to do anything to regain his freedom. These two images of slavery are used because a writer can show both that slaves are human and legitimize their “evil” deeds as being forced by the institutions of slavery.

Madison Washington represents the human face of a slave: his every attribute reflects the fear abolitionists felt when faced with the images of Nat Turner. Washington is presented as being “[t]all, symmetrical, round, and strong [with an] appearance betokened Herculean strength; yet there was nothing savage or forbidding in his aspect [and a voice] full and melodious” (28). Later, he is shown to be a good Christan man who, after attaining his freedom, risks his own life to free his family from captivity. He is always presented as being in command of himself, eloquent, and a leader of men. This melodramatic point-of-view leaves the reader with no choice but to sympathize with Madison Washington and by extension all good people who happened to have been ill-fortuned enough to be born both black and into slavery.

While one can feel pity for Madison, slave characters like Babo illicit no sympathy for themselves, but they raise philosophical questions about the effects of slavery on the individual. Melville never suggests that Babo was ill-treated or abused as a slave, and only describes him as a “small Negro Senegal [who spent] some years among the Spaniards” (93). It is obvious from the story that Babo is vastly intelligent which begs the question: why should someone as intelligent as Babo be confined to an institution of slavery and what happens to such an individual? Melville answers both parts of the question by stating resolutely that such a mind would not be held within an cage no matter how gilded, and that one such as Babo, while being moral to a point, would quickly leave his morals behind to achieve his freedom.

Babo does have some good qualities aside from his intelligence. If we can accept the word of Delano even when he was a captive Babo was instrumental in “pacifying his more ignorant brethren, when at intervals tempted to murmurings” (46). This interpretation of Babo is further illustrated when during the deposition it is revealed that the “Negresses of age” had to be restrained so they could not have “tortured to death, instead of simply killing, the Spaniards slain by the command of the Negro Babo” and that Babo “with his own hand, committed no murder” (102). Babo was twisted enough by slavery that he had the bones of Don Alexandro mounted on the ship’s bow, but he was not so far gone that he would treat the whites as they treated slaves.

While Babo is not entirely corrupted by slavery, he is twisted enough that he, personally, is beyond pity; however, with his actions he shows how the institution of slavery can twist even the most intelligent mind and force it into doing brutish things. Madison Washington represents an attempt by abolitionists to avoid the Nat Turner stereotype of the slave, but the character of Babo embraces this stereotype and Melville simultaneously condemns the actions taken while he shows that individuals such as Nat Turner are heavily influenced and corrupted by slavery itself, so that only by withdrawing individuals with such proclivities from the institutions of slavery, can one be safe from their innate internal rage on a widespread basis.

Superficially, Cereno is sick with a fever, but one can also read between the lines “only the sour heart that sour sickness breeds made [Cereno] serve Babo so; cutting Babo with the razor “ (77). Quite obviously the cut is self inflicted by Babo; however, had Babo been a normal slave the same incident would have caused a similar reaction from his master. The “sour sickness” that Babo speaks of is not entirely Cereno’s illness, but the institution of slavery that demands one exert his control over the entirety of another’s being. This interpretation of Cereno’s supposed action is illustrated by Captain Delano’s remark that, “this slavery breeds ugly passions in man!” This comment can be expanded to encompass both Babo’s “punishment” and Babo’s actual actions aboard the ship.

Abolitionist literature used characters such as Madison Washington and Babo to question the political and philosophical effects of slavery. While the former is a respectable individual who the reader can feel sympathy for, the latter is vile and demented, but forces the reader to question the aspects of slavery that would twist such an individual.

Chopin’s “The Story of an Hour” and Achebe’s “Civil Peace” as a Call for Succinct Writing

Posted on by +

Chopin’s story expertly takes the average book and succinctly boils it down to two pages of rapid emotions and events. While the average writer would have felt a need to develop events prior to the story to allow the reader a full and developed sense of the personalities of the characters, Chopin instead says this is what you need to know, and you know what to do with it. The reader is given a short snapshot of a person: (wife, weak heart, young, pretty, unhappy, in most likely a semi-arranged marriage) and a range of emotions: (shock, surprise, grief, realization, elation, and triumph). The reader then has to assign each of these emotions and snapshots to Mrs. Mallard to gleam a small insight into her being. Overall this style leaves the reader with a powerful sense of the emotions and felling that went through Mrs. Mallard’s mind from her perspective rather than allowing the reader to develop their own perspective on events, and in turn pass judgment on Mrs. Mallard.
Achebe’s story similarly gives the reader a deep look into the mind of the main character but in a succinct manner. Jonathan is portrayed as a hardworking and modest man who knows what is really important in life. He is also a man who is extremely lucky (or blessed if you prefer) to retain so much after so much strife in the war. Aside from the characters strength of spirit Achebe’s story also portrays the average person not as average but worthy of praise because rather than being crushed by unfortunate events Jonathan treats them as events of the past rather than events that define the future. Although I have not read any of his other works Achebe seems to believe in a way similar to Horatio Alger that hard work brings happiness rather than discontentment.
Together the two stories serve as a reminder that succinctly does not mean powerless and that verbose writing is not preferable to succinct writing. Most of us are guilty of trying to expand a paper to reach a minimum word count when it should have ended 100+ words ago. But these two stories show that it is not length that matters but content. More specifically that just because a paper or a story is 100 pages long does not mean by definition that it says anything more than a paper four pages long.

Comparison of Cold Mountain and the Odyssey

Posted on by +

“Cold Mountain” is the story of a confederate soldier named Inman and his journey back to his homeland after years of fighting in the civil war, along the way he meets many interesting personalities some benign some malevolent. The second focus of the story is on Inman’s lover Ada and her struggle to learn how to live without her father, Inman and servants. “The Odyssey” is the story of an Ithacan king named Odysseus and his journey back to his homeland after years of fighting in the Trojan War, along the way he meets many interesting personalities some benign and some malevolent. The second focus of the story is on Odysseus’s wife Penelope and her struggle to live without her husband. The two stories sound very similar on the surface, but how similar are they really after the two line synopsis? “Cold Mountain” has frequently been called a modern “Odyssey” but is this an accurate description?

The first important information is how the wars end for our protagonists. In Inman’s case he deserted to return home because he had gotten too weary of the fighting and killing. However Odysseus returned home after a successful campaign against the City of Troy after 12 years, although long since wearied of the war he had nevertheless staid until the end. The difference here though can be attributed to cultural differences between the time “Odyssey” was written and “Cold Mountain” was. Although the differences are cultural they are also important to the story as it gives the main antagonist force their reason(s) for pursuing the Protagonist. In Odysseus’s case the main antagonist is Poseidon God of the sea Poseidon causes Odysseus to become lost at see in retribution for his vanity. However in Inman’s case he is chased and finally killed by the Home Guard for deserting the army.

Another large difference is in the personalities of Penelope and Ada, Ada was rather weak when she had no one to lean on but Penelope was able to keep everything together even as it fell apart around her until her husband returned. Without her husband Penelope was able to prevent major damage to her family by the suitors and in the process keep herself from falling into melancholy or being forced to choose a new husband. Ada on the other hand was unable to keep the house and farm or even herself in good condition, she fell far into melancholy to the point of neglecting her own physical needs. It was not until Ruby came into Ada’s life that she was able to overcome her melancholy and start functioning as a person again. The valiant wife bravely awaiting her husbands return is far from what “Cold Mountain” has to offer, yet even still the longing for the return of loved ones is a main theme of both stories.

Both stories go into great details of the challenges each protagonist faces, yet these are not important to the overall picture. No one would think about adding a Cyclops to the American south east just as no ancient Greek would create a hero out of a deserter. Although the details of the events are different they have the same effect of portraying the great obstacles the protagonists had to face before returning home. These obstacles allow the reader to see just what the protagonists are made of and get a look deep into their psyches.

Unlike Inman who died after returning home, but not before impregnating Ada, Odysseus survived and was happily reunited with his wife and son. Again the difference here could be construed as differences in literary styles between the two times, by the time “Cold Mountain” the “triumphant return and all is okay” ending was long since a clich” of literature and the contemporary audience doesn”t really believe the endings anymore. Instead “Cold Mountain” ends with the triumphant return and untimely death of Inman, followed by all is okay. For the readers of the “Odyssey” Odysseus was a hero of mythical proportions to have him end in anything but a triumphant ending would have been demoralizing to the audience. Yet Inman’s death did not prevent a happy ending, in fact if anything it adds even more happiness to the story because it allowed Ada to continue her life as she had grown accustomed and instead of losing a fianc” she gained a daughter.

Upon Odysseus’s return he had to battle the suitors to be able to be reunited with his wife. In Odysseus’s case Penelope had no attachment to the suitors who tried for her attention, so was quite happy when they were removed from her life. Inman in a situation similar to Odysseus had to figuratively battle with Ruby for Ada’s attention. In Inman’s case he could never have won the battle for Ada’s attention without driving a wedge between him and Ada. Ada had begun to so heavily lean on Ruby for support that without her Ada would probably have been unable to live without the emotional support she provided and not resent Inman for coming between them.

Although the ending and beginning are different the story in form is the same so at least in this way “Cold Mountain” and “The Odyssey” are literary cousins. The lessons they teach are also similar but the characters themselves could not hardly be anymore different. The characters of “The Odyssey” show strength in all things before, during and after tragedy, yet in “Cold Mountain” the characters are rather weak, having to fall to the bottom before picking themselves back up. Although it is possible to excuse all differences in the way the characters behaved on the differences of the ancient Greek and American culture, it shows just how far our society has come in terms of role models. Deciding modern culture is the sole reason for the differences portrays modern society as distancing itself from heroic portrayals of historical characters and instead of glorifying them they are portrayed as people with failings and character flaws but in the end being able to overcome them. This leaves us with only one option, first to realize that our society has progressed to the point where heroes are not all that one needs to see in life and thus modern society has realized that even normal people can do admirable things and secondly to decide that “Cold Mountain” is indeed a modern reincarnation of “The Odyssey” but that no longer are god-like men the only ones capable of being heroic.

“Ktaadn” Thoreau’s Culture Shock

Posted on by +

For anyone who has read Thoreau’s “Life in the Woods” Ktaadn seems to be written by a different person. “Life in the Woods” is written by an author so full of himself he thinks of himself as being better than everyone else around him, he values nature over all things and is extremely philosophical in his musings and above all considers nature as a thing that must be protected from man. However in Ktaadn there is very little in the way of philosophy and Thoreau means quite literally what he says as there are few hidden layers and he begins to understand that nature is not weak rather it is the mistress of her domain and it is instead man that is weak.
One thing he does do is give a personality to nature, he paints it first as a mother correcting her children from going to where they were not meant to go and helping to lead them to where she believes they belong. However he seemed to have been astonished in just how wild Ktaadn was, unlike in “Life in the Woods” Thoreau seems to be at a loss for words not using the vivid language in his descriptions that was present in his earlier works. Instead he seems content to just describe what he sees. He describes the moose in terms of horses and cows and unlike in “Walden” trees were trees and rocks were rocks rather than giving them a deeper meaning. To Thoreau nature was the unbridled primal forces at work in the world that included life and death. Man on the other hand attempted to remove nature from its rightful place until he had completely destroyed what had come before. Experiencing the untainted wilderness left Thoreau elated and awed, he craved the contact with nature that was unpolluted by human beings yet even in his cravings he still conceded that nature itself was not to be taken lightly.
Thoreau speaks on the encroachment of human civilization on the wildernesses of America. He marvels at how nature has managed to flourish even or in spite of humans destructiveness. He seems to realize that although in his home area that human footprints are seen everywhere in this wilderness no human is evident and it is more likely that any human caught inside of it would be swallowed whole rather than be able to create a permanent presence. In ” Life in the Woods ” Thoreau lives with a foot inside civilization just barley immersed into the wilderness, and from this vantage he is unable to comprehend the raw power of the wilderness. As soon is he is fully immersed in the wilderness of main he seems to understand that his prior opinions of a weak nature being rampaged by humankind was wrong, that nature is just as able to rampage man in her realm.
Overall, Thoreau seems to be going into a sort of culture shock, he is unable to describe the world around him and he also seems to forget the transcendentalism that was such a large part of his prior works. Thoreau spoke at length in “Walden” about leaving civilization behind and becoming fully immersed in nature, yet when it finally happens to him he is reduced to having to grasp at straws of his former experiences and instead of taking everything for what it is he attempts to tie it in with his prior experiences.

“The Metamorphosis” representing the Serbians in World War 2

Posted on by +

I would like to propose a new meaning of “The Metamorphosis” quite different from those already stated. “The Metamorphosis” can interpreted to show the effect of the dying on a family but also interpreted to show the effect that an outcast from society can feel. Gregor’s turning into a bug could be construed as a groups sudden repulsiveness to the world as a whole. With each member of the family displaying a different part of the world at large.

“The Metamorphosis” was published in 1915 and written during Europe’s slide to World War 2, during this time Austria-Hungry began persecuting the Serbs who they feared because of growing nationalism movements in Bosnia: newspapers were closed, student leaders arrested and the military was given a large amount of control in the country. After the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in 1913 Serbs were suddenly the pariahs of Austria-Hungry.

The Serbs had been previously a minority throughout Austria-Hungry but were mainly located in the Bosnia and Herzevogina. However the Serbs in other areas of the country would have overnight become repulsive to the whole of Austria-Hungry, with the countries government, religious leaders, and everyday people calling for the destruction of the Serbian nations to the south of Austria-Hungry.

The different entities in this struggle can be directly traced to characters in “The Metamorphosis.” The chief clerk is a suspicious man, and can represent the whole of the Austria-Hungry government, they allowed the persecution and punishment of innocent Serbs. The renters can be seen as Germany, Britain and France, they would not help the Serbs but instead stood aloof from them passing judgments one way or the other. The cleaning lady is Russia, although supposed to be on the Serbs side instead Russia caused as much trouble for the Serbs as they helped, they also were there to help sweep up the mess the Austria-Hungarians caused.

Gregor’s family represents the different feelings of the people of Austria-Hungry towards the Serbs. Gregor’s father represents those who depend on the labor that Serbs can provide but despise and fear them. Gregor’s mother represents those who are indifferent either way only stepping half-heartily in when they feel things have gone too far. Gregor’s sister represents the rest of the population of Austria-Hungry at first outside the petty squabbles but eventually succumbing to the pressure from the other sources. Gregor or the average Serbian would have found themselves to have changed from a under valued minority that provided the unwanted jobs to suddenly becoming a pest or infestation, valueless to all others.

I think in light of Kafka’s view on totalitarianism that this theory is valid. Had this story been written 20 years later then another interpretation would be that Gregor represented European Jews and the descent of Nazism and antisemitism, because this story can be easily reinterpreted to focus on any disenfranchised group it lends credence to my theory. However there is also a problem with this idea, a story that is too broad can be reinterpreted many different ways, and none of them can be assured the “real” meaning. Unfortunately short of time travel there is no real way to know for sure what was going through Kafka’s head as he wrote this story.